Tetrahedrite

This may be true for positions in the south of Lebanon' date=' but how do you justify the extensive civilian casualties in Beruit, for example, which is too far North to launch rocket attacks into Israel? Israel are not just targeting rocket positions that pose an immediate threat, they are targeting [i']civilian[/i] infrastructure such as bridges, roads, airports and media outlets. The Jewish people have had it hard in the past, but their history doesn't justify the destruction of a country. IMO, this arguement is bordering on a strawman. No country or group currently has the ability to "wipe Israel off the map". Hezbollah certainly can't. Lebanon certainly can't. Iran can't, at present (and won't try, they're not that stupid, they know Israel has a nuclear arsenal better than anything they could ever hope for). In summary, the us or them arguement is just not correct. Unfortunately, I don't see there is anything smart, or credible about using excessive force.

That made me laugh.... You could just easily replace "Iran" with "USA" in that sentence and would still be true. But seriously I think people give Iran way more credit than its due.

Against my better judgement, I too must agree that Severian does have many good points, although he has gone about making that point in perhaps too harsh a way. Severian's previous posts about Israel's historically effective use of terrorism (eg by the Irgun and the Stern group) seems to have been completely ignored, but I think it something that is important to discuss. The present islamic terrorists would take heart in the fact that the Jewish brand of terrorism was semmingly effective. Talking to some of my (christian) relatives who have lived in most of their lives Lebanon, they have a growing anger at Israel for destroying the civilian infrastructure and effectively paralysing a country that was only just getting back on its feet. This view seems to be shared by many moderate Lebanese I have seen interviewed on the news reports as well. My personal view is that the present ( and overly excessive, IMO) action by Israel will only cause more radicalisation of the Islamic world and will turn around to bite Israel on the butt (metaphorically speaking).

I've been folowing the solar tower project quite closely, and I really hope it goes ahead. Not only will it generate power, but I'm sure it will give Mildura a huge tourism boost!

Being an Australian, I don't come across here opinions very often, but ouch, she really does have a bee in her bonnet!

I think this is a major problem for a lot of people. Years of demonisation of anything containing the words nuclear or atomic has had a profound effect. And I don't think it will change any time soon. The uneducated masses are the main obstical I see to any nuclear facilities in Australia.

IR = industrial relations

Firstly, I am all for nuclear power in Australia. We have 80% of the world's known uranium resources. Modern nuclear technology is relatively safe, and is in many ways a lot more environmentally friendly than burning fossil fuels (and even hydro, to a certain extent). We also have lots of good places to put nuclear power facilities. Secondly, I don't think the disposal of the waste should be a problem at all. Australia probably has the best potential for nuclear waste disposal sites in the world. The Yilgarn craton in Western Australia is one of the most geologically inactive places know, not having changed for at least 3-4 billion years!! Add to this that it is a huge, unpopulated desert, and you have a prime location. I actually believe that we should have a nuclear waste disposal industry, it could be quite an earner for Australia. However, I don't think that either of the political parties want a serious debate on nuclear energy. The nuclear issue was simply invented by the liberal party to deflect attention from the government's attrocious culpability in the iraqi wheat for weapons scandal, and also the introduction of the draconian and enormously unpopular IR laws. Shame, really.

Ideologies and hatred have the capacity to last decades and centuries (eg israel/palastine), so five years is quite insignificant. The real question is, do you think the actions of your government have made the USA a smaller or larger target in the long run? My impression is that the USA has lost a large part of the credibility that it once had with muslim and non-muslim countries alike, and this will only serve to make you a bigger target for the idologues.

I'm disgusted by the act, but equally so by the reaction of a large number of posters here. In my opinion (and it is just that), many of you are bordering on sick, seemingly condoning the most horrible form of torture. Thirst for bloody retribution is just as bad as the crime itself. It's harsh, but thats the way I see it.

Some reference(s)/article(s) would be nice.

Awww, come on YT, that's not necessary Lest I remind you which nation it was that sent the Australian and New Zealand diggers into that ill-planned and ill-fated quagmire!

*Most* civilised countries have abolished the death penalty. The USA is the only supposedly civilised western democracy that retains it, although one can only hope that the American peoples' thirst for revenge and retribution will die out with time.

If that's what makes you feel good, then yes, the state should murder him.

No, it doesn't.

IMO, soccer is by far the most boring code that has ever had the name "football" attached to it. I really don't know how people are able to sit through a whole match without falling asleep. Any of the other three football codes in Australia (AFL, Rugby Union and Rugby League) are a much better alternative. In fact, i'd even go as far as to say that American Football and Golf are more entertaining.

I enjoyed this a lot! *New CDC Warning: GONORRHEA LECTIM The Center for Disease Control has issued a warning about a new virulent strain of Sexually Transmitted Disease. The disease is contracted through dangerous and high-risk behavior. The disease is called Gonorrhea Lectim and pronounced "gonna re-elect him." Many victims contracted it in 2004, after having been screwed for the past four years. Cognitive characteristics of individuals infected include: anti-social personality disorders, delusions of grandeur with messianic overtones, extreme cognitive dissonance, inability to incorporate new information, pronounced xenophobia and paranoia, inability to accept responsibility for own actions, cowardice masked by misplaced bravado, uncontrolled facial smirking, ignorance of geography and history, tendencies toward evangelical theocracy, categorical all-or-nothing behavior. Naturalists and epidemiologists are amazed at how this destructive disease originated only a few years ago from a bush found in Texas

You said "the uniformed serviceman has clearly made a judgement, based on some evidence, regarding the likelihood that a Middle Eastern dictator hostile to the west would have collaborated with al Qaeda.I don't know about you, but the judgement is prudent in my mind." To me it looks like you are asserting that because Sadddam was a dictator hostile to the west, and because al Qaeda is hostile to the west, that the two must have collaborated. This seems like a clear case of a logical fallacy, in the absence of any evidence what so ever to the contrary. You know very well what the point was. I was illustrating that because al Qaeda was hostile towards Saddam's regime, and it is therefore not prudent to assume that they collaborated. I will assume that this is the case, if you can produce some evidence to the contrary then I'm willing to change my mind. I do believe that the vast majority of servicemen are wrong in linking Iraq with the 11/9 attacks (exclusively). I do not think it is because they are unintelligent, I believe it is because they have been misled by the administration that sent them to war.

To start with, this is a logical fallacy. Osama did not like the dictator, and in fact called him an infidel (1), so I don't think it is prudent to make this judgement at all. Secondly, do you have any idea what this evidence may be? (I quite seriously didn't know that there was any, and I stand to be corrected). Or is it more likely that the 85% of soldiers are relying on statements by the Bush administration about the links between Iraq and the 11/9 attacks(2) (3) (4) etc etc?

[sarcasm] My apologies, all the evidence points towards Saddam Hussein being integral in the 11/9 plots [/sarcasm]

I believe that was the point of the post. The fact that 85% said the U.S. mission is mainly “to retaliate for Saddam’s role in the 9-11 attacks”, when he had absolutely no role in the 11/9 attacks, suggests to me widespread indoctrination, not just in the military, but in the population at large. I am certainly not implying that soldiers are any less intelligent than the general population, but 85% of the soldiers had to get this false idea from somewhere, they didn't just pull it out of thin air.

I don't think it would be a liquid at STP. A linear, non-polar molecule of such a low molecular weight would almost certainly be a gas under these conditions.