3/22    fragging

3/22    What are you all you Bush defenders going to do when it turns
        out that he lied to us all to drag into an unjust war?
        http://csua.org/u/b66
        \_ I don't care what reason we gave in '03.  It should've gone like
           this in '91.  His father is the one who committed the crime.  The
           son is fixing it 12 years later.  Works for me.
           \_ Oh wow, so now any country can invade any other country
              based on a crime committed sometime in its history.
              \_ No.  Any country can and always has been able to invade
                 another country based solely on the ability to do so.  What
                 planet have you been living on where someone else's permission
                 was required?
        \_ Removing Saddam is justified by any measure.  However, if
           Bush lied to do so, then fuck him, I say.  Fuck him right
           out of office.
           \_ Gee, who do you think is a more likely liar, Bush or Hussein?
              \_ Probably both.
           \_ whether it's justified or not, the more important concerns
              are of sovereignty and international law
                \_ LOSERS of wars don't have sovereignty, dumbass.
                   \_ Oh, I see, law of the jungle eh?
                      \_ On *this* planet, between nations, yes.  If I go into
                         your house and shoot your ass there are police and the
                         rest of the legal system to apprehend and punish me in
                         some way.  If my country invades your country and
                         yours is too weak to stop it, then your country is a
                         footnote in history.  There are more dead countries,
                         kingdoms, empires, etc in the history books than
                         currently exist on the planet.  When this changes you
                         can let us know.
                \_ the bush administration has decided abiding by
                   international law and the UN is for SUCKAH PUNKS.
                   this may lead to a few misunderstandings with
                   a few other countries in the very near future.
                   \_ What is international law?  People keep using that
                      word without really thinking about what it might mean.
                      Is it backed by some principle, or is it just arrived
                      at by consensus of participating countries?  I, for one,
                      wouldn't want a consensus of mostly nasty countries
                      determining what my country could or could not do.
                      \_ I really love when the lefties get upset that the US
                         is in violation of Kyoto, the land mine ban and a few
                         other treaties we never ratified or even signed in
                         some cases and then pretend we're in violation of some
                         mythical "international law".
                         \_ Most ppl get upset that the US failed to ratify
                            treaties that seem to be in the interest of
                            humanity at large for short-sighted business
                            reasons.  Find me a reasonable rationale for
                            failing to ratify Kyoto, landmine, and chemical
                            weapons treaties.
                            \_ Kyoto: it's based on junk science and doesn't
                               put real limits on China, India and other 3rd
                               world nations that can easily out pollute us in
                               a few short years.  Landmines: they'd want us to
                               pull up the mines in the DMZ between N/S Korea.
                               Chemical weapons: we've got a shitload of the
                               stuff and destroy it as fast as the plants will
                               run.  What's your problem with that?  Most "ppl"
                               run at the mouth based on ignorance and don't
                               have a clue what they're talking about beyond
                               what NPR told them to think.
                      \_ You usually do not invade a sovereign nation under
                         international law.  The legal basis for invading
                         Iraq depends on UN resolutions after the war in
                         1991 started by Iraq's invasion of Kuwait.  Here is
                         an Economist article about its legality:
                http://www.economist.com/agenda/displayStory.cfm?story_id=1648347
                          \_ Why not?  What if the country is nasty?  Are you
                             willing to let people under a nasty regime suffer
                             because of the principle of sovereign immunity?
                             I think people's lives and happiness are more
                             important.
                             \_ If every country felt this way, there would be
                                no end to the wars. Think about it for a
                                second:  the Christian countries would all
                                want to invade everyone else to "save" them.
                                The Muslim countries the same. All in the name
                                of "happiness." [formatd. again for you.]
                                \_ No end to wars?  There will always be wars
                                   so long as there are limited resources,
                                   people disagree with each other, or religion
                                   still exists.  I think it's cute that you
                                   believe wars will somehow magically end if
                                   every country was just happily isolationist.
                                   Are you a GO PAT! GO! follower?
         \_ watch out! more imaginary missles incoming!
         \_ laugh as he continues to keep FERC from stopping his energy
            company buddies from raping California.
                \_ Oh really?
                   Daniel Weintraub: New energy lessons from the last
                   crisis in California
                   http://www.sacbee.com/content/opinion/story/5932213p-6893078c.html

3/22    The real solution would be to replace motd.public with something a
        little more secure and functional, like a CGI weblog script or
        something.  But that would be too rational and easy, which wouldn't
        be in the spirit of the motd.
        \_ http://csua.org/motd
        \_ that wouldn't be the motd anymore would it?
        \_ The real solution to what exactly?  I don't see a problem.

3/21    I have an image, and I need a program to cut the image
        into segments so I can print them up individually, to make
        a larger image, as in "blowing up" the image, suggestions
        for programs to do this?  pc or unix.
        \_ ImageMagick?

3/12    Battle of the obselete CPU's: What's faster an AMD K6 or pentium2 ?
        at the same Clock speed.
        \_ You don't need a processor just get Linux.
            \_ I have Linux, and I have two motherboard/CPU's. I'm wondering
               which one is faster. Then I will hook it up and boot Linux.

3/22    Is there any blog-style software that would allow me to blog on soda?

3/23    So I just finished Serious Sam, that I picked up from the bargain
        bin. I'd heard that BH is in the credits before, but I just noticed
        it again. Was it ever established that the credits are referring to
        our BH, and why?
        \_ Bob Henderson?  What's Bob got to do with Serious Sam?  I had no
           idea Bob worked on that one!

3/23    Assume that Saddam actually has POWs and he's torturing them. What is
        the next step for the US/Britain?
        \_ It's not that *WE* aren't torturing those suspected terrorist.
           \_ Yeah, so it's good to go.  Grab a few repair techs and shoot
              them in the head going for that Mogadishu effect.  It's a good
              plan that only a sick fuck like you would think was ok.
        \_ Seems unlikely.  The average soldier right now is probably more
           worried about fratricide and accidents.
           \_ If this war ends soon, this will probably go down as the only
              war in history where one side had more casualties due to
              accidents and traitorous fucks than from enemy fire.
              \_ obviously you don't know much about history.
                 \_ enlighten us.  provide counter example.
        \_ He's not torturing them as it appears they were executed.
        \_ As far as your question goes: the plan continues.  If we think they
           might be alive and there's a possibility of some dramtic hollywood
           style rescue, we might try, but I doubt it.  The tanks and APCs will
           continue forward and the Baathist-Nazi bastards will be crushed.

3/23    TrollP. My dentist was arguing that the UN has become obsolete, along
        the lines of the League of Nations. Now... I'm not going to argue
        with a man who has a drill in my mouth. I was just wondering if
        those right of center agree with that thought or if it is just
        pure ignorance. I don't care what those left of center think.
        \_ UN obsolecense rests on the premise that the US is the single
           hyper/uber-power, and that no one can oppose us.  This is premature,
           as we still do not have the means of neutralizing unstable regimes
           armed with nuclear weapons, and we've yet to prove that we can
           smoothly execute a military campaign against a vastly inferior
           target.  The credibility of the Bush Admin's claim of UN
           obsolecense hinges on an unqualified victory over Iraq.  If
           they cannot deliver such, the UN will emerge more popular (and
           relevant) than before.
        \_ Okay, look at it this way.  The UN is a body of 'leaders' that
           aren't elected, have no system of accountability, and yet still
           dictate what constitutes 'proper' action for sovereign nations.
           It just doesn't make very much sense to me to give any credence to
           UN's 'authority'.
        \_ The Bush admin just invaded Iraq without UN Security Council
           creidbility by actually enforcing the 17 UN security council
           approval, the whole time saying they didn't need a yes
           vote to invade... but just in case kept trying to get one.
           looks like the bush admin thinks the UN is pretty irrelevant
           now.  Thanks guys!  see you in hell.
        \_ Ha, this happened to a friend of mine when he was a kid.  He said
           his mom was arguing with the dentist and his dad was horrified.
           His dad was like "just agree with the man!  Our son is in his
           hands!"
        \_ If anything Bush has actually preserved any semblance of
           credibility by enforcing the 17 UN security council
           resolutions.  That said, the US should never have joined the
           United Nations.  It was organized by Communists and has
           been a complete failure at preventing conflict, instead
           tacitly approving a number of genocides.
           \_ So Bush has preserved the principles of the UN by ignoring
              the principles of the UN?  Put head back in sand.
              \_ Better to pass endless resolutions forever.  If *those* are
                 UN principles then we can do with out it.  No one needs an
                 international debate club comprised mostly of third world
                 despots.

3/22    Is there something wrong with Soda's mail?
        \_ probably.

3/23    Any recommendations for free FAX software for windows98.
        I can't afford WinFax. Thanks.

3/23    Is there a way to create a shortcut keys in emacs so that I can
        have it insert a certain word/phrase whenever I hit the shortcut
        keys? Thanks.
        \_ Emacs is this amazing piece of software where almost anything is
           possible.  The problem is figuring out how to do it.  Instead of
           asking if emacs can do something you should ask how.  Like so:
           How to create shortcut keys in emacs so insert word hitting keys?
        \_ Here is one way:
                (defun my-insert nil
                  "Insert a string"
                  (interactive)
                  (insert "<your phrase here>"))

                (global-set-key "\C-c5" 'my-insert)
                \- see abbrev and dabbrev. if you have a chance to see RMS'
                   .emacs his use of this is kind of humorous. --psb