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

Apparition,
I got distracted with my spat with the Amoeba. I *did* read your link about hydrogen; it reinforced my point as far as I could tell. As of mid 2001, 40% efficiency of hydrogen production could at that time be achieved in the lab, but commercial production could only manage half that. Hydrogen production is not a mature, commercially viable technology at the present. It was an old article demonstrating that the technology wasn't ready. Like wot I said.

As to thinking that you were referring to me, well that's just my natural arrogance showing through. How could you *not* be talking about me? Seriously, I had said "I believe" a few times, and you were having a quick go at people who were saying this. Did I misunderstand you?

Anybody see Mr Blair on the Newsnight special? Firstly, I'd like it said that whoever selected the audience did a sterling job; they were just articulate enough to present people's worries, without being articulate enough to pursue them. Having said that, I'm encouraged by Mr Blair's performance. "Rightly or wrongly, I believe in what we're doing", he said. I believe him. I won't vote for him coz I don't like his politics, but I really do believe him on this.

Any other thoughts on this?

Also... I don't follow Mr Blair on the idea of a 2nd resolution. He says that someone using the veto would be unreasonably defying a majority of the Security Council (because if the pro-war lobby was a minority the veto wouldn't be needed). I reckon that the veto exists for just this eventuality... if the UK & US cannot convince the other permanent members, then they haven't made the case properly.

I like his rebuttal of the oil argument... "If that's what we wanted, we could do a deal with Saddam tomorrow". There's more than a ring of truth about that.

To do this in order.

"Saddam can surround himself with 20 bodyguards who hate him and not one will raise a finger against him, sure that the rest will all jump to Saddam's defence out of fear."

Isn't it amazing the inside information that pro war people are privy to, perhaps they should work for the inspectors. Although when pressed for a source, like their official counterparts, they become cagey.

-----------

"anti-war people who want to "let be" - continue slow-war or go into endgame?"

"let be" isn't that abother way of stating your earlier "do nothing" - where are these phantom people you vilify? Or are they like the people you similarly couldn't produce who were upset at the idea of the american military staying home and being isolationist?

-----------

"More to the point, who really cares who buys Iraqi oil? It'll make Iraq rich, prosperous and hopefully happy."

How will Iraq's get rich from it's oil being forign owned. I've seen from other threads that you know how this works Zagreb. You know how American business treats forign employees. And that's all the people of Iraq will be if the US takes oil well as "compensation"

"Internal coup would be difficult. Saddam appears to rule much like Stalin did, not by surrounding himself with friends, but by ensuring that retribution against anyone who crosses him is swift and merciless."


Difficult but not impossible. What's more, it has not been tried (as far as I know since the Gulf war). I'm not sure how much the US is actually trying to overthrow Saddam through a coup. Lets face it, the US has had enough experience engineering coups in central/south america and africa, so they know the tools of the trade. What's more, the US and Iraq's neighbours have enough money to buy all the Republican Guards a few times over.

One of the sticking points of a coup (or exile for that matter) is that it leaves many Iraqis who supported Saddam open to prosecution for war crimes, etc. Saudi Arabia proposed a plan recently that would offer immunity from prosecution to anyone involved in a coup. Personally, I would like to see that at least tried.

Yes, since you ask. *Way* over...

"Sorry, I don't see the relevance of that point; are you suggesting that Saddam's 1991 invasion was justified? Did he ask the Kuwaitis if they fancied a bit of reunification? My history, as you might gather, is a bit ropey, but I don't remember reading about a referendum at the time. However, I do remember reading about rape and scorched earth."

Geoff. Was the 1991 invasion of Kuwait justified? No. But to allow that Iraq is anything but a manufactured situation is naive. Scorched earth and rape? It's revolting, but it happens with occupying forces. There were cases of it when America was part of the Kosovan occupation force. One case was so severe (involving a marine, a 7 year old girl and her mother) the USA tried to hush it up and have the man shipped home to be dealt with privately. All occupying forces do it.
Demonisation of the 'enemy' goes back thousands of years - we accuse them of things we do ourselves. I happen to find rape particularly objectionable - the situation in parts of Africa is going ensure conflict for at least the next generation due to the use of rape as a tool of war.
Why did you bring it up? All it seems to have done is promote the fact that war is a dirty business. We know that, and that's why we'd like to avoid this one.

And as for the charges of borderline racism, well, I can't say b******s loudly enough. The flippant mentioning of the pattern of someone's national costume is not racism. Racism is a hatred of another race, or 'belief in the inherent superiority of a particular race or races over others, usually with the implication of a right to be dominant' (Chambers 21st cent dic). Half of my family is Nigerian. Their national costume is most colourful. If I were to take the piss out of the colour of their clothes, that's one thing, if I were to make fun of the colour of their skin, that's racism. See, they have different physical characteristics to me. Scotsmen, on the whole, don't. They are not a different race, therefore my passing comment about the over-exposure to tartan causing mental instability cannot be construed as racist. If I myself was Nigerian and having a go, then you still wouldn't have a point.
And if something as small as that can make you cavail and swoon, Zagreb, then you must pass out frequently whilst reading this thread.

"... Was the 1991 invasion of Kuwait justified? No. But to allow that Iraq is anything but a manufactured situation is naive..."

But that doesn't bear on the question of WMD, threats, resolutions and all that. If the manufacturing of the situation doesn't justify the invasion, then it's not relevant. The situation is as the situation is. Isn't it?

I'm missing something here. What am I missing here, Frogbit?

"Hydrogen production is not a mature, commercially viable technology at the present. It was an old article demonstrating that the technology wasn't ready. Like wot I said."

What the article said is that they've improved on 40% and had just gained european funding and were going to be viable by 2005. BTW do you know the efficency of petrol? I don't remember it off hand but I do remember the desiel is more efficent than petrol at 40 odd percent

The article supports my origional statement 'It's not "future" it's just badly funded'. Bush's pledge is like a kid comming in to class about five minutes before it's finished and saying 'look what I'm going to do'

When he's stuck for budget cuts, where do you think he'll go first?

"Isn't it amazing the inside information that pro war people are privy to, perhaps they should work for the inspectors. Although when pressed for a source, like their official counterparts, they become cagey."

I never said "this is definitely the case". From what I've heard, it's how Saddam operates. Why do you keep insisting on sources, much of this is from TV programmes and newspapers from years ago? Why can't you just, maybe, accept that I'm not making it up?

""let be" isn't that abother way of stating your earlier "do nothing" - where are these phantom people you vilify? Or are they like the people you similarly couldn't produce who were upset at the idea of the american military staying home and being isolationist?"

"none of our business" and "no threat to us" have both been used as reasons not to go to war on this very thread (the first by Uber Red, the second by numerous people), so there's no phantoms about it. Both these positions are isolationist.

"How will Iraq's get rich from it's oil being forign owned. I've seen from other threads that you know how this works Zagreb. You know how American business treats forign employees. And that's all the people of Iraq will be if the US takes oil well as "compensation""

They might take some oil as "compensation", but I don't think they'll steal all the oil for their own companies. Iraq needs rebuilding, oil can provide that hard cash. If not, Bush will have to use Federal Reserve money. His supporters might wonder why their taxes are being used to fund something Iraq should be able to pay for but can't because Bush took it all for his own profit. Bush isn't a dictator, remember, he has to answer to a lot of people and they won't take betrayal kindly. He might like to reflect on what happened to his own father.

"But that doesn't bear on the question of WMD, threats, resolutions and all that. If the manufacturing of the situation doesn't justify the invasion, then it's not relevant. The situation is as the situation is. Isn't it?

I'm missing something here. What am I missing here, Frogbit?"

Um. Cogence?

"I never said "this is definitely the case". From what I've heard, it's how Saddam operates. Why do you keep insisting on sources, much of this is from TV programmes and newspapers from years ago? Why can't you just, maybe, accept that I'm not making it up?"

This rather indicates that you believe what you see on the television, Zagreb. We all know that as a medium of ditribution its messages can be highly misleading.

"See, they have different physical characteristics to me. Scotsmen, on the whole, don't. They are not a different race, therefore my passing comment about the over-exposure to tartan causing mental instability cannot be construed as racist."

So, if I accuse some of the Indians near where I live of being mentally affected by "eating curry all the time", they'll just give me a cheeky wink because, hey, I'm not really being racist.

Your comments were racist, and stupid (believe it or not, Scotsmen do not wear tartan all the time), and since you refuse to recant them I won't bother replying to you any more. Ta, ta, ya racist.

The efficiency of petrol in internal combustion is around 25%. The efficiency of hydrogen in use is lots more. The article was concerned with production, not usage. Oil has lots of byproducts... distillation produces light oils, heavy oils, plastic thingies and other stuff that a chemist could correct me on. In contrast, a 40% useful yield from hydrogen production ain't that much.

Besides which, you say yourself that the technology will not be available until 2005, which supports *my* original point that it's not available *now*.

Can we both be right? BTW, was my sorry OK?

>>The endless tartan has driven him mad.<<
LOL!!!

Cheap shot, Frogbit. Why do people insist on throwing cheap insults about?

You said that Kuwait was originally part of Iraq; OK. You said that Britain and the US have artificially maintained this for decades; OK. You agree that this does not justify the 1991 invasion by Iraq; OK.

So what bearing does it have on the current situation with Saddam and WMD and all?

""Rightly or wrongly, I believe in what we're doing", he said. I believe him. I won't vote for him coz I don't like his politics, but I really do believe him on this."

Here's a question though, Geoff. If Bush decided tomorrow that war was a mistake and containment should continue, do you think Blair would disagree with him or suddenly change his mind? Again.

"...Here's a question though, Geoff. If Bush decided tomorrow that war was a mistake and containment should continue, do you think Blair would disagree with him or suddenly change his mind? Again...."

It's speculation in a vacuum. Do you think it's the kind of thing Bush is likely to say?

Nor me.

"It's speculation in a vacuum. Do you think it's the kind of thing Bush is likely to say?

Nor me."

True, but the point of my question was how much is Blair committed to this and how much is he committed to following Bush's lead. Being British myself, I'm thoroughly sick of the "lapdog" stance and our interests being put in second place to those of the United States based on no greater reasoning than a Labour Party Elite who seem to be afraid of anything bigger than them and a Tory Party Elite who owe more allegiance to the Anglo-Saxon race than to their own country.

Sorry, but it's a sore point with me. France and Germany are being silly, but at least their doing their own thing.

"Cheap shot, Frogbit. Why do people insist on throwing cheap insults about?"

It's all we can afford.

"You said that Kuwait was originally part of Iraq; OK. You said that Britain and the US have artificially maintained this for decades; OK. You agree that this does not justify the 1991 invasion by Iraq; OK.
So what bearing does it have on the current situation with Saddam and WMD and all?"

That it's not black and white - that there are no demons, that the situation is more complex that it first appears. I don't know. I have a headache. I'm being persecuted by a Scotsman who thinks he is a different race from me, but also thinks, somehow, that Indians aren't.
And then to display his superiority, shouts racist! as if he knows what he's talking about.

I agree with Zagreb on the racism thing, you are singling out his race and ridiculing it as a means of attack on his person if I was to say that the colorful clothes of nigeria where why they shagged monkeys or some other wholy unaccurate statement of course you would be offended and rightly soyou singled out his race for ridicule did it make you feel bigger? better? as for war on Iraq... Good we the world minces about far to often if we dont like someone then we should just sort them out as long as I dont suffer that is the main thing it may be selfish and cruel but its what the world is built on and I for one love it.