Melvinhoe

[Quadibloc]

I was looking to see if a PDF copy of a particular history book might be
found online. One thing I stumbled across in the search was a thesis about
how the American Legion played a role in promoting Americanism
in U.S. textbooks.

This put me in mind of a MAD magazine satire where the book 'Melvinhoe'
was offered as a replacement for Ivanhoe in American public schools.

Finally, I decided to look for the book by Sir Walter Scott. But since I didn't
have much energy or time for reading, nor all that much appetite for great
literature... I did not sit down with the book itself, or either of two
abridgements I also found on the Internet Archive. No, I settled for the
Classic Comics adaptation.

But from that I still learned what I wanted to know: the protagonist was
not Russian, he wasn't even an Irishman who was still in the process of
migrating from the Russian home of his Indo-European forbears (like
Conan the Barbarian from Cimmeria). No... he was a good Saxon, Wilfred
of Ivanhoe. So Ivanhoe is a place, not a person.

And one of Canada's early Prime Ministers was Sir Wilfred Laurier, so it's a
real first name.

John Savard

[Robert Carnegie]

Post by Quadibloc
I was looking to see if a PDF copy of a particular history book might be
found online. One thing I stumbled across in the search was a thesis about
how the American Legion played a role in promoting Americanism
in U.S. textbooks.
This put me in mind of a MAD magazine satire where the book 'Melvinhoe'
was offered as a replacement for Ivanhoe in American public schools.
Finally, I decided to look for the book by Sir Walter Scott. But since I didn't
have much energy or time for reading, nor all that much appetite for great
literature... I did not sit down with the book itself, or either of two
abridgements I also found on the Internet Archive. No, I settled for the
Classic Comics adaptation.
But from that I still learned what I wanted to know: the protagonist was
not Russian, he wasn't even an Irishman who was still in the process of
migrating from the Russian home of his Indo-European forbears (like
Conan the Barbarian from Cimmeria). No... he was a good Saxon, Wilfred
of Ivanhoe. So Ivanhoe is a place, not a person.
And one of Canada's early Prime Ministers was Sir Wilfred Laurier, so it's a
real first name.

Ivanhoe can be a person's name as well. The real place is
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivinghoe> but apparently
lots of places now are named after the book.

I don't know if _Ivanhoe_ was a school book in America?
It was a "British American film" shot in England and Scotland
in 1951 and written by a HUAC blacklistee. The story
(as by Scott) involves Jews: this may also be expected in
_Melvinhoe_ if more of it exists than a title, and indeed if not.

It simply did not occur to me that "IVAN"-hoe was suspected
of being a Russian alias, even in comedy. But I'm mostly in
favour of mocking prejudice. Except when it really does get
books banned.

[Quadibloc]

Post by Robert Carnegie
The story
(as by Scott) involves Jews: this may also be expected in
_Melvinhoe_ if more of it exists than a title, and indeed if not.

Oh, yes, even the Classic Comics adaptation noted _that_ as Rebecca and
her father were two of the principal characters.
No more than a title existed. The mock ad showed "Melvinhoe" along with
"The Red, White, and Blue Badge of Courage" and some other famous
literary works with their "suspicious" titles altered.

I found it. It was from MAD Magazine 84, the January 1964 issue.

In "Modern Teacher" magazine, the following fake ad appeared:

Have You Been Suspended Lately for Recommending Communistic
Literature to your Students?

Play It Safe With
SIMON PURE BOOKS

The Simon Pure Publishing Company has re-written hundreds of
well-known subversive works so that they meet the patriotic
standards of all parents who are members of the DAR, Birch Society,
etc. Here are only a few of the books and stories you can order and
safely assign to your class _today_:

* Goldilocks and the Three Eagles
formerly "Goldilocks and the Three Bears"

* Melvinhoe
formerly "Ivanhoe"

* The Red, White and Blue Badge of Courage
formerly "The Red Badge of Courage"

* West of Eden
formerly "East of Eden"

* The 39 Prairies
formerly "The 39 Steps"

Write For Our Free Catalogue
SIMON PURE BOOKS
Box 1776, Philadelphia, Pa.

John Savard

[Kevrob]

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Robert Carnegie
The story
(as by Scott) involves Jews: this may also be expected in
_Melvinhoe_ if more of it exists than a title, and indeed if not.

Oh, yes, even the Classic Comics adaptation noted _that_ as Rebecca and
her father were two of the principal characters.
No more than a title existed. The mock ad showed "Melvinhoe" along with
"The Red, White, and Blue Badge of Courage" and some other famous
literary works with their "suspicious" titles altered.

I found it. It was from MAD Magazine 84, the January 1964 issue.
Have You Been Suspended Lately for Recommending Communistic
Literature to your Students?
Play It Safe With
SIMON PURE BOOKS
The Simon Pure Publishing Company has re-written hundreds of
well-known subversive works so that they meet the patriotic
standards of all parents who are members of the DAR, Birch Society,
etc. Here are only a few of the books and stories you can order and
* Goldilocks and the Three Eagles
formerly "Goldilocks and the Three Bears"
* Melvinhoe
formerly "Ivanhoe"
* The Red, White and Blue Badge of Courage
formerly "The Red Badge of Courage"
* West of Eden
formerly "East of Eden"
* The 39 Prairies
formerly "The 39 Steps"
Write For Our Free Catalogue
SIMON PURE BOOKS
Box 1776, Philadelphia, Pa.

EC was always alert to the Red Menace.....

Loading Image...

:)

[Michael F. Stemper]

Post by Quadibloc
Have You Been Suspended Lately for Recommending Communistic
Literature to your Students?
Play It Safe With
SIMON PURE BOOKS
The Simon Pure Publishing Company has re-written hundreds of
well-known subversive works so that they meet the patriotic
standards of all parents who are members of the DAR, Birch Society,
etc. Here are only a few of the books and stories you can order and
* The 39 Prairies
formerly "The 39 Steps"

That one is subtle!

[Quadibloc]

Post by Michael F. Stemper

Post by Quadibloc
* The 39 Prairies
formerly "The 39 Steps"

That one is subtle!

Well, I suppose the idea was that confusing "Steps" with "Steppes" and thus
accusing a book of being Communistic, because Russia has steppes, was to
show just how silly the right-wing extremists were.

Incidentally, I found that the issue of MAD Magazine in question, issue 84
from January 1964, stuck in my memory in another way. It was the fake ad
on the back cover that inspired the name of the imaginary computer
architectures I describe in parts of my site.

John Savard

[Paul S Person]

On Mon, 13 Sep 2021 00:05:22 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Michael F. Stemper

Post by Quadibloc
* The 39 Prairies
formerly "The 39 Steps"

That one is subtle!

Well, I suppose the idea was that confusing "Steps" with "Steppes" and thus
accusing a book of being Communistic, because Russia has steppes, was to
show just how silly the right-wing extremists were.

And we know that the Birchers and their friends hadn't objected to
each and every one of these titles because?

Post by Quadibloc
Incidentally, I found that the issue of MAD Magazine in question, issue 84
from January 1964, stuck in my memory in another way. It was the fake ad
on the back cover that inspired the name of the imaginary computer
architectures I describe in parts of my site.

Whatever else you may say of it, MAD Magazine came up with more
innovative ideas than anything else I've ever encountered.

They may not have been practical or even made sense, but that's not
the point.

[Quadibloc]

Ivanhoe can be a person's name as well. The real place is
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivinghoe> but apparently
lots of places now are named after the book.

Thank you for the link, which was informative.

Of course, though, I suppose Ivanhoe could still be
considered 'subversive', why, it presents Robin Hood as
a hero!

A re-written version intended to be patriotic would no doubt
show the Normans as heroically retreating from a Communist
revolution in continental Europe, and the unhappy Saxons as
just troublemakers, like the Taiwanese who complained about
our great allies the Kuomintang.

Which reminds me...

How can Tsai Ing-Wen repudiate the legacy of the Kuomintang
without appearing to claim that Taiwan is not part of the historic
Chinese nation, thus being subject to accusations of being
provocative with regard to cross-strait relations?

An option exists for a new flag for Taiwan which in no way
suggests the notion of "Taiwan independence" that is so
controversial.

Let Taiwan change its flag to the yellow dragon flag of the
Qing dynasty - which also happens to be the last time that
Taiwan actually _was_ under the same rule as the rest of
China!

John Savard

[Paul S Person]

On Mon, 13 Sep 2021 00:13:27 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc

Post by Quadibloc

Ivanhoe can be a person's name as well. The real place is
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivinghoe> but apparently
lots of places now are named after the book.

Thank you for the link, which was informative.
Of course, though, I suppose Ivanhoe could still be
considered 'subversive', why, it presents Robin Hood as
a hero!
A re-written version intended to be patriotic would no doubt
show the Normans as heroically retreating from a Communist
revolution in continental Europe, and the unhappy Saxons as
just troublemakers, like the Taiwanese who complained about
our great allies the Kuomintang.
Which reminds me...
How can Tsai Ing-Wen repudiate the legacy of the Kuomintang
without appearing to claim that Taiwan is not part of the historic
Chinese nation, thus being subject to accusations of being
provocative with regard to cross-strait relations?
An option exists for a new flag for Taiwan which in no way
suggests the notion of "Taiwan independence" that is so
controversial.
Let Taiwan change its flag to the yellow dragon flag of the
Qing dynasty - which also happens to be the last time that
Taiwan actually _was_ under the same rule as the rest of
China!

IIRC, the original idea was that they were the legitimate rulers of
/all/ of China. Taiwan was just the only bit they could hold on to.

But perhaps that has changed.

[Quadibloc]

Post by Paul S Person
IIRC, the original idea was that they were the legitimate rulers of
/all/ of China. Taiwan was just the only bit they could hold on to.
But perhaps that has changed.

Sadly, although the Communists were much, much worse, the Nationalists
weren't perfect. Thus, Mao Tse-Tung was able to exploit their faults to
gain power, and there were issues in Taiwan as well.

Taiwan was not a democracy under Chiang Kai-Shek, even if it was an ally
of the United States. Although the Mandarin-speaking refugees from the
mainland were a minority in Taiwan, Mandarin, and not the language of
the majority of the people resident in Taiwan, one of the Southern Min
family of Chinese dialects, was the official language of Taiwan. Businesses
were seized on false accusations of collaboration with the Japanese from
Taiwanese businessmen, so that people who lost property to the Communists
on the mainland could go back to being wealthy businessmen. Basically,
instead of peacefully staying in refugee camps instead of meddling in the affairs
of the Taiwanese people.

Over the years, however, politics in Taiwan liberalized, and it is a democracy
today. Currently, the party in power is the DPP, the Democratic People's
Party. This party represents the pre-existing Chinese people of Taiwan (not
to be confused with the indigenous people of Taiwan, a small minority that
also exists).

It is due to the internal politics of Taiwan that the issue of "Taiwan Independence"
arises. The U.S. has warned Taiwan not to act provocatively, and Red China has
stated that it would view Taiwan proclaiming independence from China as a
provocation, but the Republic of China is already not part of, and independent from,
the People's Republic of China.

The reason that some people in Taiwan reject Taiwan being part of the historic
nation of China, as opposed to the despotic tyranny of the People's Republic of
China, which, of course, any sane person would reject, is due to things like a
stratagem the Kuomintang used to maintain a grip on power while still holding
electiions - they filled dummy parliamentary seats representing the mainland
with their own members.

Much of Taiwan's history has only recently come out. For more information on
the conflict between the waishengren (mainlanders) and the benshengren
(majority inhabitants of Taiwan), one can look up things such as the February
28 incident.

John Savard

[Robert Carnegie]

Post by Quadibloc

Ivanhoe can be a person's name as well. The real place is
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivinghoe> but apparently
lots of places now are named after the book.

Thank you for the link, which was informative.
Of course, though, I suppose Ivanhoe could still be
considered 'subversive', why, it presents Robin Hood as
a hero!
A re-written version intended to be patriotic would no doubt
show the Normans as heroically retreating from a Communist
revolution in continental Europe, and the unhappy Saxons as
just troublemakers, like the Taiwanese who complained about
our great allies the Kuomintang.
Which reminds me...
How can Tsai Ing-Wen repudiate the legacy of the Kuomintang
without appearing to claim that Taiwan is not part of the historic
Chinese nation, thus being subject to accusations of being
provocative with regard to cross-strait relations?
An option exists for a new flag for Taiwan which in no way
suggests the notion of "Taiwan independence" that is so
controversial.
Let Taiwan change its flag to the yellow dragon flag of the
Qing dynasty - which also happens to be the last time that
Taiwan actually _was_ under the same rule as the rest of
China!

Please tell me you're aware of how very stupid these ideas are.

[Quadibloc]

Post by Robert Carnegie
Please tell me you're aware of how very stupid these ideas are.

Which ideas?

The reworking of Ivanhoe into an inverted version, where the Normans are the
good guys representing established order, and Ivanhoe is a villain... of course
that is stupid, but it represents the kind of stupidity that the far-right espouses.

As for my idea, proposed in jest, of Taiwan going back to the Qing dynasty flag -
while it was not serious, it does fit into the realities of Taiwan internal politics,
with which I dealt with in another post in this thread.

John Savard

[Robert Carnegie]

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Robert Carnegie
Please tell me you're aware of how very stupid these ideas are.

Which ideas?
The reworking of Ivanhoe into an inverted version, where the Normans are the
good guys representing established order, and Ivanhoe is a villain... of course
that is stupid, but it represents the kind of stupidity that the far-right espouses.
As for my idea, proposed in jest, of Taiwan going back to the Qing dynasty flag -
while it was not serious, it does fit into the realities of Taiwan internal politics,
with which I dealt with in another post in this thread.

It's external politics that you don't seem to grasp.

I would substitute the population of Taiwan with
you and 20 million vatgirls, and then come back, oh,
five minutes later, to appreciate the mess you'd leave.

[Dimensional Traveler]

Post by Robert Carnegie

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Robert Carnegie
Please tell me you're aware of how very stupid these ideas are.

Which ideas?
The reworking of Ivanhoe into an inverted version, where the Normans are the
good guys representing established order, and Ivanhoe is a villain... of course
that is stupid, but it represents the kind of stupidity that the far-right espouses.
As for my idea, proposed in jest, of Taiwan going back to the Qing dynasty flag -
while it was not serious, it does fit into the realities of Taiwan internal politics,
with which I dealt with in another post in this thread.

It's external politics that you don't seem to grasp.
I would substitute the population of Taiwan with
you and 20 million vatgirls, and then come back, oh,
five minutes later, to appreciate the mess you'd leave.

I'm sure it takes more than 5 minutes for a Chinese troop transport to
cross the Taiwan Strait. Give it at least a couple of hours so they can
completely occupy the island.

[Quadibloc]

Post by Dimensional Traveler
I'm sure it takes more than 5 minutes for a Chinese troop transport to
cross the Taiwan Strait. Give it at least a couple of hours so they can
completely occupy the island.

As long as Taiwan retains its present population, however, that would have
catastrophic consequences for what was then the People's Republic of China.

However, to ensure against the possibility that America might abandon its
dedication to liberty, that enemies whether within its borders or abroad
might convince Americans that they would be putting their lives at risk to
interfere...

those who actually were facing a choice between liberty and death should
be the ones to make it.

It's high time the United States dropped any objection to the Republic of
China having its own strategic nuclear deterrent, since it faces a threat of
aggression from a nuclear-armed nation.

John Savard

[Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha]

Post by Quadibloc
It's high time the United States dropped any objection to the
Republic of China having its own strategic nuclear deterrent,
since it faces a threat of aggression from a nuclear-armed
nation.

There is a considerable danger period while the build up is taking
place, in which mainland China knows Taiwan *will* have them, but
also knows it doesn't *yet*.

The very definition of "provokative."

Not that the current administration will lift a finger to oppose
China (or anyone else) on much of anything.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

[Alan Baker]

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Quadibloc
It's high time the United States dropped any objection to the
Republic of China having its own strategic nuclear deterrent,
since it faces a threat of aggression from a nuclear-armed
nation.

There is a considerable danger period while the build up is taking
place, in which mainland China knows Taiwan *will* have them, but
also knows it doesn't *yet*.
The very definition of "provokative."
Not that the current administration will lift a finger to oppose
China (or anyone else) on much of anything.

Like the previous administration did anything.

[Paul S Person]

On Tue, 14 Sep 2021 15:09:17 -0700, Alan Baker

Post by Alan Baker

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Quadibloc
It's high time the United States dropped any objection to the
Republic of China having its own strategic nuclear deterrent,
since it faces a threat of aggression from a nuclear-armed
nation.

There is a considerable danger period while the build up is taking
place, in which mainland China knows Taiwan *will* have them, but
also knows it doesn't *yet*.
The very definition of "provokative."
Not that the current administration will lift a finger to oppose
China (or anyone else) on much of anything.

Like the previous administration did anything.

Now, now, he's just repeating a Trump Talking Point, or some random
bit of similar Republican trash.

I suspect either would have acted to restrain the commies if they
decided to attack.

[Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha]

Post by Paul S Person
I suspect either would have acted to restrain the commies if
they decided to attack.

The current administration has - deliberately - armed terrorists with
state of the art US weaponry. Do you know what crime "providing aid
and comfort to the enemy" is the defition of?
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

[Paul S Person]

On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 09:42:14 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Paul S Person
I suspect either would have acted to restrain the commies if
they decided to attack.

The current administration has - deliberately - armed terrorists with
state of the art US weaponry. Do you know what crime "providing aid
and comfort to the enemy" is the defition of?

Thanks for illustrating my point!

What do you think your hero, Trump, would have done in this situation
(which, BTW, he set up)?

Left the Afghani helpers behind and evacuated ... the materiel?

[Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha]

Post by Paul S Person
On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 09:42:14 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Paul S Person
I suspect either would have acted to restrain the commies if
they decided to attack.

The current administration has - deliberately - armed terrorists
with state of the art US weaponry. Do you know what crime
"providing aid and comfort to the enemy" is the defition of?

Thanks for illustrating my point!
What do you think your hero, Trump, would have done in this
situation

Not abandoned thousands of Americans to be hostages for terrorists.

Post by Paul S Person
(which, BTW, he set up)?

No, he didn't.

Post by Paul S Person
Left the Afghani helpers behind and evacuated ... the materiel?

Taken more time for an orderly withdrawal, I suspect.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

[Paul S Person]

On Thu, 16 Sep 2021 12:20:41 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Paul S Person
On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 09:42:14 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Paul S Person
I suspect either would have acted to restrain the commies if
they decided to attack.

The current administration has - deliberately - armed terrorists
with state of the art US weaponry. Do you know what crime
"providing aid and comfort to the enemy" is the defition of?

Thanks for illustrating my point!
What do you think your hero, Trump, would have done in this
situation

Not abandoned thousands of Americans to be hostages for terrorists.

There are no "thousands of Americans" in Afghanistan.

Not once the airlift ended.

The last I heard of the six airplanes was that a lot of the people
they were trying to get out were neither Americans nor
formerly-helpful Afghans with proper travel papers. Which may or may
not be true, who can say?

An alt-right host recently had a well-publicized meltdown when the
/veteran/ he was interviewing denied that they were hostages (among
other things) BTW. Too much reality; his head exploded (not
literally).

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Paul S Person
(which, BTW, he set up)?

No, he didn't.

Post by Paul S Person
Left the Afghani helpers behind and evacuated ... the materiel?

Taken more time for an orderly withdrawal, I suspect.

With the Taliban taking the country so fast?

At his invitation, BTW.

[Robert Carnegie]

Post by Paul S Person
On Thu, 16 Sep 2021 12:20:41 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Paul S Person
On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 09:42:14 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Paul S Person
I suspect either would have acted to restrain the commies if
they decided to attack.

The current administration has - deliberately - armed terrorists
with state of the art US weaponry. Do you know what crime
"providing aid and comfort to the enemy" is the defition of?

Thanks for illustrating my point!
What do you think your hero, Trump, would have done in this
situation

Not abandoned thousands of Americans to be hostages for terrorists.

There are no "thousands of Americans" in Afghanistan.
Not once the airlift ended.
The last I heard of the six airplanes was that a lot of the people
they were trying to get out were neither Americans nor
formerly-helpful Afghans with proper travel papers. Which may or may
not be true, who can say?
An alt-right host recently had a well-publicized meltdown when the
/veteran/ he was interviewing denied that they were hostages (among
other things) BTW. Too much reality; his head exploded (not
literally).

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Paul S Person
(which, BTW, he set up)?

No, he didn't.

Post by Paul S Person
Left the Afghani helpers behind and evacuated ... the materiel?

Taken more time for an orderly withdrawal, I suspect.

With the Taliban taking the country so fast?
At his invitation, BTW.

Please stop explaining to Terry what he's got wrong.
He knows what he's got wrong. He does it on purpose.
And doing anything but ignore him hastens the end
of this newsgroup as a place of rational communication.
People leave, with or without declaring it, because
the group has been filled up with crap. The cunt is
onto selling diet pills now. That's not even trolling,
that's spamming.

[Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha]

On Friday, 17 September 2021 at 16:25:02 UTC+1, Paul S Person

Post by Paul S Person
On Thu, 16 Sep 2021 12:20:41 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Paul S Person
On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 09:42:14 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Paul S Person
I suspect either would have acted to restrain the commies
if they decided to attack.

The current administration has - deliberately - armed
terrorists with state of the art US weaponry. Do you know
what crime "providing aid and comfort to the enemy" is the
defition of?

Thanks for illustrating my point!
What do you think your hero, Trump, would have done in this situation

Not abandoned thousands of Americans to be hostages for
terrorists.

There are no "thousands of Americans" in Afghanistan.
Not once the airlift ended.
The last I heard of the six airplanes was that a lot of the
people they were trying to get out were neither Americans nor
formerly-helpful Afghans with proper travel papers. Which may
or may not be true, who can say?
An alt-right host recently had a well-publicized meltdown when
the /veteran/ he was interviewing denied that they were
hostages (among other things) BTW. Too much reality; his head
exploded (not literally).

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Paul S Person
(which, BTW, he set up)?

No, he didn't.

Post by Paul S Person
Left the Afghani helpers behind and evacuated ... the
materiel?

Taken more time for an orderly withdrawal, I suspect.

With the Taliban taking the country so fast?
At his invitation, BTW.

Please stop explaining to Terry what he's got wrong.

Yeah, it makes Bobbie jealous when I pay attention to someone else.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

[Paul S Person]

On Fri, 17 Sep 2021 10:18:01 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie

Post by Robert Carnegie

Post by Paul S Person
On Thu, 16 Sep 2021 12:20:41 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Paul S Person
On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 09:42:14 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Paul S Person
I suspect either would have acted to restrain the commies if
they decided to attack.

The current administration has - deliberately - armed terrorists
with state of the art US weaponry. Do you know what crime
"providing aid and comfort to the enemy" is the defition of?

Thanks for illustrating my point!
What do you think your hero, Trump, would have done in this situation

Not abandoned thousands of Americans to be hostages for terrorists.

There are no "thousands of Americans" in Afghanistan.
Not once the airlift ended.
The last I heard of the six airplanes was that a lot of the people
they were trying to get out were neither Americans nor
formerly-helpful Afghans with proper travel papers. Which may or may
not be true, who can say?
An alt-right host recently had a well-publicized meltdown when the
/veteran/ he was interviewing denied that they were hostages (among
other things) BTW. Too much reality; his head exploded (not
literally).

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Paul S Person
(which, BTW, he set up)?

No, he didn't.

Post by Paul S Person
Left the Afghani helpers behind and evacuated ... the materiel?

Taken more time for an orderly withdrawal, I suspect.

With the Taliban taking the country so fast?
At his invitation, BTW.

Please stop explaining to Terry what he's got wrong.
He knows what he's got wrong. He does it on purpose.
And doing anything but ignore him hastens the end
of this newsgroup as a place of rational communication.
People leave, with or without declaring it, because
the group has been filled up with crap. The cunt is
onto selling diet pills now. That's not even trolling,
that's spamming.

But its so much /fun/.

And I'm not sure he does know. I'm not sure he isn't entangled in a
source of Trump Talking Points and drinking the kool-aid.

And mentioning a diet pill in a discussion /weight control/ is neither
trolling nor spamming, it is on-topic. Even if it does make him look
like a pusher.

[Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha]

Post by Paul S Person
On Thu, 16 Sep 2021 12:20:41 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Paul S Person
On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 09:42:14 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Paul S Person
I suspect either would have acted to restrain the commies if
they decided to attack.

The current administration has - deliberately - armed
terrorists with state of the art US weaponry. Do you know what
crime "providing aid and comfort to the enemy" is the defition
of?

Thanks for illustrating my point!
What do you think your hero, Trump, would have done in this
situation

Not abandoned thousands of Americans to be hostages for
terrorists.

There are no "thousands of Americans" in Afghanistan.

And yet, members of Congress keep talking about how many please
they get for help.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

[Ninapenda Jibini]

On Fri, 17 Sep 2021 10:36:12 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Paul S Person
On Thu, 16 Sep 2021 12:20:41 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Paul S Person
On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 09:42:14 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Paul S Person
I suspect either would have acted to restrain the commies
if they decided to attack.

The current administration has - deliberately - armed
terrorists with state of the art US weaponry. Do you know
what crime "providing aid and comfort to the enemy" is the
defition of?

Thanks for illustrating my point!
What do you think your hero, Trump, would have done in this situation

Not abandoned thousands of Americans to be hostages for
terrorists.

There are no "thousands of Americans" in Afghanistan.

And yet, members of Congress keep talking about how many please
they get for help.

Republican members of Congress, desperately hoping the Dems
won't do the /them/ what Newsome did (according to one of the
Republican candidates to replace him): convince the voters that,
if a Republican became Governor, he or she [1] would /actually
do/ what he or she promised to do. And this scared the voters so
much they went out and voted to keep him in office.

Assuming there was no voting fraud, Newsome *bought* the election
with free money.

Which is politics as normal in California.

You, of course, have been programmed to hallucinate otherwise by
your masters.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration


"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

[Lynn McGuire]

Post by Paul S Person
On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 09:42:14 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Paul S Person
I suspect either would have acted to restrain the commies if
they decided to attack.

The current administration has - deliberately - armed terrorists with
state of the art US weaponry. Do you know what crime "providing aid
and comfort to the enemy" is the defition of?

Thanks for illustrating my point!
What do you think your hero, Trump, would have done in this situation
(which, BTW, he set up)?
Left the Afghani helpers behind and evacuated ... the materiel?

Trump would have bombed the Taliban vehicle columns with B-52s before
they reached Kabul.

Lynn

[Alan Baker]

Post by Lynn McGuire

Post by Paul S Person
On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 09:42:14 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Paul S Person
I suspect either would have acted to restrain the commies if
they decided to attack.

The current administration has - deliberately - armed terrorists with
state of the art US weaponry. Do you know what crime "providing aid
and comfort to the enemy" is the defition of?

Thanks for illustrating my point!
What do you think your hero, Trump, would have done in this situation
(which, BTW, he set up)?
Left the Afghani helpers behind and evacuated ... the materiel?

Trump would have bombed the Taliban vehicle columns with B-52s before
they reached Kabul.

You really think that if Trump's administration had a plan for the
withdrawal that they wouldn't be trumpeting it all over?

[Paul S Person]

On Thu, 16 Sep 2021 14:22:54 -0500, Lynn McGuire

Post by Lynn McGuire

Post by Paul S Person
On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 09:42:14 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Paul S Person
I suspect either would have acted to restrain the commies if
they decided to attack.

The current administration has - deliberately - armed terrorists with
state of the art US weaponry. Do you know what crime "providing aid
and comfort to the enemy" is the defition of?

Thanks for illustrating my point!
What do you think your hero, Trump, would have done in this situation
(which, BTW, he set up)?
Left the Afghani helpers behind and evacuated ... the materiel?

Trump would have bombed the Taliban vehicle columns with B-52s before
they reached Kabul.

Don't be daft.

The Taliban were his Friends and Allies.

I mean, the Republicans merely /support/ Traditional Family Values.

The Taliban /enforces/ them.

Who do you think the dominant partner is here?

[Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha]

Post by Paul S Person
On Thu, 16 Sep 2021 14:22:54 -0500, Lynn McGuire

Post by Lynn McGuire

Post by Paul S Person
On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 09:42:14 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Paul S Person
I suspect either would have acted to restrain the commies if
they decided to attack.

The current administration has - deliberately - armed
terrorists with state of the art US weaponry. Do you know
what crime "providing aid and comfort to the enemy" is the
defition of?

Thanks for illustrating my point!
What do you think your hero, Trump, would have done in this
situation (which, BTW, he set up)?
Left the Afghani helpers behind and evacuated ... the
materiel?

Trump would have bombed the Taliban vehicle columns with B-52s
before they reached Kabul.

Don't be daft.
The Taliban were his Friends and Allies.
I mean, the Republicans merely /support/ Traditional Family
Values.
The Taliban /enforces/ them.
Who do you think the dominant partner is here?

In all seriousness, dude, take your meds. Maybe the voices will
stop, or at least stop telling you to hurt yourself.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

[Lynn McGuire]

Post by Paul S Person
On Thu, 16 Sep 2021 14:22:54 -0500, Lynn McGuire

Post by Lynn McGuire

Post by Paul S Person
On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 09:42:14 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Paul S Person
I suspect either would have acted to restrain the commies if
they decided to attack.

The current administration has - deliberately - armed terrorists with
state of the art US weaponry. Do you know what crime "providing aid
and comfort to the enemy" is the defition of?

Thanks for illustrating my point!
What do you think your hero, Trump, would have done in this situation
(which, BTW, he set up)?
Left the Afghani helpers behind and evacuated ... the materiel?

Trump would have bombed the Taliban vehicle columns with B-52s before
they reached Kabul.

Don't be daft.
The Taliban were his Friends and Allies.
I mean, the Republicans merely /support/ Traditional Family Values.
The Taliban /enforces/ them.
Who do you think the dominant partner is here?

Dude, stop listening to the voices. They are not helping you.

Lynn

[Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha]

Post by Lynn McGuire

Post by Paul S Person
On Thu, 16 Sep 2021 14:22:54 -0500, Lynn McGuire

Post by Lynn McGuire

Post by Paul S Person
On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 09:42:14 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Paul S Person
I suspect either would have acted to restrain the commies
if they decided to attack.

The current administration has - deliberately - armed
terrorists with state of the art US weaponry. Do you know
what crime "providing aid and comfort to the enemy" is the
defition of?

Thanks for illustrating my point!
What do you think your hero, Trump, would have done in this
situation (which, BTW, he set up)?
Left the Afghani helpers behind and evacuated ... the
materiel?

Trump would have bombed the Taliban vehicle columns with B-52s
before they reached Kabul.

Don't be daft.
The Taliban were his Friends and Allies.
I mean, the Republicans merely /support/ Traditional Family
Values.
The Taliban /enforces/ them.
Who do you think the dominant partner is here?

Dude, stop listening to the voices. They are not helping you.

They're not trying to. But he likes it that way.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

[Paul S Person]

On Tue, 14 Sep 2021 12:02:57 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Dimensional Traveler
I'm sure it takes more than 5 minutes for a Chinese troop transport to
cross the Taiwan Strait. Give it at least a couple of hours so they can
completely occupy the island.

As long as Taiwan retains its present population, however, that would have
catastrophic consequences for what was then the People's Republic of China.
However, to ensure against the possibility that America might abandon its
dedication to liberty, that enemies whether within its borders or abroad
might convince Americans that they would be putting their lives at risk to
interfere...
those who actually were facing a choice between liberty and death should
be the ones to make it.
It's high time the United States dropped any objection to the Republic of
China having its own strategic nuclear deterrent, since it faces a threat of
aggression from a nuclear-armed nation.

Oh, God, no.

If they had, they would /use/ it.

And start Global Thermonuclear War.

[Quadibloc]

Post by Paul S Person
On Tue, 14 Sep 2021 12:02:57 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc

Post by Quadibloc
It's high time the United States dropped any objection to the Republic of
China having its own strategic nuclear deterrent, since it faces a threat of
aggression from a nuclear-armed nation.

Oh, God, no.
If they had, they would /use/ it.
And start Global Thermonuclear War.

If China invaded Taiwan, and the United States had to intervene, that
could start a global thermonuclear war.

If, instead, Taiwan is capable of defending itself against China,
then the United States would not need to get involved.

John Savard

[Robert Carnegie]

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Paul S Person
On Tue, 14 Sep 2021 12:02:57 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc

Post by Quadibloc
It's high time the United States dropped any objection to the Republic of
China having its own strategic nuclear deterrent, since it faces a threat of
aggression from a nuclear-armed nation.

Oh, God, no.
If they had, they would /use/ it.
And start Global Thermonuclear War.

If China invaded Taiwan, and the United States had to intervene, that
could start a global thermonuclear war.
If, instead, Taiwan is capable of defending itself against China,
then the United States would not need to get involved.

Since people seem to be enjoying doing the math,
can China melt Taiwan, if they decide to? Let's say,
vitrify just down to bedrock.

Also, remembering that the opposition to most events
of nuclear proliferation is "everybody else".

[Jack Bohn]

Post by Robert Carnegie

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Paul S Person
On Tue, 14 Sep 2021 12:02:57 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc

Post by Quadibloc
It's high time the United States dropped any objection to the Republic of
China having its own strategic nuclear deterrent, since it faces a threat of
aggression from a nuclear-armed nation.

Oh, God, no.
If they had, they would /use/ it.
And start Global Thermonuclear War.

If China invaded Taiwan, and the United States had to intervene, that
could start a global thermonuclear war.
If, instead, Taiwan is capable of defending itself against China,
then the United States would not need to get involved.

Since people seem to be enjoying doing the math,
can China melt Taiwan, if they decide to? Let's say,
vitrify just down to bedrock.

Real quick and real lazy: Google points me to a Wikipedia article that gives estimates of China's nuclear warheads of 260 in 2015 and 320 in 2020 [1], also a total megatonnage of 294 from 2009. We'll say 300 warheads of a megaton each. I think there was something about a megaton leaving a crater a mile radius, and, to show I can be even lazier than letting Google lead me to a Wikipedia page, I'm just going with that. Pi r squared and bumping it up a bit and converting, a 10 square kilometers disturbed, and, if the thermal effect is about equal the mechanical effect, claim a further 10 km^2 baked. So 6000 km^2 melted? Alas, Taiwan is said to be just under 36 thousand km^2. But wait! It says two thirds of the island is mountainous, with most of the population living contiguously on one third; that's 12,000 km^2, or PRC is halfway there. The zone of destruction in the conventional sense, rather than annihilation or vaporization is larger, so, spacing the impacts further apart, they are well capable of the lesser hyperbole of not leaving one brick on top of another.

There is the thought that 100 kilotons would be sufficient locally, which would allow you to spread it around, but the limiting factor is the number of warheads I had. It's possible a different configuration of bombs carrying 300 megatons might be enough to melt Taiwan, so I'll say China can't, but they could. (In the 300 warhead launch, I'm picturing them landing 5 kilometers away from each other in slightly overlapping hexagons of destruction. If one exploded early, would its overpressure wave throw its six neighbors off course? You might want to stagger the launches based on how long you think the world will let you do it.)

Post by Robert Carnegie
Also, remembering that the opposition to most events
of nuclear proliferation is "everybody else".

Taiwan is 180 kilometers from the mainland, and probably some port cities there. I'm guessing their opinion of nuking the island changes whichever way the wind blows. Most of the writing on nuclear war has been the US against the far away USSR. India vs. Pakistan, or India vs. China is over the mountainous regions on their borders. I suppose they haven't tactical nuclear weapons to explode on their own border to "help" their own troops, but strategic weapons to threaten the other government. That still seems to be a little to close to hometo set of nuclear fallout.




[1] the text reads: " extimated [...] an arsenal of about 260 total warheads as of 2015, which made it the second smallest nuclear arsenal amongst the five nuclear weapon states acknowledged by he Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, and one of 320 total warheads [...], the third highest." That is so close to the comparison of the second-place to the one who comes in next-to-last in a two person race that I can't help wondering if some impression not quite supported by the facts is meant, but I can't determine what. For the record, that means a move from fourth to third. From between enemies England and France (in whatever order they were) to just behind the US and Russia, in that order. And by "just" I mean "way."

[Scott Lurndal]

Since people seem to be enjoying doing the math,=20
can China melt Taiwan, if they decide to? Let's say,=20
vitrify just down to bedrock.=20

Real quick and real lazy: Google points me to a Wikipedia article that give=
s estimates of China's nuclear warheads of 260 in 2015 and 320 in 2020 [1],=
also a total megatonnage of 294 from 2009. We'll say 300 warheads of a me=
gaton each.

This weeks AW&ST has an article about China currently
building 250 new ICBM silos, mainly in western China. Although
I suspect they're aimed more for the US than for Taiwan.

AW&ST estimated between 200 and 350 warheads in inventory.

[Paul S Person]

Post by Scott Lurndal

Since people seem to be enjoying doing the math,=20
can China melt Taiwan, if they decide to? Let's say,=20
vitrify just down to bedrock.=20

Real quick and real lazy: Google points me to a Wikipedia article that give=
s estimates of China's nuclear warheads of 260 in 2015 and 320 in 2020 [1],=
also a total megatonnage of 294 from 2009. We'll say 300 warheads of a me=
gaton each.

This weeks AW&ST has an article about China currently
building 250 new ICBM silos, mainly in western China. Although
I suspect they're aimed more for the US than for Taiwan.

Or perhaps the Middle East.

Surely they must realize that, sooner or later, the Muslims in the
Middle East are going to be saying nasty things about how their
fellow-Muslims in China are being treated.

And Pakistan has nukes.

Post by Scott Lurndal
AW&ST estimated between 200 and 350 warheads in inventory.

[Scott Lurndal]

Post by Paul S Person

Post by Scott Lurndal
This weeks AW&ST has an article about China currently
building 250 new ICBM silos, mainly in western China. Although
I suspect they're aimed more for the US than for Taiwan.

Or perhaps the Middle East.

Think about that a bit. What is the purpose of burying a missle
in a Silo?

[p***@hotmail.com]

Post by Paul S Person

Post by Scott Lurndal
This weeks AW&ST has an article about China currently
building 250 new ICBM silos, mainly in western China. Although
I suspect they're aimed more for the US than for Taiwan.

Or perhaps the Middle East.

- Think about that a bit. What is the purpose of burying a missile
- in a Silo?

The silos have quick-opening lids and special ductwork that allows the missile to
be launched from inside the silo. This arrangement protects the missiles from
weather and other things.

Peter Wezeman
anti-social Darwinist

[Scott Lurndal]

Post by p***@hotmail.com

Post by Paul S Person

Post by Scott Lurndal
This weeks AW&ST has an article about China currently
building 250 new ICBM silos, mainly in western China. Although
I suspect they're aimed more for the US than for Taiwan.

Or perhaps the Middle East.

- Think about that a bit. What is the purpose of burying a missile
- in a Silo?
The silos have quick-opening lids and special ductwork that allows the missile to
be launched from inside the silo. This arrangement protects the missiles from
weather and other things.

It makes them vulnerable, when compared with mobile missiles.

But primarily they're in silos to prevent an enemy from
taking them out preemptively[*]. Not something to worry about
from the Middle East - not even Israel would be able to deliver
enough ordnance to take out China's missile fleet.


[*] 1950s thinking, before ubiquitous overhead imagery and
pinpoint accurate warhead delivery systems.

[Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha]

On Fri, 17 Sep 2021 09:22:22 -0700 (PDT),

On Friday, September 17, 2021 at 10:59:18 AM UTC-5, Scott

Post by Paul S Person

Post by Scott Lurndal
This weeks AW&ST has an article about China currently
building 250 new ICBM silos, mainly in western China.
Although I suspect they're aimed more for the US than for
Taiwan.

Or perhaps the Middle East.

- Think about that a bit. What is the purpose of burying a
missile - in a Silo?
The silos have quick-opening lids and special ductwork that
allows the missile to be launched from inside the silo. This
arrangement protects the missiles from weather and other things.

Putting them in an above-ground building would accomplish that
for less money and with greater convenience.

And be more susceptible to deliberate attack from, say, bombers.

Silos aer a second strike weapon.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

[Quadibloc]

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Putting them in an above-ground building would accomplish that
for less money and with greater convenience.

And be more susceptible to deliberate attack from, say, bombers.
Silos aer a second strike weapon.

Missiles launched from submarines are a second-strike weapon.

The ICBMs in missile silos are for the initial exchange, and are counterforce
weapons, but even there one wants resistance to an enemy attack.

John Savard

[J. Clarke]

On Fri, 17 Sep 2021 16:56:17 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Putting them in an above-ground building would accomplish that
for less money and with greater convenience.

And be more susceptible to deliberate attack from, say, bombers.
Silos aer a second strike weapon.

Missiles launched from submarines are a second-strike weapon.
The ICBMs in missile silos are for the initial exchange, and are counterforce
weapons, but even there one wants resistance to an enemy attack.

Quadi, you're living in the ancient past. SLBMs became a counterforce
weapon they day GPS became operational.

[Ninapenda Jibini]

On Friday, September 17, 2021 at 2:47:23 PM UTC-6, Jibini Kula

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Putting them in an above-ground building would accomplish
that for less money and with greater convenience.

And be more susceptible to deliberate attack from, say,
bombers.
Silos aer a second strike weapon.

Missiles launched from submarines are a second-strike weapon.

Those, too. Like silos, they can also be used for an initial strike.
But that wasn't the main intended purpose.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration


"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

[Quadibloc]

Post by Paul S Person
Surely they must realize that, sooner or later, the Muslims in the
Middle East are going to be saying nasty things about how their
fellow-Muslims in China are being treated.

Right now, apparently thanks to the money flowing in the
Belt and Road Initiative, the world's Muslim countries are
surprisingly quiet about the Uyghur situation.

Or perhaps they don't want to give aid and comfort to
their "real" enemy, "Western imperialism", which, after
all, supports Israel!

John Savard

[Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha]

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Paul S Person
Surely they must realize that, sooner or later, the Muslims in
the Middle East are going to be saying nasty things about how
their fellow-Muslims in China are being treated.

Right now, apparently thanks to the money flowing in the
Belt and Road Initiative, the world's Muslim countries are
surprisingly quiet about the Uyghur situation.
Or perhaps they don't want to give aid and comfort to
their "real" enemy, "Western imperialism", which, after
all, supports Israel!

And it's not like Muslims sects have had a few holy wars with other
sects in the past.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

[Paul S Person]

On Fri, 17 Sep 2021 13:16:44 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Paul S Person
Surely they must realize that, sooner or later, the Muslims in
the Middle East are going to be saying nasty things about how
their fellow-Muslims in China are being treated.

Right now, apparently thanks to the money flowing in the
Belt and Road Initiative, the world's Muslim countries are
surprisingly quiet about the Uyghur situation.
Or perhaps they don't want to give aid and comfort to
their "real" enemy, "Western imperialism", which, after
all, supports Israel!

And it's not like Muslims sects have had a few holy wars with other
sects in the past.

Attacking Muslims who you dislike is one thing.

Allowing the Infidel to attack or mistreat them is something else.

[Ninapenda Jibini]

Post by Paul S Person
On Fri, 17 Sep 2021 13:16:44 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili

Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

On Friday, September 17, 2021 at 9:28:24 AM UTC-6, Paul S

Post by Paul S Person
Surely they must realize that, sooner or later, the Muslims
in the Middle East are going to be saying nasty things about
how their fellow-Muslims in China are being treated.

Right now, apparently thanks to the money flowing in the
Belt and Road Initiative, the world's Muslim countries are
surprisingly quiet about the Uyghur situation.
Or perhaps they don't want to give aid and comfort to
their "real" enemy, "Western imperialism", which, after
all, supports Israel!

And it's not like Muslims sects have had a few holy wars with
other sects in the past.

Attacking Muslims who you dislike is one thing.
Allowing the Infidel to attack or mistreat them is something
else.

Indeed. But neither is historically unusual.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration


"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

[Paul S Person]

On Fri, 17 Sep 2021 11:45:15 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Paul S Person
Surely they must realize that, sooner or later, the Muslims in the
Middle East are going to be saying nasty things about how their
fellow-Muslims in China are being treated.

Right now, apparently thanks to the money flowing in the
Belt and Road Initiative, the world's Muslim countries are
surprisingly quiet about the Uyghur situation.

Yes, Chinese Imperialism does seem to be working quite well.

But they threw the Western yoke off, and I suspect they (not just
Muslim nations but African nations as well) will eventually do the
same to the Chinese.

Post by Quadibloc
Or perhaps they don't want to give aid and comfort to
their "real" enemy, "Western imperialism", which, after
all, supports Israel!

Perhaps. But I think they will find Chinese Imperialism to be quite
bothersome.

[Ninapenda Jibini]

Post by Paul S Person
On Fri, 17 Sep 2021 11:45:15 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Paul S Person
Surely they must realize that, sooner or later, the Muslims in
the Middle East are going to be saying nasty things about how
their fellow-Muslims in China are being treated.

Right now, apparently thanks to the money flowing in the
Belt and Road Initiative, the world's Muslim countries are
surprisingly quiet about the Uyghur situation.

Yes, Chinese Imperialism does seem to be working quite well.
But they threw the Western yoke off, and I suspect they (not
just Muslim nations but African nations as well) will eventually
do the same to the Chinese.

Post by Quadibloc
Or perhaps they don't want to give aid and comfort to
their "real" enemy, "Western imperialism", which, after
all, supports Israel!

Perhaps. But I think they will find Chinese Imperialism to be
quite bothersome.

I doubt they will make any distinction. As long as they get free
shit from China, China is their friend. When the tap gets shut off,
China is the target. Same as everyone else.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration


"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

[Kevrob]

Post by Paul S Person
On Fri, 17 Sep 2021 11:45:15 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Paul S Person
Surely they must realize that, sooner or later, the Muslims in the
Middle East are going to be saying nasty things about how their
fellow-Muslims in China are being treated.

Right now, apparently thanks to the money flowing in the
Belt and Road Initiative, the world's Muslim countries are
surprisingly quiet about the Uyghur situation.

Yes, Chinese Imperialism does seem to be working quite well.
But they threw the Western yoke off, and I suspect they (not just
Muslim nations but African nations as well) will eventually do the
same to the Chinese.

Post by Quadibloc
Or perhaps they don't want to give aid and comfort to
their "real" enemy, "Western imperialism", which, after
all, supports Israel!

Perhaps. But I think they will find Chinese Imperialism to be quite
bothersome.
--

China was "colonized" by Western Marxism-Leninism.
Xi has been rolling back Deng's reforms, that had us in
the West optimistically hoping China would develop into
a "normal country," eventually.

[J. Clarke]

Post by Kevrob

Post by Paul S Person
On Fri, 17 Sep 2021 11:45:15 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Paul S Person
Surely they must realize that, sooner or later, the Muslims in the
Middle East are going to be saying nasty things about how their
fellow-Muslims in China are being treated.

Right now, apparently thanks to the money flowing in the
Belt and Road Initiative, the world's Muslim countries are
surprisingly quiet about the Uyghur situation.

Yes, Chinese Imperialism does seem to be working quite well.
But they threw the Western yoke off, and I suspect they (not just
Muslim nations but African nations as well) will eventually do the
same to the Chinese.

Post by Quadibloc
Or perhaps they don't want to give aid and comfort to
their "real" enemy, "Western imperialism", which, after
all, supports Israel!

Perhaps. But I think they will find Chinese Imperialism to be quite
bothersome.
--

China was "colonized" by Western Marxism-Leninism.
Xi has been rolling back Deng's reforms, that had us in
the West optimistically hoping China would develop into
a "normal country," eventually.

The Chinese Way--seize defeat from the jaws of victory.

[Ninapenda Jibini]

On Sunday, September 19, 2021 at 2:53:41 PM UTC-6, Ninapenda

They have thousands of years of history of absorbing all
invaders with no real long term effect.

India's ancient history also followed that pattern.
However, unlike the past dynasties ruled by the Manchurians or
the Mongolians, the insinuation of Communism in China by Russia
through Mao Tse-Tung bids fair to have quite a long term effect
on China.

And yet, they are returning to their past habits pretty steadily.
Again.

If it decides to invade Taiwan - as a current nationalist
propaganda campain gives the appearance that it is considering
such a reckless action - being turned into a radioactive
wasteland _is_ a long-term proposition.

If they were likely to invade Taiwan, they wouldn't be saber rattling
about it. And they are fully aware that the US has an official policy
of responding to the use of nuclear weapons indsicriminately. One
thing pretty much guaranteed is that it won't *only* be Taiwan, and
mainland China *knows* it.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration


"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

[The Horny Goat]

On Sun, 19 Sep 2021 22:02:10 GMT, Ninapenda Jibini

Post by Ninapenda Jibini
Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

Strange - that's not the way I remember the story of the crucifiction.

"Today you will be with me in paradise" seems to figure in the
conversation from that day if I correctly recall my Sunday School
lessons of 50-60 years ago.

[Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha]

Post by The Horny Goat
On Sun, 19 Sep 2021 22:02:10 GMT, Ninapenda Jibini

Post by Ninapenda Jibini
Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

Strange - that's not the way I remember the story of the
crucifiction.
"Today you will be with me in paradise" seems to figure in the
conversation from that day if I correctly recall my Sunday
School lessons of 50-60 years ago.

"Render unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's . . ."

Jesus forgives the sin, but not the crime, which is the purview of
secular authorities.

(That hook catchs more fish . . .)
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

[Lynn McGuire]

Post by Ninapenda Jibini

On Sunday, September 19, 2021 at 2:53:41 PM UTC-6, Ninapenda

They have thousands of years of history of absorbing all
invaders with no real long term effect.

India's ancient history also followed that pattern.
However, unlike the past dynasties ruled by the Manchurians or
the Mongolians, the insinuation of Communism in China by Russia
through Mao Tse-Tung bids fair to have quite a long term effect
on China.

And yet, they are returning to their past habits pretty steadily.
Again.

If it decides to invade Taiwan - as a current nationalist
propaganda campain gives the appearance that it is considering
such a reckless action - being turned into a radioactive
wasteland _is_ a long-term proposition.

If they were likely to invade Taiwan, they wouldn't be saber rattling
about it. And they are fully aware that the US has an official policy
of responding to the use of nuclear weapons indsicriminately. One
thing pretty much guaranteed is that it won't *only* be Taiwan, and
mainland China *knows* it.

Are you 100% sure that Taiwan does not have nukes ? They were very
buddy-buddy with South Africa there for a while.

Lynn

[Quadibloc]

Post by Kevrob
China was "colonized" by Western Marxism-Leninism.
Xi has been rolling back Deng's reforms, that had us in
the West optimistically hoping China would develop into
a "normal country," eventually.

I suggest you learn about Opium Wars, and the burning of the
Old Summer Palace in 1860. That last *still* pisses the Chinese
off.

I think a more accurate description is that these things are still
found useful for propaganda purposes by the Communist Party
of China, and so they continue to be made use of to stoke the
coals of anti-Western sentiment and nationalism, so as to distract
the people from the real issue, Communist tyranny.

John Savard

[J. Clarke]

On Sun, 19 Sep 2021 14:34:59 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Kevrob
China was "colonized" by Western Marxism-Leninism.
Xi has been rolling back Deng's reforms, that had us in
the West optimistically hoping China would develop into
a "normal country," eventually.

I suggest you learn about Opium Wars, and the burning of the
Old Summer Palace in 1860. That last *still* pisses the Chinese
off.

I think a more accurate description is that these things are still
found useful for propaganda purposes by the Communist Party
of China, and so they continue to be made use of to stoke the
coals of anti-Western sentiment and nationalism, so as to distract
the people from the real issue, Communist tyranny.

You are assuming that the Chinese people feel "tyrannized". Shrub
made the same mistake with regard to the people of Iraq.

[Scott Lurndal]

Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 19 Sep 2021 14:34:59 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Kevrob
China was "colonized" by Western Marxism-Leninism.
Xi has been rolling back Deng's reforms, that had us in
the West optimistically hoping China would develop into
a "normal country," eventually.

I suggest you learn about Opium Wars, and the burning of the
Old Summer Palace in 1860. That last *still* pisses the Chinese
off.

I think a more accurate description is that these things are still
found useful for propaganda purposes by the Communist Party
of China, and so they continue to be made use of to stoke the
coals of anti-Western sentiment and nationalism, so as to distract
the people from the real issue, Communist tyranny.

You are assuming that the Chinese people feel "tyrannized". Shrub
made the same mistake with regard to the people of Iraq.

China is considered a Socialist Market Economy; regardless of the
fact that the ruling party as Communist in its name.

[[e-mail]]

Post by Scott Lurndal
China is considered a Socialist Market Economy; regardless of the
fact that the ruling party as Communist in its name.

Curious how you're shaping your pigeonholes. What's 'Socialist' about
it? The State has hardly 'faded away'.

pt

[Scott Lurndal]

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by Scott Lurndal
China is considered a Socialist Market Economy; regardless of the
fact that the ruling party [h]as Communist in its name.

Curious how you're shaping your pigeonholes. What's 'Socialist' about
it? The State has hardly 'faded away'.

I did a google search "Is china communist?" which resulted
in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_market_economy

[David Johnston]

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by Scott Lurndal
China is considered a Socialist Market Economy; regardless of the
fact that the ruling party as Communist in its name.

Curious how you're shaping your pigeonholes. What's 'Socialist' about
it? The State has hardly 'faded away'.

You've got it the wrong way around. When the state fades away it is
then that "true communism" will have been achieved. Socialism is (in
Marxism) supposed to be an intermediate stage where government still
exists to administer the means of production.

[[e-mail]]

Post by Scott Lurndal
China is considered a Socialist Market Economy; regardless of the
fact that the ruling party as Communist in its name.

Curious how you're shaping your pigeonholes. What's 'Socialist' about
it? The State has hardly 'faded away'.

You've got it the wrong way around. When the state fades away it is
then that "true communism" will have been achieved. Socialism is (in
Marxism) supposed to be an intermediate stage where government still
exists to administer the means of production.

You're right. Senior moment, I'm afraid.

pt

[Scott Lurndal]

Post by Kevrob

Post by Paul S Person
On Fri, 17 Sep 2021 11:45:15 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Paul S Person
Surely they must realize that, sooner or later, the Muslims in the
Middle East are going to be saying nasty things about how their
fellow-Muslims in China are being treated.

Right now, apparently thanks to the money flowing in the
Belt and Road Initiative, the world's Muslim countries are
surprisingly quiet about the Uyghur situation.

Yes, Chinese Imperialism does seem to be working quite well.
But they threw the Western yoke off, and I suspect they (not just
Muslim nations but African nations as well) will eventually do the
same to the Chinese.

Post by Quadibloc
Or perhaps they don't want to give aid and comfort to
their "real" enemy, "Western imperialism", which, after
all, supports Israel!

Perhaps. But I think they will find Chinese Imperialism to be quite
bothersome.
--

China was "colonized" by Western Marxism-Leninism.
Xi has been rolling back Deng's reforms, that had us in
the West optimistically hoping China would develop into
a "normal country," eventually.

I suggest you learn about Opium Wars, and the burning of the
Old Summer Palace in 1860. That last *still* pisses the Chinese
off.

Or the British invasion of Kabul circa 1840 (and destruction of major religous
artifacts thereby[*]) just to ensure a stable route to carry Opium
to China where the british were glorified pushers. The conflicts
over this resulted in the British taking Hong Kong, and attacking
other cities in mainland China.

[*] Setting the stage for the Taliban to return the favor
with the Buddhas of Bamiyan 150 years later.

The 19th century is littered with British adventurism in southwest
asia, India, China, Africa and to a lesser extent North America;
the roots of much strife that continues in the world today.

[The Horny Goat]

Post by Scott Lurndal
Or the British invasion of Kabul circa 1840 (and destruction of major religous
artifacts thereby[*]) just to ensure a stable route to carry Opium
to China where the british were glorified pushers. The conflicts
over this resulted in the British taking Hong Kong, and attacking
other cities in mainland China.
[*] Setting the stage for the Taliban to return the favor
with the Buddhas of Bamiyan 150 years later.
The 19th century is littered with British adventurism in southwest
asia, India, China, Africa and to a lesser extent North America;
the roots of much strife that continues in the world today.

In fact was there ANY deployment of British regular troops in North
America after the end of the War of 1812 in January/February 1815?

(In our area one of the downsides of the pandemic was the cancellation
of the Peace Arch centenary celebration in Feb 2021 - the Peace Arch
is located about 200' from where the 49th parallel separating the
United States and Canada west of Lake of the Woods and the time
capsule inside the Arch was supposed to be opened after 100 years.
Since the time capsule contained names of all contributors - including
several thousand school kids, one of which was my grandfather - a lot
of us were looking forward to the event)

(I don't know of any British deployment north of British Honduras -
now known as Belize - which most would regard as Central America as
opposed to North America. I am of course excluding members of the RAF
who ran flight schools in Canada during WW2)

[[e-mail]]

Post by The Horny Goat

Post by Scott Lurndal
Or the British invasion of Kabul circa 1840 (and destruction of major religous
artifacts thereby[*]) just to ensure a stable route to carry Opium
to China where the british were glorified pushers. The conflicts
over this resulted in the British taking Hong Kong, and attacking
other cities in mainland China.
[*] Setting the stage for the Taliban to return the favor
with the Buddhas of Bamiyan 150 years later.
The 19th century is littered with British adventurism in southwest
asia, India, China, Africa and to a lesser extent North America;
the roots of much strife that continues in the world today.

In fact was there ANY deployment of British regular troops in North
America after the end of the War of 1812 in January/February 1815?

Define 'British'. Weren't Canadian Army regulars regarded as 'British'
prior to 1867?

Not exactly a 'deployment', but the members of the disastrous
Franklin Expedition were wandering around the Arctic in the 1840s.

pt

[Scott Lurndal]

Post by The Horny Goat
In fact was there ANY deployment of British regular troops in North
America after the end of the War of 1812 in January/February 1815?

The Oregon Territory issues weren't settled until the 1830s IIRC. I'm
not sure they had troops there or not; perhaps in Victoria?

[Robert Woodward]

Post by Scott Lurndal

Post by The Horny Goat
In fact was there ANY deployment of British regular troops in North
America after the end of the War of 1812 in January/February 1815?

The Oregon Territory issues weren't settled until the 1830s IIRC. I'm
not sure they had troops there or not; perhaps in Victoria?

The Oregon Treaty, which divided the Oregon territory at the 49th
parallel (except for Vancouver Island) was signed on June 15, 1846. A
problem with the San Juan islands resulted in the so-called "Pig War" in
the late 1850s (the pig was the only casualty).

[Stephen Harker]

Post by Robert Woodward

Post by Scott Lurndal

Post by The Horny Goat
In fact was there ANY deployment of British regular troops in North
America after the end of the War of 1812 in January/February 1815?

The Oregon Territory issues weren't settled until the 1830s IIRC. I'm
not sure they had troops there or not; perhaps in Victoria?

The Oregon Treaty, which divided the Oregon territory at the 49th
parallel (except for Vancouver Island) was signed on June 15, 1846. A
problem with the San Juan islands resulted in the so-called "Pig War" in
the late 1850s (the pig was the only casualty).

CJ Bartlett in _Defence and diplomacy: Britain and the Great Powers
1815-1914_ states that "Cardwell early in the Gladstone Government of
1868, planned to cut colonial garrisons as a whole by almost half to
26,000, of which only 3,000 were to be stationed in British North
America".

[J. Clarke]

On Tue, 21 Sep 2021 05:38:35 +1000, Stephen Harker

Post by Stephen Harker

Post by Robert Woodward

Post by Scott Lurndal

Post by The Horny Goat
In fact was there ANY deployment of British regular troops in North
America after the end of the War of 1812 in January/February 1815?

The Oregon Territory issues weren't settled until the 1830s IIRC. I'm
not sure they had troops there or not; perhaps in Victoria?

The Oregon Treaty, which divided the Oregon territory at the 49th
parallel (except for Vancouver Island) was signed on June 15, 1846. A
problem with the San Juan islands resulted in the so-called "Pig War" in
the late 1850s (the pig was the only casualty).

CJ Bartlett in _Defence and diplomacy: Britain and the Great Powers
1815-1914_ states that "Cardwell early in the Gladstone Government of
1868, planned to cut colonial garrisons as a whole by almost half to
26,000, of which only 3,000 were to be stationed in British North
America".

Probably wise. An attempt at British adventurism in that timeframe
would have been a disaster for the British.

[The Horny Goat]

Post by Scott Lurndal

Post by The Horny Goat
In fact was there ANY deployment of British regular troops in North
America after the end of the War of 1812 in January/February 1815?

The Oregon Territory issues weren't settled until the 1830s IIRC. I'm
not sure they had troops there or not; perhaps in Victoria?

That would be about right. However most of the white settlement in the
area between the Columbia River and 54-40 would have been both
American and British trading posts trading with local native
communities.

Most of the settlement in WA / OR took place in the late 1850s (then
interrupted for obvious reasons and resuming in the late 1860s).
Northern Washington (e.g. pretty much everything from Seattle to the
Canadian border was settled in the 1860s and 1870s and Whatcom county
which is the one bordering the Canadian border on the coast around
1876-78 with most of that county's place names being celebs around
that time - Bellingham, Blaine (one was VP, the other was a cabinet
member), Custer (yeah that Custer) etc.

[Kevrob]

[snip]

Post by Kevrob
China was "colonized" by Western Marxism-Leninism.
Xi has been rolling back Deng's reforms, that had us in
the West optimistically hoping China would develop into
a "normal country," eventually.

I suggest you learn about Opium Wars, and the burning of the
Old Summer Palace in 1860. That last *still* pisses the Chinese
off.

Oh, sure, and the foreign concessions and the "unequal treaties" and
Japan setting up the Manchukuo puppet state and fighting with China
for years before attacking Far Eastern and Pacific territories held by
the US and European powers, making WWII a true global conflict.

I was just referring to how a China that was taking pride in its sovereignty
was beholden to Western ideas. I could have said the same about Dr Sun's
failed attempt to set up a democratic republic.

Moscow wasn't happy about Maoism essentially setting up a rival center
of The Revolution in Beijing.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet_split

[Paul S Person]

On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 13:10:19 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Paul S Person
On Tue, 14 Sep 2021 12:02:57 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc

Post by Quadibloc
It's high time the United States dropped any objection to the Republic of
China having its own strategic nuclear deterrent, since it faces a threat of
aggression from a nuclear-armed nation.

Oh, God, no.
If they had, they would /use/ it.
And start Global Thermonuclear War.

If China invaded Taiwan, and the United States had to intervene, that
could start a global thermonuclear war.
If, instead, Taiwan is capable of defending itself against China,
then the United States would not need to get involved.

If Taiwan is capable of defending itself against China -- then blue
monkeys just flew out of my butt.

And, no, they did no such thing.

Try and return to reality. I know its hard.

[Lynn McGuire]

Post by Paul S Person
On Tue, 14 Sep 2021 12:02:57 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Dimensional Traveler
I'm sure it takes more than 5 minutes for a Chinese troop transport to
cross the Taiwan Strait. Give it at least a couple of hours so they can
completely occupy the island.

As long as Taiwan retains its present population, however, that would have
catastrophic consequences for what was then the People's Republic of China.
However, to ensure against the possibility that America might abandon its
dedication to liberty, that enemies whether within its borders or abroad
might convince Americans that they would be putting their lives at risk to
interfere...
those who actually were facing a choice between liberty and death should
be the ones to make it.
It's high time the United States dropped any objection to the Republic of
China having its own strategic nuclear deterrent, since it faces a threat of
aggression from a nuclear-armed nation.

Oh, God, no.
If they had, they would /use/ it.
And start Global Thermonuclear War.

There is a rumor that Taiwan bought nuclear weapons from South Africa.
One hopes that it is only a rumor.

Lynn

[Wolffan]

Post by Lynn McGuire

Post by Paul S Person
On Tue, 14 Sep 2021 12:02:57 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Dimensional Traveler
I'm sure it takes more than 5 minutes for a Chinese troop transport to
cross the Taiwan Strait. Give it at least a couple of hours so they can
completely occupy the island.

As long as Taiwan retains its present population, however, that would have
catastrophic consequences for what was then the People's Republic of China.
However, to ensure against the possibility that America might abandon its
dedication to liberty, that enemies whether within its borders or abroad
might convince Americans that they would be putting their lives at risk to
interfere...
those who actually were facing a choice between liberty and death should
be the ones to make it.
It's high time the United States dropped any objection to the Republic of
China having its own strategic nuclear deterrent, since it faces a threat of
aggression from a nuclear-armed nation.

Oh, God, no.
If they had, they would /use/ it.
And start Global Thermonuclear War.

There is a rumor that Taiwan bought nuclear weapons from South Africa.
One hopes that it is only a rumor.
Lynn

Allegedly Taiwan has nukes from somewhere, maybe South Africa, maybe Israel,
maybe the US. Allegedly there are two types: nuclear land mines, placed on
likely invasion points, and air-deliverable nukes suitable for carriage on
F-16s for one-way flights to Beijing and similar places of interest.

[Lynn McGuire]

Post by Dimensional Traveler

Post by Robert Carnegie

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Robert Carnegie
Please tell me you're aware of how very stupid these ideas are.

Which ideas?
The reworking of Ivanhoe into an inverted version, where the Normans are the
good guys representing established order, and Ivanhoe is a villain... of course
that is stupid, but it represents the kind of stupidity that the far-right espouses.
As for my idea, proposed in jest, of Taiwan going back to the Qing dynasty flag -
while it was not serious, it does fit into the realities of Taiwan internal politics,
with which I dealt with in another post in this thread.

It's external politics that you don't seem to grasp.
I would substitute the population of Taiwan with
you and 20 million vatgirls, and then come back, oh,
five minutes later, to appreciate the mess you'd leave.

I'm sure it takes more than 5 minutes for a Chinese troop transport to
cross the Taiwan Strait.  Give it at least a couple of hours so they can
completely occupy the island.

Gonna take more than one troop transport to invade Taiwan. Since China
has reputedly more than 10,000 missiles aimed at Taiwan, they might use
those to kill the 24 million inhabitants first. Taking out the 200
Taiwanese F-16s first will be difficult though along with the other 200
fighter jets.

And then China will have to deal with the Taiwan ballistic missiles
aimed at the Three Gorges dam.

Plus then the world will have to deal with the fact that over half of
the computer chip bases are made in Taiwan along with a significant
number of computer chips.

Lynn

[Scott Lurndal]

Post by Lynn McGuire

Post by Dimensional Traveler

Post by Robert Carnegie

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Robert Carnegie
Please tell me you're aware of how very stupid these ideas are.

Which ideas?
The reworking of Ivanhoe into an inverted version, where the Normans are the
good guys representing established order, and Ivanhoe is a villain... of course
that is stupid, but it represents the kind of stupidity that the far-right espouses.
As for my idea, proposed in jest, of Taiwan going back to the Qing dynasty flag -
while it was not serious, it does fit into the realities of Taiwan internal politics,
with which I dealt with in another post in this thread.

It's external politics that you don't seem to grasp.
I would substitute the population of Taiwan with
you and 20 million vatgirls, and then come back, oh,
five minutes later, to appreciate the mess you'd leave.

I'm sure it takes more than 5 minutes for a Chinese troop transport to
cross the Taiwan Strait.  Give it at least a couple of hours so they can
completely occupy the island.

Gonna take more than one troop transport to invade Taiwan. Since China
has reputedly more than 10,000 missiles aimed at Taiwan, they might use
those to kill the 24 million inhabitants first. Taking out the 200
Taiwanese F-16s first will be difficult though along with the other 200
fighter jets.

The ROC has 116 F-16s. 56 additionally are on order.

The ROC has a total of 288 combat aircraft.

The PRC has about 2000 combat aircraft.

First world air force inventories are generally between 50 and 75%
mission capable[*]. Less is know of either the PRC or ROC mission
capable rates.

[*] The USAF F-22, for example, has a 52% mission capable rate.
The USAF F-35A had a 62% rate in 2019, and up to 76% in 2020 per the USAF.

[Lynn McGuire]

Post by Scott Lurndal

Post by Lynn McGuire

Post by Dimensional Traveler

Post by Robert Carnegie

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Robert Carnegie
Please tell me you're aware of how very stupid these ideas are.

Which ideas?
The reworking of Ivanhoe into an inverted version, where the Normans are the
good guys representing established order, and Ivanhoe is a villain... of course
that is stupid, but it represents the kind of stupidity that the
far-right espouses.
As for my idea, proposed in jest, of Taiwan going back to the Qing dynasty flag -
while it was not serious, it does fit into the realities of Taiwan
internal politics,
with which I dealt with in another post in this thread.

It's external politics that you don't seem to grasp.
I would substitute the population of Taiwan with
you and 20 million vatgirls, and then come back, oh,
five minutes later, to appreciate the mess you'd leave.

I'm sure it takes more than 5 minutes for a Chinese troop transport to
cross the Taiwan Strait.  Give it at least a couple of hours so they can
completely occupy the island.

Gonna take more than one troop transport to invade Taiwan. Since China
has reputedly more than 10,000 missiles aimed at Taiwan, they might use
those to kill the 24 million inhabitants first. Taking out the 200
Taiwanese F-16s first will be difficult though along with the other 200
fighter jets.

The ROC has 116 F-16s. 56 additionally are on order.
The ROC has a total of 288 combat aircraft.
The PRC has about 2000 combat aircraft.
First world air force inventories are generally between 50 and 75%
mission capable[*]. Less is know of either the PRC or ROC mission
capable rates.
[*] The USAF F-22, for example, has a 52% mission capable rate.
The USAF F-35A had a 62% rate in 2019, and up to 76% in 2020 per the USAF.

Sources please.

Lynn

[Scott Lurndal]

Post by Lynn McGuire
And then China will have to deal with the Taiwan ballistic missiles
aimed at the Three Gorges dam.
Plus then the world will have to deal with the fact that over half of
the computer chip bases are made in Taiwan along with a significant
number of computer chips.
Lynn

Post by Scott Lurndal

Post by Lynn McGuire

Post by Dimensional Traveler

Post by Robert Carnegie

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Robert Carnegie
Please tell me you're aware of how very stupid these ideas are.

Which ideas?
The reworking of Ivanhoe into an inverted version, where the Normans are the
good guys representing established order, and Ivanhoe is a villain... of course
that is stupid, but it represents the kind of stupidity that the
far-right espouses.
As for my idea, proposed in jest, of Taiwan going back to the Qing dynasty flag -
while it was not serious, it does fit into the realities of Taiwan
internal politics,
with which I dealt with in another post in this thread.

It's external politics that you don't seem to grasp.
I would substitute the population of Taiwan with
you and 20 million vatgirls, and then come back, oh,
five minutes later, to appreciate the mess you'd leave.

I'm sure it takes more than 5 minutes for a Chinese troop transport to
cross the Taiwan Strait.  Give it at least a couple of hours so they can
completely occupy the island.

Gonna take more than one troop transport to invade Taiwan. Since China
has reputedly more than 10,000 missiles aimed at Taiwan, they might use
those to kill the 24 million inhabitants first. Taking out the 200
Taiwanese F-16s first will be difficult though along with the other 200
fighter jets.

The ROC has 116 F-16s. 56 additionally are on order.
The ROC has a total of 288 combat aircraft.
The PRC has about 2000 combat aircraft.
First world air force inventories are generally between 50 and 75%
mission capable[*]. Less is know of either the PRC or ROC mission
capable rates.
[*] The USAF F-22, for example, has a 52% mission capable rate.
The USAF F-35A had a 62% rate in 2019, and up to 76% in 2020 per the USAF.

Sources please.

Aviation Week and Space Technology annual guide to world wide
air force inventories.

But you can find all the same numbers on Wikipedia.

https://www.airforcemag.com/usaf-fighter-mission-capable-rates-fiscal-2020/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_China_Air_Force#Current_inventory
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Liberation_Army_Air_Force#Current_inventory

[Lynn McGuire]

Post by Scott Lurndal

Post by Lynn McGuire
And then China will have to deal with the Taiwan ballistic missiles
aimed at the Three Gorges dam.
Plus then the world will have to deal with the fact that over half of
the computer chip bases are made in Taiwan along with a significant
number of computer chips.
Lynn

Post by Scott Lurndal

Post by Lynn McGuire

Post by Dimensional Traveler

Post by Robert Carnegie

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Robert Carnegie
Please tell me you're aware of how very stupid these ideas are.

Which ideas?
The reworking of Ivanhoe into an inverted version, where the Normans are the
good guys representing established order, and Ivanhoe is a villain... of course
that is stupid, but it represents the kind of stupidity that the
far-right espouses.
As for my idea, proposed in jest, of Taiwan going back to the Qing
dynasty flag -
while it was not serious, it does fit into the realities of Taiwan
internal politics,
with which I dealt with in another post in this thread.

It's external politics that you don't seem to grasp.
I would substitute the population of Taiwan with
you and 20 million vatgirls, and then come back, oh,
five minutes later, to appreciate the mess you'd leave.

I'm sure it takes more than 5 minutes for a Chinese troop transport to
cross the Taiwan Strait.  Give it at least a couple of hours so they can
completely occupy the island.

Gonna take more than one troop transport to invade Taiwan. Since China
has reputedly more than 10,000 missiles aimed at Taiwan, they might use
those to kill the 24 million inhabitants first. Taking out the 200
Taiwanese F-16s first will be difficult though along with the other 200
fighter jets.

The ROC has 116 F-16s. 56 additionally are on order.
The ROC has a total of 288 combat aircraft.
The PRC has about 2000 combat aircraft.
First world air force inventories are generally between 50 and 75%
mission capable[*]. Less is know of either the PRC or ROC mission
capable rates.
[*] The USAF F-22, for example, has a 52% mission capable rate.
The USAF F-35A had a 62% rate in 2019, and up to 76% in 2020 per the USAF.

Sources please.

Aviation Week and Space Technology annual guide to world wide
air force inventories.
But you can find all the same numbers on Wikipedia.
https://www.airforcemag.com/usaf-fighter-mission-capable-rates-fiscal-2020/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_China_Air_Force#Current_inventory
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Liberation_Army_Air_Force#Current_inventory

According to Forbes, ROC has 140 F-16s with 66 on order.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2021/06/01/to-block-encirclement-by-china-taiwan-should-pair-f-16s-and-tankers-expert/

"Taiwan’s own military strategy is entirely defensive. And its nearly
400 fighters—140 F-16A/Bs, 129 F-CK-1s, 58 F-5s and 55 Mirage 2000s as
of last year—wouldn’t need to fly far to meet a Chinese invasion force
barreling across the Taiwan Strait."

"The Taiwanese air force is upgrading its 1990s-vintage F-16A/Bs to the
new F-16V standard with new sensors and weapons and also buying 66 new
F-16Vs from Lockheed Martin as part of an overall $8-billion deal."

Lynn

[J. Clarke]

On Tue, 14 Sep 2021 16:43:14 -0500, Lynn McGuire

Post by Lynn McGuire

Post by Scott Lurndal

Post by Lynn McGuire

Post by Dimensional Traveler

Post by Robert Carnegie

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Robert Carnegie
Please tell me you're aware of how very stupid these ideas are.

Which ideas?
The reworking of Ivanhoe into an inverted version, where the Normans are the
good guys representing established order, and Ivanhoe is a villain... of course
that is stupid, but it represents the kind of stupidity that the
far-right espouses.
As for my idea, proposed in jest, of Taiwan going back to the Qing dynasty flag -
while it was not serious, it does fit into the realities of Taiwan
internal politics,
with which I dealt with in another post in this thread.

It's external politics that you don't seem to grasp.
I would substitute the population of Taiwan with
you and 20 million vatgirls, and then come back, oh,
five minutes later, to appreciate the mess you'd leave.

I'm sure it takes more than 5 minutes for a Chinese troop transport to
cross the Taiwan Strait.  Give it at least a couple of hours so they can
completely occupy the island.

Gonna take more than one troop transport to invade Taiwan. Since China
has reputedly more than 10,000 missiles aimed at Taiwan, they might use
those to kill the 24 million inhabitants first. Taking out the 200
Taiwanese F-16s first will be difficult though along with the other 200
fighter jets.

The ROC has 116 F-16s. 56 additionally are on order.
The ROC has a total of 288 combat aircraft.
The PRC has about 2000 combat aircraft.
First world air force inventories are generally between 50 and 75%
mission capable[*]. Less is know of either the PRC or ROC mission
capable rates.
[*] The USAF F-22, for example, has a 52% mission capable rate.
The USAF F-35A had a 62% rate in 2019, and up to 76% in 2020 per the USAF.

Sources please.

Mission capable: It will kind of fly if the pilot is _real_ good and
_real_ careful and doesn't try to do anything "interesting".

[Lynn McGuire]

Post by Scott Lurndal

Post by Lynn McGuire

Post by Dimensional Traveler

Post by Robert Carnegie

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Robert Carnegie
Please tell me you're aware of how very stupid these ideas are.

Which ideas?
The reworking of Ivanhoe into an inverted version, where the Normans are the
good guys representing established order, and Ivanhoe is a villain... of course
that is stupid, but it represents the kind of stupidity that the
far-right espouses.
As for my idea, proposed in jest, of Taiwan going back to the Qing dynasty flag -
while it was not serious, it does fit into the realities of Taiwan
internal politics,
with which I dealt with in another post in this thread.

It's external politics that you don't seem to grasp.
I would substitute the population of Taiwan with
you and 20 million vatgirls, and then come back, oh,
five minutes later, to appreciate the mess you'd leave.

I'm sure it takes more than 5 minutes for a Chinese troop transport to
cross the Taiwan Strait.  Give it at least a couple of hours so they can
completely occupy the island.

Gonna take more than one troop transport to invade Taiwan. Since China
has reputedly more than 10,000 missiles aimed at Taiwan, they might use
those to kill the 24 million inhabitants first. Taking out the 200
Taiwanese F-16s first will be difficult though along with the other 200
fighter jets.

The ROC has 116 F-16s. 56 additionally are on order.
The ROC has a total of 288 combat aircraft.
The PRC has about 2000 combat aircraft.
First world air force inventories are generally between 50 and 75%
mission capable[*]. Less is know of either the PRC or ROC mission
capable rates.
[*] The USAF F-22, for example, has a 52% mission capable rate.
The USAF F-35A had a 62% rate in 2019, and up to 76% in 2020 per the USAF.

I wonder where the F-16s "on order" are being made ? The old F-16
factory in Fort Worth, Texas has been converted to the F-35 aircraft.

Ah, in Greenville, SC.

https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2619834/air-force-opens-new-f-16-production-line-for-foreign-military-sales/

Lynn

[J. Clarke]

On Tue, 14 Sep 2021 16:26:05 -0500, Lynn McGuire

Post by Lynn McGuire

Post by Dimensional Traveler

Post by Robert Carnegie

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Robert Carnegie
Please tell me you're aware of how very stupid these ideas are.

Which ideas?
The reworking of Ivanhoe into an inverted version, where the Normans are the
good guys representing established order, and Ivanhoe is a villain... of course
that is stupid, but it represents the kind of stupidity that the far-right espouses.
As for my idea, proposed in jest, of Taiwan going back to the Qing dynasty flag -
while it was not serious, it does fit into the realities of Taiwan internal politics,
with which I dealt with in another post in this thread.

It's external politics that you don't seem to grasp.
I would substitute the population of Taiwan with
you and 20 million vatgirls, and then come back, oh,
five minutes later, to appreciate the mess you'd leave.

I'm sure it takes more than 5 minutes for a Chinese troop transport to
cross the Taiwan Strait.  Give it at least a couple of hours so they can
completely occupy the island.

Gonna take more than one troop transport to invade Taiwan. Since China
has reputedly more than 10,000 missiles aimed at Taiwan, they might use
those to kill the 24 million inhabitants first. Taking out the 200
Taiwanese F-16s first will be difficult though along with the other 200
fighter jets.
And then China will have to deal with the Taiwan ballistic missiles
aimed at the Three Gorges dam.
Plus then the world will have to deal with the fact that over half of
the computer chip bases are made in Taiwan along with a significant
number of computer chips.

They've got the sealift to land around 20,000 troops. This is why
Quadi's fears of their invading and conquering the US are so silly.

[Scott Lurndal]

Post by J. Clarke
On Tue, 14 Sep 2021 16:26:05 -0500, Lynn McGuire

Post by Lynn McGuire

Post by Dimensional Traveler

Post by Robert Carnegie

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Robert Carnegie
Please tell me you're aware of how very stupid these ideas are.

Which ideas?
The reworking of Ivanhoe into an inverted version, where the Normans are the
good guys representing established order, and Ivanhoe is a villain... of course
that is stupid, but it represents the kind of stupidity that the
far-right espouses.
As for my idea, proposed in jest, of Taiwan going back to the Qing dynasty flag -
while it was not serious, it does fit into the realities of Taiwan
internal politics,
with which I dealt with in another post in this thread.

It's external politics that you don't seem to grasp.
I would substitute the population of Taiwan with
you and 20 million vatgirls, and then come back, oh,
five minutes later, to appreciate the mess you'd leave.

I'm sure it takes more than 5 minutes for a Chinese troop transport to
cross the Taiwan Strait.  Give it at least a couple of hours so they can
completely occupy the island.

Gonna take more than one troop transport to invade Taiwan. Since China
has reputedly more than 10,000 missiles aimed at Taiwan, they might use
those to kill the 24 million inhabitants first. Taking out the 200
Taiwanese F-16s first will be difficult though along with the other 200
fighter jets.
And then China will have to deal with the Taiwan ballistic missiles
aimed at the Three Gorges dam.
Plus then the world will have to deal with the fact that over half of
the computer chip bases are made in Taiwan along with a significant
number of computer chips.

They've got the sealift to land around 20,000 troops. This is why
Quadi's fears of their invading and conquering the US are so silly.

The chinese merchant fleet consists of more than 5,600 vessels,
27 million DWT (1 DWT = 92571 pounds) capacity.

China shipping container lines has 148 vessels of more than 610,00 TEU.

How much of the US sealift in 1945 consisted of passenger liners?

They wouldn't need to make beach landings. Just capture one
of the large shipping ports and bring in men and material in
bulk.

The straight of Taiwan is only 100 miles wide.

[Paul S Person]

Post by Scott Lurndal

Post by J. Clarke
On Tue, 14 Sep 2021 16:26:05 -0500, Lynn McGuire

Post by Lynn McGuire

Post by Dimensional Traveler

Post by Robert Carnegie

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Robert Carnegie
Please tell me you're aware of how very stupid these ideas are.

Which ideas?
The reworking of Ivanhoe into an inverted version, where the Normans are the
good guys representing established order, and Ivanhoe is a villain... of course
that is stupid, but it represents the kind of stupidity that the
far-right espouses.
As for my idea, proposed in jest, of Taiwan going back to the Qing dynasty flag -
while it was not serious, it does fit into the realities of Taiwan
internal politics,
with which I dealt with in another post in this thread.

It's external politics that you don't seem to grasp.
I would substitute the population of Taiwan with
you and 20 million vatgirls, and then come back, oh,
five minutes later, to appreciate the mess you'd leave.

I'm sure it takes more than 5 minutes for a Chinese troop transport to
cross the Taiwan Strait.  Give it at least a couple of hours so they can
completely occupy the island.

Gonna take more than one troop transport to invade Taiwan. Since China
has reputedly more than 10,000 missiles aimed at Taiwan, they might use
those to kill the 24 million inhabitants first. Taking out the 200
Taiwanese F-16s first will be difficult though along with the other 200
fighter jets.
And then China will have to deal with the Taiwan ballistic missiles
aimed at the Three Gorges dam.
Plus then the world will have to deal with the fact that over half of
the computer chip bases are made in Taiwan along with a significant
number of computer chips.

They've got the sealift to land around 20,000 troops. This is why
Quadi's fears of their invading and conquering the US are so silly.

The chinese merchant fleet consists of more than 5,600 vessels,
27 million DWT (1 DWT = 92571 pounds) capacity.
China shipping container lines has 148 vessels of more than 610,00 TEU.
How much of the US sealift in 1945 consisted of passenger liners?
They wouldn't need to make beach landings. Just capture one
of the large shipping ports and bring in men and material in
bulk.
The straight of Taiwan is only 100 miles wide.

Gathering all that shipping together and prepping it would attract
attention.

And the economic price of diverting commercial shipping would be
considerable.

One of the (several) reasons the Axis never invaded Britain was
because they would have had to requisition so many commercial small
craft that the French economy would have been severely impacted. A lot
of goods moved on rivers by those same small craft.

In today's terms, it would have created a major supply chain problem.

[Scott Lurndal]

Post by Paul S Person

Post by Scott Lurndal

Post by J. Clarke

Post by Lynn McGuire
Plus then the world will have to deal with the fact that over half of
the computer chip bases are made in Taiwan along with a significant
number of computer chips.

They've got the sealift to land around 20,000 troops. This is why
Quadi's fears of their invading and conquering the US are so silly.

The chinese merchant fleet consists of more than 5,600 vessels,
27 million DWT (1 DWT = 92571 pounds) capacity.
China shipping container lines has 148 vessels of more than 610,00 TEU.
How much of the US sealift in 1945 consisted of passenger liners?
They wouldn't need to make beach landings. Just capture one
of the large shipping ports and bring in men and material in
bulk.
The straight of Taiwan is only 100 miles wide.

Gathering all that shipping together and prepping it would attract
attention.
And the economic price of diverting commercial shipping would be
considerable.
One of the (several) reasons the Axis never invaded Britain was
because they would have had to requisition so many commercial small
craft that the French economy would have been severely impacted. A lot
of goods moved on rivers by those same small craft.

The Allies didn't have ships that carry 20,000 forty-foot shipping containers.

You can pack an awful lot of men and material in that space for a
three hour trip across the straight.

[Wolffan]

Post by Scott Lurndal

Post by Paul S Person

Post by Scott Lurndal

Post by Lynn McGuire
Plus then the world will have to deal with the fact that over half of
the computer chip bases are made in Taiwan along with a significant
number of computer chips.

They've got the sealift to land around 20,000 troops. This is why
Quadi's fears of their invading and conquering the US are so silly.

The chinese merchant fleet consists of more than 5,600 vessels,
27 million DWT (1 DWT = 92571 pounds) capacity.
China shipping container lines has 148 vessels of more than 610,00 TEU.
How much of the US sealift in 1945 consisted of passenger liners?
They wouldn't need to make beach landings. Just capture one
of the large shipping ports and bring in men and material in
bulk.
The straight of Taiwan is only 100 miles wide.

Gathering all that shipping together and prepping it would attract
attention.
And the economic price of diverting commercial shipping would be
considerable.
One of the (several) reasons the Axis never invaded Britain was
because they would have had to requisition so many commercial small
craft that the French economy would have been severely impacted. A lot
of goods moved on rivers by those same small craft.

The Allies didn't have ships that carry 20,000 forty-foot shipping containers.
You can pack an awful lot of men and material in that space for a
three hour trip across the straight.

your comments are somewhat undermined by the fact that you apparently don’t
know the difference between a ’strait’ and a ’straight’.

And sticking a landing force on a Really Big Ship (such as one which can
carry 20,000 forty-foot shipping containers) is called ‘Creating a Really
High Value Target’. Merchant ships, especially Really Big merchant ships,
are not designed to take hits from anti-ship missiles. Taiwan has a number of
surface craft, submarines, and aircraft capable of launching Harpoon and
other anti-ship missiles. Two-three Harpoon hits and that Really Big Ship is
sitting at the bottom of the strait, and any surviving troops are swimming to
shore. Without their weapons and equipment. The subs also have torpedoes; a
single hit from a Mk37 or a Mk48 will sink a merchant ship, even a Really Big
merchant ship. Hell, a Mk8 will do the trick. HMS Conquerer used Mk8** torps
to kill General Belgrano. The British Mk8 dates from the 1920s. Still
works... American Mk8s are somewhat newer, but also still work. (Stay away
from Americam Mk13 and 14, though, they DON’T work.)

[Paul S Person]

Post by Scott Lurndal

Post by Paul S Person

Post by Scott Lurndal

Post by Lynn McGuire
Plus then the world will have to deal with the fact that over half of
the computer chip bases are made in Taiwan along with a significant
number of computer chips.

They've got the sealift to land around 20,000 troops. This is why
Quadi's fears of their invading and conquering the US are so silly.

The chinese merchant fleet consists of more than 5,600 vessels,
27 million DWT (1 DWT = 92571 pounds) capacity.
China shipping container lines has 148 vessels of more than 610,00 TEU.
How much of the US sealift in 1945 consisted of passenger liners?
They wouldn't need to make beach landings. Just capture one
of the large shipping ports and bring in men and material in
bulk.
The straight of Taiwan is only 100 miles wide.

Gathering all that shipping together and prepping it would attract
attention.
And the economic price of diverting commercial shipping would be
considerable.
One of the (several) reasons the Axis never invaded Britain was
because they would have had to requisition so many commercial small
craft that the French economy would have been severely impacted. A lot
of goods moved on rivers by those same small craft.

The Allies didn't have ships that carry 20,000 forty-foot shipping containers.
You can pack an awful lot of men and material in that space for a
three hour trip across the straight.

your comments are somewhat undermined by the fact that you apparently don’t
know the difference between a ’strait’ and a ’straight’.
And sticking a landing force on a Really Big Ship (such as one which can
carry 20,000 forty-foot shipping containers) is called ‘Creating a Really
High Value Target’. Merchant ships, especially Really Big merchant ships,
are not designed to take hits from anti-ship missiles. Taiwan has a number of
surface craft, submarines, and aircraft capable of launching Harpoon and
other anti-ship missiles. Two-three Harpoon hits and that Really Big Ship is
sitting at the bottom of the strait, and any surviving troops are swimming to
shore. Without their weapons and equipment. The subs also have torpedoes; a
single hit from a Mk37 or a Mk48 will sink a merchant ship, even a Really Big
merchant ship. Hell, a Mk8 will do the trick. HMS Conquerer used Mk8** torps
to kill General Belgrano. The British Mk8 dates from the 1920s. Still
works... American Mk8s are somewhat newer, but also still work. (Stay away
from Americam Mk13 and 14, though, they DON’T work.)

Indeed.

And he ignored the economic effect of /not/ transporting those
shipping containers.

[Michael F. Stemper]

Post by Scott Lurndal

Post by J. Clarke
On Tue, 14 Sep 2021 16:26:05 -0500, Lynn McGuire
They've got the sealift to land around 20,000 troops. This is why
Quadi's fears of their invading and conquering the US are so silly.

The chinese merchant fleet consists of more than 5,600 vessels,
27 million DWT (1 DWT = 92571 pounds) capacity.

From whence comes this conversion factor? Searching for 92571 turned
up nothing useful.

The only seemingly relevant DWT that I could find was:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadweight_tonnage>

However, it treats DWT as something that is measured, not as a unit of
measure. It says that DWT is measured in long tons (1000 kg).

[Scott Lurndal]

Post by Scott Lurndal

Post by J. Clarke
On Tue, 14 Sep 2021 16:26:05 -0500, Lynn McGuire
They've got the sealift to land around 20,000 troops. This is why
Quadi's fears of their invading and conquering the US are so silly.

The chinese merchant fleet consists of more than 5,600 vessels,
27 million DWT (1 DWT = 92571 pounds) capacity.

Basically I didn't read the google results carefully enough.

DWT is also an abbreviation for pennyweight and google returned
the value for 27,000,00 pennyweights as 92571.429 pounds.

[Michael F. Stemper]

Post by Scott Lurndal

Post by Scott Lurndal

Post by J. Clarke
On Tue, 14 Sep 2021 16:26:05 -0500, Lynn McGuire
They've got the sealift to land around 20,000 troops. This is why
Quadi's fears of their invading and conquering the US are so silly.

The chinese merchant fleet consists of more than 5,600 vessels,
27 million DWT (1 DWT = 92571 pounds) capacity.

Basically I didn't read the google results carefully enough.

Okay, thanks for resolving my confusion.

Post by Scott Lurndal
DWT is also an abbreviation for pennyweight and google returned
the value for 27,000,00 pennyweights as 92571.429 pounds.

I did come across "DWT" as "pennyweight", but couldn't see that
it would apply to shipping.

"D" as in "pounds, shillings, pence" I presume.

[Quadibloc]

Post by Michael F. Stemper

Post by Scott Lurndal

Post by Scott Lurndal
The chinese merchant fleet consists of more than 5,600 vessels,
27 million DWT (1 DWT = 92571 pounds) capacity.

Basically I didn't read the google results carefully enough.

Okay, thanks for resolving my confusion.

Post by Scott Lurndal
DWT is also an abbreviation for pennyweight and google returned
the value for 27,000,00 pennyweights as 92571.429 pounds.

I did come across "DWT" as "pennyweight", but couldn't see that
it would apply to shipping.
"D" as in "pounds, shillings, pence" I presume.

To start with, my Google result

https://www.isl.org/en/news/china-become-the-worlds-second-largest-ship-owning-nation

tells me that the Chinese merchant fleet has a capacity of 270 million DWT.

However, even a capacity of 900,000 pounds sounds pathetically small for
the world's largest trading nation.

It turns out that in this context, DWT does not stand for pennyweight, but
instead Dead Weight Tonnage.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadweight_tonnage

clarifies the matter. Historically, it was measured in long tons (2,240 lbs), but is now
normally given in metric tons (2,204.62 lbs). Which is, of course, considerably
heavier than a pennyweight (24 grains, 1/20 of a troy ounce) a bit over a twentieth
of an avoirdupois ounce, or 1.555-odd grams.

So we have a factor of about 640,000 here.

John Savard

[Wolffan]

Post by Michael F. Stemper

Post by Scott Lurndal

Post by J. Clarke
On Tue, 14 Sep 2021 16:26:05 -0500, Lynn McGuire
They've got the sealift to land around 20,000 troops. This is why
Quadi's fears of their invading and conquering the US are so silly.

The chinese merchant fleet consists of more than 5,600 vessels,
27 million DWT (1 DWT = 92571 pounds) capacity.

From whence comes this conversion factor? Searching for 92571 turned
up nothing useful.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadweight_tonnage>
However, it treats DWT as something that is measured, not as a unit of
measure. It says that DWT is measured in long tons (1000 kg).

A DWT is a cubic metre of seawater, or a bit more than one tonne.

[Michael Dworetsky]

Post by Quadibloc
I was looking to see if a PDF copy of a particular history book might be
found online. One thing I stumbled across in the search was a thesis about
how the American Legion played a role in promoting Americanism
in U.S. textbooks.
This put me in mind of a MAD magazine satire where the book 'Melvinhoe'
was offered as a replacement for Ivanhoe in American public schools.
Finally, I decided to look for the book by Sir Walter Scott. But since I didn't
have much energy or time for reading, nor all that much appetite for great
literature... I did not sit down with the book itself, or either of two
abridgements I also found on the Internet Archive. No, I settled for the
Classic Comics adaptation.
But from that I still learned what I wanted to know: the protagonist was
not Russian, he wasn't even an Irishman who was still in the process of
migrating from the Russian home of his Indo-European forbears (like
Conan the Barbarian from Cimmeria). No... he was a good Saxon, Wilfred
of Ivanhoe. So Ivanhoe is a place, not a person.
And one of Canada's early Prime Ministers was Sir Wilfred Laurier, so it's a
real first name.
John Savard

The British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and his (third) wife Carrie
Symonds have named their infant son Wilfred.

--
Mike Dworetsky

[[e-mail]]

Post by Michael Dworetsky

Post by Quadibloc
I was looking to see if a PDF copy of a particular history book might be
found online. One thing I stumbled across in the search was a thesis about
how the American Legion played a role in promoting Americanism
in U.S. textbooks.
This put me in mind of a MAD magazine satire where the book 'Melvinhoe'
was offered as a replacement for Ivanhoe in American public schools.
Finally, I decided to look for the book by Sir Walter Scott. But since I didn't
have much energy or time for reading, nor all that much appetite for great
literature... I did not sit down with the book itself, or either of two
abridgements I also found on the Internet Archive. No, I settled for the
Classic Comics adaptation.
But from that I still learned what I wanted to know: the protagonist was
not Russian, he wasn't even an Irishman who was still in the process of
migrating from the Russian home of his Indo-European forbears (like
Conan the Barbarian from Cimmeria). No... he was a good Saxon, Wilfred
of Ivanhoe. So Ivanhoe is a place, not a person.
And one of Canada's early Prime Ministers was Sir Wilfred Laurier, so it's a
real first name.
John Savard

The British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and his (third) wife Carrie
Symonds have named their infant son Wilfred.

Considering Johnson's decision-making record, I'm not sure that
is a strong endorsement.

pt

[Michael Dworetsky]

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by Michael Dworetsky

Post by Quadibloc
I was looking to see if a PDF copy of a particular history book might be
found online. One thing I stumbled across in the search was a thesis about
how the American Legion played a role in promoting Americanism
in U.S. textbooks.
This put me in mind of a MAD magazine satire where the book 'Melvinhoe'
was offered as a replacement for Ivanhoe in American public schools.
Finally, I decided to look for the book by Sir Walter Scott. But since I didn't
have much energy or time for reading, nor all that much appetite for great
literature... I did not sit down with the book itself, or either of two
abridgements I also found on the Internet Archive. No, I settled for the
Classic Comics adaptation.
But from that I still learned what I wanted to know: the protagonist was
not Russian, he wasn't even an Irishman who was still in the process of
migrating from the Russian home of his Indo-European forbears (like
Conan the Barbarian from Cimmeria). No... he was a good Saxon, Wilfred
of Ivanhoe. So Ivanhoe is a place, not a person.
And one of Canada's early Prime Ministers was Sir Wilfred Laurier, so it's a
real first name.
John Savard

The British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and his (third) wife Carrie
Symonds have named their infant son Wilfred.

Considering Johnson's decision-making record, I'm not sure that
is a strong endorsement.
pt

If you think that is an unusual name, give a thought to the offspring of
Leader of the House MP Jacob Rees-Mogg, who have some odd names:

Sixtus Dominic Boniface Christopher, Alfred Wulfric Leyson Pius, Thomas
Wentworth Somerset Dunstan, Peter Theodore Alphege, Anselm Charles
Fitzwilliam and Mary Anne Charlotte Emma (the latter is not especially
unusual).

--
Mike Dworetsky

[Quadibloc]

Post by Michael Dworetsky
If you think that is an unusual name, give a thought to the offspring of
Sixtus Dominic Boniface Christopher, Alfred Wulfric Leyson Pius, Thomas
Wentworth Somerset Dunstan, Peter Theodore Alphege, Anselm Charles
Fitzwilliam and Mary Anne Charlotte Emma (the latter is not especially
unusual).

At least each of them has at least _one_ given name suitable for
regular use... Christopher, Alfred, Thomas, Peter and Charles.

John Savard

[Kevrob]

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Michael Dworetsky
If you think that is an unusual name, give a thought to the offspring of
Sixtus Dominic Boniface Christopher, Alfred Wulfric Leyson Pius, Thomas
Wentworth Somerset Dunstan, Peter Theodore Alphege, Anselm Charles
Fitzwilliam and Mary Anne Charlotte Emma (the latter is not especially
unusual).

At least each of them has at least _one_ given name suitable for
regular use... Christopher, Alfred, Thomas, Peter and Charles.

I 'd invite " regular guys" Dom, Ted, Fitz, Al and even Wulf to meet
me at a sports bar/pub to watch the game and raise a glass.
If Alfred goes by Fred, we won't even confuse them.