Re: Saying "No" to Your Right to Know

"Tim Norfolk"

In no particular order:
=============

Responses in order.

1. Actually, America ended up making a profit on WWII. Not only did
they get their hands on all of Britain's gold, but they also helped
dissolve the Empire, meaning that Britain had to borrow money at
interest. In addition, the re-building of Europe gave a huge market
for US manufactured goods, until about 1975.

I believe you are in serious error or in serious make-it-up mode.

Not quite. I read an interesting essay about the effects after WWII,
when Britain was broke. The US lent them money (in 1947, I believe),
but forced them into the Breton Woods agreement as part of the
bargain. I am sure that the government lost money, but the US made
money as a whole.
==============================

Even though you may have read an interesting essay, it is still my opinion
that "America ended up making a profit on WWII" is a seriously flawed
conclusion.



2. The consensus among some military and economic experts is that
Reagan's actions hastened the collapse of the USSR by about 6 weeks.

Well, I am not much for "consensus" assumptions. ?Again, you can have an
opinion ... I believe yours is not supported.

There is a new history book, just discussed on Monday's 'Colbert
Report' which discusses this. If I recall, Al Franken talks about an
interview with a senior USSR general as well.
==================================

I would certainly not wish to disturb an opinion based on the Colbert Report
and Al Franken.



3. We can't generate the power needed, nor apply it for long enough,
for a laser to destroy a missile. ICBMs are big hunks of thick metal.
It pretty much has to be an explosive interception, with the very real
danger of just putting the detonation of the nuclear bomb somewhere
else. Given the size of the US, this could easily be still on the
continent.

Interesting thought. ?I suppose you also believe a lot of other things
that
might be incorrect. ?Again, you can have your opinion, but it might be
just
as incorrect as some of your other thoughts. ?(You error is in thinking
things have to be destroyed to be rendered useless and that you must use
lasers to accomplish your task.


It is damned hard to kill a nuclear weapon. They are by design not
exactly fragile.
=========================

You might mean many things when you say "kill a nuclear weapon" ... however,
you have not made much of a point that can be discussed with any clarity.



4. My point about the Patriot is that they couldn't even hit short-
range, fairly slow missiles, which is what they were designed to do.

There were difficulties with the Patriot missle. ?I do not know much about
them nor do I know whether their deployment was proper or not. ?I know a
lot
about programs in which I was personally involved ... I know how those
programs were perceived by those that had no need to know. ?All of them
were
compartmentalized. ?So, I can only judge by the misconceptions about which
I
am sure.

5. I stand by my earlier point. You are claiming that we can build
systems that, in the planning stage '...folks say "the physics will
not allow such a system to be built"'. Would you care to give an example?

Your point was not well conceived. ?There are many examples ... one quick
one is an airborne ruby laser system built after the "experts" at ARPA
indicated that the system could not be built because the power required
would demand the generators at niagra falls. ?The system was built and
flown
on a modified F4 into North Vietnam using a technique that is still
classified. ?(Follow-on systems were much better conceived and built and
required much less power than the original ... and the lasers were better
as
well.) ?[That original did require that one of the engines of the F4 be
dedicated to powering the laser, but it was built. ?I built many systems
that experts in physics said could not be built for one reason or another.
The state of the art is often "pushed" by such innovation. ?The old
"consensus" gives way to the new reality.

That doesn't jibe with your comment that the experts said that it was
'physically impossible'. I did work with some DOD guys on lasers, and
the fundamental problem with trying to kill, rather than blind things,
is the power dissipation.
==================================

There is "physic-s" right there in the middle of physically impossible ...
OK, not right in the middle ... more like at the very beginning. I guess I
am just being trolled. You win. [You got me with "some DOD guys on lasers"
.... LOL ... nh ... gg.]




6. As for the energy research, our current long-term hope for US
independence is shale oil. The research for that was from the
Department of Energy under Carter. The oil companies pushed to shut
the programs down under Reagan. The scientists who worked on it are
now dying/retiring, and it will take at least 10 years to get back to
where we were in 1980.

You are full of a lot of opinions. ?Energy "independence" is an illusion,
in
my opinion. ?The real world is a big and dangerous place. ?One must always
be on guard for what might be on the horizon. ?It is still possible for
the
American Empire to collapse. ?Many will cheer the demise but they will cry
if the new gorilla is not as benevolent as the old gorilla. ?In
retrospect,
the Americans will be missed for the exceptional people that they were.

Given that we are almost certainly in the peak oil years, we had
better get an alternative soon. My choice would be a combination of
desert solar and nuclear, but we are just too dependent on fossil
fuels. At least until we get some decent fuel cells.

I will join you in deep regret is the US falls. I love this country,
which is why I became a citizen last year.
================================

You win ... nh ... gg.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Homemade Optical Table
    ... which will raise resonance frequencies again. ... Couple of years later, built an identical one myself, down in the ... to put the He-Ne lasers inside. ... facing each other; each facing pair leaned ...
    (sci.optics)
  • Re: DI Shootout--4 DIs compared
    ... "BM" so as not to offend anyone's delicate sensibilities? ... opinion at all. ... That first clip sounded like shit last night, and it sounds like shit today. ... them built in as a 'benefit' to the player. ...
    (alt.guitar.bass)
  • Re: Saying "No" to Your Right to Know
    ... America ended up making a profit on WWII. ... Again, you can have your opinion, but it might be just ... one is an airborne ruby laser system built after the "experts" at ARPA ...
    (rec.gambling.poker)
  • Re: Its Time For a Website Upgrade
    ... In fact, years ago, I built a Website dedicated for Reeky ... I look at it as sort of a mildly interesting thing (not to be taken ... to register their opinion on some question. ... mechanism is built in to prevent repeat votes from single individuals ...
    (rec.motorcycles)
  • Re: Phantom of the Opera
    ... also don't want to wait till last minute and try to get half price tix ... but the press releases say they have built the ... but my cousin has seen four different versions. ... It is his favorite show and I suspect he will have a strong opinion be it ...
    (alt.vacation.las-vegas)