11.30.07
OK youre in a motorboat traveling 2344 km-hour in Venice and your boat is at a 30
negative void coefficient reactors
DS — oook
I may not be remembering it very well, What I do remember is this, A) it used a laser or light beam and B) when you remove it the process stops immediately whether its fission or fusion but it was in an article on Nuclear power plants
that’s all it takes to go critical … changing the shape of the liquid
take away the coolant, the reaction stops
ok..pull his ear hair
Nor that Nor any hair! i
lol
so why would they put fusion in wiht fission design plants ?
get yore fangers outin’ mah hayer
Anyway let me look brb
they don’t
and Cry’s
but in fission designed plants of today, you can’t have a meltdown
American reactor design is self-damping … Russian reactor design was self-accelerating
DStewart has Propeciaphobia
it’s impossible
.sz.s .k,.
fangers?
,,mxkmxs
CRY — no no its Orfiesphobia
cry, ayup. Fangers.
wtf is a fanger?
your cat again?
Cry, fangers is them thangs on the end a yore ahms
TwoBilly
noo fvikmgetrdff
A meltdown is technically possible in any fission reactor. 
not really, no if your void coefficient is too big either way it is
mouse fanger ?
PERVERTS
but no plant build today would have that problem
Trouser Mouse oh One eyed trouser mouse is the slang
the new plants are much more stable and the ticket is to build a ton of the small reactors
sure, and you could have a tungusta event tomorrow
Which also won’t be done
We subjected the reactor,” Planchon says, “to what are considered two of the most serious accident initiators for liquid-metal reactors: a loss of pumped coolant flow through the core and a loss of heat removal from the primary system. Both tests were performed at full reactor power with the automatic shutdown features intentionally disabled.
Twobar…they should build them all the same…
This is different but equally interesting
but the pebble bed technology looks to be very safe, from an uncontrollable siutation
cookie cutter style
when they blow up, your DNA wont dissolve so you talk lah this here
trivia question - in what story from the sixties did the protagonist refer to his penis as Polyphemus
talk lak OcDoc, Frankenstein !
hm.. something by Henry Miller?
your autobiography?
lol
OcDoc Jack Kerouac book?
You have to maintain a proper balance between heat generation and heat removal, you have to remove decay heat, and you have to contain radioactive materials, primarily fuel and fission products.” Decay heat comes from radioactive materials in the core, even when the reactor is shut off.
Gravity’s Rainbow
“Divine Right’s Trip” serialized in the “Whole Earth Catalog”
Naked Lunch LOL Whole Earth Catalog Stewart Brand
Do you guys know what the term ‘naked lunch’ refers to ?
Real hippy shit
in a proprely designed reactor, if the reaction gets too hot it stops, and if it gets too cool it stops
I only vaguely remember the WEC
Twobar….a nublie female?
Polyphemus = one eyed giant
Must still exist
no .. do you?
Nomex…the USSR and proper never met
‘naked lunch’ is when you are all jagged coming down off the heroin, and you have to eat, you dont want to, but you HAVE to, and then, feeling terrible beyond belief, you take a look at what that is at the end of your fork
Portola Institute
That is where he came up with it
actually they did, but chernobyl wasn’t one of them
DStewart, did you happen to see the Tigers kick the living shit out of the Yankees?
Burroughs was a bonafide junkie
chernobyl was a graphite regulated reactor, which was a really shitty design
they wanted nuke power…but they never bothered with failsafes…
but he had the good sense of humor even when feeling as bad as it gets
The SNS will work much like the IPNS since both aim a pulsed beam of protons at a target, which, by a process called “spallation,” emit pulses of neutrons that are trained on material samples.
no but i am sure you are going to tell us twobar
But the SNS will operate at a higher energy of one billion electron volts, at beam intensities 40 to 100 times as strong and with liquid mercury as a target instead of the IPNS’ depleted uranium.
Nomex..thats why the US did not use that desgin
in fact, the chernobyl design was a stolen US design that the US never used, due to safety concerns
RVD, already did
Nomex…leave it to the KGB……
:
superconducting supercollider
***FOOM!!!! DOH!!
?? “Colonialism may have been morally bankrupt, but it was good for business, according to US academics whose research suggests that the longer the 80 islands they studied were under the yoke of a European power, the healthier their economies are today
Tailor, of course I did.
thats from some limey
Twobar…heh go figure…
What a game, I loved it.
Thats experimental
maybe Europe should have lept Africa lol
Twobar, one wonders what made it morally bankrupt… anachronism, one might think.
I cant find the one I am looking for exactly
Tailor, it was huge
DStewart…colonies became a liability after industrial age
just think of all that imperialism we imposed on those poor innocent natives
They made the Yankees look like children.
OcDoc..not the USA
DS, ‘morally bankrupt ‘ doesnt fit no matter what direction I try and stuff it in there
hehe
The Yankees were just swinging at so many first pitches
but these are talking about several fission designs which are virtually (Not impossible) but virtually impossible to have a meltdown. You would have to get everyone stoned and disable back ups and everythign concievable would have to go wrong plus added human error multiplied by 1000
FreeTimer — you got the URL on that??
Dam it..I just installed a new cable modem and wireless router, and I cant get the wireless laptop to work. The laptop doesnt want to ’sense’ the wireless. Although I had it working for an hour. If anybody has a good link, let me know
but with most designs now, even if you did that, the reaction would still stop naturally
Yeah, especially the part about having to get everyone stoned…
ANYWAY here is a lot of data but I have read more specifics about 4 plant designs
What was it, 9 up 9 down in 23 pitches?
Twobar, here’s a good link. www.apple.com
http://www.anl.gov/Media_Center/logos20-1/fermi01.htm
you have to threaten the laptop with a cattle prod
elsewhere On a different website
THanks Free!
First three innings…
Quit using fucking Microsoft shit Windows
4 plant designs. Nomex, right
you’re joking right?
as per your last comment.
Tailor, yeah
Everyone get Knoppix, forget Vista
Nomex, does that sound like a joke?
But I wish I could find the website I had, Ill try to
It isn’t.
you have to say, in a sinister voice, “How about a little VOLTAGE lappy toppy?!”
Windows is the joke.
bwahahahahahah
apple is a joke
blah blah.
TT…I will get Vista…on my own terms though
“please pay a $1000 premium for a pretty computer with macOS
Yeah, just keep using the shit.
and not right away either..
now that they use the exact same hardware
Cheaper for more power.
CryHavoc, after it’s cracked? 
no it isn’t
question
Nomex bend over Mac loves you!!!
Yeah, in fact, it is.
they use the same hardware
TT..nope..I will get a legit copy…
Why can america, france, russia, china, uk have nuclear weapons and openly declare having them, but not other countires?
a dual xeon mac is more expensive than a dual xeon HP
what’st he rationale?
Really? In that case, I can run OS X on my Toshiba laptop
but I want to see what sec issuest they have first
are they like the police? i dont understand the world should be a fair place, no?
And then it won’t run like garbage, as it does now.
they got windows running on a mac, give it a few months
anyone can have nukes
OcDoc, um, there’s the non-proliferation treaty
I wish I had the room here to build another PC
there is no law preventing it except international agreements that they sign
OcDoc, but then why does the Un security council forbid other countries from getting nuclear weapons?
a treaty is a voluntary thing … if you sign it you have to follow it … if not, then you don’t it doesn’t
Thorium is much more abundant in nature than uranium. Thorium can also be used as a nuclear fuel through breeding to uranium-233 (U-233). When this thorium fuel cycle is used, much less plutonium and other transuranic elements are produced, compared with uranium fuel cycles. Several reactor concepts based on thorium fuel cycles are under consideration.
OcDoc…wanting them and having them 2 different things..
OcDoc, ok, then let’s talk about the treaty what’s the rationale behind the treaty
do you really have to post that?
first..you need the infra to support them…
amen
One big problem remember early on with nuclear was it also at the time seemed to have a finite energy supply
to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons
DStewart, there is one single simple main problem with apple..its gay.
the treaty says “we have these weawpons of mass destruction, and we’ll keep them, but the rest of y ou can’t have them and we won’t give them to you.”
and no…a big ass rubber slingshot will not cut it
Twobar is right, again.
apple is just another PC manufacturer
while allowing peaceful use of nukes for energy, medicine etc
plus it’s too expensive.
now they are finding they can use other materials to get the fission reaction they want along with new methods
they just haven’t given into their fateyuet yet
yes
US, yes. Once again, good conquers evil, as we beat up DS US, yes. Once again, good conquers evil, as we beat up DS
so what don’t you understand about that
I never owned Apple because it cost more, but I always liked the machines, my ex#2 has one
the nastier nukes that you have…the more infra you have to have and a lot of countries do not have the infra needed
OcDoc, the treaty says we can’t spread nuclear technology because we fear they may be used to build nuclear bombs, and nuclear bombs are bad for the world, right
DStewart is really Karl ROve
that’s the crux of the treaty i mean that’s the rationale agree?
US, by gawd. That’s the crux of the matter.
that’s not my opinion of what the purpose is
DS IS KARL ROVE
Fusion reactors would force peace down peoples throat…
haha
OcDoc, but that’s the STATED purpose, right?
I dunno, they said that about nuclear too “free electricity”
that’s not my interpretation of what it says
OcDoc, ok, give me your interpretation
I haven’t read the original for a while
governments will find some way to fuck fusion up you just wait
Accelerator-driven systems (ADS) address both these issues. They are seen as safer that a normal fission reactor because they are subcritical and stop when the input current is switched off. This is because they burn material which does not have a high enough fission-to-capture ratio for neutrons to enable criticality and maintain a fission chain reaction. It may be thorium fuel, or actinides which need ‘incineration’
OcDoc, so what’s the purpose of the treaty, tell me
Nomex…heheh thats why it is win win they fuck with the reactor..no meltdown…just a nuclear bomb going off… if they don’t…….
not even a nuclear bomb I believe
more power and potable water then they can use
to allow peaceful use of atomic energy without increasing the number of nations with nuclear weapons
though maybe a political nuclear bomb where did this potable water thing come from? I’ve heard it a bunch
OcDoc, ok, “without increasing the number of nations with nuclear weapons”,
fusion doesn’t make water
First, we get DStewart an interior decorator. Next, we buy him a Dell.
the power and water….will seriously impact the war making trend…
why not increase them?
brb
I think this was what I was talking about though this other article explained it much better: The capability of high-current, high-energy accelerators to produce neutrons by spallation from heavy elements has been used in the structural research of such materials. In this process a beam of high-energy protons (usually 500 MeV) is directed at a high-atomic number target* and up to one neutron can be produced per 25 MeV of the incident proton beam. (These numbers compare with 200-210 MeV released by the fission of one uran
it turns hydrogen into helium and some alpha particles no water production involved
the more nations with nukes there are, the more dangerous the world becomes
The proton beam But my understanding is when you remove the beam you stop the process immediately
OcDoc, aha, so according to that logic, then it’s best to have 0 weapons in the world, right?
that’s way more information than I wanted to see
OcDoc, cause you said, the more we have, the worse it’ll be
Though it may be and I need to read more, sub critical as well as lower out put of energy
The reaction would slowly stop.
“The tyranny of political correctness has for years suppressed the qualms that many Britons have had about what was happening to their country. Radical imams were allowed to preach hatred while being funded with state benefits, but few dared to question such madness, let alone act against it. This is where our liberals would take us
I would say it would be best to have zero nuclear weapons in the world, but it’s not possible
OcDoc, why not? OcDoc, why do you say it’s not possible..
If N.Korea has the bomb, Japan will have to have the bomb. China won’t go for that. How do you spell c-r-i-s-i-s?
Im not positive, I am trying to relate what i am reading now to material I read 6 months ago and cant find which explained it better.
because nations that already have nuclear weapons will not give them up entirely
Astro, the scientists said immediately in the one article
OcDoc, why won’t they???
instantly stop
disarmament only works if everyone does it. Hence, it doesn’t work since that can never be guaranteed among separate nations.
the DPRK having the bomb isn’t the problem, it’s when the DPRK finally destabilizes that’s where the problem starts
bbl
US yes. How can one ever trust the enemy to fully disarm . Its stupid.
Now these physcists maybe are full of shit but the last article I read said you remove the beam it immediately stops fission
Twobar, exactly - by definition this is someone you can’t trust fully
because knowing that other nations might also have nuclear weapons, they want to have a few of their own to threaten MAD
But I thought and I cant find this there is a type of gas involved, maybe thats not so.
aloha
any bbq pros here
I don’t know about pro… But I do a lot of BBQ
I recall reading about that
No, because there’s still some fission occuring in the material itself, as the neutrons break off, and smack into other atoms.
US yes. Its amazing it even is thought about, much less acted on
Okay, Nomex. Pretty equivalently spec’ed HP Dual Xeon and Mac Pro: Apple $5148, HP $5346
Khartoum - He is a military hardman, an enemy of the White House and the man who holds the key to solving the humanitarian disaster in Darfur. But as visitors to his presidential residence discovered last week, Omar al-Bashir also wears leopard-skin shoes
Sorry. $5348
TheTailor real bbq’in or that lame grilling stuff?
uranium oxide gas or some shit
well we hav e the BBQ Royale here every year….
so far it has worked well … the nations that already have them have not used them (much)
of course last I head the power output was crap
$5300…for a box?
DS, $5248 ? Are you mad ?
Twobar, no. Just specing them out equivalently.
OcDoc, wait wait, but why would u have MAD in the first place if you didnt’ have nuclear warheads in the first place?
bud`, low and slow
DS, equivalently ? You must be mad.
TheTailor any wood smoking
like, why did someone start thinking, “let’s start researching something that can kill 1 million people in an instant, yea!”
bud - ya mean marinade, wood smoke or what?
how did that happen in the first place?
Same processor, same video, same memory. Of course, the Mac still has more HD space.
and how did that idea get approval?
ok, that’s even procs, even ram, even HDs?
very strange….
DStewart, for that kind of money you can get a Dell.
even video cards?
bud — hickory chips… and water lot of it
After some two years’ deliberation, the Generation IV International Forum (GIF) then representing ten countries late in 2002 announced the selection of six reactor technologies which they believe represent the future shape of nuclear energy. These are selected on the basis of being clean, safe and cost-effective means of meeting increased energy demands on a sustainable basis, while being resistant to diversion of materials for w
No, NOmex. Smaller HD on the HP
Mutually Assured Defecation. If you crap on me, I will crap on you.
you can’t be sure someone else doesn’t have nuclear weapons, so you have to have some to keep the other guy from using them against you and it has worked well so far
Hickory vs. Apple vs. Oak woods
but was the HP 10k rpm?
DStewart, for that kind of money you can buy a cadillac, brand new
bud`, not much, throw on some fruitwood from time to time…
OcDoc, so what happens to a non-nuclear nation?
No. 160GB SATA 3Gb/s NCQ 7200 RPM
the Nazi’s in germany first thought of that
Only one is cooled by light water, two are helium-cooled and the others have lead-bismuth, sodium or fluoride salt coolant. The latter three operate at low pressure, with significant safety advantage. The last has the uranium fuel dissolved in the circulating coolant. Temperatures range from 510°C to 1000°C, compared with less than 330°C for today’s light water reactors, and this means that four of them can be used for thermochem
bud`, hickory is ok, I like fruitwoods better
what guarantee does the non-nuclear nation have that a nuclear nation won’t use htem first against them? and they have no way of hitting back right?
it could be the helium where I go the idea of some gas being used
The Mac is 250MB, same specs otherwise.
they have to hope for the best, or build their own without any help
read up on it. In WW2, Hitler’s team was working on nukes hence the US decided to develop them first and win.
GB
TheTailor so you’d prefer apple over hickory
go = got
saobi, thats why you dont let the scum have nukes
TT - ya sometimes a bit of cherrywood or applewood, but I prefer the hickory
bud`, Yeah, I would,
OcDoc, so then it’ll be justified for a non-nuclear nation to build their own for their own security, no?
so macs are nearly as cheap now interesting
bud - depends on what you are smoking in the smoker
bud`, I think it’s a matter of personal taste.
And a nuclear nation is justified in attempting to prevent it.
Nomex, cheaper.
so now all you have to decide is if you wanna be able to do nothing, or use windows ;p
DStewart, for $5200, you can get a really nice hairpiece. Which would you rather have, a mac or a nice wig? Eh ?
I would say they could be justified to build nuclear weapons for their own defense, yes
i mean, if i’m a non-nuke nation, and i know the us has 10,000 nukes, it makes sense for me to try to get nukes as protection, no?
Anyway, Ill stop, What gets me now though is why are we building 100 nuclear plants this very moment in the USA ?
right? that’s what you’d do as well, right?
Maybe why arent we building 1000 ?
an we’d kill you to stop you, right ?
Kaliuna well, everything
OcDoc, that’s what the us have nukes in the first place for, right?
Twobar could replace BOTH his hairpieces for $5300
it seems we should be building more than 1 which is all I am aware of
that’s what you’d do, right ?
it’s not very rational because the US is unlikely to nuke a non-nuke nation
US-Male, so then you re saying it’s every man for himself in the world
saobi, if your one of the bad guys, than you cant have any nukes.
Nomex, and that doesn’t even factor in the inherent savings of using Mac OS rather than the shit of Windows and all the god damn constant maintenance and down-time by the chunks of seconds waiting for Windows to do the simplest shit like redraw a screen.
so hickory is probably best bet
you can build this, and i can sto pyou, and let’s fuck each other up
now i have to go spec crap out
no shit. And we win.
Nancy Reagan, Nancy Pelosi, Nancy Drew??
Twobar, who determins a “bad” guy?
Tailor, we can find him a nice wig for 5 bucks on ebay
I like fruitwoods, I use pecan alot
so the world is like a jungle, you say
I do.
every country is a selfish country
saobi, uh, that’s a difficult question…whos the bad guy ?
yes, welcom to the jungle, little one
Nor the financial losses suffered by using Windows because it god damn breakds down and runs like crap
you would only want to build nukes to defend yourself against a neighbor who has them, or to attack someone
saobi, let me answer you properly..
my quesiton is, is every country inherently a selfish country in relation to other countreis
who doesn’t have them that’s the definition of “nation”
yes, welcome to the jungle, my child. Step out of your coccoon
Nomex, and just so you know… I use both every day.
is there such a thing as “morality” and “justice” in international politics? or is it just dog eat dog?
sigh
it’s dog eat dog.
maybe i’m too naive
any other questions ?
there is such a thing, but it has to be mutual
One plant design is about 1.2 billion or so.. Christ the government could lend the money for that for national security purposes.. But on the other hand if we were to build all of our nuclear plants immediately we might miss our on some upcoming technologies which would have favored a different plant design. But regardless you would still think we would have more than one plant under construction in this country of 300 million pe
more like alpha dog eat wimp dogs
saobi, if you gave the middle east nukes and took Israel’s away, Israel would be dust by lunchtime. That ought to tell you who the bad guys are.
that’s why the nonproliferation treaty is a TREATY
Macs can run like shit also
US-Male is actually Hannah Montana that is all
Twobar, so all middle east countries are “bad” becaue anyone who goes against isreal are bad?
Timothy, yeah—if you really work to make them do so. WHereas Windows does it all by itself. Windows decays.
who ?
why is iseral so special?
thanks for the help
but that’s not the point
saobi, you understand my point, I hope. Not ALLl the middle east, but you know what I mean, dont play stupid.
but that’s beside the point
It’s the holy land of the chosen people! etc
because they probably have nuclear weapons but haven’t used them despite provocation
saobi, Israel is special because much of the middle east wants it destroyed
ok, we are complicating the discussion i guess my question is:
why do they want it destroyed?
no, its very simple
saobi, no reason that a consensual democracy that honors human rights and exists on a patch of land that was barren desert until its ancient occupants returned would be special.
jhicks, religiousity jhicks it dates back 4000 years
Given the history of the USA as well as its contemporary status, to feel a need to protect yourself from her nukes is insane unless you sponser purposefully and with vigor terrorism and mass murder..
you don’t KNOW what your question is?
is it ok to hurt other nations in order to gain benefits for your own nation? i mean say as a president
Is this a circular argument?
no
OcDoc, its not ok?
jhicks yes
no
k
saobi, what’s special is the millions of square miles occupied by medieval Islamic tyrants and their enslaved subjects
hahaha DS sums it up perfectly as usual
so it’s not ok for the a leader of a countryt o protect its own people and advance its nation’s interests at the expense of others nations?
It’s a flea infested shithole though isn’t it?
You have Attila the Hun, Al Capone, Hannibal Lecter, Jack the Ripper, and Rasputin, locked up in a room together. They are all furiously trying to carve spears out of broom handles. The first to finish, wins. He is not going to worry about the fairness of the situation, and wait for the others to finish their spears.
and even then you are going to get americans non nuclear army, you will get a conventional war not a nuclear war, but if you are not a terrorist and have no intentions to cause genocide or other crimes against humanity fearing americas nukes is irrational.
yes, that’s okay
jhicks that it is
k
OcDoc, it is ok? you just said it’s not ok
Let me explain, I understand the UK has Nukes.
fafu haha
I understand the UK has a long history which I know something about.
each nation can try to compete successfully against other nations no nation has a right to HURT other nations
Raaaaindrops keep fallin on my haid
I have 0 fear or feeling of a need to defend myself against the UK
Habs 3 Leafs 2 OT Shootout
you keep changing the question
OcDoc, so you are saying, nations can only advance their own interests without hurting other nations’ interests is that what you are saying?
I can’t keep up with you ringing the changes
John, that’s unimportant. What’s important is the Tigers beating the Yankees.
You’d better watch those evil brits!
i’m not changing
In fact I dont like France and I dont trust it, But I have 0 fears France would ever use nukes to any reason which was sinister
ok let me be more concrete
DStewart we saw that on the screen and were duly impressed heh heh
Speaking of which, where’s Swigert so I can gloat?
let’s say i’m the president of coutnry X
yes, as long as you don’t use FORCE to hurt another nation it’s okay
DStewart, gloating doesn’t become you
still the ACC is beautiful
I don’t trust Pakistan
Twobar, nevertheless…
you have every right to use force to defend your nation
I don’t trust China either but I trust Pakistan less
can i engage in an economic war with another country, with the result being our own people’s living standards will increase, while the other country will have a famine
I worry about NK and I worry about Iran, Iran is a religious madhouse not just a terrorist nation, A terrorist sponsering natin wiht a religious nut at the helm who believes its holy to nuke Israel
will that be ok
DS, pull those little cheeks back. If you leave them in a gloatful leer, yore face will remain like that
I _definitely_ don’t trust Russia
there is no such thing as economic war it is impossible
OcDoc, ok, but hypothetically
I don’t accept your hypothetical
Yes, if you could hypothetically do the impossible
Now even if Bush was the Religious nut some people claim he is, And he clearly isnt, His religion would consider his use of nuclear weapons as pure evil…
scratch a russian, underneath you’ll find a hun
Whereas in Iran it woudl be glorious
so what you’re saying is, you want to deny reality and act as if nations behaved to your ideal notions. and thereby endanger everyone through inaction
and it would might bring the kingdom of heaven to the president of Iran sooner
OcDoc, if I could fly unaided by machines, but the result would be that you would have to crawl through the dirt, would that be okay?
Canada can’t be trusted either.
if you say so
The rules of international relations are the rules of anarchy. There is no international law worth the name, because there is no international law enforcement.
OcDoc, just hypothetically
To fear America means you have somethign evil to hide, Terrorists, Genocide, Something we would be interested in stopping.
that’s not true … mutual agreements can be enforced
America has never had any designs since we had nukes to take others land or property.
by the stronger party, yes
OcDoc, ok, let me give you another one then. lets say there’s a huge oil resource discovered in a country, and if we toppled the gov’t of that country and installed a new gov’t that’s supportive of us, and can supply us with their oil, and therefore securing oil resources of our country, should I go ahead and topple that nation’s current gov’t. would that be justified
To use our nukes for any evil purpose
well, not completely but mostly
The enforcement of mutual agreements is called “diplomacy,” and its terminal express is called “war.” expression
Embargo is an act of war, right?
I think that any legitimate decision of a legitimate government of a recognized nation should be left alone
Blockade is an act of war.
I question the use of them in Japan but thats history and it was war and they started it, and I wont second guess history but I will say America is not likely to use nukes again and certainly not against anything but the most extreme threat not only to ourselves but to other nations we protect other nations.
yeah, thanks DStewart
OcDoc, huh?? i’m asking you if you think that’s ok why do you act like a spokesperson
I don’t think it’s okay for one nation to interfere in the internal issues of another nation
let them stand on their own two feet or fall
saobi, you’re asking moral questions.
Free markets!
let’s try this hypothetical. You’re in the desert miles from civilzation, with no water, and you find a huge stash of candy bars.
ok?\
how many pancackes does it take to build a doghouse ?
DStewart, yes, i am, the question ultimately is, is it silly to talk about morality in international politics
US-Male: kit kats?
ROFL
And I say might makes right sometimes, and when it comes to allowing a guy in Iran who believes a nuclear holocaust would only bring him to his god, because we can stop him, we should stop him from doing so, using military means if none others. And I dont care if its fair
US-Male: or snickers?
no it’s not silly
both
its the safest thing for the world
mmmm
OcDoc, but does it exist in the international politics
I care more about safety and peace than I do fairness
morlaity, that is
US, 843
somewhat
DStewart,. correct !
FreeTimer, so you think it’s ok to be unfair if it secures your own interests
I care more about liberty than I do about peace Peace is not an ultimate value.
we have mutually beneficial agreements with many other nations …
Peace
DStewart, but if you are dead, how can you be liberated?
based on right and wrong
I think its ok to be unfair if you deny Genocidal mass murdering maniacs with messianic complexes nukes.
But war can destroy liberty
FreeTimer, but he’s only talking, that’s only rhetoric its only politics
saobi, I can’t. But if I’m enslaved, how valuable is my life or peace?
I think its not only ok, I think we have a moral oblibation to see to it that we have nukes but that Iran doesnt. I believe its a moral imperative. and I am an atheist
saobi, also, if I’m dead, I can’t be rich.
shouting “fire” in a crowded theater is also only talking
this isnt coming from God
3 losers in mitchell south dakota today, clinton/daschle/mcgovern
DStewart, well if you are enslaved, you are still alive, which is still 10000000 times better than being dead
its coming from my rationality to Irans irrationality
no, it’s not
OcDoc, um, yes it is.
I’d rather be dead
saobi, is it? Then why do people fight for and give their lives for freedom?
OcDoc, trust me, you’d rather not
it’s a matter of personal preference
I Dont trust a religious nut who things starting Armegeddon is a good thing.
OK, you’re in a motorboat traveling 234.4 km/hour in Venice, and your boat is at a 30° angle realtive to the water. FIsh are jumping into your boat from all sides. Now, how many tomatoes are there in a can of Ragu ?
DStewart, buecause politicians hire good speech writers?
saobi, you talk like a slave.
trust me, I would … and if you let it be known that you’d rather be a slave than dead, you will be a slave pretty soon
A willing slave.
US-Male 3 1/2
trust me
yowz|| is right !
DStewart, what’s wrong with being a slave?
Omg
shouldnt’ slaves be respected as well?
Even a christian religious nut knows its a sin in thier religion for anyone to start armegeddon but god himself, and no I dont believe in a literal armegeddon but Im talking about what could happen in Iran which is virtually impossible to happen in the USA ever
people who want to be slaves should not be respected
US-Male, what is the square root of orange?
no, if you had to respect laves there would be no point in having them blue
OcDoc, do slaves hurt others, no
saobi, should slaves be respected? Yes—to the point where their masters free them and cease to be masters of any slaves.
cool
yowz - banana
saboi, we call that “rights.”
what rights?
laves = slaves
laves tu manos
To start, their right to their own lives and their right to liberty. To start, their right to their own lives and their right to liberty.
tus manos?
Yowz, You need any heacy equipment operators ?
do you have the right to overthrow the gov’t?
You may, yes.
always use them free
DStewart, under what scenario
We have the right to protect the world and our interests and allies when neccesary
Any enslaving government may properly be overthrown
self defense and the proper defense of others
A tyrannical government may properly be overthrown.
FreeTimer, so then the other side also has their right to protect their interests and allies, no?
saobi, no.
DStewart, so what if the us gov’t becomes tyrannical DStewart, why not?
Yowz, Some day I may ask you for a job.. Im getting do sick of being in business.. But I have had a lot of experience on equipment, and what I do lack I can make up fast…
Iraq had no right to protect its interests.
shouldn’t you respect slavemasters ?
DStewart, you are saying, only your side have the rigth to protect its own interests, but not the other side, why?
free, like you’d live in south dakota.
I dont know, some say I might seek to go to work for someone else, one thing I am good at is operating equipment.
it depends on what you mean by “interests”
Yowz, If i Had to I would
Nope. I’m saying only the side that has liberty has a right to protect its interests.
OcDoc, um, he used that world, as him
The only rule in international relations is to get stronger. War is the norm. International agreements are temporary truces.
An enslaving government has no right to protect its practice of tyranny.
DStewart, said who?
so define the words and settle the issue
well free, i live 4 hrs from comet, all interstate hwy
good intentions count for something
saobi, says morality, inherent in human nature.
in heaven, maybe
DStewart, again, prove that ot me i’m a man of science and rationality, not vague words
also in the real world
saobi, and I would sure like to see you come up with some other ground of any right to do anything.
LOL
make yoru case
Yowz and I’m another couple hours south of Comet
Yowz, Fantasising now, but I am getting tired of self employment. its always hard, you know that. Self employed people as far as I am concerned should have to pay any taxes just because of the 24 hour a day 7 day a week job it is.
i’m a man of science and rationality, not vague words
