 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeArticlesDiving DestinationsLearning Scuba DivingMarine LifeMiscellaneousDiscussion GroupsGeneralScuba EquipmentScuba LocationsAustralian ScubaUK ScubaDirectoryScuba Clubs |
Scuba Forum / General / January 2007OT; Hey, Alan
How about those Chinese Communists and their SDI, eh? Shooting satellites out of orbit with missiles we sold/taught them to build. Comments welcome. >How about those Chinese Communists and their SDI, eh? > >Shooting satellites out of orbit with missiles we sold/taught them to build. > >Comments welcome. Well I hope they liked the feeling, I doubt that their toys will work in a real world test > >How about those Chinese Communists and their SDI, eh? > > > >Shooting satellites out of orbit with missiles we sold/taught them to build. > > > >Comments welcome. > Well I hope they liked the feeling, I doubt that their toys will work > in a real world test. I guess we'll see, wont we? > >How about those Chinese Communists and their SDI, eh? > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Well I hope they liked the feeling, I doubt that their toys will work > in a real world test Oh, I expect they'll work about as well as our toys will work in a real world situation (which means about half the time for both). As for Scott's comment, he might want to check out the tightness of export restrictions to China. It's much easier for someone here to ship advanced technology to Hanoi than it is to Bejing (btw, the ease of shipping stuff to communist Vietnam is with the explicit blessing of the Bush State Department). The Chinese didn't do anything with missles we sold them or taught them how to build. They hit a satellite they'd put up quite some time ago with a missile they developed themselves, most likely based on Russian core technology (Russia hit a satellite with a missile quite some time ago). It might be hard for his Archie Bunker mind to accept, but there are clever people of other races and in other countries that are as capable of the same technological feats as we are. The reality is that we don't have near the technological advantage some here think we have. We do lead the world in a number of areas, but it's not in every field and it's not always by a large margin. Alan Scott napisal(a): > How about those Chinese Communists and their SDI, eh? > > Shooting satellites out of orbit with missiles we sold/taught them to build. > > Comments welcome. FYI rockets were invented bt the Chinese. > Scott napisal(a): > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > FYI rockets were invented bt the Chinese. Must have had lots of satellites to shoot down in the first millennium. Matthias >> Scott napisal(a): >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Must have had lots of satellites to shoot down in the first millennium. <cough>  SignaturePopeye A skilled, armed man lives on a plane of security and contentment different from that of others. The man who cannot cut it, envies, fears and sometimes hates the man who can. -Cooper www.finalprotectivefire.com Matthias Voss napisal(a): > > Scott napisal(a): > > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Must have had lots of satellites to shoot down in the first > millennium. First or second millennium ? BTW until 1957 they were 100% successful ;-) Janusz > Scott napisal(a): > > How about those Chinese Communists and their SDI, eh? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > FYI rockets were invented bt the Chinese. FYI ICBMs invented by the Germans. FYI satellites were invented by the Russians. Transistors and integrated circuits were invented by folks in the US. (I'm presuming that there was at least some software on the Chinese rocket. If they relied soley on ballistic effects it'd be easy for satellites that still have manuverability to evade the missle) Dennis Dennis (Icarus) napisal(a): > > Scott napisal(a): > > > How about those Chinese Communists and their SDI, eh? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > FYI ICBMs invented by the Germans. FYI first operational ICBM was Soviet > FYI satellites were invented by the Russians. FYI it was French (Verne) and BTW even Moon is a satellite > Transistors and integrated circuits were invented by folks in the US. First transistor patents were German IC concept is British > (I'm presuming that there was at least some software on the Chinese rocket. > If they relied soley on ballistic effects it'd be easy for satellites that > still have manuverability to evade the missle) What's your point? Making fool of yourself? Janusz > Dennis (Icarus) napisal(a): > > > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > FYI ICBMs invented by the Germans. > FYI first operational ICBM was Soviet Ok, the V-2 was the first ballistic missle. > > FYI satellites were invented by the Russians. > > FYI it was French (Verne) and BTW even Moon is a satellite Damn, only to you would I have to explain that I was a MAN-MADe satellite. Update this page then http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite they seem to give credit to Sputnik. Jules verne wrote a book about the unintended effect firing an enormous cannon and launching the shell into orbit. Think that's a practical design? Otherwise, if you want to give credit to who may've thought of the idea of a man-made satellite, you'll have ot go back further to Newton. He, too, used artillery. Not really practical. http://books.nap.edu/html/oneuniverse/motion_48-49.html > > Transistors and integrated circuits were invented by folks in the US. > First transistor patents were German http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transistor#History There is no evidence that the the German transistors were ever built. On 16 December 1947 William Shockley, John Bardeen and Walter Brattain succeeded in building the first practical point-contact transistor at Bell Labs. > IC concept is British http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_circuit#History.2C_origins.2C_and_generations The integrated circuit was first conceived by a radar scientist, Geoffrey W.A. Dummer (born 1909), working for the Royal Radar Establishment of the British Ministry of Defence, and published in Washington, D.C. on May 7, 1952. Dummer unsuccessfully attempted to build such a circuit in 1956. A precursor idea to the IC was to create small ceramic squares (wafers), each one containing a single miniaturized component. Components could then be integrated and wired into a bidimentional or tridimentional compact grid. This idea, which looked very promising in 1957, was proposed to the US Army by Jack Kilby, and led to the short-lived Micromodule Program (similar to 1951's Project Tinkertoy). [1] However, as the project was gaining momentum, Kilby came up with a new, revolutionary design: the IC. Generally, credit in engieering goes to the chap who actually blds the device. > > (I'm presuming that there was at least some software on the Chinese rocket. > > If they relied soley on ballistic effects it'd be easy for satellites that > > still have manuverability to evade the missle) > > > What's your point? Making fool of yourself? Going over history. That escaped you? Dennis Dennis (Icarus) napisal(a): > > Dennis (Icarus) napisal(a): > > > > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Ok, the V-2 was the first ballistic missle. I have to agree :-) > > > FYI satellites were invented by the Russians. > > > > FYI it was French (Verne) and BTW even Moon is a satellite > > Damn, only to you would I have to explain that I was a MAN-MADe satellite. Sorry, but I can't understand. Are you really MAN-MADe satellite? > Update this page then > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite > they seem to give credit to Sputnik. Because Sputnik was the first one launched. Concept was invented much more early. BTW Sputnik wasn't technologically advanced. The real achievement was that it was launched. > Jules verne wrote a book about the > unintended effect firing an enormous cannon and launching the shell into > orbit. Think that's a practical design? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_the_Earth_to_the_Moon > Otherwise, if you want to give credit to who may've thought of the idea of a > man-made satellite, you'll have ot go back further to Newton. He, too, used > artillery. Not really practical. > http://books.nap.edu/html/oneuniverse/motion_48-49.html LOL > > > Transistors and integrated circuits were invented by folks in the US. > > First transistor patents were German [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > succeeded in building the first practical point-contact transistor at Bell > Labs. from the same source Legal papers from the Bell Labs patent show that Shockley and Pearson had built operational versions from Lilienfeld's patents, yet they never referenced this work in any of their later research papers or historical articles. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Edgar_Lilienfeld Among other things, he invented the transistor and the electrolytic capacitor in the 1920s. He filed several patents describing the construction and operation of transistors. Although the devices described in his patents should theoretically work, there is no evidence that they actually did. Despite that, the patents describe many features of modern transistors. When the inventors of the first practical transistor, Brattain, Bardeen and Shockley tried to get a patent on their device, most of their claims were rejected due to the Lilienfeld patents. > > IC concept is British > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_circuit#History.2C_origins.2C_and_generations > The integrated circuit was first conceived by a radar scientist, Geoffrey > W.A. Dummer (born 1909), working for the Royal Radar Establishment of the > British Ministry of Defence, and published in Washington, D.C. on May 7, > 1952. Dummer unsuccessfully attempted to build such a circuit in 1956. exactly what I said - IC concept is British > A precursor idea to the IC was to create small ceramic squares (wafers), > each one containing a single miniaturized component. Components could then [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Generally, credit in engieering goes to the chap who actually blds the > device. Generally it goes to the chap who gets patent rights > > What's your point? Making fool of yourself? > > Going over history. That escaped you? Really? Janusz > Dennis (Icarus) napisal(a): > > [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > patent on their device, most of their claims were rejected due to the > Lilienfeld patents. Which says more about flaws in the USPTO than it does about the inventions. If you've ever developed something, you'd know that it's the details that make the difference between a clever idea and a working device. There are lots of patented, but unworkable ideas, and it's often the process of turning of a core idea into a working product where the most valuable patents are generated. History gives credit to those who succeed, not those who patent a grand idea they can't produce. While business practices today can give financial reward to people who patent things they never make, history (and society) remembers such people as parasites, not inventors (NTP vs. RIM comes to mind). Although I do have to agree that Shockly, et. al., should have referenced Lilienfeld in their work. > > > IC concept is British > > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > exactly what I said - IC concept is British Not exactly. Dummer's concept was more akin to a Hybrid microcircuit or a multi-chip module ( <http://www.teledynemicro.com/> for examples), and as stated, he couldn't even make that work. Making interconnected, multiple active devices on a single piece of substrate is the definition of an integrated circuit. Kilby is credited with building the first integrated circuit, although many feel that Noyce's device, built on silicon and using junction isolation, is the true forerunner of today's integrated circuits. > > A precursor idea to the IC was to create small ceramic squares (wafers), > > each one containing a single miniaturized component. Components could then [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Generally it goes to the chap who gets patent rights No, the royalities (maybe) go to the first chap who gets the patent rights. Credit goes to the person who turns the idea into reality. > > > What's your point? Making fool of yourself? > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Janusz Alan Street napisal(a): > > Dennis (Icarus) napisal(a): > Which says more about flaws in the USPTO than it does about the > inventions. If you've ever developed something, you'd know that it's [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > remembers such people as parasites, not inventors (NTP vs. RIM comes to > mind). or maybe they are remembered as successful lawyers? > Although I do have to agree that Shockly, et. al., should have > referenced Lilienfeld in their work. Nobody likes to be second. > > > > IC concept is British > > > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > a multi-chip module ( <http://www.teledynemicro.com/> for examples), > and as stated, he couldn't even make that work. No. Basis for Dummer's concept was square of silicone (0.5inch) > Making interconnected, multiple active devices on a single piece of > substrate is the definition of an integrated circuit. Kilby is credited > with building the first integrated circuit, although many feel that > Noyce's device, built on silicon and using junction isolation, is the > true forerunner of today's integrated circuits. And that is why TI and Fairchild had war over patents. IMHO Noyce design was much more mature. > > > Generally, credit in engieering goes to the chap who actually blds the > > > device. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > No, the royalities (maybe) go to the first chap who gets the patent > rights. Credit goes to the person who turns the idea into reality. Or maybe royalties go to the company and credit goes to the person. Janusz <snip> > > > > FYI satellites were invented by the Russians. > > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Sorry, but I can't understand. Are you really MAN-MADe satellite? Damn, only to you would I have to explain that IT was a MAN-MADe satellite. > > Update this page then > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > more early. BTW Sputnik wasn't technologically advanced. The real > achievement was that it was launched. So why do you give credit to Verne, and not Newton then? > > Jules verne wrote a book about the > > unintended effect firing an enormous cannon and launching the shell into [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > never referenced this work in any of their later research papers or > historical articles. Yes, which confirms nicely that it wwas invented at Bell Labs. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Edgar_Lilienfeld > Among other things, he invented the transistor and the electrolytic [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > patent on their device, most of their claims were rejected due to the > Lilienfeld patents. Which means that it was invented, developed, at Bell labs. > > > IC concept is British http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_circuit#History.2C_origins.2C_and_generations > > The integrated circuit was first conceived by a radar scientist, Geoffrey > > W.A. Dummer (born 1909), working for the Royal Radar Establishment of the > > British Ministry of Defence, and published in Washington, D.C. on May 7, > > 1952. Dummer unsuccessfully attempted to build such a circuit in 1956. > > exactly what I said - IC concept is British And yet, he didn't get it working. :-) > > A precursor idea to the IC was to create small ceramic squares (wafers), > > each one containing a single miniaturized component. Components could then [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Really? Clearly it did. Dennis > <snip> >>>>> FYI satellites were invented by the Russians. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Damn, only to you would I have to explain that IT was a MAN-MADe satellite. remember, he really is j Anus. > Dennis bob crownfield napisal(a): > remember, he really is j Anus. Hi Bubba, How is your dementia? Janusz Dennis (Icarus) napisal(a): > <snip> > > > > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Damn, only to you would I have to explain that IT was a MAN-MADe satellite. Time for third attempt. IT? > > > Update this page then > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > So why do you give credit to Verne, and not Newton then? Because Newton's object was to be launched horizontally and it had to fall down onto Earth. Check your cite. There is even nice diagram. > > > Jules verne wrote a book about the > > > unintended effect firing an enormous cannon and launching the shell into [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > > Yes, which confirms nicely that it wwas invented at Bell Labs. On the basis of Lilienfeld's patent (BTW US). That's why Shockley's patent application was rejected. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Edgar_Lilienfeld > > Among other things, he invented the transistor and the electrolytic [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Which means that it was invented, developed, at Bell labs. Just like staff which is being invented, developed now in countries which don't care about patent rights. > > > > IC concept is British > > > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > And yet, he didn't get it working. > :-) and you can tell me why > > > A precursor idea to the IC was to create small ceramic squares (wafers), > > > each one containing a single miniaturized component. Components could [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > Dennis > Dennis (Icarus) napisal(a): > > > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Time for third attempt. > IT? Damn, IT (it) is giving you problems now? Do you really want to continue playing this game? I could start nailing you on stuff if you like :-) Let me know how you want to play it. > > > > Update this page then > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Because Newton's object was to be launched horizontally and it had to > fall down onto Earth. Check your cite. There is even nice diagram. Incorrect. It was a thought experiment. Fired horizontally at the right speed, ignoring atmosheric drag, and it woud go into free fall. A satellite is in what around its primary? Free fall. Thus, Newton's cannonball was the first concept of a man-made satellite. But you don't see that, do you? :-) <snip> > > > from the same source > > > Legal papers from the Bell Labs patent show that Shockley and Pearson [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > On the basis of Lilienfeld's patent (BTW US). That's why Shockley's > patent application was rejected. But Lilienfeld couldn't get it working. > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Edgar_Lilienfeld > > > Among other things, he invented the transistor and the electrolytic [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Just like staff which is being invented, developed now in countries > which don't care about patent rights. I presume you mean "stuff". Learn from my example. > > > > > IC concept is British http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_circuit#History.2C_origins.2C_and_generations > > > > The integrated circuit was first conceived by a radar scientist, > > Geoffrey [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > and you can tell me why Didn't Alan cover that? <snip> > Dennis (Icarus) napisal(a): > > > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > FYI ICBMs invented by the Germans. > FYI first operational ICBM was Soviet Really? It may well be, but I'd like to see something confirming that. My Russian friends have a habit of boasting that Russians made the first airplane, the first helicoptor, the first television, the first computer and pretty much the first of anything worthwhile. I admire their nationalism, if not their concept of reality, especially since proof of these accomplishments is usually "in secret Russian archives" that never seem to see the light of day. But I expect that you wouldn't do that, would you? :-) > > FYI satellites were invented by the Russians. > > FYI it was French (Verne) and BTW even Moon is a satellite http://history.nasa.gov/sputnik/ As far as I know, the first man-made satellite put into orbit was Sputnik I. Ideas and concepts are nice, but if ya can't make it real, it's called Science Fiction. > > Transistors and integrated circuits were invented by folks in the US. > First transistor patents were German Perhaps, but the first BJTs were made in the US, and it was another few years before FETs could become a reality (and at which time the patents were worthless). > IC concept is British Concepts are nice. Da Vinci had a lot of nice concepts that can't translate into anything real, even today. The first bits of real silicon, along with the patents to protect them, came from the US. Since then, of course, every country that has semiconductor technology can stake claims to innovations and advancements. The US continues to lead the world at the very bleeding edge of this technology, but that translates into a pretty short term business lead, at best, and is close to meaningless when it comes to national defense. > > (I'm presuming that there was at least some software on the Chinese rocket. > > If they relied soley on ballistic effects it'd be easy for satellites that [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Janusz >> Dennis (Icarus) napisal(a): >> > > [quoted text clipped - 58 lines] >> > >> What's your point? Making fool of yourself? So much for another one of those "world history asswippings" from jANUS that JOF is so proud of. Alan Street napisal(a): > > Dennis (Icarus) napisal(a): > > > > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Really? Really. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_rocket_and_missile_technology > It may well be, but I'd like to see something confirming that. > My Russian friends have a habit of boasting that Russians made the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > proof of these accomplishments is usually "in secret Russian archives" > that never seem to see the light of day. Sorry, I don't have access to "secret Russian archives" ;-) BTW if Russians say so it has to be true LOL. > But I expect that you wouldn't do that, would you? :-) > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > As far as I know, the first man-made satellite put into orbit was > Sputnik I Yes it was. >. Ideas and concepts are nice, but if ya can't make it real, > it's called Science Fiction. Or theoretical research > > > Transistors and integrated circuits were invented by folks in the US. > > First transistor patents were German [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > translate into anything real, even today. The first bits of real > silicon, along with the patents to protect them, came from the US. silicon? I thought that there were discussion about first transistor > Since then, of course, every country that has semiconductor technology > can stake claims to innovations and advancements. The US continues to > lead the world at the very bleeding edge of this technology, but that > translates into a pretty short term business lead, at best, and is > close to meaningless when it comes to national defense. It sounds exactly like Russian version Janusz > Alan Street napisal(a): > > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > Really. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_rocket_and_missile_technology OK > > It may well be, but I'd like to see something confirming that. > > My Russian friends have a habit of boasting that Russians made the [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > > Or theoretical research You don't patent theoretical research, you publish it. Speaking of that, it's sometimes hard to tell the difference between really, really advanced research and science fiction (aka, "total bullshit"). I've met some very convincing crackpots and some very understated geniuses. > > > > Transistors and integrated circuits were invented by folks in the US. > > > First transistor patents were German [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > silicon? I thought that there were discussion about first transistor Sorry about that. Professional slang. We tend to refer to the first wafers of anything as "silicon" (mostly as a way to piss off the III-V guys :-). Still, the first working devices came from the US. > > Since then, of course, every country that has semiconductor technology > > can stake claims to innovations and advancements. The US continues to [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > > It sounds exactly like Russian version Version of what? Alan Street napisal(a): > > Alan Street napisal(a): > > > It may well be, but I'd like to see something confirming that. > > > My Russian friends have a habit of boasting that Russians made the [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > You don't patent theoretical research, you publish it. and if it has any practical value (use) you patent it. > Speaking of that, it's sometimes hard to tell the difference between > really, really advanced research and science fiction (aka, "total > bullshit"). :-) > I've met some very convincing crackpots and some very > understated geniuses. That's live. Don't you think that it has some impact on rec.scuba? I mean that some crackpots think they are geniuses > > > > > Transistors and integrated circuits were invented by folks in the US. > > > > First transistor patents were German [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > wafers of anything as "silicon" (mostly as a way to piss off the III-V > guys :-). What about teamwork ;-) BTW 6952014 is yours? > Still, the first working devices came from the US. Yes > > > Since then, of course, every country that has semiconductor technology > > > can stake claims to innovations and advancements. The US continues to [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Version of what? propaganda Janusz > Alan Street napisal(a): > > > >. Ideas and concepts are nice, but if ya can't make it real, > > > > it's called Science Fiction. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > and if it has any practical value (use) you patent it. Sometimes. It depends on the field. > > Speaking of that, it's sometimes hard to tell the difference between > > really, really advanced research and science fiction (aka, "total [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > That's live. Don't you think that it has some impact on rec.scuba? > I mean that some crackpots think they are geniuses rec.scuba is just like the real world, only smaller and more intense (and biased a bit more to the right). > > > > Perhaps, but the first BJTs were made in the US, and it was another few > > > > years before FETs could become a reality (and at which time the patents [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > What about teamwork ;-) It's great if you have a good team > BTW 6952014 is yours? Yes > > Still, the first working devices came from the US. > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > propaganda Ah. I see. >How about those Chinese Communists and their SDI, eh? > >Shooting satellites out of orbit with missiles we sold/taught them to build. > >Comments welcome. Shows that the former Democrat and Republican administration officials who have left government service to work as lobbyists for China are effective. Richard N. Perle, for one, was an adviser for Loral Space and Communications while serving as chairman of the Pentagone Defense Policy Board. Hey, what's wrong in making a buck, right? Who wants to be responsible for losing jobs created by trade with China? > Shows that the former Democrat and Republican administration officials > who have left government service to work as lobbyists for China are [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Who wants to be responsible for losing jobs created by trade with > China? Best part is, you share the continent with China. How many French jobs, technologies, etc. has your government or past elected officials exported at the expense of the French people? It isn't as if the French are above making a quick buck at someone else's expense. >> Shows that the former Democrat and Republican administration officials >> who have left government service to work as lobbyists for China are [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >Best part is, you share the continent with China. Depends if you consider Eurasia as one continent or two i.e. Europe and Asia. The relevance escapes me though. >How many French jobs, technologies, etc. has your government or past elected >officials exported at the expense of the French people? Since when have you been worried and concerned by european jobs going off-shore? >It isn't as if the French are above making a quick buck at someone else's >expense. So it's a vice when others do it but a virtue when Yanks do it? I gather it's okay to make a quick buck by selling advanced technology to the Chinese because so many American (and European ) companies are doing exactly that so what are you whining about? > >Best part is, you share the continent with China. > > > Depends if you consider Eurasia as one continent or two i.e. Europe > and Asia. The relevance escapes me though. Of course it does. > >How many French jobs, technologies, etc. has your government or past elected > >officials exported at the expense of the French people? > > > Since when have you been worried and concerned by european jobs going > off-shore? Only since you stuck your nose in American issues, long ago. Bitchslapping whores like the French is easy. > >It isn't as if the French are above making a quick buck at someone else's > >expense. > > So it's a vice when others do it but a virtue when Yanks do it? No one, least of all me, said that, so stop trying to put words in my mouth when your own bullshit gets thrown back at you. > I gather it's okay to make a quick buck by selling advanced technology > to the Chinese because so many American (and European ) companies are > doing exactly that so what are you whining about? So, in other words, you dont have an answer to any of the very dirtect, simple questions. What you gather would fill an inverted thimble. -- Scott napisal(a): > > >Best part is, you share the continent with China. > > > > > Depends if you consider Eurasia as one continent or two i.e. Europe > > and Asia. The relevance escapes me though. > > Of course it does. Maybe as a proof of your stupidity and lack of basic knowledge. > > >How many French jobs, technologies, etc. has your government or past > elected [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Only since you stuck your nose in American issues, long ago. Does it mean since 1492? > Bitchslapping whores like the French is easy. > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > No one, least of all me, said that, so stop trying to put words in my mouth > when your own bullshit gets thrown back at you. Scotty, check labels on equipment you are using or just have at home. Probably even PC you have is labelled "Made in China" > > I gather it's okay to make a quick buck by selling advanced technology > > to the Chinese because so many American (and European ) companies are > > doing exactly that so what are you whining about? > > So, in other words, you dont have an answer to any of the very dirtect, > simple questions. Answering simple, direct questions is difficult for you? You owe me answer on Marine Corps (other thread). Janusz |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.