walrusman

...like totally awesome...

How disappointing... I really don't care for "Nucular", fossil fuels, or any of these. I mean, 10,000 years of storage? Talk about passing problems onto future generations. And fossil fuels are bad for too many reasons. I really hoped wind farms and solar would take off by now. It would be nice to see Australia lead the charge on cleaner, better alternative power. By the way, are there any plans on putting solar panels in space and redirecting the power to earth? Or did I just dream that?

Love to see that one. But is he going to try to take away gambling or the lottery? My parents love that cherokee casino in catoosa.

See, that's the problem Jim. You're watching CNN, the liberal mother tree of the news networks. These are the same people that fell for the "Milk Factory" report in the first Gulf War. They actually believe that Hezbollah cares about the civilians they hide within just because they staged an evacuation attempt. The thing is, by making a big deal about this WWIII thing with Gingrich, you're basically saying we can't call a spade a spade when we think it's a damn spade. This isn't being political. You may not agree with Republicans, I certainly don't, but there are a few ( a very select few, I might add ) politicians out there that are intellectually valuable and intelligent and he's one of them. I truly don't believe he's playing political games. So, to me, that means he's calling it how he sees it. And Jim, you didn't include the long list of reasons why, which Newt runs through. I don't blame you though because it would take alot of space here on the forum. But that's crucial to this WWIII wording that he's using. There's a good reason why he's calling it that. Quite convincing, when you consider the current issues and state of affairs preceding WWII. Oh and Jim, is it hot enough for ya' in T-town?

You all aren't against this whole gay marriage thing are ya??

I hope I'm not hijacking your thread, but what happens to Time if our universe is traveling through a worm hole? Does it slow down or speed up, or do we know? Would we even notice it?

Yes, I mean like that.

Ok, I have to admit ignorance here. I thought nukes meant big explosion followed by large uninhabitable regions of the world for a long time.

Well I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. If I had my way about things, I'd pull out of that entire region and give them the proverbial middle finger. Concentrate on missle defense systems and shore up the borders with the national guard. I would provide no help or hinderance to them, completely ignored. Only then would we have the moral high ground in the eyes of the world. Any attempted attack on us could be viewed as nothing less than "unprovoked". But all that is unrealistic, I know. That's what I call these countries that drill a hole in the ground and out comes money - weee!! The rest of us have to actually earn our place in the global market. If it wasn't for oil, nobody would give a crap about their backwards ass countries...and they wouldn't be able to compete with the rest of the world. They might actually have to pull together and PRODUCE or MAKE something rather than KILLING things. Sorry, I just can't stand the mentallity of people obsessed with religion and death...

Sorry, but that's just poetry. I mean really. Nukes will never be just another part of war, that's silly. There aren't enough people and the globe isn't big enough for it be just another part of war. I've been listening to this fantasy for years and it's ridiculous to think that humans will wipe themselves out in a fit of global destruction. It just sounds cool when you say it...

There is no such thing as diplomacy with these groups though. They do "false diplomacy". They dress up all nice and smile and take pictures for the camera to foster a sense of diplomatic character. The fighting stops and they regroup and replenish their weaponry and get started again. They just use the illusion of diplomacy to buy time, land, concessions - but the war is never over to them - never... Look at Israel. Land for peace? They withdrew from Lebanon as asked. They withdrew from Gaza as asked. They withdrew from the west bank as asked. They did what was asked, for peace and they got none. They got murdered and kidnapped soldiers in return. There is no diplomacy. We still don't understand this enemy. And they understand us REAL WELL. They're playing us for fools. And they love it when you start talking about diplomacy.

I think it's a worse threat, not equivalent. But only because of what I said before: we have to seek out the bad guys within trust fund states of enablers. We can't just unleash our military might like it was designed for. This means a much longer, tougher war - with more emphasis on world opinion and support. WWII took us a few years to win, this one will take us decades, if it can be won at all. And with Israel killing civilians, albeit within their rights, they're just validating the propaganda used to brainwash those people into terror pawns. Edit: Ok, after re-reading your post I think I may have misunderstood you, still might be. But, it most definitely is a worse threat because they see ancient history as if it happened yesterday - they hold grudges like nothing I've ever witnessed. And since half of these countries are swarming with brainwashing mills turning out poor misguided suicide bombers, it just seems impossible it will ever stop. They don't just want us out of that region. They want to kill us all for their god. Religion is powerful, I'm certain this is a worse threat.

A parent's job is to make these kinds of decisions and it doesn't really matter why they make them. Parents are responsible, in theory anyway, for raising their child into an adult - the way in which they do that is FAR more crucial than lobs of skin and body parts. Besides, most of the women I know are disgusted by foreskin and I'm way more interested in what THEY think...

I can't imagine what relevance it really has. If we're in a position that we think we need to use nukes, I doubt it's going to matter much if we have a policy in place anyway... This is just forward thinking. Like if several Arab countries were to surprise attack Israel for instance, without enough time for the US to mass troops and come to their aid while they're being slaughtered out of existence - then we might use nukes on those countries. Or something like that. You'd be amazed how many "policies" are in place that are just as ominous sounding as that one. You have to remember, we are a democratic country governed by the people, a country of laws. Not a dictatorship or monarchy. So we have to have things arranged a particular way in order to operate.

Ok, I don't think I'm grasping space-time correctly. When they talk about ripples in space-time, what does that mean to the objects caught up in these ripples? I mean, if someone was at point A at the crest of a ripple, and someone else was at point B, at the base of that ripple, do they experience time differently? Or if point B was at the crest of another ripple, how would time effect the two points then?

I was just throwing that out as an example. Was just wondering how time is affected by the big bang, if at all, and how the aftershock might change it. I like to make things as believable as possible, so I figure if it's believable to scientists, then it should be believable to the common reader. And I think real science is far more interesting and unpredictable than imaginary science. So, I was just curious about any theories floating around out there that involve the big bang and time, that perhaps I could study and use. I would love to share more, but I can't. It's one of those things... And thank you AJB, I will look at those links throughout the day today! Dr. Dalek - I would love to get published and will certainly let you know. Thanks for your interest.

What do you mean by that? I thought he was talking about the embryos, which would be true.

Amen. The PR war is absolutely necessary and we are absolutely losing right now, Israel too. And consider this war has limited use of our big war toys. Our military was designed for outright big muscle battle of the superpowers, not necessarily close urban combat with guerillas. If it was just a matter of sending in jets and bombing an entire country 100 years into the past with impunity, sure we could take that whole region of the world in a few days. But this war is about seeking out the bad guys within a trust fund state full of enablers.

Please forgive me because I absolutely know squat on this subject... Are there any theories involving the shockwave from the big bang and time? It sounds interesting to find a way to link our present time to some other point in time after the shockwave...like some weird reverse evolution or something. Or, do scientists still belive in this shockwave? What do they say is supposed to happen? For those who've seen my other post under biology, yes, this pertains to the same story.

What do you all think about this talk of hitting Iran before they get "nuked up"? McCaine said the only thing worse than striking Iran before they get nukes, is striking Iran after they get them.

I'm sorry you're scared. It's all a matter of opinion. Some people are of the opinion WWIII is here, some people think it's been here for awhile and we're just now coming around to notice and some people think it's yet to start. I guess it just depends on perspective. Sure looks like things are about to spiral out of control. But there's a lot of times when things look really bad, alot of tough talk, armies mobilize - but nothing happens. I'm not talking about Israel and Lebanon, but rather the US, Europe, Canada and Iran, Syria. I fear for Israel's safety and existence if Iran or Syria is attacked by any of us. Even if we just take out their nuclear facilities. But then I fear for Israel's safety even more if we allow Iran to make nuke warheads. How do you deal with them then? Yikes...that's really scary.

I didn't say there wouldn't be any of those. I said democracy has very little to do with fixing the problem with terrorism. I think you go out of your way to disagree with me. I haven't met a single muslim who will tell me that a suicide bomber will go to hell for killing Israeli citizens. And I'm not even talking about terrorists yet. The only point I'm making here is that their religion doesn't really have a problem with killing infadels. They denounce it, but I don't see much passion behind it. Just my own observations. There was a radio talk show host here in Kansas City that asked a group of "peaceful" Muslims to denounce the killing of innocent civilians - none of them would do it without a qualifier. There's always a "but", "if" something - because it's bad for the peace process, not bad for Allah.

Democracy really doesn't have anything to do with it in my opinion. Well maybe a little, but it's obsession with death and religion. Even if this part of the world was as rich and free as america they would still bomb and terrorize. It's how they please their god. Watch some of those specials where the reporters talk with some of these people. These people are romantic about dying in service of Allah. How do you die in service of Allah? You suicide bomb the infadels. And I hope nobody is making too much of the 72 virgins thing, because that's a western hangup. That's just one aspect of their heavenly treatment offered by Allah after they "target and kill innocent people" that CNN doesn't want to talk about.

Actually, on a lighter note, we were entertaining the idea of a new kind of bombing campaign over there. We need to send a constant stream of B-52's dropping Ipods, X-Box's, porn, fast food, pot, computers - we need to bring America to them. Once the citizens get ahold of all this fun stuff, they might actually consider "living" for a change....hmm imagine that.

Absolutely right on the money. I tried to dig into the history books to find out who's land it really was and all I found was what you always find when you go digging into history - no clear answer. It does however seem the Jews have been kicked around and enslaved by that part of the world for most of their existence. Establishing their own state and then fighting for it appears, to me anyway, like the underdog finally getting a taste of victory. So it all comes down to muscle. Not exactly our idea of moral high ground, but that's how all land on the earth has been distributed. I doubt there's a square inch of land on the earth that hasn't been stolen or taken away from somebody else. Just like I doubt there's a race of humans out there who haven't been enslaved and been slave drivers at some point in history - just some more than others. That said, Israel should move. Not because I don't think they deserve to live there, they do. Israel has a right to bomb Hezbollah - they are not wrong for that, even though civilians are being killed. Hezbollah is in the wrong - no doubt. But it doesn't matter that they're right. Their bombing campaign in lebanon will create new terrorists, new scars and validate the lies and propaganda used by terrorists to recruite. Everytime this conflict sparks up into fighting that is what happens. This conflict will never, ever end as long as Israel exists. It's not fair, but it's the truth. For their own sake, they should move. It's just pragmatic. They are this little bitty country, surrounded by millions, if not billions of people who absolutely hate them and who's religion preaches for their destruction. After watching all of the death and destruction by these Arabs resulting from a freaking "cartoon", for crying out loud, it should be apparent by now - there's not a diplomatic bone in their bodies. They are trust fund states. If they didn't have oil, they wouldn't have anything.