Walsingham

I've just realised that 'we' don't cope very well with nuanced views. I'd say - forgive the impertinence - that Guard Dog likes people, and is good to good people. But is wary of extending that principle 'too far'. Looking after everyon, irrespective isn't the idea. I've got to say that I don't have any issue with this, this afternoon. I mean it reflects on my point above, doesn't it? If you can see the person you're helping then you can tell pretty well if you're making things worse or better. It's the control problem I mentioned.

Query as a psychologist: do real world pursuits not have more issues to track?

There are lots of similar ongoing conflicts I'm also very interested in, such as Tibet, Chechnya, Sinkiang, West Sahara, Kurdistan, and so on, which all can be adequately explained by knee-jerk nationalism and/or oil politics. There are several unique aspects to the Israeli/Palestinian one which exists in none of the above mentioned conflicts. The unlikely illegal mass immigration of one people to a completely foreign land (on the basis of religion!). If you would have asked me about establishing a Jewish state in Palestine around 1900 when the Jewish population was about 1%, I would have laughed and called you insane The lack of consensus on the conflict in media The absence of "heroes" or movements which I personally would give my support without many objections The pretty extreme one-sided support of Israel in the US The schizophrenic nature of Israeli society, which is ever-changing and contains many different groups with completely different goals All of these points make the conflict unique and if not interesting to discuss, interesting to follow. Well, that's an interesting perspective. But I have to query why you are interested at all in conflict? I don't pay any attention to this issue because I don't believe it's going to change. You should infer that I need to know when things are going to change. I have a practical interest. I'm not clear what yours is, though? Is it simply like watching an ant farm? Come to that I'd be interested in hearing why everyone on this thread bothers to follow this issue.

I wonder if their capability has anything to do with all the hacking? On the subject of engines I thought the old Commie principle was that the plane had a one day combat life in a conventional shooting war. If it survived then it had earned a new engine.

I had a similar problem with rats/squirrels a few years back. Never did work out which, always running loose in the wall spaces. Bloody madness.

Orogun you are coming from a flawed premise here. We have anti-trust laws here (Sherman Act, Clayton Anti-Trust Act, Robinson-Patman just to name a few and hundeds of state laws), that you are not taking into account that would prevent exactly what you theorize would happen. I'd even take it one step further than suggest legislative action that borrows a page from the Glass-Stengal act that would prevent insurance companies from owning hospitals and Medical facilities and vice versa. That would fix your concern too Wals. Fair play. So why haven't we seen anything like it so far? Also I should gently remind you that I've been reliant on government healthcare my entire life, and with the notable exception of my spine - noone seems to know what to do about the human spine being badly designed* - it's been stupendous. I have to know how to push the occasional bureaucratic lever. But it's no harder than getting a replacement recycling bin. *Could we redesign it?

The more I learn about systems engineering the less I like the way we're doing things. We're like chimps on a train, shrieking and pulling or pushing every lever in sight. I am in favour of regulating high energy systems, like modern civilisation. I just don't advocate it until we know what effect our controls will have. I would also be more comfortable if I didn't know many swivel-eyed bastards who indulge waking dreams of ordering people about simply for the puritanical thrill of it.

Uh, Venezuela is one of the US's largest oil suppliers. I could have been clearer. My understanding is that in spite of being a key source, oil exports fell dramatically due to Chavez' management. ~~ As for moral crusaders and white knights... I am firmly of the opinion that recognising one isn't clean does not preclude wanting rid of the dirt.

All you're doing is re-entrenching well established lines. It's the mechanics of the situation which define what is going to happen, not moral opinions. Neither side can deliver a lasting peace strategy, ergo no lasting peace. I should add that there are dozens of equally worthy and far more interesting conflicts raging worldwide. Take an interest in them.

They aren't. The US DoD, for example, and most similar organizations, use internal networks that aren't connected to the internet/WWW. I heard in an NPR interview on the subject of stuxnet that the most likely way it got into the Iranian system is through a USB/flash drive. Either they actually obtain one belonging to someone with regular access to the network and put the virus or trojan on it, or they just drop one in a place where someone with security clearance might find it, and stick it in attempting to see whose it is/what's on it. A less likely scenario is actual agents infiltrating the organization/operation and doing it personally. Exactly... "The Cyber War" is nothing but more FUD coming out of Washington. It's akin to "The Evil Empire" or "We've always been at war with Eastasia!" As long as people are worried about phantom threats they won't be on their representatives butts to fix real problems. Has it occurred to you that a constant paranoia about threats from one's own government is no less pernicious to civil awareness and freedom than a constant paranoia about external threats? I feel almost precisely the same way about you waffling on about Big Brother as you feel right now about what you think is a false threat from cyberwar. I've experienced personally the damage done by hacking, and whatever the source, it is already real. It is already costing billions in security that could be better spent elsewhere. It can and will have subtle and far reaching effects on how we live our lives in the next twenty years. It may not make streelights explode or set fair to your socks, but it is going to matter.

Why do you not think highly of Rand? I'm genuinely curious. Because she was completely out of her gourd?

IIRC there are many non-jewish Israelis. I feel sure I've met several. Don't recall anything about not being able to vote.

I love how some of you chaps are perfectly happy to accept his legacy. Hence the original article. I feel sorry for any nation which has been so poorly lead it has to idolise a complete economic illiterate, and raging egomaniac who has effectively squandered billions of their natural resources just to strike a pose. Venezuela doesn't have to align with the US, but given they are a huge consumer of oil and gas, and they're effectively next door, agreeing a nationally beneficial supply relationship is pure nuts and bolts common sense. Doing otherwise strikes me as political posing.

Yup. Plus I've actually met Harry Harrison.

Perhaps the computer could be small and handheld. Maybe link it to some sort of telephone? Speaking just for myself, and being a dinosaur from before the rise of the net, I don't see why we need to net so badly in big organisations. 95% of what comes through it is pure bureaucratic hogwash. Even when a genuine instruction or idea is sent the impact of the medium is so weak you might as well sound the charge by farting through a trumpet.

I'm convinced by your analysis.

Wait. What commercial?

Bruce VC's advice is spot on. Practice, practice, practice. Timing is crucial in any language. I'd also suggest simplifying the language and concepts to mitigate the risk of causing offence. Anger, jail, these are things which even MLK would struggle to use lightly. The jail anecdote really only works in a lengthier context, IMO.

"Ken Livingstone, George Galloway and Gerry Adams all said he was a great man, which is pretty much all you need to know about Hugo Chavez." Guardian readers pay tribute to man who would have banned The Guardian

greylord, while I can approve of your egalitarian instinct in retsraining government I don't think you are really squaring your logic all the way round. The nature of democratic law is PRECISELY and COMPLETELY about people forcing their opinions on other people. All democracy gets you is the right to stand up and debate it before it happens. Our democratic stance in most countries ensures against discrimination on grounds of sexuality. If you really don't want government sticking its nose into religion, then I would respectfully suggest that religion stop relying on government to protect its corner. Stop religions being able to confer civil benefits - tax breaks for married couples, exemption from giving testimony, contractual and financial capabilities - on religious institutions. Then it must rely solely upon the force of its arguments and the integrity of its proponents.

Do not want become boring Europeans. http://youtu.be/YiTrcnsgmVQ Yes, I can see why not.

So, hang on, let me see if I understand this? Private industry owns both the insurance against the event, and the provision for the event? So their ideal point (in graph terms) is where premium intake and cost of provision are at maximum? GD, you will concede that in the limited sense of this dynamic private health insurance and private healthcare provision are a poor combination? However, I am oliged to concede that given a proliferation of providers it would be harder for a small number of commercial agencies to monopolise both in a given area, bringing costs down.

Please do continue. Rest assured this is a wonderful use of your time, and we're enthralled.

South Africa is very much the exception which proves the rule. Look at the entire rest of Africa. You might also want to brush up on your Irish history. There were widespread and appalling reprisals against non-Republicans following independence. Not to mention an exodus (no joke intended) of Protestants. Besides, as I say, even in South Africa you've seen the gradual and sliding elimination of the Afrikaans culture. And however you feel about that, expecting a nation to vote itself into nonexistence is damned foolish. They might do it, but I'm buggered if I know how I'd sell it to them. Any problem that communism solves is a problem I'd rather live with. It's the political equivalent of castration.

Good for you. I couldn't face it. Better than getting eaten by worms, I suppose.