Re: History of bulk electronic components suppliers

[Eeyore]

Though small, you make a good point--how much do you think it'll
cost us in lives and treasure to have had the war effort sabotaged &
scuttled?

You'd prefer to have the pointless lost wars ?

Graham

 

[Jim Thompson]

The largest group of Republicans are of course not rich. This
infuriates Democratic politicians who don't understand why low-income
people would elect to be either conservative or Republican, "against
their own self-interest". A book was written on the subject, "What's
Wrong With Kansas?" Most libs wind up concluding that the lower
middle-class (their avowed constituancy!) are just stupid yokels who
deserve being poor. What they miss is that anyone would ever be
motivated by anything other than immediate greed; the very concept is
incomprehensable to them.

Of course, in relative or even in absolute terms, conservatives and
especially Christian conservatives are far more generous (of money,
time, kindness, and blood) than liberals, and immensely more generous
than secular liberals. This is good, since kids tend to follow their
parents' beliefs here, and the conservatives are having a lot more
babies.

Which is why, although I am not a believer, I have great respect for
people who are.

How much do you donate to charity? Do you volunteer? Give blood?

How many kids do you have?

Oh, you never told us: how much do you weigh?


John

I just ran across some interesting stats for the cowardly Democrats...

So far the Iraq war has cost approximately 3200 American soldiers
their lives.

In the same time period 5600 Arizonans died in traffic accidents.

...Jim Thompson

 

[John Larkin]

I just ran across some interesting stats for the cowardly Democrats...

So far the Iraq war has cost approximately 3200 American soldiers
their lives.

In the same time period 5600 Arizonans died in traffic accidents.

...Jim Thompson

It is sort of heartless to say it, but 3200 isn't a lot of lives, and
they signed up to be warriors anyhow. SH killed a couple of million,
nearly a million in his attacks on Iran and Kuwait, the rest his own
population. The UN corruption-for-oil program killed hundreds of
thousands more.

This Dem/press "respect for soldiers lives" is crocodile tears; they
don't even like soldiers.

And face it: armies need practice. That's one reason we have so many
"allies" in Afghanistan and Iraq: they need to see how we operate, and
they need combat time under their belts.

John

 

[Rich Grise]

The word "liberal" used to mean "in favor of Liberty", but it's come to
mean "socialist" these days. >:-[

Nope. It means progressive.

Tell me, sincerely: as a progressive, presumably in favor of sharing
the benefits of the planet with everyone, are you willing to sacrifice
any of your own personal well-being to, say, help miserably poor and
sick people in less developed places? Or is your progressivism of the
theoretical "tax somebody else to help them, I can't afford it" sort?

I know a lot of theoretical progressives who are nasty, selfish, angry
jerks. They don't give squat about actual poor people, they just want
to crush people who are richer than themselves.

I'll always give a buck or so to a street beggar, having been there
myself.

The way I see it, you can't give from an empty vessel, but if your
cup runneth over, it feels really good to share - not so much because
I'm "doing good works", but more as a celebration of my good fortune
to have spare money to donate.

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Richard The Dreaded Libertarian]

I have lots of facts. You just don't like tham.

OK, let's dump the theory and get real: for every dollar you
verifiably donate to

http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/

I will donate four. I'll even put up four US dollars against one
Canadian. Let's limit it, say, to $15,000 on my part. After all, I
have a lot of other good causes on my donation list for this year.

What do you say?

Wanna donate to my "Vote None of the Above" campaign? ;-)

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Homer J Simpson]

Though small, you make a good point--how much do you think it'll
cost us in lives and treasure to have had the war effort sabotaged &
scuttled?

What effort? The effort to get entangled in a bloody mess for years to come?
As one GI pointed out, over half the lives lost in Vietnam were lost AFTER
the government knew it could not win.


--
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..

--

--
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..

 

[Richard The Dreaded Libertarian]

Though small, you make a good point--how much do you think it'll
cost us in lives and treasure to have had the war effort sabotaged &
scuttled?

What's going on in Iraq isn't a war, it's simply an invasion perpetrated
on George W. Bush's whim. He called it a "War" so that he could grab
power under the "War Powers Act", and even the new Congress seems to
be willing to just bend over and take it.

The "Terrorists" won the day the US Government started strip-searching
people at airports.

If the point of "terrorism" is to annoy and inconvenience the maximum
number of people, then it's clear that Homeland Security is doing their
work for them.

Feh.
Rich

 

[Richard The Dreaded Libertarian]

What about you Rich? AIUI, you were born Rich, weren't you? ;-)

Well, actually, I think they didn't name me until after I was already
born, and it was "Richard."

I just shortened it to "Rich" because I found out what "Dick" means,
and I can walk up to a hot babe at the pub and say, "Hi, I'm Rich." ;-)

Cheers!
Rich

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 14:03:07 -0700, Jim Thompson
[snip]

I just ran across some interesting stats for the cowardly Democrats...

So far the Iraq war has cost approximately 3200 American soldiers
their lives.

In the same time period 5600 Arizonans died in traffic accidents.

...Jim Thompson

It is sort of heartless to say it, but 3200 isn't a lot of lives, and
they signed up to be warriors anyhow. SH killed a couple of million,
nearly a million in his attacks on Iran and Kuwait, the rest his own
population. The UN corruption-for-oil program killed hundreds of
thousands more.

This Dem/press "respect for soldiers lives" is crocodile tears; they
don't even like soldiers.

And face it: armies need practice. That's one reason we have so many
"allies" in Afghanistan and Iraq: they need to see how we operate, and
they need combat time under their belts.

John

Why don't we let them shoot Democrats for practice? And to double-up
on the experience, ship 'em to Mexico first, then shoot 'em when they
try to illegally cross the border ;-)

...Jim Thompson

 

[John Larkin]

On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 14:03:07 -0700, Jim Thompson
[snip]

I just ran across some interesting stats for the cowardly Democrats...

So far the Iraq war has cost approximately 3200 American soldiers
their lives.

In the same time period 5600 Arizonans died in traffic accidents.

...Jim Thompson

It is sort of heartless to say it, but 3200 isn't a lot of lives, and
they signed up to be warriors anyhow. SH killed a couple of million,
nearly a million in his attacks on Iran and Kuwait, the rest his own
population. The UN corruption-for-oil program killed hundreds of
thousands more.

This Dem/press "respect for soldiers lives" is crocodile tears; they
don't even like soldiers.

And face it: armies need practice. That's one reason we have so many
"allies" in Afghanistan and Iraq: they need to see how we operate, and
they need combat time under their belts.

John

Why don't we let them shoot Democrats for practice? And to double-up
on the experience, ship 'em to Mexico first, then shoot 'em when they
try to illegally cross the border ;-)

...Jim Thompson

If I were a Mexican, I'd want to be on this side of the border.
Wouldn't you?

John

 

[John Larkin]

Wanna donate to my "Vote None of the Above" campaign? ;-)

No, I want to (and do) donate to helping sick kids in poor countries.
Homer probably doesn't, because talk is a lot cheaper when all you
care about is yourself.

John

 

[John Larkin]

The word "liberal" used to mean "in favor of Liberty", but it's come to
mean "socialist" these days. >:-[

Nope. It means progressive.

Tell me, sincerely: as a progressive, presumably in favor of sharing
the benefits of the planet with everyone, are you willing to sacrifice
any of your own personal well-being to, say, help miserably poor and
sick people in less developed places? Or is your progressivism of the
theoretical "tax somebody else to help them, I can't afford it" sort?

I know a lot of theoretical progressives who are nasty, selfish, angry
jerks. They don't give squat about actual poor people, they just want
to crush people who are richer than themselves.

I'll always give a buck or so to a street beggar, having been there
myself.

The way I see it, you can't give from an empty vessel, but if your
cup runneth over, it feels really good to share - not so much because
I'm "doing good works", but more as a celebration of my good fortune
to have spare money to donate.

There's hard evidence that voluntary charitable giving is of
significant net benefit to the giver. It's win-win. Enforced giving is
less than zero sum.

John

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 14:03:07 -0700, Jim Thompson
[snip]

I just ran across some interesting stats for the cowardly Democrats...

So far the Iraq war has cost approximately 3200 American soldiers
their lives.

In the same time period 5600 Arizonans died in traffic accidents.

...Jim Thompson


It is sort of heartless to say it, but 3200 isn't a lot of lives, and
they signed up to be warriors anyhow. SH killed a couple of million,
nearly a million in his attacks on Iran and Kuwait, the rest his own
population. The UN corruption-for-oil program killed hundreds of
thousands more.

This Dem/press "respect for soldiers lives" is crocodile tears; they
don't even like soldiers.

And face it: armies need practice. That's one reason we have so many
"allies" in Afghanistan and Iraq: they need to see how we operate, and
they need combat time under their belts.

John

Why don't we let them shoot Democrats for practice? And to double-up
on the experience, ship 'em to Mexico first, then shoot 'em when they
try to illegally cross the border ;-)

...Jim Thompson

If I were a Mexican, I'd want to be on this side of the border.
Wouldn't you?

John

I suppose. But why bother with immigration/citizenship then? The
Democrats would love it... me I'd flee to Oz ;-)

...Jim Thompson

 

[Homer J Simpson]

If the point of "terrorism" is to annoy and inconvenience the maximum
number of people, then it's clear that Homeland Security is doing their
work for them.

For every social action there is a reaction.

The trick is to get that to work for you.

The terrorists seem to have that trick worked out.


--
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..

 

[Homer J Simpson]

I suppose. But why bother with immigration/citizenship then? The
Democrats would love it... me I'd flee to Oz ;-)

It's the Repugnicrats who want the cheap labor for their businesses.


--
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..

 

[James Arthur]

You'd prefer to have the pointless lost wars ?

Graham

I'm not a big fan of war, but it makes more sense to win, if you're
into it.

Alas, wars are fought with weapons, but won with words, and our
words make the war--any war, for that matter--unwinnable.

Best regards,
James Arthur

 

[James Arthur]

The "Terrorists" won the day the US Government started strip-searching
people at airports.

If the point of "terrorism" is to annoy and inconvenience the maximum
number of people, then it's clear that Homeland Security is doing their
work for them.

Feh.
Rich

We agree. The terrorist's aim is to spread panic and terror, which
we accommodate by panicking.

It works well for politicians though, who are in the business of
dreaming up things we should be scared of, then promising to protect
us.

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

[James Arthur]

It is sort of heartless to say it, but 3200 isn't a lot of lives, and
they signed up to be warriors anyhow. SH killed a couple of million,
nearly a million in his attacks on Iran and Kuwait, the rest his own
population. The UN corruption-for-oil program killed hundreds of
thousands more.

This Dem/press "respect for soldiers lives" is crocodile tears; they
don't even like soldiers.

And face it: armies need practice. That's one reason we have so many
"allies" in Afghanistan and Iraq: they need to see how we operate, and
they need combat time under their belts.

John

Absolutely spot-on.

The fact is that this is among the most successful military
campaigns of all time in all terms except the PR, the perception.

And perception is vital. You cannot crush an enemy's spirit, you
cannot deprive him of all hope, you cannot drive him to capitulation,
resignation and surrender, while continually encouraging him with
reports that you're weary, discontent, and inclined to withdraw.

_That_ is how you lose.

That was the harm of what John Kerry and Jane Fonda did in Vietnam.
The North Vietnamese leaders have since revealed their strategy. They
believed the war would be won "on the campuses of America." With
words. And it was.

Thanks for helping, John and Jane.

Today, the problem is amplified; CNN and the internet conveys our
words (Nancy Pelosi's?) to the enemy at the speed of light. And he
rejoices.

James Arthur

 

[Rich Grise]

There's hard evidence that voluntary charitable giving is of
significant net benefit to the giver. It's win-win. Enforced giving is
less than zero sum.

Well, they do say, "what goes around comes around".

Whoever the hell "they" is. ;-)

Cheers!
Rich

 

[Richard The Dreaded Libertarian]

No, I want to (and do) donate to helping sick kids in poor countries.
Homer probably doesn't, because talk is a lot cheaper when all you
care about is yourself.

Well, when I win the lottery, one of my plans is to buy a vacant lot
somewhere and set up a flop house, AKA Homeless Shelter.

I will have only one rule: No violence. One strike, and you're back
in the street.

Cheers!
Rich