Making Baby Jesus Cry

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Gattigap
Fortunately, technology has since accelerated and enhanced this skill.

You just have to believe you can do it, and have a pile of money for the special effects.

[sgtclub]

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/20...t-in-iran.html

[riots in Iran]

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
You just have to believe you can do it, and have a pile of money for the special effects.

Or a rockin' computer program.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Or a rockin' computer program.

Penske has a time machine. Could we use that?

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Sexual Harassment Panda
Center for Defense Information in Washington. They seem to be idealogically neutral at first glance.

The CDI is about as ideologically neutral as Penske. My pacifist friends have been sending me their articles since the ninetys. Including the ones about how if Saddam lit all the oil wells the world would plunge into another nuclear winter.

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

Originally posted by Spanky
The CDI is about as ideologically neutral as Penske. My pacifist friends have been sending me their articles since the ninetys. Including the ones about how if Saddam lit all the oil wells the world would plunge into another nuclear winter.

Fine. Then you point us to a source that a) is technically competent, b) can be understood by a lay person, and c) is ideologically neutral.

This is your dead horse, not mine. Geez, I get nothin' but grief for trying to elevate the discussion beyond "If you don't agree with me you're a moron".

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Excellent point, Hank.

Actually, the basic technologies have been around for a while. Many a gunfight in the Old West was one not by the gunfighter with the quicker draw, but the one who was able to shoot down his enemy's bullets.

You realize the comet has been moving those 15 years?

How many old west gunfights were won by shooting up the hills where you think the bad hombres were holed up?

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
You realize the comet has been moving those 15 years?

How many old west gunfights were won by shooting up the hills where you think the bad hombres were holed up?

All the ones that had John Wayne.

SS may be thinking of the Gary Cooper gunfights, though.

[Spanky]

Right now North Korea has the ability to launch a nuclear weapon right where I live. There is absolutely nothing anyone can do about it. If that pyschotic leader of NK has some minor indegestion he can press a button and vaporise half the people that post to this board.

If he tried to smuggle a weapon, or some other WMD, it would face all sort of logistical problems. But with a push of a button from that psychopath we are all cockroach ordeurves.

People say that SDI is insane because you are trying to stop a bullet with a bullet. But isnt' that what we did in the first Iraq war? With 1981 technology we were able to stop a bullet with a bullet. Yes - it was not perfect - it did not work all that great - but we showed it can be done. Since that time technology for the patriot was developed lazer and guidance technology has had a chance to develop another 25 years.

There is a large section of the scientific and technical community that think it can be done. There is also a large section that says it can't be done (mostly the same people who said we could never stop a bullet with a bullet). But generally people line up where you expect them to line up. People that are generally against any defense appropriations are against this program.

But there are a significant number of intelliegent and reasonable people in the field that think it can be done says there is a chance. A good one in fact.

So right now there is a lunatic that can vaporize me and there are some people that say they can do something about it. Is it not insane to not give them a chance? If ninety nine percent of the scientific community said it was not feasilbe - then OK. But if just twenty percent thought we could do it then shouldn't we move forward? But in this case it is about half and half.

I can't think of a single thing that the Federal government does that effects me more directly than this. I can't imagine a more immediate threat to my life than NK. This is not some long range geo-political security issue this is about the immediate life and death of most of the people I know.

And yet there are people proposing to kill this project because many people think it can't work. Not the overwhelming majority, just many people on the left. To me this is just not stupid but it is insane. People that are against this are so wrapped up in their ideology they can't see something that is totally painfully obvious.

A lunatic can kill us at any time very easily so shouldn't we try and do everything we can to change that situation no matter how small the chances of success?

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Spanky
Right now North Korea has the ability to launch a nuclear weapon right where I live. There is absolutely nothing anyone can do about it. If that pyschotic leader of NK has some minor indegestion he can press a button and vaporise half the people that post to this board.

If he tried to smuggle a weapon, or some other WMD, it would face all sort of logistical problems. But with a push of a button from that psychopath we are all cockroach ordeurves.

People say that SDI is insane because you are trying to stop a bullet with a bullet. But isnt' that what we did in the first Iraq war? With 1981 technology we were able to stop a bullet with a bullet. Yes - it was not perfect - it did not work all that great - but we showed it can be done. Since that time technology for the patriot was developed lazer and guidance technology has had a chance to develop another 25 years.

There is a large section of the scientific and technical community that think it can be done. There is also a large section that says it can't be done (mostly the same people who said we could never stop a bullet with a bullet). But generally people line up where you expect them to line up. People that are generally against any defense appropriations are against this program.

But there are a significant number of intelliegent and reasonable people in the field that think it can be done says there is a chance. A good one in fact.

So right now there is a lunatic that can vaporize me and there are some people that say they can do something about it. Is it not insane to not give them a chance? If ninety percent of the scientific community said it was not feasilbe - then OK. But if just twenty percent thought we could do it then we shouldn't we move forward? But in this case it is about half and half.

I can't think of a single thing that the Federal government does that effects me more directly than this. I can't imagine a more immediate threat to my life than NK. This is not some long range geo-political security issue this is about the immediate life and death of most of the people I know.

And yet there are people proposing to kill this project because many people think it can't work. Not the overwhelming majority, just many people on the left. To me this is just not stupid but it is insane. People that are against this are so wrapped up in their ideology they can't see something that is totally painfully obvious.

A lunatic can kill us at any time very easily so shouldn't we try and do everything we can to change that situation no matter how small the chances of success?

If you go out on the street, there is a chance that some car will veer off the road and kill you. You could maybe change that result by wearing a huge, specially designed, titanium-and-platinum alloy cage around your body that costs $100,000, but there's only a 10% chance it will work. So you should do it, right?

I think there are a significant number of people who just want to get a handle on the cost-benefit analysis, and/or don't feel like it's worth it. I mean, fuck, for years we didn't have airbags in cars, even though we know they save a lot of people in accidents, because they made cars too expensive. We don't have a policeman for every 3 people, even though that would probably reduce the crime rate to zero, because it would be too expensive and is not worth the money.

You are using crap examples, is my point.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Spanky
Right now North Korea has the ability to launch a nuclear weapon right where I live. There is absolutely nothing anyone can do about it. If that pyschotic leader of NK has some minor indegestion he can press a button and vaporise half the people that post to this board.

. . . .

A lunatic can kill us at any time very easily so shouldn't we try and do everything we can to change that situation no matter how small the chances of success?

1) Present company excepted, no great loss.

2) No. That's the thinking that has led to too much safety regulation of basically everything.

That said, we demonstrated the practical possibility of missile-to-missile connection 15 years ago, albeit without a high success rate. Tests more recently have shown promise, but a long way to go. In the end, it's not going to be a computer processing power question--we'll have that. It will simply be a mechanical question of being able to direct one speeding missile to catch up to and hit another. (then again, with NK it may be that our chances are better figuring their missiles won't hold together)

BTW, why would NK launch an attack against us? The northern half of the peninsula would be solid rubble in 30 minutes. Japan and SK are the the ones that have to worry.

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

Originally posted by Spanky
Right now North Korea has the ability to launch a nuclear weapon right where I live. There is absolutely nothing anyone can do about it. If that pyschotic leader of NK has some minor indegestion he can press a button and vaporise half the people that post to this board.


A lunatic can kill us at any time very easily so shouldn't we try and do everything we can to change that situation no matter how small the chances of success?

I'm guessing you weren't a whole lot of fun at Cold War-era key parties. Right?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
If you go out on the street, there is a chance that some car will veer off the road and kill you. You could maybe change that result by wearing a huge, specially designed, titanium-and-platinum alloy cage around your body that costs $100,000, but there's only a 10% chance it will work. So you should do it, right?

I think there are a significant number of people who just want to get a handle on the cost-benefit analysis, and/or don't feel like it's worth it. I mean, fuck, for years we didn't have airbags in cars, even though we know they save a lot of people in accidents, because they made cars too expensive. We don't have a policeman for every 3 people, even though that would probably reduce the crime rate to zero, because it would be too expensive and is not worth the money.

You are using crap examples, is my point.

Dimwit- they kept working on airbag technology until it was feasible. Ty and them want to drop SDI because its not ready yet. Go wild on stem cell because MAYBE someday things could be better- drop SDI because TODAY thinkgs aren't perfect.

there are probably good arguments to be made against SDI, but you guys don't make them. you all have to upgrade your advocate brain power around here.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
If you go out on the street, there is a chance that some car will veer off the road and kill you. You could maybe change that result by wearing a huge, specially designed, titanium-and-platinum alloy cage around your body that costs $100,000, but there's only a 10% chance it will work. So you should do it, right?
.

You could do like europe and require external airbags:



although the cost-benefit on that for RT, says "put 'em on!"

[Spanky]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
If you go out on the street, there is a chance that some car will veer off the road and kill you. You could maybe change that result by wearing a huge, specially designed, titanium-and-platinum alloy cage around your body that costs $100,000, but there's only a 10% chance it will work. So you should do it, right?

I think there are a significant number of people who just want to get a handle on the cost-benefit analysis, and/or don't feel like it's worth it. I mean, fuck, for years we didn't have airbags in cars, even though we know they save a lot of people in accidents, because they made cars too expensive. We don't have a policeman for every 3 people, even though that would probably reduce the crime rate to zero, because it would be too expensive and is not worth the money.

You are using crap examples, is my point.

This is not some random occurance. This is an intentional kill. If he luanches a missile there is a hundred percent chance I will die. I would like to reduce that by whatever percentage I can. It is like I have a neighbor that has a high power rifle aimed at my house. If he gets riled he might use it. Shouldn't I try and pull my shades down. If NK and SK go to war and that lunatic thinks he is going to lose there is no telling what he will do. Don't you think Saddam would have luanched missiles at the US if he could have. He luanched them at Isreal?

China also has a bunch of ICBMs and there has been a lot of sabre rattling over Taiwan. And we have pledged to protect it. If those two go at it who knows what the Chinese will do?

We are not talking about traffic deaths. Or mortality statistics. We are talking about millions of people vaporized in few seconds.