costard

I don't get it (no news there) - "revolution" means "Comes full circle." How is it that it also means "lasting change"?

ASL Vet: Seriously, why isn't every political movement doing exactly this? Since when has continuing to do the thing that doesn't work been the best thing to do? JonS, the hereditary union memberships I'm talking about are willable or otherwise transferable assets held in families. Such instruments do exist - they're just not legal in NZ or Oz. As for global warming and the message - it could be the only threat likely to appeal to every population and force some sort of globally cohesive action. The politics of fear is still being practiced... The fact that the reasoning behind the message is somewhat inaccurate (so far) in its predictions (I'm thinking specifically about the energy loss due to phase change of water and the lack of inclusion of this in the modelling) leads me to class the acceptance of the message as an act of faith. As such, I can't see that giving my allegiance to the high priests of the Green movement makes any more sense than doing the same for the Pope. Gore, frankly, scares the **** out of me. Elmar, my error, thankyou. But if I were to have a look at the make up of the leadership of the Danish governments, or the German, French, Swedish... (by Party) since WWII, I wonder how many different Parties would actually turn up?

Sad but true SO - the Left has an international structure that has come out of the International Communists (Trotskyites), International Socialists (rabid ferals and their unwashed and ill-educated offspring) and the union movement. The communications systems of the Left are well developed and have been around for decades. Now that the structure of the Left has matured to the point where it has spawned an aristocracy in its own right (viz the Australian Labour Party's pre-selection methods and hereditary union membership in the US) the realisation has dawned that they need to protect their income (just as any other aristocracy). The education and health systems are most easily controlled because they're usually sponsored to a greater degree by the taxpayer: the public sector noodles along and installs those it regards as reliable for the job, policy is written with profit (for whom?) in mind. It could be that the Left has more in the intellectual bank the the Right, but all I can see is the letting loose of human nature in the halls of power and the resultant pain for the poor sods toiling away underneath. Given that most countries in the west have two party systems where both parties are intent on paying themselves with taxpayer funds from government contracts, I see little chance of an intellectually, or even plainly honest person ever attaining power.

ASL Vet has some legitimate concerns about the power structure of the left and it behooves us to have an adequate view of what is actually going on before we bag him out - it's unfortunate that the only people still writing in support of a conservative point of view and getting airtime are outright loons. As for the power structure of the Left - it is global and it is quite happy to maintain the laws brought in by the right for their own ends. In Australia we have a Prime Minister married to a lady who has made most of a billion by heading up a company that has provided public services for nations in Europe - Germany and GB for starters. And our public service contractors over here are owned by German, British and US interests (all this came out of the philosophy of outsourcing and the belief that doing so would lead to efficiencies and a win for the taxpayer. Ho-****ing-ho.) Pollies are traded around for unkown reasons (we scored Butler as Tasmania's GG a little while go for his efforts in Iraq, we now have someone coming over for a Liberal (conservative) Party safe seat in Sydney. You-scratch-my-I'll-scratch-yours has travelled well. ASL Vet, as far as a hidden agenda for the implementation of a carbon based taxation system, consider this: at present, the value of national currencies relative to one another is distorted by the fact that they're still based, to a greater extent, on the available physical resources available to that nation (mostly gold - hence one the reasons the Canadian, Australian and New Zealand dollars have done so well in the last year). It doesn't matter if this material is uranium, gold, iron, any one of the thousands of commodities traded around the globe, there will always be some sort of distortion able to be manipulated to afford someone an unfair advantage in the global market. Now, if we introduce a (global) tax on carbon, specifically it's transition from the biosphere to the atmosphere, we damp the effect of the commodity based currency system. Or at least, these are my observations and suspicions. It helps that I do wear a tinfoil hat occasionally.

Yup - it was supposed to float. A bit like their dollar.

He had to pluck up the courage to shoot some balloons to lose altitude. I can well imagine....

Fair call Joachim.

I guess it depends on how you define the role of gummint: if the role of gummint is to provide for the leadership of the nation's populace, then a gummint composed of members of the clerical caste isn't secular. If the role of gummint is to collect taxes - demand money with menaces - and spend the loot, then the secularity of the gummint will depend on the overarching culture of the people doing the menacing (the military) and the spending (mostly the military in this case - having gone to the trouble of collecting the money, I can't see them being too happy about giving it up). If you see the role of gummint as determining the laws by which the populace is encouraged to abide, then the secularity of the gummint will rely upon the extent to which the laws of the nation are taken from a religious text. Mostly, I think, it's about the division of loyalties - between loyalty to [a god] and loyalty to a people. I like the distinction between the classes by the way - the taxer and the taxee for the most part.

Not often, but sure, why not? Send me a pm when you're ready to go. Come to think, it's must be about time for an Out of the Dust Tournament.

The USSR fell because the limits placed on dissemination of information were such that it couldn't compete economically. i.e., the security apparatus couldn't trust the populace with computers. Iran is looking at a similar problem.

I understand the citizenry of Israel to be higly observant of religion, but aso highly educated. I also understand that it isn't a particularly happy or stable place to live. If the meaning of God (as a construct of the human mind) is to explain the inexplicable (hence "inneffable", or "intelligent designer" as a descriptor) then I'd say Wildhack has a very pertinent point. Someone claiming to have inside knowledge of the workings of the universe has a much better time of harnessing the support of a populace than someone who just says "F***** if I know why, but doing things this way seems to work." Unless that populace is well enough educated to understand that the first person is most probably telling lies in a deliberate attempt to subvert the political system, in which case his motives, being obscure, are likely suspect (cf. the US recent history.)

Something screwy about that last set of data diesel - the Panther had the same gun as the IVF2? The Tiger I gun had the same effective range and rate of fire as the Jagpanther/Tiger II? As for the uber capability of German optics - I doubt the Yanks and Poms hadn't caught up by this stage of the war (Fireflies in battle). 617 squadron (Gibson's crew) was hitting the centre of the target with six ton bombs dropped from twenty thousand feet - I believe they had to have used pretty fancy optics to get those results. As for the Firefly / Tiger mismatch (and it has been a genuine pleasure to snot those kitties at range, heheheh, sucks be to Sly) - the Tiger I is practically obsolete by '44. Certainly the Soviets are giving it a hell of a beating with the T34/85 in the east. Panthers are the go here - if you can get them.

An anally rententive chef has to be better than the alternative. At least, I'm certain I wouldn't want to eat at the restaurants you patronise, Boo.

Nope. You just have to learn to enjoy the detail.

I think it should be "silt" of the earth, not salt; Shakespeare got it wrong. Most people here are tolerant of others' POV and not at all inclined to believe that they alone hold the wisdom of the ages. I think that rather than your lead indicator for religiosity being the level of education of a society, it should be the level of media saturation maintainable by a political (or pseudo-religious) movement. Technology requires a level of education to maintain - the use it's put to doesn't. In a developed society, where the leadership is not bound by a set of rules 800 or more years old, it is generally recognised that a free populace doesn't make trouble for itself but works for its own betterment. Also, that change is necessarily a risk, but not necessarily a poor or unmanageble risk. Thus the reform of the Roman Catholic Church and the development of Protestant economies, the quantifiable (and of an order of magnitude) differences in levels of wealth generated by the different national populations. If your political system allows for the efficient exploitation of your human resource, you will lead the rest of the world in wealth generation, even if your natural resource base is weak. If it doesn't you'll either have to change or be pushed under. As I see it, the Muslim world is well aware of the need for good leadership (which societies aren't? well, those that can but don't vote) - and is well enough educated to subject the advertising coming out of the West to critical analysis. (The West has held the monopoly on mass media content for many decades.) Pity we in the West aren't as capable - either of performing the analysis or rejecting the parts of the message that are quite obviously perfumed turds. There are lots of things the west does well - but anyone living in the West will tell you that over the last two decades their freedoms (and wealth) have been eroded. Partly this has been a trade-off as leisure time is valued more and so people are less inclined to work hard for their wealth, mostly it has been due to a failure in trust and communication as the message turned out to be untruthful advertising.

Sure looks good.

Except Kiwis. Everyone loves New Zealanders. You're the best.

Yup, can't legislate against bad taste. Can't do anything about a Minister for Racing (!) who is also our Attorney General, and a moron.

Oooh, nasty. I like Hellcats - cheap, manouvrable and deadly. I'm pretty sure their AP ammo is better than that of the Sherman's: at least, when I see a German AFV snotted by a Hellcat it usually explodes in spectacular fashion.

Unfortunately no. Indirect fire is catered for by the arty modules (in this case 105mm). You can, if the circumstances are right, aim for a high point on the ground between your gun and the target and get the occassional miss to overshoot and hit a reverse slope target, but it isn't easily done as you have to match the ballistic path of the shell to the terrain and target location. The latest version of CMSF has introduced semi-indirect fire for mortars and arty (i.e. shooting at a location just out of sight) and we're expecting this to be in the CMx2 WW2 titles.

Lars, you have snow but it isn't winter? Move somewhere else and leave the Arctic to the Eskimo. Or rig yourself a firefighting pump and wash the snow off next time.

When it comes to charm, the influence of testosterone can't be overated.

I usually bag your suggestions out of habit diesel - but I saw a dozen people stand in front of that fan and none of them had any hair moved by airflow.

Maybe its just encouragement for considering a foreign policy method which isn't waging war. And when you consider that he is still waging war... Should he have asked someone other than his kids what to name their dog? He's such a weak appeaser as far as Iran is concerned that the UN is [possibly] going to get IAEA inspectors into their enrichment facility. Having Russian offensive missiles on their border is hardly likely to let Poland feel comfortable with forming an alliance with Russia - I don't see how this move benefits anyone but Western Europe (and America).

The British knew where to end the Empire tho'- they tried an army in Kandahar and had it shot to pieces trying to get out. Brigandage was dealt with summarily, its true: I'm not too sure the modern west would react well to that being the case now. Hostage holding was common too (on the part of the British) - the real threat of losing family members had some moderating effect on tribal chiefs' betrayals and political manouvrings.