taks

uh, are you talking american dollars? dang. so either you're rich, or the touareg is a pipe dream... taks

i have a buddy that just loves VW engineering, particularly with the touareg. unfortunately, any worthwhile model is about $50k here in the states. a bit more than i feel like spending on a single vehicle at the moment. taks

technically, infiniti is actually nissan. they do not sell them as infiniti in japan, either. the G35 is based on the nissan skyline (race car) and not surprisingly enough, nissan intends to do a street legal version of the skyline in 2007 or 2008 (can't remember for sure). taks

don't have a picture (you can find it anywhere, however) but my all-time favorite vehicle is/was the infiniti G35. unfortunately, i bought it before the AWD versions came out and, alas, living in colorado with a 2-wheel, rear-wheel drive vehicle with a stick shift and 260 bhp is not a happy proposition. one trip through hoosier pass (11500') in a storm was enough to scare some sanity into me. i sold the G in september to make way for a 2000 cherokee sport. i like it, but it is taking some time to get used to a true 4-wheel drive... going in for new tires today, btw. taks

i was thinking the same thing... very bad. the makeup job didn't help, but they were probably trying to cover up something even worse. taks

what difference does it make as either a) you refuse to read my evidence or b) you are incapable of reading and understanding my evidence. in either case, you've never offered anything backs your position in any argument i've participated in (the last time you posted some links they actually supported my position, hehe), so i'm not sure why you harp that bandwagon as often as you do. my "anecdotal" evidence is actually a response to alanschu's anecdotal evidence. his claim is that it breaks down certain barriers, offered without proof. the fact that there is even ONE case counter to that claim is positive affirmation of my position. in other words, you're plain wrong. the goal of affirmative action is to "level" the playing field. it has not done that. it has created reverse discrimination, and continues to do just that. it allows students into schools that would not otherwise meet the minimum qualifications. it requires companies to hire based on quotas. it does not level the playing field, it creates the opposite. taks

uh, most societal systems require oppression. in such cases, ANY people in power will result in oppression (and likewise cruelty). this is not necessarily the intent, however, as they may not see their tyranny as such. taks

the concept of the "zero point field", or zpf as it it normally referred is not new. it is rather old, actually, and tied to the concept of an ether which goes back hundreds of years. to date, no credible evidence has been offered to prove it exists, only questions about existing theory. the zpf is an interesting concept, and certainly does a good job of explaining inertia (in particular), but still has MANY more holes than standard cosmology theory and quantum theory contain. taks

affirmative action? you're joking, right? it's a mess. a travesty. it doesn't work at all. the people pushed into positions or schools they aren't qualified to be in get more money, but do terribly. i've watched it happen, professionally and as a student. it's not short term, either. it lasts as long as there are people benefiting from a situation they haven't earned. taks

funny, but i never use any of those words. i also don't EVER call people idiots or any of the above just because their opinion is different. seems the liberal movement would rather assign name tags and insults than work out the issues. such are the methods of liberals, eh? taks

and i said it utlimately means the same thing... just not out in the open, which is all it takes to make my point: if bush put it out in the open he'd be chastised, which even you agreed to. we have no reason to use them and the world knows it. there is no threat we can't currently contain without nukes... should iran and NK come up with a nuke, then you might see the US putting their words on the table. till then... taks

i love it how anybody that has a different opinion or ideology is automatically either lying, stupid, or both. thank gawd i didn't vote for that lying moron kerry... otherwise i'd be blamed of the same thing! taks

i don't think anybody is saying france will do anything... the point is that they said they could. taks

but he's also never said they're a possibility... that's what we're talking about. i don't think anybody is foolish enough to think that a superpower doesn't contain the threat of nuclear force behind it's words... they (uh, we) just have to be tactful enough not to put them in front. the point then, is that when chirac puts such thoughts out on the table, nobody whimpers, but if the US does it, all hell will break loose. you even mildly agree with that assumption. taks

not sure what i swallowed from fox... i read other sites, often, as a matter of fact. typical foreign opinion is "US bad, bush cowboy, bad too, US bad again, just for spite." it's silly, actually. and even worse in here. taks

usually only the board, not necessarily the executives. if the law regards board members, then it becomes even more ridiculous. you'll see wealth transfer out of norway quickly when shareholders are no longer allowed to vote as they please. taks

yeah... that's it... gotcha. taks

oh i know... i'm well aware of your positions. truth be known, i'm not a bush fan myself, though i regularly find myself defending him against similar hypocrisy and outright lies simply because nobody else will (er, not many, at least). i just tend to find the other "side" even more reprehensible... sort of a lesser of two evils thing. taks

no, i don't think so. it will make them worse. that's what i meant by the resent. anybody that poured his life (specifically his) into an equal position alongside a woman that is there simply because the law requires it will harbor great resent. further, opinions of said women will be ignored more often than not and they will have accomplished little other than an increase in pay. taks

i haven't researched heat sinking in a while, but i believe the best place to go is HardOCP for overclocking/heat sink information. they tend to favor high-end, expensive solutions, but there is a wealth of information for all levels AND, an excellent forum for such discussions. taks

empires can never stabilize even what is theirs. the british did if for centuries, as did the romans and even the greeks, yet fall they did. the US is probably setting a modern day record for longevity (i'd say britain, too, but they were technically still a monarchy when we were formed so their current "society" is younger). i'm not prepared to discuss how much further this record will continue... ugh. taks

stevethaibin and i have some fundamentally different ideological viewpoints (though we've never had any "hate" debates... just differing views). so when i offer him a compliment about a reasoned response, it's likely not sarcastic. there are a few, however, that get my full sarcastic wrath, but it is usually not faint, nor hard to pick up. so yeah, probably similar viewpoints between you and i... taks

ah, finally, another reasoned response... and from suspect i would not have expected! there's always hope. taks

but france would not have opposed, either. ah yes, funny how france and russia's opposition was more about oil than our willingness, yet rarely is that mentioned. to quote you for myself "Truth to the extreme." bull****. yet here it is 3 years later and we aren't reaping any of the benefits. au contraire, we are spending HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS with no return. exactly what oil is it that we plan to get out of this? hate to tell you but over 60% of the US oil comes from good ole north america. nice try, but facts always win over hyperbole and blustering. can't argue that, but how about proposals rather than accusations. taks

in answer to your first question, a definitive no, di, the world would not react the same way to bush as they have done with chirac. even in this thread nobody seems to point out the hypocrisy other than you. very telling. had it been bush, all the usual suspects would be in here screaming for his head. but alas, there is silence. as it turns out, bush ain't the only leader in the world concerned about terrorists. he's also not the only one that thinks they cannot be bargained with, and the failure of the big three to convince iran to back down is certainly no surprise if you believe the latter statement true. but the rest of the world and their media cohorts are prevented from making note of these global facts as they have to protect their "USA bad" ideology at all costs. taks