A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » History
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

gratitude etc. (was Apollo: One gas environment?)



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 13th 04, 12:10 AM
Derek Lyons
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default gratitude etc. (was Apollo: One gas environment?)

(Henry Spencer) wrote:

In article ,
Scott Hedrick wrote:
The important difference, of course, is that the national government of the
abusers is taking steps to punish them...


Many people would have vastly more confidence in this if those steps
promptly resulted in serious punishment for those people *and* their
superiors (who are responsible for the behavior of their subordinates).


The problem is many people have inflated expectations of how far up
the chain the superiors are directly responsible.

Historically, the odds are against it; the way to bet is that nobody
important will suffer for it, even those who carried out the improper
orders will get just slaps on the wrist, and it will be years before even
that happens. Just *why* is this an important difference?


If you cannot see the difference between a country that attempts to do
the right thing, and a country that does not, then your blind
anti-Americanism has affected you even worse than I thought.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.
Ads
  #2  
Old May 13th 04, 03:07 AM
Dave Michelson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Derek Lyons wrote:

The problem is many people have inflated expectations of how far up
the chain the superiors are directly responsible.


No, the problem is that many superiors make insufficient effort to ensure that
their influence extends far enough down the chain.

If subordinates sense that their superior feels that certain things are
important, they'll usually follow through.

If subordinates are ignored or, worse, get mixed or even garbled messages,
then bad things usually happen.

If you cannot see the difference between a country that attempts to do
the right thing, and a country that does not, then your blind
anti-Americanism has affected you even worse than I thought.


"We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. When the loyal opposition dies,
I think the soul of America dies with it."

- Edward R. Murrow

--
Dave Michelson

  #3  
Old May 13th 04, 03:56 AM
Neil Gerace
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Derek Lyons" wrote in message
...

The problem is many people have inflated expectations of how far up
the chain the superiors are directly responsible.


After World War II the chain reached all the way to the top. Why shouldn't
that be the case here?


  #4  
Old May 13th 04, 06:15 AM
Kevin Willoughby
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , derekl1963
@nospamyahoo.com says...
(Henry Spencer) wrote:
In article ,
Scott Hedrick wrote:
The important difference, of course, is that the national government of the
abusers is taking steps to punish them...

Many people would have vastly more confidence in this if those steps
promptly resulted in serious punishment for those people *and* their
superiors (who are responsible for the behavior of their subordinates).

The problem is many people have inflated expectations of how far up
the chain the superiors are directly responsible.


Well, there is the issue of who knew, which (pending new information
that could pop up any moment) suggests that only a few low-level prison
guards did nasty things, vs. those who should set policy such that it is
abundantly clear that torture chambers and rape rooms are absolutely,
unequivocally, *NOT* acceptable. The latter goes to the very top. Not
just the Secretary of Defense, but to the President, and even the entire
American voting public.


Historically, the odds are against it; the way to bet is that nobody
important will suffer for it, even those who carried out the improper
orders will get just slaps on the wrist,


The cynic in my wonders if this is exactly what will happen to the
Secretary of Defense.


and it will be years before even
that happens. Just *why* is this an important difference?


If you cannot see the difference between a country that attempts to do
the right thing, and a country that does not, then your blind
anti-Americanism has affected you even worse than I thought.


Canada isn't part of North America?
--
Kevin Willoughby
lid

Imagine that, a FROG ON-OFF switch, hardly the work
for test pilots. -- Mike Collins
  #5  
Old May 13th 04, 02:43 PM
Scott Hedrick
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Dave Michelson" wrote in message
news:vLAoc.459120$oR5.11719@pd7tw3no...
If subordinates sense that their superior feels that certain things are
important, they'll usually follow through.

If subordinates are ignored or, worse, get mixed or even garbled messages,
then bad things usually happen.


That's the cost of power. The trial scene in Star Trek 6 hit it right on the
head. Kirk was responsible for events he couldn't possible have known about
precisely because he was the captain.

"We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. When the loyal opposition

dies,
I think the soul of America dies with it."

- Edward R. Murrow


I recall reading a science fiction story- the details of which, like the
name, I can't remember now- in which the "loyal opposition" was created by
the authoritiarian regime to give the illusion of dissent. The "opposition"
didn't even know it was a puppet.


  #6  
Old May 13th 04, 02:44 PM
Peter Stickney
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Kevin Willoughby writes:
In article , derekl1963
@nospamyahoo.com says...
If you cannot see the difference between a country that attempts to do
the right thing, and a country that does not, then your blind
anti-Americanism has affected you even worse than I thought.


Canada isn't part of North America?


Funny that you should bring that up - IIRC, the Canadian Parachute
Regiment was disbanded after reports of its mistreatement of prisoners
in Bosnia while it was assigned to peacekeeping duties there.

And don't get me started on the Belgians in Somalia - I don't know
about you, but holding a 12 year old over an open fire, requiring a
twelve year old girl to strip and perform sexual favors for the
troops, and stuffing other kids into ammo boxes to die in the sun (And
getting a slap on the wrist from the Belgian Military Courts, in the
one conviction obtained) isn't exactly Geneva Convention stuff either.

--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster
  #7  
Old May 13th 04, 02:48 PM
Scott Hedrick
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Kevin Willoughby" wrote in message
...
The latter goes to the very top. Not
just the Secretary of Defense, but to the President, and even the entire
American voting public.


These things were done in my name, by my agents. That makes me responsible.
Which is why I won't object if payments are made to the abused.

The cynic in my wonders if this is exactly what will happen to the
Secretary of Defense.


I don't think he should be removed. I don't know what else can be done.

If you cannot see the difference between a country that attempts to do
the right thing, and a country that does not, then your blind
anti-Americanism has affected you even worse than I thought.


Canada isn't part of North America?


Which has what to do with what was said? If Canadians are Americans, then
they need to start drinking our beer.


  #8  
Old May 13th 04, 03:41 PM
Nicholas Fitzpatrick
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Peter Stickney wrote:

Canada isn't part of North America?


Funny that you should bring that up - IIRC, the Canadian Parachute
Regiment was disbanded after reports of its mistreatement of prisoners
in Bosnia while it was assigned to peacekeeping duties there.


It was Somalia. There was a full-scale inquiry. There was no
indication that it was more than a few rogue soldiers (which,
unfortunately, is going to happen in these kind of situations ...
or at least it always seems to happen). Althought there did seem
to be some systemic problems in the regiment, that created an
atmosphere where these things did happen; hence the disbanding.

Also, the inquiry raised questions (but never completely answered)
the question that the Malaria drug that was in use at the time,
may have been impacting the judgement of the soldiers. The
drug does have psychotic side-effects. See
http://www.commando.org/somalia/mefloquine.html

Nick
  #9  
Old May 13th 04, 03:44 PM
Nicholas Fitzpatrick
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Scott Hedrick wrote:

Which has what to do with what was said? If Canadians are Americans, then
they need to start drinking our beer.


I tried drinking US beer once ... it was an awful experience, the alcohol
content is so low, that I was sobering up faster than I could drink
the stuff ... :-)

Seriously though, the only main-stream beer down there that seem
potable is Samuel Adams. The rest seem even worse than our mass-market
Labatt and Molson products (which I didn't think was possible!)

(which reminds me ... how come they don't put the alcohol content
on US beer bottles ... and just how low does a light beer get there?

Nick
  #10  
Old May 13th 04, 04:31 PM
Scott Hedrick
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Nicholas Fitzpatrick" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Scott Hedrick wrote:

Which has what to do with what was said? If Canadians are Americans, then
they need to start drinking our beer.


I tried drinking US beer once ... it was an awful experience, the alcohol
content is so low, that I was sobering up faster than I could drink
the stuff ... :-)


It gets worse- try the Americanized versions of imports. I've had imported
Killian's Irish Red- the crap that Coors passes off is Coors Light with food
coloring.

Bass is just plain sneaky. You can toss down a half-dozen and pass a
breathalyzer- then it attacks all at once.

Seriously though, the only main-stream beer down there that seem
potable is Samuel Adams.


SA's pretty good.

The rest seem even worse than our mass-market
Labatt and Molson products (which I didn't think was possible!)


The best thing about Lablatt is the commercials.

(which reminds me ... how come they don't put the alcohol content
on US beer bottles


It would hurt sales.

... and just how low does a light beer get there?


Like making love in a canoe.

If I were a trucker, I'd keep a case of Guinness handy as an emergency
source of diesel.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Apollo Hoax FAQ (is not spam) :-) Nathan Jones Misc 6 July 29th 04 06:14 AM
Apollo Buzz alDredge Misc 5 July 28th 04 10:05 AM
Apollo Buzz alDredge UK Astronomy 5 July 28th 04 10:05 AM
The Apollo Hoax FAQ darla Misc 10 July 25th 04 02:57 PM
The Apollo Hoax FAQ darla UK Astronomy 11 July 25th 04 02:57 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:10 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2017 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.