Legend of the Ronny

[tvashtarkatena]

That makes two idiots who can't discern the difference between an inherently violent political philosophy and one that is not.

 

Communism IS inherently violent. Look at the body count and the track record, you worthless piece of shit.

 

Wow, you really DON'T understand the concept of an 'instance'. I'd guess you must be dot.com minted icon monkey instead of a professionally trained software engineer. Hey, that's fine. There's nothing wrong with learning how to hunt and peck a pulldown for your living while being ignorant of even the most basic architectural fundamentals of your profession. More power to ya for faking it and snaggin the salary!

[tvashtarkatena]

people are violent. political systems are not inherently violent.

 

just as guns don't kill people.

 

It's only a matter of time before people living in kibutzes and other coop communities start killing one another.

[olyclimber]

some of the "professionally trained" people I've worked with are not as capable as some of the "dot.com icon monkeys" I've worked with, but it doesn't help out your insult to point that out.

[tvashtarkatena]

some of the "professionally trained" people I've worked with are not as capable as some of the "dot.com icon monkeys" I've worked with, but it doesn't help out your insult to point that out.

 

No, it does help my point. The talented self taught developers of whom you speak still took the trouble to dive deeper and learn the fundamentals of their art. Professional training can be had on one's own; it need not come from an accredited source. If that were true, Bill Gates would have been fucked.

 

Any software engineer worth a damn should be able to quickly pick up what an 'instance' is. There is apparently one on this forum who a) has been too lazy to teach himself this basic concept of his profession or b) just doesn't have the mental faculties to grasp it. This inability to differentiate between historical events and the imperfect executions of the philosophies involved (which of course, are usually a minor part of the story anyway) is a theme that pervades his posts.

Edited January 3, 2008 by tvashtarkatena

[ashw_justin]

Fairweather, I wonder if it's even possible to dumb this idea idea down any further for you. How about this. Imagine it's 1945. Russia just dropped nuclear bombs on German cities. How would the use of nuclear weapons by Russia have affected politics in the U.S.? It would have encouraged a repressive, jingoistic government to take control under the guise of protecting its citizens from an evil enemy, regardless of how much direct military conflict actually existed. Is this getting through to you? Our display of violent force only encouraged the beast called "communism" to do its business.

 

Seriously. How old are you? And from what pap did you digest this fiction?

Young enough not to have been brainwashed by what was apparently highly effective cold-war era U.S. propaganda.

 

Since you bring it up, here's just one idea from scientific theory that is highly relevant to world politics. That is the idea of symmetry, specifically as expressed by Newton's third law. All actions have repercussions...

 

And now I await your next insults. Just how far will you go to insult me personally in order to avoid addressing my arguments, I wonder?

[ashw_justin]

Tell me this: who should be proud of the use of nuclear weapons in any context? Or do you expect us to believe that the only thing that the detonation of your bomb enabled was the advancement of science?

Are you serious? For all the ugliness, the entire Cold War advanced science. The particular nuke-test in question here only proved that underwater nuclear weapons were NOT very effective against a potentially threatening naval flotilla. Only 14 of 130 ships sunk or seriously damaged. Is it possible you should stick to chemistry and leave history/politics alone?

ps. you missed the point entirely. You brought up the idea of enabling. As in enabling nuclear proliferation, which any successful test of nuclear weapons does.

[ashw_justin]

That makes two idiots who can't discern the difference between an inherently violent political philosophy and one that is not.

Communism IS inherently violent. Look at the body count and the track record, you worthless piece of shit.

Violence is violence. Call it whatever you want (especially if you are in power).

[No. 13 Baby]

I am shocked that FW hasn't changed his nuclear annihilation-enabling avatar.

 

If any nuclear warheads are detonated in the future, "funny" pictures like yours will be regarded as part of the enabling process. I guess I just don't think you're funny. Please try to think of things beyond your all-consuming hatred of humankind.

[ashw_justin]

But FW's merely paying homage to a time when we became the Good Guys and they the Bad Guys--because we got the bomb first, and the winners write the history books.

[Fairweather]

Here's a guy who's dedicated his life to documenting "Death by Government". I have the book too - long out of print. Enjoy.

 

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/WSJ.ART.HTM

 

To view this double standard from another perspective, both World Wars cost twenty-four million battle deaths. But from 1918 to 1953, the Soviet government executed, slaughtered, starved, beat or tortured to death, or otherwise killed 39,500,000 of its own people (my best estimate among figures ranging from a minimum of twenty million killed by Stalin to a total over the whole communist period of eighty-three million). For China under Mao Tse-tung, the communist government eliminated, as an average figure between estimates, 45,000,000 Chinese. The number killed for just these two nations is about 84,500,000 human beings, or a lethality of 252 percent more than both World Wars together. Yet, have the world community and intellectuals generally shown anything like the same horror, the same outrage, the same out pouring of anti-killing literature, over these Soviet and Chinese megakillings as has been directed at the much less deadly World Wars?

 

As can be seen from Table 1, communist governments are overall almost four times more lethal to their citizens than non-communist ones, and in per capita terms nearly twice as lethal (even considering the huge populations of the USSR and China).

 

 

Just a note of my own on the nuke thing: I always find it amusing that scientists tinker and build with such zeal - and all too quickly try to wash their hands when what they knew all along comes to fruition.

Edited January 3, 2008 by Fairweather

[No. 13 Baby]

Rummel... the same guy that lied about "almost" winning the Nobel Prize?

[minx]

isn't this the same conversation you guys have been having for months?

[Fairweather]

Yes, that's why our navy deploys no tactical nuclear torpedoes (which detonate on proximity, not contact, typically). They're just not effective. Having studied the effects of nuclear weapons on warships and been through NBC drills on them, it was made very clear to me in training that tactical nuclear torpedoes, which detonate underwater, are quite lethal.

 

Goddamn!!!!!!!! The Tvash has yet another career! In addition to entomologist, soldier, Cheif Technology Officer of an IT firm, battery/circuit designer, Literary Critic, ACLU attorney, speed climber, virologist, day-trading world traveler, husband, self-proclaimed great lover, and religious scholar, the Tvashman hath yet another page to share on his resume!! This is just toooooooooooooooooooo incredible. Now, tell us about your secret nuclear training...I want to hear all about it. I mean, I know there's stuff you're not allowed to say n'all, but, really, I want to hear what it was like out there man! Did they make you wear goggles and shit? How did you ever find time to do all of that financial, high tech, medical, literary stuff? You are one busy dude.

 

 

And totally full of fucking shit. Seriously. Your lies and fantasies are getting out of control.

 

 

By the way champ, it wasn't called the "Baker" test. It was called Crossroads. Baker - "B" - simply denotes the second test of the series. See also, Castle, Ivy series, etc. But, of course, you already knew this. You can now run back, correct the errors in your post, and act like you knew all along what the fuck you were talking about.

[JayB]

some of the "professionally trained" people I've worked with are not as capable as some of the "dot.com icon monkeys" I've worked with, but it doesn't help out your insult to point that out.

 

No, it does help my point. The talented self taught developers of whom you speak still took the trouble to dive deeper and learn the fundamentals of their art. Professional training can be had on one's own; it need not come from an accredited source. If that were true, Bill Gates would have been fucked.

 

Any software engineer worth a damn should be able to quickly pick up what an 'instance' is. There is apparently one on this forum who a) has been too lazy to teach himself this basic concept of his profession or b) just doesn't have the mental faculties to grasp it. This inability to differentiate between historical events and the imperfect executions of the philosophies involved (which of course, are usually a minor part of the story anyway) is a theme that pervades his posts.

 

In what sense were the "executions of the philosophies involved" imperfect?

 

 

 

 

 

[JayB]

Fairweather, I wonder if it's even possible to dumb this idea idea down any further for you. How about this. Imagine it's 1945. Russia just dropped nuclear bombs on German cities. How would the use of nuclear weapons by Russia have affected politics in the U.S.? It would have encouraged a repressive, jingoistic government to take control under the guise of protecting its citizens from an evil enemy, regardless of how much direct military conflict actually existed. Is this getting through to you? Our display of violent force only encouraged the beast called "communism" to do its business.

 

Seriously. How old are you? And from what pap did you digest this fiction?

Young enough not to have been brainwashed by what was apparently highly effective cold-war era U.S. propaganda.

 

Since you bring it up, here's just one idea from scientific theory that is highly relevant to world politics. That is the idea of symmetry, specifically as expressed by Newton's third law. All actions have repercussions...

 

And now I await your next insults. Just how far will you go to insult me personally in order to avoid addressing my arguments, I wonder?

 

Are you seriously arguing that the Soviet Union only became repressive and murderous *after* Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

[Hugh Conway]

You can teach 'em to type, you can't teach 'em to grow tits.

[Fairweather]

Fairweather, I wonder if it's even possible to dumb this idea idea down any further for you. How about this. Imagine it's 1945. Russia just dropped nuclear bombs on German cities. How would the use of nuclear weapons by Russia have affected politics in the U.S.? It would have encouraged a repressive, jingoistic government to take control under the guise of protecting its citizens from an evil enemy, regardless of how much direct military conflict actually existed. Is this getting through to you? Our display of violent force only encouraged the beast called "communism" to do its business.

 

Seriously. How old are you? And from what pap did you digest this fiction?

Young enough not to have been brainwashed by what was apparently highly effective cold-war era U.S. propaganda.

 

Since you bring it up, here's just one idea from scientific theory that is highly relevant to world politics. That is the idea of symmetry, specifically as expressed by Newton's third law. All actions have repercussions...

 

 

Our possession of atomic weapons didn't force Stalin to loosen his iron grip on his new "possessions" in eastern and central Europe. Ever heard of Poland? Yugoslavia? Hungary? Bulgaria? Romania? Czechoslovakia? Etc? Etc? Are you old enough to remember "East" Germany? How about his grab of The Kuril Islands after we defeated Japan? Do you really think he was all that scared of our weapons? Have you even heard of these places? As a leader (and butcher) of his people, yes, he was likely obligated to seek nuclear parity, and thanks to some good old fashioned espionage, "aquired" German technical know-how, and damn good scientists of his own, he did just that. Would he have done it without US pressure? Hell yes. Communism was - and still is - even worse that those proselytizing religions you hear so much about around here. Its true adherents demand its spread - by "workers revolution" or any means necessary. Hence Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, Cambodia, Nicaragua, etc. We did right to make every effort to stop that scourge. When I was in high school, there was a book that was required reading. The Gulag Archipelago, by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. Please read it if you can find the time.

Edited January 3, 2008 by Fairweather

[ashw_justin]

Are you seriously arguing that the Soviet Union only became repressive and murderous *after* Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

No, I'm not. I'm merely presenting what is an apparently unimaginable possibility, that our own displays of aggression might actually encourage the development and support of repressive governments elsewhere on the pretense of their own national defense. Anxiety over a U.S. nuclear attack was probably a dream come true for the fearmongerers.

[Fairweather]

You do realize of course, that up until late 1945 the Soviets were, for all intents, our allies?

[rbw1966]

And had been executing their own people for decades.

[Fairweather]

True, that. I don't envy Roosevelt's position one bit. We made a deal with the devil when we buddied up with Stalin. I'm not sure I would have done it - but what was the alternative?

[ashw_justin]

You do realize, that up until 1945 the Soviets were, for all intents, our allies?

How do you know that fear over our apparent plan of nuclear-backed domination of the world didn't sour the deal? I wasn't there (i.e. in the CCCP), and neither were you. Forgive me for my skepticism in the face of the constant dogma that we are always good, innocent victims and that our enemies always have been and always will be evil murderers who have it coming. Somehow that strikes me as a little too simple... it almost sounds like some kind of idealistic political philosophy... executed perfectly, at least until people start realizing that there is no shit that does not stink.

[Fairweather]

You do realize, that up until 1945 the Soviets were, for all intents, our allies?

How do you know that fear over our apparent plan of nuclear-backed domination of the world didn't sour the deal?

Please share hard evidence of this master plan for nuclear backed domination. I haven't read about it. I believe that Soviet aggression toward Iran was the only instance where it is alleged we back-channel threatened the use of nukes. I'm not even sure about that. I'll see if I can find it. Meanwhile, please show evidence of our master plan.

 

Just a little factoid: Harry S Truman was the last American President not in possession of a college degree. Now ya know.

[Fairweather]

I wasn't there (i.e. in the CCCP), and neither were you. Forgive me for my skepticism in the face of the constant dogma...

 

C'mon, Justin. I've never actually seen Sodium ionically bond to Chloride. But I don't leave open the possibility the bond is covalent just because I can't see it happen. There are things we'll never know about history, but we can reach sound conclusions and test our hypotheses through journals, photos, interviews - all the while allowing for reasonable dissent. OK - maybe my salt parallel was not so good - but I never claimed to be a chemist.

[ashw_justin]

Please share hard evidence of this master plan for nuclear backed domination.

Trust me I'd love to know what actually motivates our leaders and their adversaries during the worst of times. It's possible that we never will--these are things that we as lowly political fodder are not supposed to even consider. But I'll take that as an acknowledgment that this theory isn't about to be disproven. I wonder why we had nuclear missiles deployed in Turkey by 1961 if we had no agenda of nuclear domination? I bet there was some sort of "Turkish Missile Crisis" in Russia to go along with our little political festival in the Caribbean, but certainly we would have been insulated from this sort of introspection.