On Fri, 28 Dec 2007 11:49:19 -0600, "Adam Corolla"
wrote:
"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 26 Dec 2007 14:39:34 -0600, "Adam Corolla"
wrote:
"Jeff R." wrote in message
m.au...
"Adam Corolla" wrote in message
news
FYI, eBay cancelled the auction, stating that Gallium is considered a
"hazardous substance."
Not he
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI....m=300182719496
Just "ended".
I wish to hell I knew why eBay cancelled MY auction and not the other
guy's,
but their policies for sales from Ireland to Australia (the auction to
which
you linked) might not be the same as selling it from within the US to
other
points within the US (my auction) especially since the USPS will not
transport gallium, period. I had no idea that gallium was on the USPS's
banned list until eBay canceled my auction, then I looked it up because I
couldn't believe it.
Well, it makes sense I guess. If gallium comes in contact with two common
substances, aluminum and water, it creates hydrogen gas which is extremely
flammable. Also without even water, liquid gallium destroys other metals
including aluminum, meaning it could create all kinds of havoc inside a
vehicle.
Particularly inside an aircraft. Think of it rolling around inside
the cargo hold, up against the skin of the aircraft and the
bulkheads....at 35,000 feet
Gunner
Definitely a bad situation, I could easily understand why gallium would have
to be transported by ground or water only. I wonder how the seller in
Irelend plans to ship to Australia?
"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.
Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner
So said every other empire that ever existed. "We're bringing civilization
to those people and improving their lives, while protecting them from
themselves and us from them." The fact that "those people" fight the
empire-builders is simply seen as evidence that they don't know what's best
for them and therefore *need* to be controlled by the empire or a government
it sets up. The problem with the whole "We're going to attack your country
and install the government of our choice" method of ensuring that everyone
"plays nice" is that the powers that be are the ones that get to define what
"playing nice" means, and they use their own values rather than the values
of the people whose nations the PRBs dominate. In order to get to a point
at which one can even enforce "play nice", one has to play *very nasty* for
quite a while in order to gain total domination over the other players.
In a way, the people of those countries are considered non-persons who are
too uncivilized, ignorant and backward to see what's best for them. Also,
they're considered to be an obvious a threat to us, because they fight back
when we "enter" (invade) their country and/or "fix their government"
(install one of our own creation), therefore they are violent and must be
kept under control for the good of all. This has been the modus operandi
of nearly every would-be world conqueror since the beginning of written
history. Everyone thinks their own system is better than all the rest,
unconsciously minimizing their own problems and exaggerating the problems of
the others.
Policing the world is a great idea, except for the fact that no force in the
world is or ever will be objective enough to be trusted with the power
required to do it. The US has repeatedly supported dictators who are known
to have tortured and killed their own people over leaders favored by the
people of their country but possibly antagonistic to US trade policies, and
has by that and other methods showed a glaring lack of objectivity at least
equal to that of the old USSR.
"The greatest evils in the world are done in the name of fighting evil."
All true indeed. Though we never went out and colonized half the world
with the Maxim Gun. In fact..I dont know of any US colonies. We tend
to go out, kick some ass, defend our friends, then go home again.
As for supporting dictators, true enough at times. The rational being
that better a US friendly dictator, than a puppet of the USSR who
hates the US. And there is some validity to that outlook. Depending of
course on who is looking from what direction. "The enemy of my enemy
is my friend", at least until he becomes our enemy.
On the other hand, we dont have a history of 400 yrs of colonial rule
and when we pull out of an occupied and defeated enemy, we generally
leave it in much better shape than we found it. Germany and Japan,
South Korea etc are examples.
The British empire left behind blood, mass murder and civil uprisings
when they pulled out, with few exceptions.
The fact of the matter, we could have simply sat on our hands and
watched the rest of the planet murder and enslave us. And then 20 yrs
down the road, have the now larger and unified enemy be a much much
larger problem when they decided to take us on. Germany and Japan are
prime examples, as is the USSR.
In fact, the Third World War started in 1945 and didnt end until
December 8th, 1991
Without the US playing Big Brother in 1918, 1942 and from 1945 to
1991..the geopolitical face of the planet would have looked vastly
different, and none of us would likely be in any position to be
discussing this issue, least of all in English.
Its a dirty job, but someone has to play Big Brother. The alternative
is unthinkable.
Gunner
"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.
Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner