KaskadskyjKozak

The nuclear arms race did not result in a nuclear war, or even a major conventional conflict, which is what Einstein was warning against with that quotation.

just you wait and see

no more stop signs speedin' limits no body's gonna slow me down

Naturally, I'm quite relieved to hear that, Chuck. Since this is nothing personal, I'm obliged to inform you that there are several instances of posters making slightly off-topic contributions without the thread author's stated consent in one or more threads in each of the 1597 other pages in this forum, and I expect that you'll bring the same highminded impartiality to the task of retroactively correcting them in those cases where their behavior deviates from your personal standards of etiquette that you displayed here... PEACE ON SPRAY IS SHORT-LIVED. WE ARE A WAR-LIKE PEOPLE, DESPITE AFFECTATIONS, PONTIFICATIONS, AND PROTESTATIONS TO THE CONTRARY.

stop and go and lots of lane changes noticably slows traffic. If everyone just went the same speed (even if it was only 20 mph) it would be a lot better.

You've taken a convenient "unambiguous" position when the results are unknown w/r/t alternatives. It is not as simple as you suggest - then or now.

but how can you argue against the results? we went from having practically zero army to having the best military on the earth! what's the point of having all that ocean between us and the evil-doers if we can't just chill out and drink beer all day? The results? We were not even prepared to fight in Europe until like 1943. And in the meantime, the Nazis killed millions and the Brits suffered horribly standing their ground.

Ah yes, Patton - strung up by the press for striking a soldier. How ethics have changed. " The difficulty in understanding the Russian is that we do not take cognizance of the fact that he is not a European, but an Asiatic, and therefore thinks deviously. We can no more understand a Russian than a Chinese or a Japanese, and from what I have seen of them, I have no particular desire to understand them except to ascertain how much lead or iron it takes to kill them. In addition to his other amiable characteristics, the Russian has no regard for human life and they are all out sons-of-bitches, barbarians, and chronic drunks." – George S. Patton

No, we should have launched an even bigger invasion of russia just post WWI to eliminate the cold war threat. As Patton stated so well a few years later.

We almost completely eviscerated our military. There's a lot of ground between a "large" military and what we actually had. France and Britain definitely should have maintained a larger military and invaded Germany when they remilitarized the Rheinland, or, at the very least went into Czechoslovakia. You have to draw a line somewhere. The current Iraq war has deep roots in the first war and its incomplete resolution. What if we had not invaded Iraq to drive them out of Kuwait? Where would we be today? Perhaps a situation very similar to WWII.

linky

Looks to me more of a nuanced case where you are damned if you do and damned if you don't.

I went to the same school, and you could get out in 4 years with an engineering degree, but only if everything went to spec. Fail a class, decide you want a minor, decide to do something out of order, or an extended internship and it almost immediately added either a semester or year. On the flip side Mrs. Selkirk came out in 4 years with BA's in Poli. Sci. and Philosophy and a minor in French mostly because she'd damn smart, but partially because a great deal of her coursework did double duty. It was virtually impossible to get an engineering degree from the UC system when I was there in anything under 5 years.

TTK thinks our country was never under a threat of invasion in WWII or from the USSR and has stated such. What was wrong with our model prior to WWI? Ahem, WWI and WWII. Our isolationism cost us in terms of both a few hundred thousand lives and hundreds of billions in each case. We were caught with our pants down when we had to react. That's left a legacy.

"O, Fortuna!"

Exactly... Fuck idealism. Fuck work. If you want freedom, climb.

Look - it's a trained rightwing parrot. He's got 4 replies! Oh, the irony. Keep spewing your bullshit cliches. Meanwhile I'll watch as you use the "white" word constantly, and TTK makes racist impressions of Clarence Thomas speaking to Chuck Schumer - among a myriad of other examples.

I tried to make an appt a few weeks back for a lingering chest infection. They said they had no openings for 3 days. I pressed the issue - they saw me that day.

so it's ok to get racist as you age? how about sexist? that's a laugh - there's so much racism from you lefties it reeks. Hey, Hugh, the Emperor has no Clothes!

i rented Ben Hur recently as part of my Netflix queue. I had never seen it and always meant to. Another classic with Chuck.

Such nice sentiments coming from someone who doesn't know shit about the man. Good journey, Chuck. You'll be missed. More love from the left. Someone dies with whom they disagreed, and it's time to dance on the grave, and sling shit.

I see what you're saying - like Anatomy & Physiology for nursing majors or something like that...where a high proportion fail. OK, so I think the closest thing in the English path is literary theory (which isn't a cake walk). Yah, but hard science classes are often taught by fucknuts with horrible accents who don't care for shit about teaching or whether you learn (where's the next grant coming from?), and make a high attrition rate just because they can. There's a middle ground somewhere where liberal arts and hard science disciplines could be very comparable.

$58K for working 9 months a year? That's pretty damn sweet, IMO.

IMO, the amount of chemistry, physics, or bio you'd need to master in order to teach regular high school science classes is really not that tough.

i'm in a teacher's union and it isn't anathema to me to see higher pay for jobs that are actually harder to fill - that seems like straight market economics to me - if you wanna reduce my pay so you can pay a math teacher more though that will be pissing me off, as well as insinuating that what i teach (social studies) is less valuable that math/science in the grand scheme of things. Seems like that's what would have to happen eventually if supply and demand ever factored into teacher salaries. Maybe not straight off the bat, but when you are taking the funds out of the same pot - eventually someone with a BA in English is going to top out at a lower comp level, or get a smaller merit increase - and that money will be landing in the hands of the folks with the more valuable (in the strict economic sense) qualifications. Knowing what I do about the respective difficulties associated with securing a degree in the hard sciences, versus securing a degree in the humanities (did both), I think I'd be pissed off if the guy with the degree in English was making the same amount of money that I was. Is there even such a thing as a "weed-out" course in English programs? Seems like taking the money out of administrator pay, or cutting the number of administrator's would be a politically acceptable way to get beyond the "fairness" impasse.... All this "English Major" bashing is starting to piss me off...so of course you know now what I studied! There were PLENTY of "weed-out" courses...ever taken a course in Post-Modern American Poetry? A little Ezra Pound? Read much Thomas Pynchon or DeLillo? Writing critical theory abstracts?! Puh-lease! Though I will grant you that most of those were electives, not required, so I guess one could get an English degree without going taking courses like "Chaos Theory in Literature" like I did. My only point is, please stop bashing the English Majors! Some of them (like me) are really good at math/physics too!! I would agree with your point about administrators however... A lot of "hard" science classes really aren't that "hard", which is why I never understood the poor schmucks who change from "pre-med" to "English Lit" after failing their first course in Chemistry or Physics.