🚀 go-pugleaf

mcs wrote:
> "Werner" <whetzner@mac.com> wrote in message
> news:1163778563.489782.302610@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > mcs wrote:
> >>.. For instance, if we had cameras that were able to see
> >> the head of a penny from space in early 70s how is it we can't defeat
> >> terrorists who have no army persay, no organized communication system, no
> >> airforce and  no armored tanks?
> >
> > Guerrilla wars sometimes succeed. Guerrillas are very ruthless. They
> > murder without mercy teachers, officials, police, doctors or anyone who
> > opposes them; anyone who represents the 'established order'.
> >
> Ha I am not saying they are not lethal but how organized  and  effective can
> many terrorists be  without  education  and the total  ammunitions we have
> in technology  and arms  against the best trained army in the world . At
> some point you think the technology and total number of weapons would close
> the gap in winning this war. Lets say the same five people plant bombs and
> then they go to the same two houses all the time. How hard would it be to
> form some kind of strategy to even tighten the noose of those who associate
> with them over time, by setting up traps and monitoring the same people?


The whole point of guerrilla tactics is that they are unconventional.
Conventional technology is generally ineffective against such tactics.

If you think you have the answer I suggest you talk to the military.



> Something is not right. . True terroism is lethal but do we know why many in
> Congress say we fought an ill prepared war?  .
>


Sure. It's easy to say. It's easy to blame others.


> > I'm sure we could stop the Iraq insurgency. But I expect it requires
> > the same kind of ruthlessness practiced by insurgents. We don't have
> > that kind of will. For example, Saddam basically wiped out Kurdish and
> > Shiite towns to stop insurgencies. We could easily wipe out Baghdad and
> > the surviving insurgents would reconsider their efforts. But we will
> > not.
>
> then we will win or we will not win and if we don't win then what was the
> point? At any point we have to know that any one terrorist or ten terrorists
> can do more damages then killing thousands of them. It only takes one to to
> ten terrorists to plot weapons of mass destruction. The sad fact is we know
> who has the weapons of mass destruction and thats not who we are going after
> are we?
>
>


You have a point there. But how likely is NK to nuke the USA?


>
> >
> >...> >
> > I don't see any industry murdering people. I always had the impression
> > that pharmacy industry seeks to saves lives and energy companies
> > provide energy. What would we do without either?
> >
> First off you don't probably see 50 percent of commercials in our area for
> health care. You should compare our health to other cities. we have more
> violence and diesease and less longevity. We almost have twice the amount of
> cancers and heart disease. My argument is if we are concerned with errant
> car seats why we are not concerned with one in five kids getting asthma in
> some places in ne? I am more concerned with why reporters don't think this
> is important then why Pharmacies do know why and are here ready to pounce on
> people whose health is compromised. In addition like I said ten times
> before. if one were objective we have epa and Amercian Lung Association and
> new studies pointing out studies that says tens of thousands are dying from
> this moderate polution and I am one of them. I don;t take being poisoned
> lightly. So then you see other things and you realize that whats happening
> is what I consider all amercians being protected equally. to say the least.


If things are so bad move elsewhere. Show me numbers. Don't freak out.
Love Canal was supposed to be bad.
http://1marketsquare.com/CapLP/Environment.shtml

But don't worrry so much. Industry is moving overseas along with
talent, jobs, quality of life and wealth.