Better nuke Israel before it is too late

In article ,
ess (phil hunt) wrote:

On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 01:30:34 GMT, Chad Irby wrote:
(phil hunt) wrote:

You mean "viruses". There is no such word "virii" in either English
or Latin.

There is *now*. Since the word "virii" has been in common enough use
for more than a few years, it's a word.

Only by those who are deliberately foolish and ignorant.

Or who don't care about silly rules that are only followed by Latin
students with nothing better to do.

English word construction rules? You must be kidding...

It may not be a technically *correct* word, but it's a word nonetheless.

Like bioweapon, nuke, Internet, laser, or many other fun words.

There is nothing ill-formed about any of these words.

When people started using acronyms, the response by grammarians and
other linguists was very similar to the way you're complaining about
"virii." You're just used to the idea.

"Computer" used to mean "a person who does computations." When people
began using it for machines, there was a certain amount of revulsion
among the less-flexible.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

Jim Yanik wrote in message ...
(Rob van Riel) wrote in
om:
The US -did- use TWO nuclear weapons;on Japan.I believe that use was
justified.

I wish I had your certainty on this. Horrible though their use was, I
know that in the long run, it probably saved lives. I even think that,
at the time, it was the correct decision. At the same time, I firmly
believe the nuclear genie should never have been let out of the
bottle. The world needs a better answer, and I deeply regret that in
1945 no better answer was deemed to be available.


It is not necessarily a 'doomsday' weapon,either.No more than bio or
chemical WMD.

Not necessarily, but use on any scale has far reaching consequences.
The Tall Boy and Fat Man were firecrackers compared to what's around
today. I overstated the case a bit, but not much. Bio is probably more
dangerous, chemical is probably the lesser of these evils.


IMO,bioweapons have the greatest possibility of being a 'doomsday'
weapon,as the bugs or virii could potentially mutate past any vaccine or
antibiotic protection,and could self-sustain themselves,spreading well past
the target area,perhaps 'round the world'.

Bio weapons are indeed dangerously unpredictably. They literally have
a life of their own, and do not care about any human agenda.

Rob

Rob van Riel wrote:


Not necessarily, but use on any scale has far reaching consequences.
The Tall Boy and Fat Man were firecrackers compared to what's around
today. I overstated the case a bit, but not much.

Have to pick this nit:

The two bombs were Fat Man (plutonium implosion) and Little Boy (U-235
gun design). The 'Tallboy' was one of Barnes Wallis' deep-penetrators
which, I vaguely recall, weighed 5 tons.

-Marc
--
Marc Reeve
actual email address after removal of 4s & spaces is
c4m4r4a4m4a4n a4t c4r4u4z4i4o d4o4t c4o4m

(Marc Reeve) wrote in message ...
Rob van Riel wrote:


Not necessarily, but use on any scale has far reaching consequences.
The Tall Boy and Fat Man were firecrackers compared to what's around
today. I overstated the case a bit, but not much.

Have to pick this nit:

The two bombs were Fat Man (plutonium implosion) and Little Boy (U-235
gun design). The 'Tallboy' was one of Barnes Wallis' deep-penetrators
which, I vaguely recall, weighed 5 tons.

-Marc

You are correct, I'm always mixing these boys up.

Rob

(Marc Reeve) wrote in news:1g2w7u2.imqxk41kal68sN%
:

The 'Tallboy' was one of Barnes Wallis' deep-penetrators
which, I vaguely recall, weighed 5 tons.

Just FYI, it was actually a 6 ton (12,000 lb) bomb.

Seraphim wrote:

(Marc Reeve) wrote in news:1g2w7u2.imqxk41kal68sN%
:

The 'Tallboy' was one of Barnes Wallis' deep-penetrators
which, I vaguely recall, weighed 5 tons.

Just FYI, it was actually a 6 ton (12,000 lb) bomb.

Thanks. It's been a good 15 years since I last read _The Dam Busters_,
hence the vague recall. At least I was in the ballpark.

-Marc
--
Marc Reeve
actual email address after removal of 4s & spaces is
c4m4r4a4m4a4n a4t c4r4u4z4i4o d4o4t c4o4m

Rob van Riel wrote:

(Kenneth Williams) wrote in message

Israel would only use nuclear weapons to protect itself in the event
that the nation was about to fall- as a last resort. But Israel's
neighbors only want to build a bomb to be used against Israel.

The US only wanted the bomb to kick the **** out of the Japanese, and
to intimidate the Russians. In the eyes of many in the region, Israel
has been a constant and violently active military threat since it was
created. I don't approve of the use of nuclear weapons, but it does
seem like the only way to be rid of Israel, and thus to the Arabs, a
last resort. The alternative is to live under the threat of Israeli
agression for all eternity.

Aw c'mon. How about actually addressing the points he made here.
Frinstance

Israel would only use nuclear weapons to protect itself in
the event that the nation was about to fall- as a last
resort.

If you do not agree with that statement, or do agreee with it, then say
so. Don't waffle on with irrelevancy about the US flattening Japan

And,

But Israel's neighbors
only want to build a bomb to be used against Israel.

If you do not agree with that statement, or do agreee with it, then say
so. Don't weasel out with "the alternative blah blah blah". Is there not
enough evidence for you that some Arabs have stated the intention of
eliminating Israel?

ronh
--
"People do not make decisions on facts, rather,
how they feel about the facts" Robert Consedine

On 13 Oct 2003 23:43:55 -0700, (Kenneth
Williams) wrote:

My priorities are just fine, than you.

Israel is a theocracy, anyone that says otherwise is either a fool or
a liar. There is no nuke warhead for the Harpoon, but any thinking
person would refuse to sell it 9if it existed) to *anyone* in the
Middle East.

Al Minyard

Mr. Minyard,

Do you hate Jews or what?

I do not "hate" any particular group of people. I do recognize that,
as a group, theocracies tend to perpetuate evil, be they Moslem, Jew,
or any other religion.

The reason I ask is that I've been to Israel many times in my life and
do not get the impression that you have that they are a bunch of
religious fanatics bent on world destruction.

I too have been to Israel, and actions speak louder than words when it
comes to international relations.

Israel is a pretty small island of freedom in a vast region of brutal
regimes with oppressive Islamic laws. I would be more worried if
Israel's neighbors got the bomb than Israel possessing a few hundred.

Either worries me, equally.

Israel would only use nuclear weapons to protect itself in the event
that the nation was about to fall- as a last resort. But Israel's
neighbors only want to build a bomb to be used against Israel.

So you say, but a country that routinely bulldozes home in a fit of
mass punishment should not have nukes.

I can't believe you would not be against this. You seem to side with
the enemies of peace.

All of the countries in the region are enemies of peace.

Thank God President Bush is for Israel.

I think you should take a trip to Israel yourself Mr. Minyard and see
what life is like. Talk to an average Israeli family or person in the
street. They don't want war, they want peace. But not at any cost.
Israel is proud of their IDF because most citizens have served in it
for most of their lives. Israel is free largely due to the IDF and the
security of the bomb.

They want the elimination of the Palestinians, who want the
elimination of Israel, it is a no-win situation.

The US and Former Soviet Union never went to war due to MAD, but that
strategy doesn't work in the Middle East. Had Saddam had a bomb he
would have used it against Israel in 1991 even if it meant the
annihilation of Iraq. Such is the hatred of the Jews in the region.

Israel isn't a theocracy but they are justified morally in having the
bomb.

Kenneth Williams

Israel is most definitely a theocracy, one only needs to look at the
role that Rabbis play in the government to see this.

Al Minyard