Well, obviously the ones banning firearms are exempting themselves, leaving them plenty of firepower to commit the atrocities detailed in your little chart.
The last war America won was WWII. We won that the good old fashion way.
We should do the same against ISIS.
I support One Last Hurrah if it really is One Last Hurrah.
After which we go nigh-isolationist. End NATO, end the rest of our foreign defensive agreements, sell base land back to respective countries (negotiate new contracts for as-needed temporary basing for any future wars), and just let the world destroy itself.
I’m sick and tired of the ‘world police’ baloney. Isolationism was grand.
This is such a BS argument.
This is what happens when America loses its balls to win a War. It turns against its own citizens.
The last war America won was WWII. We won that the good old fashion way.
We should do the same against ISIS.
It was Allied forces that won the War, not America
Wow! I actually have never seen anyone arguing that US wasn't the main victor in that war. Soviet Union and Britain - two countries that won WW2, there can be NO arguing!
Last time it was, do it for the god damn children. It is beyond tiresome.
If you know god damn phone can be tapped, you just encrypt the crap out of comm and send it through your own private channel (VPN, whatever, so doubly encrypted).
You mean the ones who weren’t citizens of the country in question and who owned guns? How about that.
There was no genocide. I bet you think Jackson’s actions were destructive to the Indioes, too.
Originally Posted by nomadman
It was Allied forces that won the War, not America
All of Russia’s first-class aviation fuel was supplied by the USA. Their boots and most of the uniform material, as well. Blue rubber for their tires, all of their aluminum, fully ? of their munitions, over 500,000 trucks (all far better than the 200,000 Russia produced themselves during the war). Upgunned (76mm) Sherman tanks were a big part of the Russian drive through the Balkans, where hundreds of them participated and had a measure of success. Aerocobras, P40s, C-47s, and A-20s (18,000+) all considerably assisted the Russian war effort. Almost all telephone communication was over American phones. The Russians produced 92 railway locomotives; they got 2,000 through lend-lease.
Well over half the Luftwaffe was engaged in the west from 1942-5, and 75% of German aircraft casualties were against the western Allies. Each U-boat cost 5,000,000 Marks to build. The Germans built over 1,000. A Panther tank cost 117,000 Marks, That means about 40,000 tanks were not built so that the Germans could wage the War of the Atlantic. Think 40,000 panthers might have made a difference against an unallied Russia in the East? Each V2 rocket cost, in labor and material, the same as 3.5 fighter planes. The Germans launched over 3,000 V2s. Do the math on that.
The British and Americans deployed over 20,000 heavy bombers against the Germans, causing great destruction. The Russians never developed one. The Allies supplied 317,000 tons of explosive materials, including 22,000,000 shells–over half the total Soviet production of ~600,000 tons. Additionally, the Allies supplied 103,000 tons of toluene, the primary ingredient of TNT. In addition to explosives and ammunition, 991,000,000 miscellaneous shell cartridges were also provided to speed up the manufacturing of ammunition. In addition to military equipment, other wartime commodities were essential to the effort. These included 2,300,000 tons of steel, 229,000 tons of aluminum, 2,600,000 tons of petrol, 3,800,000 tons of foodstuffs, 56,445 field telephones, and 600,000 kilometers of telephone wire. The Soviet Union also received 15,000,000 pairs of army boots. Lend-lease aircraft amounted to 18% of all Soviet air forces–20% of bombers, 16% of all fighters, and 29% of naval aircraft.
There were also 10,000 heavy caliber anti-aircraft guns defending the Reich. Do you think those would have shored up German defenses in the East?
What would have happened if Rommel’s Africa Corps and the 30+ German divisions in France would have been in the don bend in fall 1942 protecting Stalingrad instead of waiting for British and American divisions to land? What would have happened if the 400,000 troops stationed in Norway could have helped Army Group North capture Leningrad? What would have happened if, in 1944, the German armies trying to hold the divisions fighting in Italy and the Balkans could have been freed to fight against the Russians in the south? What would have happened if, in 1944, the German armies trying to hold the Allies out of France could have been sent to Bylorussia prior to Bagatron? The Germans were never really able to muster more than half their strength against the Russians. They were fighting a technological war against the Brits and Americans that required a huge manufacturing effort.
Russia gives the western allies no credit for tying down so many German resources and destroying so many others (30% of 1944’s total production) with their strategic bombing campaign. Russians like to think themselves hard and are proud of the fact that over 20,000,000 Soviet soldiers died in WWII, when that only shows how useless and undisciplined Russian soldiers are.
These idiot lawmakers just want to wiretap everyone.
Exactly! Terrorist attacks are a gift from heaven for the politicians, because it helps them advance their surveillance of the entire population.
As I said before:
These spying schemes have nothing to do with terrorists or criminals and never have. The shere scale of them shows this. Logic dictates that the most common subject spied upon is the intended target, and that's ordinary civilians. This should be glaringly obvious.
Terrorists and criminals are rarely considered a threat to a state (although they are of course presented as such), but its civilians are. So states have always wanted to know what their subjects were thinking and whether any threats could emerge from that. States of old try to suppress freedom of expression so ideas can not reach critical mass. When that doesn't work anymore, they switch to managing freedom of expression. When that doesn't work anymore, they switch to managing people's ability to come to an informed opinion. In order to be able to do that you have to know what people think in detail. In this day and age that means Big Data to the rescue!
Before 9/11 some safeguards still existed here and there against wholesale spying on the population, but 9/11 gave the states the opportunity to negate those safeguards. And because of the size of the operations it had to come out at some point. If Ed Snowden hadn't exposed what he found somebody else would have. There are just too many people involved.
So I applaud Tim Cook for his stance on encryption, and I'll stick with Apple for that.
...meanwhile in CIA headquarters: "Phew! That was lucky, these guys almost started to form a logical argument against the privacy laws through open debate but luckily I distracted them with the old 'guns don't kill people' one-two. Never fails to stop any human debate in its tracks and turn it into a totally polarised fake fact fest" I don't think that the 2 opposing groups on gun controls will ever convince the other to change their position via an apple insider forum; shall we return to the totally cynical use of the Paris attacks to attempt to jump start a law that has deep technical flaws as its basis?
So... guns do magically just kill people, then. Because your claim that the statement to the contrary is just a CIA psy-op would suggest this.
COINTELPRO has better things to do than to tell the truth.
I was pretty careful
Not to express anything that suggested I was on one side of the 'not part of this thread and won't be solved here debate' but you seem to have assumed a position for me. I found the debate on freedoms, privacy and government ability to legislate technology interesting. I would like to return this thread to that useful debate as I genuinely think the basis of the law is flawed and people were meaningfully debating it.
A very controversial matter, since both parts are right ... Privacy has to be protected, but State security in this time is a concern.... No solution. I want my iMessages to be encrypted, but what about iMessage being used by terrorists?
After France was dealt retribution for its air strikes, control-freaks in the USA chose to take advantage of the on-going murder and genocide in the Middle East to push their continuing erosion of the right to privacy.
Fortunately, Apple is still leading the industry by providing end-to-end encryption, forcing Homeland Security to do its job by gaining evidence of unlawful activity prior to accessing people's private data.
Once again, the key point of why some people feel driven to a suicide bombing - let that sink in a little.
A suicide bombing.
Yeah - a suicide bombing - to argue for national sovereignty, the media once again fails to address why such actions are deemed necessary.
Although some may argue that the media is innocent of public opinion manipulation, the total lack of historical conext and constant coverage of hysteria indicates a huge lack of journalistic integrity.
Are the western nations at all culpable in any retaliatory acts? Could invading other countries to grab 'control' the flow of oil be worth murdering so many?
I really hope the issues presented on Apple Insider, especially regards Tim Cook's responses to breaking encryption, are given sufficient context for public awareness. This situation has wide-ranging consequences, not just for US nationals living inside US boarders.
Comments
Yeah! If nobody has guns, nobody will die!
Oops.
This is such a BS argument.
This is what happens when America loses its balls to win a War. It turns against its own citizens.
The last war America won was WWII. We won that the good old fashion way.
We should do the same against ISIS.
If you are going to make a point, at least get your facts straight.
The last war America won was WWII. We won that the good old fashion way.
We should do the same against ISIS.
I support One Last Hurrah if it really is One Last Hurrah.
After which we go nigh-isolationist. End NATO, end the rest of our foreign defensive agreements, sell base land back to respective countries (negotiate new contracts for as-needed temporary basing for any future wars), and just let the world destroy itself.
I’m sick and tired of the ‘world police’ baloney. Isolationism was grand.
You chart is completely irrelevant. Tyre is no coo relation between owning m16 and genocide of Armenians.
also where is American genicide against natives?
It was Allied forces that won the War, not America
Yes, the Allies were doing so well pre-1942.
Wait, that's not right.
Total fracking, those NAZIs will never stop.
Last time it was, do it for the god damn children. It is beyond tiresome.
If you know god damn phone can be tapped, you just encrypt the crap out of comm and send it through your own private channel (VPN, whatever, so doubly encrypted).
This is pure idiocy.
They think Terrorists are morons.
lol.
You mean the ones who weren’t citizens of the country in question and who owned guns? How about that.
There was no genocide. I bet you think Jackson’s actions were destructive to the Indioes, too.
All of Russia’s first-class aviation fuel was supplied by the USA. Their boots and most of the uniform material, as well. Blue rubber for their tires, all of their aluminum, fully ? of their munitions, over 500,000 trucks (all far better than the 200,000 Russia produced themselves during the war). Upgunned (76mm) Sherman tanks were a big part of the Russian drive through the Balkans, where hundreds of them participated and had a measure of success. Aerocobras, P40s, C-47s, and A-20s (18,000+) all considerably assisted the Russian war effort. Almost all telephone communication was over American phones. The Russians produced 92 railway locomotives; they got 2,000 through lend-lease.
Well over half the Luftwaffe was engaged in the west from 1942-5, and 75% of German aircraft casualties were against the western Allies. Each U-boat cost 5,000,000 Marks to build. The Germans built over 1,000. A Panther tank cost 117,000 Marks, That means about 40,000 tanks were not built so that the Germans could wage the War of the Atlantic. Think 40,000 panthers might have made a difference against an unallied Russia in the East? Each V2 rocket cost, in labor and material, the same as 3.5 fighter planes. The Germans launched over 3,000 V2s. Do the math on that.
The British and Americans deployed over 20,000 heavy bombers against the Germans, causing great destruction. The Russians never developed one. The Allies supplied 317,000 tons of explosive materials, including 22,000,000 shells–over half the total Soviet production of ~600,000 tons. Additionally, the Allies supplied 103,000 tons of toluene, the primary ingredient of TNT. In addition to explosives and ammunition, 991,000,000 miscellaneous shell cartridges were also provided to speed up the manufacturing of ammunition. In addition to military equipment, other wartime commodities were essential to the effort. These included 2,300,000 tons of steel, 229,000 tons of aluminum, 2,600,000 tons of petrol, 3,800,000 tons of foodstuffs, 56,445 field telephones, and 600,000 kilometers of telephone wire. The Soviet Union also received 15,000,000 pairs of army boots. Lend-lease aircraft amounted to 18% of all Soviet air forces–20% of bombers, 16% of all fighters, and 29% of naval aircraft.
There were also 10,000 heavy caliber anti-aircraft guns defending the Reich. Do you think those would have shored up German defenses in the East?
What would have happened if Rommel’s Africa Corps and the 30+ German divisions in France would have been in the don bend in fall 1942 protecting Stalingrad instead of waiting for British and American divisions to land? What would have happened if the 400,000 troops stationed in Norway could have helped Army Group North capture Leningrad? What would have happened if, in 1944, the German armies trying to hold the divisions fighting in Italy and the Balkans could have been freed to fight against the Russians in the south? What would have happened if, in 1944, the German armies trying to hold the Allies out of France could have been sent to Bylorussia prior to Bagatron? The Germans were never really able to muster more than half their strength against the Russians. They were fighting a technological war against the Brits and Americans that required a huge manufacturing effort.
Russia gives the western allies no credit for tying down so many German resources and destroying so many others (30% of 1944’s total production) with their strategic bombing campaign. Russians like to think themselves hard and are proud of the fact that over 20,000,000 Soviet soldiers died in WWII, when that only shows how useless and undisciplined Russian soldiers are.
These idiot lawmakers just want to wiretap everyone.
Exactly! Terrorist attacks are a gift from heaven for the politicians, because it helps them advance their surveillance of the entire population.
As I said before:
These spying schemes have nothing to do with terrorists or criminals and never have. The shere scale of them shows this. Logic dictates that the most common subject spied upon is the intended target, and that's ordinary civilians. This should be glaringly obvious.
Terrorists and criminals are rarely considered a threat to a state (although they are of course presented as such), but its civilians are. So states have always wanted to know what their subjects were thinking and whether any threats could emerge from that. States of old try to suppress freedom of expression so ideas can not reach critical mass. When that doesn't work anymore, they switch to managing freedom of expression. When that doesn't work anymore, they switch to managing people's ability to come to an informed opinion. In order to be able to do that you have to know what people think in detail. In this day and age that means Big Data to the rescue!
Before 9/11 some safeguards still existed here and there against wholesale spying on the population, but 9/11 gave the states the opportunity to negate those safeguards. And because of the size of the operations it had to come out at some point. If Ed Snowden hadn't exposed what he found somebody else would have. There are just too many people involved.
So I applaud Tim Cook for his stance on encryption, and I'll stick with Apple for that.
"Phew! That was lucky, these guys almost started to form a logical argument against the privacy laws through open debate but luckily I distracted them with the old 'guns don't kill people' one-two. Never fails to stop any human debate in its tracks and turn it into a totally polarised fake fact fest"
I don't think that the 2 opposing groups on gun controls will ever convince the other to change their position via an apple insider forum; shall we return to the totally cynical use of the Paris attacks to attempt to jump start a law that has deep technical flaws as its basis?
...the old ‘guns don’t kill people' one-two. Never fails to stop any human debate in its tracks and turn it into a totally polarized fake fact fest...
So... guns do magically just kill people, then. Because your claim that the statement to the contrary is just a CIA psy-op would suggest this.
COINTELPRO has better things to do than to tell the truth.
It is simply mind boggling how one man can have no clue whatsoever! You mind is spottless - wow! Next time try to think
So no reply or refutation of what I’ve said, then?
I was pretty careful
Not to express anything that suggested I was on one side of the 'not part of this thread and won't be solved here debate' but you seem to have assumed a position for me. I found the debate on freedoms, privacy and government ability to legislate technology interesting. I would like to return this thread to that useful debate as I genuinely think the basis of the law is flawed and people were meaningfully debating it.
No solution.
I want my iMessages to be encrypted, but what about iMessage being used by terrorists?
After France was dealt retribution for its air strikes, control-freaks in the USA chose to take advantage of the on-going murder and genocide in the Middle East to push their continuing erosion of the right to privacy.
Fortunately, Apple is still leading the industry by providing end-to-end encryption, forcing Homeland Security to do its job by gaining evidence of unlawful activity prior to accessing people's private data.
Once again, the key point of why some people feel driven to a suicide bombing - let that sink in a little.
A suicide bombing.
Yeah - a suicide bombing - to argue for national sovereignty, the media once again fails to address why such actions are deemed necessary.
Although some may argue that the media is innocent of public opinion manipulation, the total lack of historical conext and constant coverage of hysteria indicates a huge lack of journalistic integrity.
Are the western nations at all culpable in any retaliatory acts?
Could invading other countries to grab 'control' the flow of oil be worth murdering so many?
I really hope the issues presented on Apple Insider, especially regards Tim Cook's responses to breaking encryption, are given sufficient context for public awareness. This situation has wide-ranging consequences, not just for US nationals living inside US boarders.
May the killing end. Sooner the better.
A very controversial matter, since both parts are right ... Privacy has to be protected, but State security in this time is a concern....
No solution.
I want my iMessages to be encrypted, but what about iMessage being used by terrorists?
What about they use the 1000 other options... Good grief. You think terrorists are idiots?
So, it's not privacy vs security, that's a good old false dichotomy. Check that up.
It;'s privacy vs less privacy and security is totally unrelated to it.