Snapshots of Afghanistan - August 2009

On 2009-08-30 15:17:39 -0700, "Bill Graham" said:


"Savageduck" wrote in message
news:2009083015080142612-savageduck@REMOVESPAMmecom...
A process which will virtually eliminate the drug advances which we
have achieved during the last 50 years or so. (almost all of which have
been American, and none from those countries which have socialized
medicine)
Not all. Check on pharmaceutical companies such as Ciba-Geigy, Sandoz,
Nattermann Aventis, and many more.

Mostly financed by UD money........

Also US research based pharmaceutical companies were put behind the
curve with the Bush administration restrictions on stem cell research.

I agree with this. But just because I am a conservative doesn't mean I
am a religious nut. The Republican party does contain a few atheists,
you know......

There is hope for you yet.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

"Chris Malcolm" wrote in message
...
In rec.photo.digital Bill Graham wrote:
"Savageduck" wrote in message

There was some justification for the initial phase of the Afghan War
following WTC and the failure of the Taliban to cease support for Al
Quaida & OBL.
The 8 year duration is a direct result of the Bush administration change
of focus to the irrational and unnecessary Iraq debacle.
If we had stayed the course in Afghanistan and kept out of Iraq things
could have been settled by now with a lot lower cost all round.

Yes, and Saddam and/or his sons would be able to kill off another 2
million
Iraqis in the next 30 years, and they would still be living without
freedom
and democracy. Right now, the Iraqi people have a decent future to look
forward to. As far as Afghanistan is concerned, I doubt if it would have
made any difference. We will be there until we finally decide to get out,
and little will change there one way or the other......We might as well
leave right now.

I see! Thanks for explaining that. I was always puzzled why the US
hadn't put the necessary effort into chasing down the terrorists who
had hit the twin towers. But what happened was the US govt noticed
that there was a nasty dictartorship somewhere else in the world that
was murdering its citizens, and with commendably unselfish generosity
decided they could pull back some of the military resources needed for
getting the bin Laden gang and help those poor people overthrow their
dictator.

"Somewhere else in the world" turns out to be right next door. Also, Bush
didn't act all on his own, you know. (contrary to what all the liberals seem
to want us to think) He had the backing of the CIA, the State department,
congress, and the Pentagon, as well as most of his cabinet. It was only when
things didn't go so well, that all these others began backing out and acting
as if they never had any say in it.....They call these people, "Fair weather
friends". They all jumped ship, and let the capitan go down with the
boat....



Wouldn't it be a good idea to deal with our own enemies first, before
helping other peoples to get rid of theirs?

I agree in retrospect. Were you saying that in October 2001? - Or did you
just think of that in the last couple of years? (Just asking)


--
Chris Malcolm

On 2009-08-30 15:27:19 -0700, Savageduck said:

On 2009-08-30 15:10:36 -0700, "Bill Graham" said:


"Savageduck" wrote in message
news:2009083015080142612-savageduck@REMOVESPAMmecom...
On 2009-08-30 14:24:43 -0700, "Bill Graham" said:


"Savageduck" wrote in message
news:2009083014031378840-savageduck@REMOVESPAMmecom...
On 2009-08-30 13:18:21 -0700, "Bill Graham" said:


"Savageduck" wrote in message
news:2009083005011343042-savageduck@REMOVESPAMmecom...
On 2009-08-29 23:19:25 -0700, "Bill Graham" said:


"Bob Larter" wrote in message
...
I'd come off as less of an idiot to you were I to read and accept your
propaganda, that's for sure........I am sorry to inform you that I get
my information from other sources.

Yeah, like Faux News.

It beats the fawning idolatry of Brian Williams. Check out Glen Beck,
If you're interested in our progress toward socialism.

Glen Beck!!??
...and your alternative is Brian Williams?
Oh Bill! It is so sad to finally understand the reason for the
astonishing level of bitterness you hold for the World and your fellow
US citizens. Glen Beck has told you who to blame, and it is everybody
but GWB and Murdock.
I guess it is far too late to let you know there are other far more
reliable, and less biased sources of information than Fnews and most of
what the networks sell (though occasionally they are able to come close
to getting to the truth.)

Funny.....I listen to what is said, and not who is saying it. Beck
comes through to me loud and clear, and in spades. How about telling me
where he is wrong, instead of castigating his character? Or, do you
even hear what he is saying?

I gave up listening to Fox News for the desperate sometime ago, in much
the same way I don't listen to Limbaugh or Savage, all provide
"unbalanced" misinformation, and as such their characters are as
questionable and unreliable as their reportage.

So I am right......You don't hear what he is saying. Funny, when I
listen to Brian Williams and others who anchor the evening news on ABC,
CBS, and NBC, I hear a lot of meaningless claptrap, and lots and lots
of misinformation. Especially when they quote numbers.....Most of these
people can't tell the difference between a million, billion, and
trillion......They tend to use these three words interchangeably. This
doesn't give me a hell of a lot of confidence in the veracity of what
they say.

Nobody says you should accept what is reported by any network as the
absolute truth, they are all chasing ratings after all.

To me, the logic of the conservative commentators is a lot more
realistic than these people. Beck, for example, has researched the
people who are advising president Obama, and I sure don't like their
backgrounds......Many are socialists at best, and communists at
worst.....Terrorists, to boot. It explains why Obama is hell bent on
socializing the medical profession in this country.
Opinions you have adopted due to brainwashing from the Fox/Murdock team.

A process which will virtually eliminate the drug advances which we
have achieved during the last 50 years or so. (almost all of which have
been American, and none from those countries which have socialized
medicine)
Not all. Check on pharmaceutical companies such as Ciba-Geigy, Sandoz,
Nattermann Aventis, and many more.
Also US research based pharmaceutical companies were put behind the
curve with the Bush administration restrictions on stem cell research.

(It takes a capitalized drug industry to get the incentives to develop
good medicines.)
see above.

Our only hope is to dump this guy and his administration in the next
election. There is only one word for a socialized economy, and that
word is "drab". Everyone will look alike, act alike, and think
alike......Just go to England and look around, and you will see what I
mean.

You don't travel much do you?

I listen to the other three news stations as much as I do Fox, and I
compare what they all say. But you refuse to listen to what the best
one is saying, don't you? So how can you tell me that I am biased?
Check out your own mirror........

I gave up on Fox when their right-wing mind-numbing political agenda
filled with FUD lost all credibility.
...but it appears you are right in the center of their target market.
--
Regards,

Savageduck

I guess you have a reading problem too:

I am not the one with a problem in this discussion. My reading skills
are just fine.

...and coming from a background in Law Enforcement I have had to deal
with a whole culture of individuals who have a similar mind set to
yours. A group of sheep herded by Fox, Hannity, Beck & Limbaugh, all
led by the nose through fear of what a just US might cost them (or in
this case you.)

I am thankful I have been able to retire and retain ties with those
colleagues you think rationally, and forget about the knee-jerk
reactionaries.

That was; "I am thankful I have been able to retire and retain ties
with those colleagues WHO think rationally and forget about the
knee-jerk reactionaries."

--
Regards,

Savageduck

"Savageduck" wrote in message
news:2009083015271944303-savageduck@REMOVESPAMmecom...
On 2009-08-30 15:10:36 -0700, "Bill Graham" said:


"Savageduck" wrote in message
news:2009083015080142612-savageduck@REMOVESPAMmecom...
On 2009-08-30 14:24:43 -0700, "Bill Graham" said:


"Savageduck" wrote in message
news:2009083014031378840-savageduck@REMOVESPAMmecom...
On 2009-08-30 13:18:21 -0700, "Bill Graham" said:


"Savageduck" wrote in message
news:2009083005011343042-savageduck@REMOVESPAMmecom...
On 2009-08-29 23:19:25 -0700, "Bill Graham" said:


"Bob Larter" wrote in message
...
I'd come off as less of an idiot to you were I to read and accept
your propaganda, that's for sure........I am sorry to inform you
that I get my information from other sources.

Yeah, like Faux News.

It beats the fawning idolatry of Brian Williams. Check out Glen
Beck, If you're interested in our progress toward socialism.

Glen Beck!!??
...and your alternative is Brian Williams?
Oh Bill! It is so sad to finally understand the reason for the
astonishing level of bitterness you hold for the World and your
fellow US citizens. Glen Beck has told you who to blame, and it is
everybody but GWB and Murdock.
I guess it is far too late to let you know there are other far more
reliable, and less biased sources of information than Fnews and most
of what the networks sell (though occasionally they are able to come
close to getting to the truth.)

Funny.....I listen to what is said, and not who is saying it. Beck
comes through to me loud and clear, and in spades. How about telling
me where he is wrong, instead of castigating his character? Or, do
you even hear what he is saying?

I gave up listening to Fox News for the desperate sometime ago, in
much the same way I don't listen to Limbaugh or Savage, all provide
"unbalanced" misinformation, and as such their characters are as
questionable and unreliable as their reportage.

So I am right......You don't hear what he is saying. Funny, when I
listen to Brian Williams and others who anchor the evening news on ABC,
CBS, and NBC, I hear a lot of meaningless claptrap, and lots and lots
of misinformation. Especially when they quote numbers.....Most of these
people can't tell the difference between a million, billion, and
trillion......They tend to use these three words interchangeably. This
doesn't give me a hell of a lot of confidence in the veracity of what
they say.

Nobody says you should accept what is reported by any network as the
absolute truth, they are all chasing ratings after all.

To me, the logic of the conservative commentators is a lot more
realistic than these people. Beck, for example, has researched the
people who are advising president Obama, and I sure don't like their
backgrounds......Many are socialists at best, and communists at
worst.....Terrorists, to boot. It explains why Obama is hell bent on
socializing the medical profession in this country.
Opinions you have adopted due to brainwashing from the Fox/Murdock team.

A process which will virtually eliminate the drug advances which we
have achieved during the last 50 years or so. (almost all of which have
been American, and none from those countries which have socialized
medicine)
Not all. Check on pharmaceutical companies such as Ciba-Geigy, Sandoz,
Nattermann Aventis, and many more.
Also US research based pharmaceutical companies were put behind the
curve with the Bush administration restrictions on stem cell research.

(It takes a capitalized drug industry to get the incentives to develop
good medicines.)
see above.

Our only hope is to dump this guy and his administration in the next
election. There is only one word for a socialized economy, and that
word is "drab". Everyone will look alike, act alike, and think
alike......Just go to England and look around, and you will see what I
mean.

You don't travel much do you?

I listen to the other three news stations as much as I do Fox, and I
compare what they all say. But you refuse to listen to what the best
one is saying, don't you? So how can you tell me that I am biased?
Check out your own mirror........

I gave up on Fox when their right-wing mind-numbing political agenda
filled with FUD lost all credibility.
...but it appears you are right in the center of their target market.
--
Regards,

Savageduck

I guess you have a reading problem too:

I am not the one with a problem in this discussion. My reading skills are
just fine.

...and coming from a background in Law Enforcement I have had to deal with
a whole culture of individuals who have a similar mind set to yours. A
group of sheep herded by Fox, Hannity, Beck & Limbaugh, all led by the
nose through fear of what a just US might cost them (or in this case you.)

I am thankful I have been able to retire and retain ties with those
colleagues you think rationally, and forget about the knee-jerk
reactionaries.

"Thinking rationally" is (thank God) in the eye of the beholder.As I say, I
have been listening carefully to what Glen Beck has been saying these last
few weeks.....How about you? There are those who think for themselves, and
those who just "follow the law". Once upon a time, Fritz broke in a Jewish
lady's door and dragged her out screaming into the night:
"But Fritz, I have always been a good person and never did anything wrong!"
she said.
"Sorry, but orders are orders, Mrs. (Whoever) The law says I have to send
you off to the concentration camp, and I am a good person who always obeys
the law."

How about you, Savageduck? - Are you a good person who always obeys the law?
Or do you ever think for yourself?

On 2009-08-30 14:30:19 -0700, (Ray Fischer) said:

Bill Graham wrote:
"DRS" wrote in message

Patton was a self-aggrandising idiot. The Soviets would have creamed the
Allies in 1945. The only areas in which the Allies were superior to the
Soviets were logistics, artillery and communications. The Soviet airforce
was qualitatively and quantitatively as good as ours and their heavy
armour was to ours as a Hummer is to a Mini. They had more seasoned
combat troops too.

Of course, that begs the question of just why a liberal democracy would
want to "take over the world" anyway.

1. You are wrong, and G. Patton knew it at the time, or he wouldn't have
recommended it.

Then what's the difference between Patton and Goering?

They were both pompous, arrogant, egotistic asses, (you can also throw
Montgomery in there) but Patton had a sense of purpose to drive his men
to sacrifice themselves to polish his reputation. As a result he was
ultimately successful, but he had to be defused and was given a
dead-end occupation command, or he would have cost many more lives.
Goering couldn't do much but posture at the end.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

"Savageduck" wrote in message
news:2009083015445497157-savageduck@REMOVESPAMmecom...
On 2009-08-30 14:30:19 -0700, (Ray Fischer) said:

Bill Graham wrote:
"DRS" wrote in message

Patton was a self-aggrandising idiot. The Soviets would have creamed
the
Allies in 1945. The only areas in which the Allies were superior to
the
Soviets were logistics, artillery and communications. The Soviet
airforce
was qualitatively and quantitatively as good as ours and their heavy
armour was to ours as a Hummer is to a Mini. They had more seasoned
combat troops too.

Of course, that begs the question of just why a liberal democracy would
want to "take over the world" anyway.

1. You are wrong, and G. Patton knew it at the time, or he wouldn't have
recommended it.

Then what's the difference between Patton and Goering?

They were both pompous, arrogant, egotistic asses, (you can also throw
Montgomery in there) but Patton had a sense of purpose to drive his men to
sacrifice themselves to polish his reputation. As a result he was
ultimately successful, but he had to be defused and was given a dead-end
occupation command, or he would have cost many more lives.
Goering couldn't do much but posture at the end.

When you add up all the lives that Patton would have lost in his Endeavour
to take over the world, be sure to add in those that he would have saved.
Especially all the Soviet lives that Stalin managed to kill of in the years
since 1945. And all the lives wiped out by all the other dictators like
Saddam, Kim Jung Ill, and the Chinese Communists and many more too numerous
to mention. Then be sure to add up all the people killed off by tidal waves,
famines and earthquakes in countries that had no reasonable building laws.
or food programs, and all the diseases that our drugs would have stopped in
their infancy. and.......Well, I could write a book about it.......
Just want to make sure that you don't miss anyone.......

On 2009-08-30 14:33:31 -0700, (Ray Fischer) said:

Bill Graham wrote:
"Walter Banks" wrote in message
Bill Graham wrote:

I could personally care less about them or that part of
the world. I never sent anyone over there to kill 3000 innocent people,
There is no one on my block here in Oregon that is training to go
anywhere
to kill civilians, and never has been.

Many more than 3000 innocent people have been killed
since 911 in the name of WTC revenge. Which killer should I
be most concerned about the one who killed first or the one who
killed the most.

How about the one who targeted innocent civilians like the ones who happened
to be in those twin towers?

Or the ones who happend to be in Bahgdad? Or Mosul? Or elsewhere in
Iraq?

Civilians have always been killed in the wars of
mankind, but even the Japanese in WW-II didn't target them at Pearl
Harbor......

But the Allies did in Dresden.

There is more to the Dresden story, total numbers were never confirmed
and as tragic as it was the civilians and refugees were never the
target, the rail yards and some of the war industries were.
The real tragedy was, the Russians were just behind the flow of
refugees from the East, and would have occupied Dresden within a few
weeks of the bombing anyway. The industries were about done for without
any further bombing.
Dresden was named as a target because the name came out of a hat, a
lottery so to speak. It was just on a list of German cities to be
considered as targets and its luck ran out.
There is also the claim that the bombing was done as a demonstration
for the Russians.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing...n_World_War_II

--
Regards,

Savageduck

"Savageduck" wrote in message
news:2009083015585829560-savageduck@REMOVESPAMmecom...
On 2009-08-30 14:33:31 -0700, (Ray Fischer) said:

Bill Graham wrote:
"Walter Banks" wrote in message
Bill Graham wrote:

I could personally care less about them or that part of
the world. I never sent anyone over there to kill 3000 innocent
people,
There is no one on my block here in Oregon that is training to go
anywhere
to kill civilians, and never has been.

Many more than 3000 innocent people have been killed
since 911 in the name of WTC revenge. Which killer should I
be most concerned about the one who killed first or the one who
killed the most.

How about the one who targeted innocent civilians like the ones who
happened
to be in those twin towers?

Or the ones who happend to be in Bahgdad? Or Mosul? Or elsewhere in
Iraq?

Civilians have always been killed in the wars of
mankind, but even the Japanese in WW-II didn't target them at Pearl
Harbor......

But the Allies did in Dresden.

There is more to the Dresden story, total numbers were never confirmed and
as tragic as it was the civilians and refugees were never the target, the
rail yards and some of the war industries were.
The real tragedy was, the Russians were just behind the flow of refugees
from the East, and would have occupied Dresden within a few weeks of the
bombing anyway. The industries were about done for without any further
bombing.
Dresden was named as a target because the name came out of a hat, a
lottery so to speak. It was just on a list of German cities to be
considered as targets and its luck ran out.
There is also the claim that the bombing was done as a demonstration for
the Russians.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing...n_World_War_II

Yes......Not all the mistakes in war were committed by the axis
powers.....Everyone makes mistakes, especially in a war carried on at
several fronts, and against several different enemies. But the overall
intentions have to be considered, as well as the nature of the mistakes. It
was never our intention to just kill off civilians. The killing of civilians
just to see them die was uniquely popularized by modern day terrorists like
OBL. These are people who believe their God wants as many people killed off
as possible. (Why He doesn't just destroy the whole earth with a celestial
collision of some sort is beyond me, but then the logic of most religions
escapes me anyway, so I am not the one to ask or answer questions like this)

Bill Graham wrote:

Also US research based pharmaceutical companies were put behind the
curve with the Bush administration restrictions on stem cell research.

I agree with this.

Uh, no. Stem cell research is not drug research.

Doug McDonald

On 2009-08-30 15:39:51 -0700, "Bill Graham" said:

----------Snipped for Pain relief---------------

I guess you have a reading problem too:

I am not the one with a problem in this discussion. My reading skills
are just fine.

...and coming from a background in Law Enforcement I have had to deal
with a whole culture of individuals who have a similar mind set to
yours. A group of sheep herded by Fox, Hannity, Beck & Limbaugh, all
led by the nose through fear of what a just US might cost them (or in
this case you.)

I am thankful I have been able to retire and retain ties with those
colleagues you think rationally, and forget about the knee-jerk
reactionaries.

"Thinking rationally" is (thank God) in the eye of the beholder.As I
say, I have been listening carefully to what Glen Beck has been saying
these last few weeks.....How about you? There are those who think for
themselves, and those who just "follow the law". Once upon a time,
Fritz broke in a Jewish lady's door and dragged her out screaming into
the night:
"But Fritz, I have always been a good person and never did anything
wrong!" she said.
"Sorry, but orders are orders, Mrs. (Whoever) The law says I have to
send you off to the concentration camp, and I am a good person who
always obeys the law."

How about you, Savageduck? - Are you a good person who always obeys the
law? Or do you ever think for yourself?

I am an ordinary person, I have received my share of speeding tickets,
I am not a criminal who seeks to harm innocents.
I certainly think for myself. I gave myself the option not to deal with
Fox, I bought a Mercedes (my third one), because I like it. I have a
D300 & D70 because they work for me. I bought a Pentax K1000 and a
Spotmatic before that, a Yashica Electro35, and I actually have and use
a Fujifilm P&S , an E900. I also have a Mac (actually I have 5 Macs and
an Apple IIe, somewhere in my garage is an old 8088 machine, I learned
FORTRAN on an NCR mainframe with punchcards in 1970.) All done thinking
for myself, though there will always be some who will question the
quality of that thinking.

I had a profession where I enforced the Law, and where there were times
I made discretionary calls to provide a degree of counsel instead of
applying the full weight of the Law. I found it to be a useful and at
times satisfying method. In my last few years as a supervisor and
investigator there have been many times I have had to deal with over
zealous officers. However for the most part Law enforcement officers do
actually understand they are there to enforce the Law not interpret it
or punish suspects. The determination of guilt and punishment lies with
the Court..


--
Regards,

Savageduck