h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

No, you're right after a fashion, frogbit. There were lessons learned from the invasion of Vietnam, but not moral lessons. The military and the government learned that public support was important in maintaining a war, that the media should be spoon-fed pre-digested stories rather than allowed access to the real events.

"Winning the hearts and minds" is now something the govt tries to do to the US public as well as to the civilians whose regime we're changing. And they talk about it so openly! Military wonks are totally clear that they need to work to maintain public support for their operations, never taking a second thought about the possibility that their operations should follow after public support compells them to do it. Some official decides that a war or "humanitarian intervention" is necessary, then they work backwards to ensure that the public understands why the decision is so important.

()

I can tell by your Expresion TMershi you know excactly what was going on in the garage

I can tell by your Expresion TMershi you know excactly what was going on in the garage

>That's disinginuous Subcom. They learned not to pick on anyone who can give them a fair fight.<

I am sorry to break this to you subcom but their is no such thing as a fair fight. That is a myth started by those who have never been in a fight themselves and have watched to much telivision. The world is not a fair place.

Thank you Starbirth for that sobering, and above all, educational sentiment.

"The world is not a fair place."

My, what a gem. It's suddenly all become clear.

Oh, hang on.

"There is no such thing as a fair fight. That is a myth started by those who have never been in a fight themselves and have watched to much telivision."

You may have a small point. No fight is fair *because someone is going to win it, which means someone has to lose*.

So if the term "fair fight" makes you rage with the injustice of the world, how about something more definite? How about:

"They learned not to pick on anyone who could fight back at all."

There. That's a little less ambiguous.

A "fairish" fight would be pitting Mike Tyson against, oh, our Jessie Englishman who beat him a while back.
An unfair fight (say, the USA again Iraq) would be more like pitting Mike Tyson again Mother Theresa.

Dec 16 1950


To fight "world conquest by communist imperialism" in Korea, President Truman declares a state of national emergency. The order is still in effect, one of four current states of national emergency granting extraordinary powers.

Starbirth,

It was frogbit who wrote, "That's disinginuous Subcom. They learned not to pick on anyone who can give them a fair fight."

I didn't say anything about whether Vietnam was "a fair fight." I don't care which army was better or tougher than the other. You can have a boxing match between two evenly matched opponents and declare that it's a "fair" fight. Then you can talk about whether boxing is a good idea for anyone, whether Muhammed Ali would have good control over his body if he weren't entertaining millions of people by getting bludgeoned and trying to bludgeon others.

Whether the US was evenly matched against the Vietnamese does not change the inappropriateness of US participating in the war and propping up a series of dictators sympathetic to capitalism.

Maybe frogbit will engage you in a debate about whether US vs. Vietnam was a fair fight. I'm interested in the decision to fight, not in the tactics of the fight.

Frogbit, All your ranting and mockery doe's not change the fact that their is 'no such thing as a fair fight'.

By the way I love your analogy of the US as {the foul mouthed rapist,bully,uneducated} Tyson against Iraq as {angelic,merciful} Mother Theresa.

Glad you are not biased {winkeye>

"You dismiss people who dissagree, as anti-american and you're using the old phrases such as bringing up the phantoms who supposedly cry foul about america becoming isolationist."

Listening to BBCR4, I have just learned that from Jan 1st 2003, any person travelling as a tourist (up to 2 months) from UK to USA who has a "communicable disease" or any, ANY type of previous arrest record, charge or spent conviction must now apply @ U S Embassy in London or Belfast for visa instead of the old system of filling in a form on the aeroplane. (cost $100)

The USA is apparently compiling a database which accesses each european countries' medical and police records.

Simon Calder (travel journalist) talked of how he had already been delayed by the new "knee-jerk" system which is designed to improve the lives (life expectancy?) of its citizens by restricting the rights of all "aliens"

Being HIV+ I already knew that it was difficult going to USA and chose to avoid going to the lengths of posting my medication rather than carrying it (blurting out that i was not going to be forced to defend my right to freedom by a bully). Yet I know a great many friends are going to run a great risk at choosing to try.

Also, I imagine many of us have convictions which relate to teenage fervour or stupidity, rather than posing a risk to the National Security of the largest, most powerful bully the world has ever cowered beneath...

Unfortunately, middle England is going to think that this approach to security is acceptable; whilst not realizing the drip, drip nature of these "reforms" will eventually affect them or theirs.

America! Please realise a world of freedom is within your grasp if you could dare to make the "American Dream" a Global Reality...

p.s. Do not understand American Dream or Globalisation, I just believe in the appeasement of allies.

Jasperdog, You are upset because the US wants to know if people coming into its borders have a 'communicable disease' or is a felon?
I would call that 'common sense' that any soviegn country should adhere to.

But I guess what my Question is 'why would you want to visit {and perjure yourself by not declaring your AID's infection} a country you refer to as the largest and most powerful bully the world has ever cowered beneath?

And what do yo mean by:

*p.s. Do not understand American Dream or Globalisation, I just believe in the appeasement of allies.*

"Frogbit, All your ranting and mockery doe's not change the fact that their is 'no such thing as a fair fight'.

By the way I love your analogy of the US as {the foul mouthed rapist,bully,uneducated} Tyson against Iraq as {angelic,merciful} Mother Theresa.

Glad you are not biased {winkeye>"

Well, not exactly ranting, but then again, accuracy was never your strong point. To be honest I was using Tyson's reputation as a fairly unbeatable boxer rather than suggesting that the USA is a "foul-mouthed, rapist, bully, uneducated" anything. I didn't either, suggest that Iraq was angelic and merciful. In fact, if you read the posting properly, I wasn't equating either person with either country. I was mereley illustrating what, in my eyes, constituted the epitome of an unfair fight. That you sprung on it and cast your own country as Tyson and Iraq as Mother Theresa, I find interesting. However, if you feel the analogy fits, then wear it. I personally don't feel it fits. In fact let's take the humanity out of it altogether.
A bear versus a minx.
So let's recap. Starbirth maintains that there is "no such thing as a fair fight".
Frogbit agrees and suggests that that is no reason to excuse a monsterously unfair fight.



"Jasperdog, You are upset because the US wants to know if people coming into its borders have a 'communicable disease' or is a felon?
I would call that 'common sense' that any soviegn country should adhere to."

Of course Starbirth, being an adherant of the policy of freedom for all, you would be the last person in the world to be pissed off should you discover that Russia or North Korea or Australia had been rifling through your medical records to decide whether you can visit or not.

And most of all, who said I was unbiased?

I don't expect a reply to this posting, let alone one that actually addressed any of the serious points in it. I only write this stuff in an effort to defend my views for all to see.

Do us all a favour Starbirth, start a movement that pushes for isolationism. If the USA is so damn great, how come you need to keep grabbing other people's resources?

Zagreb, it seems plain to me that
Frogbit was *not* defending the imperial partition of Iraq/Kuwait at all! He was saying the opposite - that Kuwait was part of Iraq, before it was split off, and so that explains Saddam's invasion!

>>as some idiots did with the commendably unjingoistic "Black Hawk Down".>>
Zagreb, I can't *believe* you said that. Blackhawk Down is pure jingoistic propaganda of the worst sort!

>So let's recap. Starbirth maintains that there is "no such thing as a fair fight".
Frogbit agrees and suggests that that is no reason to excuse a monsterously unfair fight.<

Frogbit,I am glad your agree that there is no such thing as a fair fight. I also afree with you that there is no reason to excuse a unfair fight or any fight what so ever. When ever a fight takes place no matter the reason agression,self defence,retribution it is a failure of all involved.

>Of course Starbirth, being an adherant of the policy of freedom for all, you would be the last person in the world to be pissed off should you discover that Russia or North Korea or Australia had been rifling through your medical records to decide whether you can visit or not.<

You are right I would not be. If I want to visit anothers home then I must adhere to their rules. If I do not agree with their terms then I have every right not to go.

>And most of all, who said I was unbiased?<

Not me.

A fair fight is where the oponents are evenly matched and *only* the opponents are affected.

Ofcourse starbirth would say there is no such thing. After all he has no problem with the 3 to 4 thousand non participants that american forces could help killing in afghanistan.

>Blackhawk Down is pure jingoistic propaganda of the worst sort! <

And I just thought it was a really bad movie. {but I do like the use of the word Jingnostic Della}

When can we expect another play Della? Now that I did like.