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

Hi Az!

Fair enough. I don't think anyone here is recommending that individuals set aside their personal responsibilities, whatever they may be. I would not support such conduct!

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

Extreme? I wouldn't've said so,::
Maybe my brain is still frazzled by current events
as for "generally recognisable differences between the two!" the trouble being the (two)---- yet there is (three)--wheels on my waggon{trinity augre}julie driscol,

get the feeling from what you write, LTP, ::I tend to ,modify or adapht my views on personal observation, happening,not what i am told,this accounting for 75% of content, traditional or (non provocational) the other 25%.

Then again i might just be just up for it at the moment.

PS i am currently located in UK ,despite all attempts to change that.
by "society" in this case "gov" who are supposed to be a selection of "individuals" conforming to a agreed set of standards.

STANDERDS ?
the control and use of all "wood" =tool houseing,fuel,food.
tv,phones,all needing (fuel-markets)

is this so in my observations


NO
but

they say ......?

C'mon, LTP, do you have some reasonably stable opinions/beliefs that we can discuss, or are you the sort of person who will answer "yes" if the last letter of my question is a consonant, or "no" if it was a vowel?

I really do want to try to address the issues you raise, but I'm finding it quite difficult to understand your notes.

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

I am the sort of person that will see a disscission/debate from both sides .If i cannot argue from either side ,to me it shows a lack
of tollerence or "blinkered" view if you dont.
AS for answering yes or no ,that depends on my current thinking,that as a responsible adult/person means is contenly changeing.
PS if you want a better understanding of my stable oppinions i might suggest you read my page and convos, i believe you will get a better understanding of where i am comeing from.
I would even go as far to say that our views our close in princaple
but a large gulf in interputation.

LTP: I can see why P-C has problems understanding you. I would suggest that you work on English spelling and grammar some more - - - I'm a fair linguist (I won't say cunning) and I have a hard time getting to where you're going.

Hi Lemon ,

I am answering this post without reference to others' replies so apologies If I repeat what has already been said.

<>

"Perhaps the one that decided to allow minority groups the right to exist?"

Many ancient and medieval societies could claim this, though some later withdrew these 'rights' once the minorities began to cause trouble.

"Or the one that allows free speech?"

In which case there is no such society presently existent on this earth (except, perhaps, Denmark). Most other modern 'democracies' can and will imprison you if they feel their national, economic or political interest is at stake. If you feel the US is a shining beacon of free speech ask why you have heard nothing from the prisoners at Guantanamo.

"Or the one that raised life expectancies to levels unheard of virtually everywhere else?"

Post 18th Century anyway. Archaeologists have shown that once you eliminate post-natal and infant deaths from the figures people in times up to the 15th Century had average life expectancies not much dissimilar to that of 21st century western nations.

"Or the one that seems to have decided not to practice war to the destruction of the foe and the sacking of its cities? Even the US, bad as you may think it is, hasn't firebombed Iraqi cities in retaliation for the death of American soldiers, which many societies would do in their situation"

It is only in the last few years that the US stopped carpet bombing civilian populations. For instance in Vietnam, American B52's dropped a greater tonnage of bombs than was used, by all sides, in WW2. These included incendiary and chemical weapons - the aftermath of which the Vietnamese are still living with.

In Gulf Wars 1 & 2, the Coalition used cluster munitions in great numbers, despite their questionable legality. They say that these were targeted against military units. However, since many of these units were garrisoned close to towns, it was the poor bloody civilians who bore the brunt of the casualties. Napalm, general incendiaries and phosphorus bombs were all used.

American soldiers, especially the National Guard units are very poorly trained for any role other than assault. Unlike their British counterparts, who spend a large proportion of their time on counter-insurgency and counter-terrorism operations and training, they seem singularly unable to handle civilians. This is why their standard response to any perceived threat (such as a peaceful, if vociferous, demonstration) is the use of maximum firepower.

Modern society - pah! You can keep it

Blessings,
Matholwch /|\.

I would agree ,with that ,no need to say more,
whats next,.....

Is 'cynical realist' a label you recognise, Math? Not that I disagree with you....

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

Hi P-C

Let me just check my jacket....Yup, there's the label, plain as day .

Perhaps my military background, and the fact that most of my old and dear friends are also ex-military, gives me a more direct perspective on the situation?

I am a great believer in the "look for the simple answer, however stupid" critical approach when it comes to the arena of military cock-ups.

Blessings,
Matholwch /|\.

As in - You're big mistake was to line the men up in neat lines and send them at walking pace across all that open ground towards the machine guns - type of thing.

Noggin

No thats standerd practise, the mistake was,the skis and bergens,
and all the other Artic Pharaphenalia, as supplier got his Double double entendre
L(a"tit"ude) with his L(w)ongtitude

Glad you're amused, LTP. Could you share the joke with the rest of us ... maybe in English?

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

{{{No thats standerd practise, the mistake was,the skis and bergens,
and all the other Artic Pharaphenalia, as supplier got his Double double entendre
L(a"tit"ude) with his L(w)ongtitude)))

Whats it all
about loonie

O.K I'll bite
Post 4671 analogy regarding stupidity

Refering to general tactics for attacking the enenmy.yes/no

All in a straight line
(silly idea )as they can all get shot.for energy

Me in my normal attempt thought its not sending them in line thats silly ,but sending into actack with Skis the wrong protective gear,paraphenali.
I aslso let the few that would get what i was refering to recent events in the desert,
also in there was how this could have happened.
May be if you do a lot of cryptic cross words may help.

Key words being
para attitude lattitude and longtitude
The "tit" points to known personal traits of Staff Quatermaster.
atttude means unless someone tells him otherwise skis and bergens is what they get issued with.

and in English...?

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

Somewhere along the way I think I understood that.

Then again, that might just be because I'm a bit

I seem to have added our most recent recruit to the roster, but forgot to make an announcement. My apologies.

Traveller in Time < 42, welcome to the hallowed (or is it harrowed) ranks of the FFFF!


*cue nautical midi music*




Our newest member, Traveller in Time < 42, occupies the "Nothing in Particular" chair, and can be found in most major eras, presiding over Nothing in Particular. Traveller in Time < 42 may have been coming soon to a time near yours, please make hir feel welcome. Thank you, and have a wonderful evening.






GTB

hi Pattern-chaser,

Logicus (ltp) does seem to have his own very bizarre way of expressing himself which is often hard to read (and I have mentioned this to him on more than one occasion - hi logicus!)

I don't know if there is any solution for this. One can try to understand or just write it off. I always make an effort though sometimes I have to throw in the towel and admit I didn't understand a word of it at all. But I like logicus a lot and I know his heart is in the right place.

If only he could learn to write in complete and cohesive sentences! He really does have a lot to say. And usually he makes a lot of sense, if you can get through the mangled grammar bits.



az

Yes, I know what you're saying, Az, and I really don't try to be a pain. ... Honest. But it's frustrating when it seems that someone has something interesting to say, but can't express it coherently. LTP spells randomly, and writes in a stream of consciousness format. Sadly, the end result is indistinguishable from someone who understands little and has nothing to say. And *that's* a shame!

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"