Kevin's Watch

What u. said, lorin.

I prefer to just disparage their sources. (i.e. you got that article from Where?! Oh, you foolish fool!)

Since the point (for me) is to see how people think of a problem, trying to reference debate like it is an academic journal is somewhat silly.

Also, there's a difference between saying, "Hey, I got this from here" and "I'm right because Libertarian Blog has a huge ass long-winded, dry, poorly written article on it and if you abandon your job and look at all six hundred citations from Libertaria, Ron-Paul-Farians Unite, etc. you will see my position is unassailable!"

Orlion wrote:I prefer to just disparage their sources. (i.e. you got that article from Where?! Oh, you foolish fool!)

Since the point (for me) is to see how people think of a problem, trying to reference debate like it is an academic journal is somewhat silly.

Also, there's a difference between saying, "Hey, I got this from here" and "I'm right because Libertarian Blog has a huge ass long-winded, dry, poorly written article on it and if you abandon your job and look at all six hundred citations from Libertaria, Ron-Paul-Farians Unite, etc. you will see my position is unassailable!"

Just how much of the munitions and equipment that The Islamic State [the group formerly known as ISIS] is now using to pound the shit out of the Iraqi people did we covertly supply them with when they were previously opperating in Syria to overthrow the Assad regime?

All of it, probably.

peter wrote:Just how much of the munitions and equipment that The Islamic State [the group formerly known as ISIS] is now using to pound the shit out of the Iraqi people did we covertly supply them with when they were previously opperating in Syria to overthrow the Assad regime?

According to several news stories, one of the reasons IS is doing so well against the Kurdish army is that the former is benefitting from lots of US-supplied arms and equipment left behind by fleeing Iraqi forces, whereas the latter is having to make do with 30-40 year old kit.

It strikes me that the more the West has got involved in the region - even if occasionally trying to do the morally right thing (rather than being driven by the politics of oil and influence) - the more it has caused an ever-increasingly screwed-up consequence. It seems to be an ever more SNAFU domino effect...

Lets wish the "House of One" project launched last week in Berlin well. The £35 million project led by an interfaith team comprising of Jews, Muslims and Christians aims to build the worlds first house of worship for all three of the Abrahamic religions. Consisting of a mosque, a synagog and a church all under one roof and surounding a central communal meeting area, constuction it is hoped, will begin in 2016.

Yeah...I should work out a hack for his account so every forum he clicks on redirects to the 'Tank.

--A

I have a very low boredom threshold and a very short attention span - not in any way suited to the debating requirements of the Tank.

Why do you persist in thinking that there are requirements?

--A

Av's right, peter. Heck, I just got done quoting Bruce Hornsby in a Tank thread.

ussusimiel wrote:
It's long past time, peter, that you did your duty and joined us in the 'Tank.

You've probably been following the Whither the Watch? thread. The Watch is currently undergoing a transition/renewal and one of the effects of this has been renewed interest and activity in the 'Tank. People, who had been avoiding it for various reasons, have started posting in there again, especially women e.g. ali, lorin, Ananda. This has already changed the atmosphere in there and any additional voices would add to that and increase the diversity.

This latest post of yours is a perfect example of something that could start of a really good 'Tank thread.

C'mon, peter, you know you want to!

We'll hold your hand and keep you safe!

I can keep this up forever

u.

As the Actress said to the Bishop

This is a quick thought experiment [not worthy of the Tank!] that I'd be interested in what people's ideas would be.

Say, today, every household in the world were somehow all magically brought to the same level of living standard - but this was done in such a way that the average daily energy consumption of the globe was kept the same as it is now, just spread equally between everyone instead of being gathered more and more into ever smaller numbers of people, then at what sort of level would we all find ourselves living at. Lets assume [working from the bottom up] we would all have a roof of sorts at least over our head. Would we all run a small car - or would the average be way below the level that would allow for that [remember - all the higher levels of energy consumption things like flight of airplanes etc would be divvied up into providing things for everyone at lower levels]. I wonder what the true average standard of living of the world is if worked out in this way; I haven't got the faintest idea.

Maybe if we keep after him, he'll eventually relent...

Hashi Lebwohl wrote:Poor people elsewhere are lucky to have a shack built with scavenged material and some heavy cloth for a "door".

Damn right.

--A

One of the most shamefull things I ever did was to go on a 'tour' of the Cape-Town 'townships' while on holiday in S.A. As soon as it started I knew I was guilty of the most awful prurient voyeurism and I hated every minute of it. I couldn't leave the tour because I was afraid to be alone in that environment - but I knew it was wrong, wrong, wrong.

I felt the same way on a driving tour of Kingston, Jamaica, peter.