gtww2z9z@umiami.miami.edu (Jason Gross) (02/04/89)
In article <602276265.amon@H.GP.CS.CMU.EDU>, Dale.Amon@H.GP.CS.CMU.EDU writes: > Space Calendar, Jan 30 - Feb 5, 1989, pg 2 > > MEDIA SPONSORED REMOTE SENSING, > Washington, DC: Faces opposition from > DoD. A satellite which could provide im- > mediate photos of military activities to the > media "poses a greater threat to national > security" than current foreign-owned tech- > nology, the AAAS was told recently. > [stuff deleted] > > It is high time the Europeans got together and put up such a satellite. > I would love to see a US firm do it and make a business out of it. But > the DoD does not care about America being the forerunner in opening new > technology markets, so I would rather see this important contribution > to world peace and stability done by statists than to see it not done > at all. > You have got to be out to lunch! The DoD welcome any and all advancements in imaging technology. And how would hundreds of satellites spying on every living promote peace and goodwill. Just thinking about it gives me the willies. > Someone has to put a check to the power hungry SOB's in ALL of the > military establishment's of the world. The US is not unique in this > respect, because the mentality comes with the territority. This is why he have civilian control of ou military. You note that the guys who get to push the buttons are all civilians, and the military cannot act without consent of the civilian government (please don't let this break off into some other thread, you'll lose the point). The places where the military has control are those places that provided for such power in forming their governments. > > So what if some US soldiers get wasted because they are on TV? The same > will happen to the guys on the other side of whatever worthless > imaginary line they are battling over. Maybe it will make ALL of them > think twice about whether what they are doing is worth dying for. If > they stayed home and concentrated on defending US territorial waters > and borders they wouldn't be on TV in the first place. Because NOBODY > is going to attack us if we mind our own business. PERIOD. > I hope you are not serious about this one. I don't care if you hate the military so much that you think we should abolish it, to deem their lives less than ours makes us the despots and not them. And on the other point, we tried the isolationist route before, and it never worked. The British attacked in 1812, the Germans attacked the Czechs, Austrians, and Poles without provocation, and the Japanese attacked us at Pearl Harbor (you remember that one, I hope). We tried staying out these "European affairs" and we lost. We have too much influence and power to sit back and let events around us control our actions. [more goobledygook deleted] > Screw the warrior class. It's about time we outgrew their paleolithic > mindset. While we still have time. I rather screw your paleolithic mindset. All you want to do is close our doors and hide behind a wall of isolationism with satellites spying on the rest of the world. Gee, that would make me feel so much more secure. > > Free Minds, Free Markets > and an intact planet to be a > capitalist on, > Dale Amon > > > PS: And while you are at it, why not push for kicking ALL of our troops > off of European soil and waters and airspace? The $50,000,000,000 or > so saved per year would wipe out the US national debt, stabilize the > dollar and make Europe less of a trip wire to WWIII. if you remember recently that when INF came to pass, the Europeans we're begging to have our missiles stay. This is a distinctly libertarian remark which doesn't take into account that our recent buddy-buddy the Soviet Union still has nearly 50 or so divisions just sitting on the Eastern frontier. I agree that that Europeans should do more for the common defense, but you just cannot dismiss the risk that some "power-hungry SOB" on the other side wouldn't take such gesture as "Please, come and invade us". Go crawl back into your hole and come out when your ready to face the reality of this world. -- Jason Gross Comp Sci Ugrad University of Miami Class of '91 (?) =========================================================================== If you can read this, | "Some things never change...", but addresses do! then you are just | I-Net: gtww2z9z@umiami.miami.edu TOO CLOSE! | Bitnet: Coming Soon! =========================================================================== Disclaimer: The university and I basically do not agree on anything. Ever.
nelson@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Russ Nelson) (02/05/89)
In article <484@umiami.miami.edu> gtww2z9z@umiami.miami.edu (Jason Gross) writes: In article <602276265.amon@H.GP.CS.CMU.EDU>, Dale.Amon@H.GP.CS.CMU.EDU writes: > Space Calendar, Jan 30 - Feb 5, 1989, pg 2 > MEDIA SPONSORED REMOTE SENSING, Washington, DC: Faces opposition > from DoD. A satellite which could provide im- mediate photos > of military activities to the media "poses a greater threat to > national security" than current foreign-owned tech- nology, > the AAAS was told recently. > You have got to be out to lunch! The DoD welcome any and all advancements in imaging technology. And how would hundreds of satellites spying on every living promote peace and goodwill. Just thinking about it gives me the willies. Just thinking about ONLY the governments of the US and USSR having this technology gives ME the willies. Reagan's "Trust but verify" remark applies double here. -- --russ (nelson@clutx [.bitnet | .clarkson.edu]) "I saved the whales!" - Rebecca L. Nelson, 3.5 years old, on receiving her Christmas present of a whale "adoption" certificate. Bless her liberal heart.