Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Metalworking (rec.crafts.metalworking) Discuss various aspects of working with metal, such as machining, welding, metal joining, screwing, casting, hardening/tempering, blacksmithing/forging, spinning and hammer work, sheet metal work. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Id forgotton how beautiful the country side was.
Hmmm, They didn't show all of the amputee kids who are still falling victim to buried cluster bombs, which are estimated to outnumber Laos' current population.
The war ends, but the killing doesn't stop. People still get killed in Germany when a WWII bomb gets unearthed. Has anyone ever considered building obsolescence into munitions? couldn't every new bomb or rocket or cartridge contain something which would make it inert after a few years? |
#2
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Id forgotton how beautiful the country side was.
On Fri, 4 Jul 2014 04:05:35 -0700 (PDT), robobass
wrote: Hmmm, They didn't show all of the amputee kids who are still falling victim to buried cluster bombs, which are estimated to outnumber Laos' current population. The war ends, but the killing doesn't stop. People still get killed in Germany when a WWII bomb gets unearthed. Has anyone ever considered building obsolescence into munitions? couldn't every new bomb or rocket or cartridge contain something which would make it inert after a few years? Considering that it has to be stored for many years before deployment...up to spending gazillions of dollars every few years? But I do agree its a shame about the mines. Sure all those kids were hurt with mines? They didnt show all the people who died pounding on bombs with a hammer either. Not enough left to shovel back into the new bomb crater. Gunner - "[F]ar from being the Great Satan, I would say that we are the Great Protector. We have sent men and women from the armed forces of the United States to other parts of the world throughout the past century to put down oppression. We defeated Fascism. We defeated Communism. We saved Europe in World War I and World War II. We were willing to do it, glad to do it. We went to Korea. We went to Vietnam. All in the interest of preserving the rights of people. And when all those conflicts were over, what did we do? Did we stay and conquer? Did we say, "Okay, we defeated Germany. Now Germany belongs to us? We defeated Japan, so Japan belongs to us"? No. What did we do? We built them up. We gave them democratic systems which they have embraced totally to their soul. And did we ask for any land? No. The only land we ever asked for was enough land to bury our dead." General Colin Powell |
#3
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Id forgotton how beautiful the country side was.
On Fri, 4 Jul 2014 04:05:35 -0700 (PDT), robobass
wrote: Hmmm, They didn't show all of the amputee kids who are still falling victim to buried cluster bombs, which are estimated to outnumber Laos' current population. The war ends, but the killing doesn't stop. People still get killed in Germany when a WWII bomb gets unearthed. Has anyone ever considered building obsolescence into munitions? couldn't every new bomb or rocket or cartridge contain something which would make it inert after a few years? Oh, sure. It wouldn't do much more than double the cost of each munition. Taxpayers would like that even less. And the bad guys would be sure to leave those devices intact before using them on their enemies. War is hell. What say we just stop having wars? -- You can ignore reality, but you cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring reality. --Ayn Rand |
#4
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Id forgotton how beautiful the country side was.
On 7/4/2014 7:05 AM, robobass wrote:
Hmmm, They didn't show all of the amputee kids who are still falling victim to buried cluster bombs, which are estimated to outnumber Laos' current population. The war ends, but the killing doesn't stop. People still get killed in Germany when a WWII bomb gets unearthed. Has anyone ever considered building obsolescence into munitions? couldn't every new bomb or rocket or cartridge contain something which would make it inert after a few years? The US needs to pay reparations! |
#5
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Id forgotton how beautiful the country side was.
"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
... On Fri, 4 Jul 2014 04:05:35 -0700 (PDT), robobass wrote: Hmmm, They didn't show all of the amputee kids who are still falling victim to buried cluster bombs, which are estimated to outnumber Laos' current population. The war ends, but the killing doesn't stop. People still get killed in Germany when a WWII bomb gets unearthed. Has anyone ever considered building obsolescence into munitions? couldn't every new bomb or rocket or cartridge contain something which would make it inert after a few years? Oh, sure. It wouldn't do much more than double the cost of each munition. Taxpayers would like that even less. And the bad guys would be sure to leave those devices intact before using them on their enemies. War is hell. What say we just stop having wars? It looks like the US just did, freeing everyone else to resume their old ones. |
#6
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Id forgotton how beautiful the country side was.
On Fri, 04 Jul 2014 06:05:26 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote: On Fri, 4 Jul 2014 04:05:35 -0700 (PDT), robobass wrote: Hmmm, They didn't show all of the amputee kids who are still falling victim to buried cluster bombs, which are estimated to outnumber Laos' current population. The war ends, but the killing doesn't stop. People still get killed in Germany when a WWII bomb gets unearthed. Has anyone ever considered building obsolescence into munitions? couldn't every new bomb or rocket or cartridge contain something which would make it inert after a few years? Oh, sure. It wouldn't do much more than double the cost of each munition. Taxpayers would like that even less. And the bad guys would be sure to leave those devices intact before using them on their enemies. War is hell. What say we just stop having wars? Good idea. Tell the Americans. The Wikki shows some 58 wars or military engagements conducted in the 228 years the country gas existed. Or an average of one every four years. -- Cheers, John B. |
#7
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Id forgotton how beautiful the country side was.
Why in the FARK are we (is _anyone_) supplying any Islamic entities with weapons or ammo at all? That's my burning question. Well, we want big smiles on their faces so they won't go shutting off the oil or kicking out our military bases. Also, Our weapons manufacturers make big money on the sales, some of which filters back to Washington. But what you're referring to is not even _close_ to gun rights, so please learn the difference. Jeeze! The NRA has intervened in the UN Arms Trade Treaty. The NRA has always held the position that any arms limitation of any kind anywhere in the world is a step toward taking away Billy-Bob's right to carry a loaded AR into Walmart. I'm not the one you need to educate on the difference between domestic gun rights and selling tanks to monsters in foreign lands. |
#8
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Id forgotton how beautiful the country side was.
On Sat, 5 Jul 2014 07:47:07 -0700 (PDT), robobass
wrote: Why in the FARK are we (is _anyone_) supplying any Islamic entities with weapons or ammo at all? That's my burning question. Well, we want big smiles on their faces so they won't go shutting off the oil or kicking out our military bases. Also, Our weapons manufacturers make big money on the sales, some of which filters back to Washington. But what you're referring to is not even _close_ to gun rights, so please learn the difference. Jeeze! The NRA has intervened in the UN Arms Trade Treaty. Thank God for that. I wouldn't like to see what America would look like without any personal defense, considering that guns are used for upwards of a couple million times a year just for that. Are you saying that we should allow those crimes and deaths just because -you- don't like guns? tsk,tsk,tsk The NRA has always held the position that any arms limitation of any kind anywhere in the world is a step toward taking away Billy-Bob's right to carry a loaded AR into Walmart. I'm not the one you need to educate on the difference between domestic gun rights and selling tanks to monsters in foreign lands. Perhaps, some day, if and when you're more rational, we can discuss this. You're bringing up gun rights in the middle of a debate about heavy arms sales. You're one person who really needs that education, Rob. Maybe get an anti-NRA rabies shot, too. You were foaming there for a minute. -- The goal to strive for is a poor government but a rich people. --Andrew Johnson |
#9
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Id forgotton how beautiful the country side was.
Perhaps, some day, if and when you're more rational, we can discuss this. You're bringing up gun rights in the middle of a debate about heavy arms sales. You're one person who really needs that education, Rob. Maybe get an anti-NRA rabies shot, too. You were foaming there for a minute. I don't have a personal position gun rights. I don't live in the US, so don't care very much about it. The UN Arms Trade Treaty was intended to stop developed countries from shipping weaponry to bad nations. It had nothing to do with domestic gun rights, but the NRA took it up for no logical reason, and you seem to support that they did. You need to educate yourself, friend. |
#10
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Id forgotton how beautiful the country side was.
On Sat, 5 Jul 2014 23:40:37 -0700 (PDT),
wrote: Perhaps, some day, if and when you're more rational, we can discuss this. You're bringing up gun rights in the middle of a debate about heavy arms sales. You're one person who really needs that education, Rob. Maybe get an anti-NRA rabies shot, too. You were foaming there for a minute. I don't have a personal position gun rights. I don't live in the US, so don't care very much about it. The UN Arms Trade Treaty was intended to stop developed countries from shipping weaponry to bad nations. It had nothing to do with domestic gun rights, but the NRA took it up for no logical reason, and you seem to support that they did. You need to educate yourself, friend. I have educated myself on the UN. The disarmament treaty won't stop where they reduce weapons of mass distruction. They want to take -all- guns/firearms from -all- citizens of the world for all time, period. I view this as a very bad thing. They should instead be trying to reduce crime and criminals, not removing the tools which can, and are, being used to -fight- crime. Reeducate yourself, friend. From http://www.un.org/disarmament/ATT/ : --snip-- The Arms Trade Treaty On 2 April 2013, the General Assembly adopted the landmark Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), regulating the international trade in conventional arms, from small arms to battle tanks, combat aircraft and warships. The treaty will foster peace and security by thwarting uncontrolled destabilizing arms flows to conflict regions. It will prevent human rights abusers and violators of the law of war from being supplied with arms. And it will help keep warlords, pirates, and gangs from acquiring these deadly tools. --snip-- How does this do a _thing_ to the massacres in Africa right now? They're using machetes, not firearms, for most of the terrorism and murder there. I'm iffy on a few things the NRA does, but this is one stance on which I'm firmly behind them. They're the #1 educator on firearms worldwide, and that's A Good Thing(tm) to me. -- The goal to strive for is a poor government but a rich people. --Andrew Johnson |
#11
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Id forgotton how beautiful the country side was.
"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
... Y'mean Britain doesn't have a few of our nuclear subs and guided missile frigates? Britain doesn't need us to build their Navy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_N...marine_Service http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_E...rcraft_carrier |
#12
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Id forgotton how beautiful the country side was.
|
#13
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Id forgotton how beautiful the country side was.
On Sun, 6 Jul 2014 12:39:08 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote: "Larry Jaques" wrote in message .. . Y'mean Britain doesn't have a few of our nuclear subs and guided missile frigates? Britain doesn't need us to build their Navy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_N...marine_Service http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_E...rcraft_carrier Yes, they have their own, but I remember reading about the gimmes, too. -- The goal to strive for is a poor government but a rich people. --Andrew Johnson |
#14
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Id forgotton how beautiful the country side was.
On Sun, 06 Jul 2014 05:57:34 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote: On Sat, 05 Jul 2014 23:01:36 -0700, Gunner Asch wrote: On Sat, 05 Jul 2014 07:14:22 -0700, Larry Jaques wrote: I've always questioned the sanity of selling our top-of-the-line equipment and _TRAINING_ to countries who would surely be our next war stop, if not the next terrorist training camp site. sigh We dont sell our top of the line weapons to anyone..and the training..given the raw materials..is sporadic at best..as we have seen in Iraq Y'mean Britain doesn't have a few of our nuclear subs and guided missile frigates? We're not still selling weapons systems, F-16s, and F-16 parts to most of the world, including some "friendly" Islamic countries (like our "ally", Saudi Arabia)? We (and, quietly, the CIA) didn't train Iraqis, Afghanis, and many Al Quaeda infiltrators in both countries? Israel doesn't have beaucoup of everything? We're arming LIBYA? We're even starting to rearm Viet Freakin' Nam, fer chrissake. Every time we sell to the bad actors, it's used against us. SAM missiles are a perfect example in history for that. When we leave a country, we apparently sell (or just leave) most of our military assets there. I'd rather we didn't do that. It is a bit more complex that your simple statement. I was in Thailand when the U.S. Army vacated some of their bases and from the newspaper articles I read, there are specific (US apparently) rules and regulations that specify what can be left and what has to be removed. The decision to leave, is I believe, primarily a logistics decision. It the value is X and it costs X x 2 to ship it home then it is left. -- Cheers, John B. |
#15
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Id forgotton how beautiful the country side was.
I have educated myself on the UN. The disarmament treaty won't stop where they reduce weapons of mass distruction. They want to take -all- guns/firearms from -all- citizens of the world for all time, period. This is nonsense and you know it. You can put up all the links and quotes you want. None will point to anything regarding domestic ownership rights in the US or anywhere else, for that matter. How does this do a _thing_ to the massacres in Africa right now? They're using machetes, not firearms, for most of the terrorism and murder there. Just listen to yourself. Now you've really laid your hand bare. What kind of pill is it anyway that the NRA hands out? Or is it some kind of chip? Maybe a copper mesh hat would help. Incidently, Bahraini protesters were attacked by US made helicopter gunships, and Egyptions with teargas which hade "made in USA" stamped on the canisters. Do any of you guys find that in any way objectionable? |
#16
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Id forgotton how beautiful the country side was.
|
#17
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Id forgotton how beautiful the country side was.
|
#18
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Id forgotton how beautiful the country side was.
Incidently, Bahraini protesters were attacked by US made helicopter gunships, and Egyptions with teargas which hade "made in USA" stamped on the canisters. Do any of you guys find that in any way objectionable? Of course we do. Fortunately..WE didnt do it. Your buddies the Soviet Union murdered 94 MIllion people..and "we" didnt do it ..yet you and yours want it to happen inside our borders. I don't get your point. What I am trying to say is: 1; Lots of innocent people all around the world get killed with weapons supplied by US arms manufacturers under State Department approved sales (or not), as well as other producers from big nations. China, Russia, Sweden, South Africa, and my adopted country - Germany, to name a few. The ATT seeks to curb this practice, and has absolutely nothing to do with US domestic gun rights issues. Can we agree on that? 1.1; Weapons manufacturers in many countries have way too much influence in their respective governments, which leads to sales to bad actors. Can we agree on that? 2; Yes, of course a lot of the killing is done with Russian and Chinese made AK-47s and other weapons, but does that absolve the US from responsibility when people are killed with American weapons? The USSR killed 94 million? Maybe, but what does that have to do with anything? Every nation has done a lot of killing (Reagan - Nicaragua, Ford - Indonesia). Let's talk about who is being killed now. Can we agree on that? 3; Is forcing a shelf life on weapons or adding a kill switch to electronics something to consider? I've seen no comment, although I haven't asked any five-year-old Laotian kids. 4; Do some American gun rights advocates confuse their own cause with the effort to stamp out weapons proliferation in unstable countries? I don't think there is a consensus on this one. And. No. Isil kills with GUNS they stole from their victims, not machetes. |
#19
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Id forgotton how beautiful the country side was.
Am Montag, 7. Juli 2014 12:22:29 UTC+2 schrieb robobass:
Incidently, Bahraini protesters were attacked by US made helicopter gunships, and Egyptions with teargas which hade "made in USA" stamped on the canisters. Do any of you guys find that in any way objectionable? Of course we do. Fortunately..WE didnt do it. Your buddies the Soviet Union murdered 94 MIllion people..and "we" didnt do it ..yet you and yours want it to happen inside our borders. I don't get your point. What I am trying to say is: 1; Lots of innocent people all around the world get killed with weapons supplied by US arms manufacturers under State Department approved sales (or not), as well as other producers from big nations. China, Russia, Sweden, South Africa, and my adopted country - Germany, to name a few. The ATT seeks to curb this practice, and has absolutely nothing to do with US domestic gun rights issues. Can we agree on that? 1.1; Weapons manufacturers in many countries have way too much influence in their respective governments, which leads to sales to bad actors. Can we agree on that? 2; Yes, of course a lot of the killing is done with Russian and Chinese made AK-47s and other weapons, but does that absolve the US from responsibility when people are killed with American weapons? The USSR killed 94 million? Maybe, but what does that have to do with anything? Every nation has done a lot of killing (Reagan - Nicaragua, Ford - Indonesia). Let's talk about who is being killed now. Can we agree on that? 3; Is forcing a shelf life on weapons or adding a kill switch to electronics something to consider? I've seen no comment, although I haven't asked any five-year-old Laotian kids. 4; Do some American gun rights advocates confuse their own cause with the effort to stamp out weapons proliferation in unstable countries? I don't think there is a consensus on this one. And. No. Isil kills with GUNS they stole from their victims, not machetes.. Edit: It just came out that a lot of the initial Isil financing came illicitly from Saudi princes. So... The last time you guys filled up your Ford trucks you inadvertently purchased a carton of bullets for some radical Islamists. Green energy anyone? No. We'll just frak more. |
#20
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Id forgotton how beautiful the country side was.
Edit: It just came out that a lot of the initial Isil financing came illicitly from Saudi princes. So... The last time you guys filled up your Ford trucks you inadvertently purchased a carton of bullets for some radical Islamists. Green energy anyone? No. We'll just frak more. Edit 2. What about the Patriot act? "Providing material support for terrorism". No doubt you buy gas, and by extension provide material support to terrorists. How does the US gov't resolve this issue? As I said, I am on the sidelines. I left my birth country long ago. I read American news fervently, as it fascinates me. But, there are major policy inconsistencies which I can't resolve. |
#21
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Id forgotton how beautiful the country side was.
"robobass" wrote in message ... Incidently, Bahraini protesters were attacked by US made helicopter gunships, and Egyptions with teargas which hade "made in USA" stamped on the canisters. Do any of you guys find that in any way objectionable? Of course we do. Fortunately..WE didnt do it. Your buddies the Soviet Union murdered 94 MIllion people..and "we" didnt do it ..yet you and yours want it to happen inside our borders. I don't get your point. What I am trying to say is: 1; Lots of innocent people all around the world get killed with weapons supplied by US arms manufacturers under State Department approved sales (or not), as well as other producers from big nations. China, Russia, Sweden, South Africa, and my adopted country - Germany, to name a few. The ATT seeks to curb this practice, and has absolutely nothing to do with US domestic gun rights issues. Can we agree on that? 1.1; Weapons manufacturers in many countries have way too much influence in their respective governments, which leads to sales to bad actors. Can we agree on that? 2; Yes, of course a lot of the killing is done with Russian and Chinese made AK-47s and other weapons, but does that absolve the US from responsibility when people are killed with American weapons? The USSR killed 94 million? Maybe, but what does that have to do with anything? Every nation has done a lot of killing (Reagan - Nicaragua, Ford - Indonesia). Let's talk about who is being killed now. Can we agree on that? 3; Is forcing a shelf life on weapons or adding a kill switch to electronics something to consider? I've seen no comment, although I haven't asked any five-year-old Laotian kids. 4; Do some American gun rights advocates confuse their own cause with the effort to stamp out weapons proliferation in unstable countries? I don't think there is a consensus on this one. ================================================== =================================== This seems to have departed from the original question about *why* NRA et al. object. The proximate reason is that the treaty requires that the importing country must record the name and address of the "end user" (it's assumed that means the retail customer) of any imported gun, and to supply that info to the exporting country, plus they must keep their own record for 20 years. That is de facto registration. That's the factual objection. Tell a gun nut that his gun will be registered, and he'll raise hell. He might even shoot something out of frustration. The consequences of wars in foreign countries pale by comparison. Beyond that, it's mostly paranoia. However, there is some annoyance over another provision: If the importing country doesn't keep the record or supply it to the exporter, the exporter can be prohibited from selling guns to that (importing) country. sob! There go our Beretta shotguns. I'll never be able to complete my collection of Purdy doubles. The rack I have in my Aston Martin Shooting Brake for that Holland & Holland .500 Nitro Express will have to go unused... This, of course, also upsets Beretta, FN, Sig-Sauer and many others. Nonetheless, it will go into effect for our import sources when 50 countries have ratified it. So far, 41 have -- including Italy, home of Beretta. Maybe they'll just build another plant in the U.S. This will happen regardless of whether the U.S. ratifies the treaty. ================================================== =================================== And. No. Isil kills with GUNS they stole from their victims, not machetes. ================================================== =================================== But the machetes add so much color to the creative narrative.... -- Ed Huntress |
#22
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Id forgotton how beautiful the country side was.
On Mon, 7 Jul 2014 04:08:48 -0700 (PDT), robobass
wrote: Am Montag, 7. Juli 2014 12:22:29 UTC+2 schrieb robobass: Incidently, Bahraini protesters were attacked by US made helicopter gunships, and Egyptions with teargas which hade "made in USA" stamped on the canisters. Do any of you guys find that in any way objectionable? Of course we do. Fortunately..WE didnt do it. Your buddies the Soviet Union murdered 94 MIllion people..and "we" didnt do it ..yet you and yours want it to happen inside our borders. I don't get your point. What I am trying to say is: 1; Lots of innocent people all around the world get killed with weapons supplied by US arms manufacturers under State Department approved sales (or not), as well as other producers from big nations. China, Russia, Sweden, South Africa, and my adopted country - Germany, to name a few. The ATT seeks to curb this practice, and has absolutely nothing to do with US domestic gun rights issues. Can we agree on that? 1.1; Weapons manufacturers in many countries have way too much influence in their respective governments, which leads to sales to bad actors. Can we agree on that? 2; Yes, of course a lot of the killing is done with Russian and Chinese made AK-47s and other weapons, but does that absolve the US from responsibility when people are killed with American weapons? The USSR killed 94 million? Maybe, but what does that have to do with anything? Every nation has done a lot of killing (Reagan - Nicaragua, Ford - Indonesia). Let's talk about who is being killed now. Can we agree on that? 3; Is forcing a shelf life on weapons or adding a kill switch to electronics something to consider? I've seen no comment, although I haven't asked any five-year-old Laotian kids. 4; Do some American gun rights advocates confuse their own cause with the effort to stamp out weapons proliferation in unstable countries? I don't think there is a consensus on this one. And. No. Isil kills with GUNS they stole from their victims, not machetes. Edit: It just came out that a lot of the initial Isil financing came illicitly from Saudi princes. So... The last time you guys filled up your Ford trucks you inadvertently purchased a carton of bullets for some radical Islamists. Green energy anyone? No. We'll just frak more. But the U.S. is now the largest producer of crude oil in the world, larger than Saudi, larger than Russia. Your argument is faulty. -- Cheers, John B. |
#23
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Id forgotton how beautiful the country side was.
On Mon, 7 Jul 2014 03:22:29 -0700 (PDT), robobass
wrote: Incidently, Bahraini protesters were attacked by US made helicopter gunships, and Egyptions with teargas which hade "made in USA" stamped on the canisters. Do any of you guys find that in any way objectionable? Of course we do. Fortunately..WE didnt do it. Your buddies the Soviet Union murdered 94 MIllion people..and "we" didnt do it ..yet you and yours want it to happen inside our borders. I don't get your point. What I am trying to say is: 1; Lots of innocent people all around the world get killed with weapons supplied by US arms manufacturers under State Department approved sales (or not), as well as other producers from big nations. China, Russia, Sweden, South Africa, and my adopted country - Germany, to name a few. The ATT seeks to curb this practice, and has absolutely nothing to do with US domestic gun rights issues. Can we agree on that? If you had taken the time to read that short quote, you would have seen the actual damning text from the treaty. The treaty has outrageous content and it would absolutely restrict all US gun rights if we signed it. We unequivocally cannot agree on that. 1.1; Weapons manufacturers in many countries have way too much influence in their respective governments, which leads to sales to bad actors. Can we agree on that? Corruption is everywhere, not just in arms deals. Ending corruption would be good. 2; Yes, of course a lot of the killing is done with Russian and Chinese made AK-47s and other weapons, but does that absolve the US from responsibility when people are killed with American weapons? The USSR killed 94 million? Maybe, but what does that have to do with anything? Every nation has done a lot of killing (Reagan - Nicaragua, Ford - Indonesia). Let's talk about who is being killed now. Can we agree on that? 3; Is forcing a shelf life on weapons or adding a kill switch to electronics something to consider? I've seen no comment, although I haven't asked any five-year-old Laotian kids. The costs are probably why they have been considered and rejected. But we did already discuss this briefly. 4; Do some American gun rights advocates confuse their own cause with the effort to stamp out weapons proliferation in unstable countries? I don't think there is a consensus on this one. We see the UN's global document which wants to take our guns away, too, and we reject that -ABSOLUTELY-! There is no consensus on UN treaties (or AGWK), thank Crom. And. No. Isil kills with GUNS they stole from their victims, not machetes. So how are reduced arms sales in the future going to stop current deaths with current weapons? Isil isn't the only terrorist org out there right now, which is why I brought up the machetes, which are not firearms but have caused millions of recent deaths. -- The goal to strive for is a poor government but a rich people. --Andrew Johnson |
#24
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Id forgotton how beautiful the country side was.
On Mon, 7 Jul 2014 04:08:48 -0700 (PDT), robobass
wrote: Am Montag, 7. Juli 2014 12:22:29 UTC+2 schrieb robobass: Incidently, Bahraini protesters were attacked by US made helicopter gunships, and Egyptions with teargas which hade "made in USA" stamped on the canisters. Do any of you guys find that in any way objectionable? Of course we do. Fortunately..WE didnt do it. Your buddies the Soviet Union murdered 94 MIllion people..and "we" didnt do it ..yet you and yours want it to happen inside our borders. I don't get your point. What I am trying to say is: 1; Lots of innocent people all around the world get killed with weapons supplied by US arms manufacturers under State Department approved sales (or not), as well as other producers from big nations. China, Russia, Sweden, South Africa, and my adopted country - Germany, to name a few. The ATT seeks to curb this practice, and has absolutely nothing to do with US domestic gun rights issues. Can we agree on that? 1.1; Weapons manufacturers in many countries have way too much influence in their respective governments, which leads to sales to bad actors. Can we agree on that? 2; Yes, of course a lot of the killing is done with Russian and Chinese made AK-47s and other weapons, but does that absolve the US from responsibility when people are killed with American weapons? The USSR killed 94 million? Maybe, but what does that have to do with anything? Every nation has done a lot of killing (Reagan - Nicaragua, Ford - Indonesia). Let's talk about who is being killed now. Can we agree on that? 3; Is forcing a shelf life on weapons or adding a kill switch to electronics something to consider? I've seen no comment, although I haven't asked any five-year-old Laotian kids. 4; Do some American gun rights advocates confuse their own cause with the effort to stamp out weapons proliferation in unstable countries? I don't think there is a consensus on this one. And. No. Isil kills with GUNS they stole from their victims, not machetes. Edit: It just came out that a lot of the initial Isil financing came illicitly from Saudi princes. It sucks to have allies like that, doesn't it? sigh So... The last time you guys filled up your Ford trucks you inadvertently purchased a carton of bullets for some radical Islamists. Green energy anyone? No. We'll just frak more. Fark fracking! Indeed, let's do more green energy, but let's not subsidize bad actions for bad actors here. -- The goal to strive for is a poor government but a rich people. --Andrew Johnson |
#25
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Id forgotton how beautiful the country side was.
Larry Jaques wrote: I have educated myself on the UN. The disarmament treaty won't stop where they reduce weapons of mass distruction. They want to take -all- guns/firearms from -all- citizens of the world for all time, period. I view this as a very bad thing. Let them put on their silly blue headgear and go door to door, demanding that people hand over their guns. They wouldn't last three days, and some prime NYC real estate would be freed up. -- Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to have a DD214, and a honorable discharge. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com |
#26
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Id forgotton how beautiful the country side was.
On Wed, 09 Jul 2014 13:55:49 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote: Larry Jaques wrote: I have educated myself on the UN. The disarmament treaty won't stop where they reduce weapons of mass distruction. They want to take -all- guns/firearms from -all- citizens of the world for all time, period. I view this as a very bad thing. Let them put on their silly blue headgear and go door to door, demanding that people hand over their guns. They wouldn't last three days, and some prime NYC real estate would be freed up. And the parks will be fertilized for years to come. -- "Living in the United States now is like being a Tampon. We're in a great place, just at a bad time." |
#27
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
Id forgotton how beautiful the country side was.
On Fri, 18 Jul 2014 10:18:00 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote: On Wed, 09 Jul 2014 13:55:49 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell" wrote: Larry Jaques wrote: I have educated myself on the UN. The disarmament treaty won't stop where they reduce weapons of mass distruction. They want to take -all- guns/firearms from -all- citizens of the world for all time, period. I view this as a very bad thing. Let them put on their silly blue headgear and go door to door, demanding that people hand over their guns. They wouldn't last three days, and some prime NYC real estate would be freed up. And the parks will be fertilized for years to come. g -- Liberalism is the result of severe pathogens in our society. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Side by side refrigerator in garage abruptly quits working, needs 2hour thawing | Home Repair | |||
"Teenut". . . . . Gone, but not Forgotton | Metalworking | |||
GE Side by Side Refrigerator Freezer Door Disassembly (Ice Maker Controls) | Home Repair | |||
what is size of Kenmore Side-by-Side Refrigerator model 106.57757790 | Home Repair | |||
Slow cold water delivery GE side by side refrigerator | Home Repair |