Talk:Disempowering Terrorists - Revision history

Mdelaney: /* Terrorism and returning to the Moon */

2007-08-19T12:55:44Z

Terrorism and returning to the Moon

86.42.172.100: /* Terrorism and returning to the Moon */

2007-08-19T12:53:57Z

Terrorism and returning to the Moon

Mdelaney: /* Terrorism and returning to the Moon */

2007-08-19T03:11:38Z

Terrorism and returning to the Moon

Miros1: /* Terrorism and returning to the Moon */

2007-08-16T15:33:12Z

Terrorism and returning to the Moon

Miros1: /* Terrorism and returning to the Moon */

2007-08-16T15:31:32Z

Terrorism and returning to the Moon

Jriley: /* Terrorism and returning to the Moon */ Tech Eds

2007-08-14T12:47:45Z

Terrorism and returning to the Moon: Tech Eds

Miros1: /* Terrorism and returning to the Moon */

2007-08-14T01:05:52Z

Terrorism and returning to the Moon

Miros1 at 01:03, 14 August 2007

2007-08-14T01:03:19Z

Jriley: /* Terrorism and returning to the Moon */

2007-08-13T21:23:37Z

Terrorism and returning to the Moon

Jriley: Terrorism and returning to the Moon

2007-08-13T21:21:51Z

Terrorism and returning to the Moon

@@ Line 52: / Line 52: @@
 :I personally do not see government or government agencies as the answer to our return to the moon problems. In fact government seems to be causing most of the everyday problems we have in the world today that are stifling growth in many areas.
-:-- [[User:86.42.172.100|86.42.172.100]] 12:53, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
+:-- [[User:Mdelaney|Mdelaney]] 12:55, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
 ----

@@ Line 42: / Line 42: @@
 ----
-:First, I did not say the article upset me I said it made me uncomfortable but needed to be addressed, I didn't attack the subject, I mainly only said I had a problem with the title being misleading relative to the content and suggested merging it with the buy-in article. As an article on disempowerment it isn't very strong as it stands since most of the article is taken up by duplicating the explanation of buy-in that already exists in your other article. You seem to have a major problem with editorial criticism, but this is Lunarpedia, not Rileypedia :-)
+:First, I did not say the article upset me I said it made me uncomfortable but needed to be addressed, I didn't attack the subject, I mainly only said I had a problem with the title being misleading relative to the content and suggested merging it with the buy-in article. As an article on disempowerment it isn't very strong as it stood since most of the article was taken up by duplicating the explanation of buy-in that already exists in your other article. You seem to have a major problem with editorial criticism, but this is Lunarpedia, not Rileypedia :-)
 :Second, I'm very much aware of the current reality and in fact spent most of last week dealing with that current reality while traveling. I have no way of knowing how much of that ''reality'' is real and how much is hype though. Nor has anyone outside certain very elevated circles. I've even found that people working in anti terrorism don't know how much of their  working knowledge is true, they just take it at face value and do their job. I know how that feels, I've had to deal with it too.
@@ Line 50: / Line 50: @@
 :Fourth, many people have little or no faith in NASA returning to the moon because NASA is an arm of the US government which itself does not seem interested in anything other than raising revenue. There is also the element of corruption that exists within all governments worldwide. Representatives all over the world seem to do very well for themselves while in government, mostly by becoming high paid chairpersons of large corporations.
-:I personally do not see government or government agencies as the answer to our return to the moon problems. In fact government seems to be causing most of the everyday problems we have in the world today that are stifling growth in certain areas.
+:I personally do not see government or government agencies as the answer to our return to the moon problems. In fact government seems to be causing most of the everyday problems we have in the world today that are stifling growth in many areas.
-:-- [[User:Mdelaney|Mdelaney]] 03:11, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
+:-- [[User:86.42.172.100|86.42.172.100]] 12:53, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
 ----

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:11, 19 August 2007
Line 39:		Line 39:

	--[[User:Jriley\|Jriley]] 21:21, 13 August 2007 (UTC)		--[[User:Jriley\|Jriley]] 21:21, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
		+
		+	----
		+
		+	:First, I did not say the article upset me I said it made me uncomfortable but needed to be addressed, I didn't attack the subject, I mainly only said I had a problem with the title being misleading relative to the content and suggested merging it with the buy-in article. As an article on disempowerment it isn't very strong as it stands since most of the article is taken up by duplicating the explanation of buy-in that already exists in your other article. You seem to have a major problem with editorial criticism, but this is Lunarpedia, not Rileypedia :-)
		+
		+	:Second, I'm very much aware of the current reality and in fact spent most of last week dealing with that current reality while traveling. I have no way of knowing how much of that ''reality'' is real and how much is hype though. Nor has anyone outside certain very elevated circles. I've even found that people working in anti terrorism don't know how much of their working knowledge is true, they just take it at face value and do their job. I know how that feels, I've had to deal with it too.
		+
		+	:Third, the war on terror can really only be credited for lack of a return to the moon in the last 6 years. The previous 29 years were squandered on the cold war, the shuttle to nowhere, aborted space stations, gulf war 1, the vietnam war, fuel crises, iranian hostage crisis, bombing libya, star wars, lebanon, falklands, grenada, russian invasion of afghanistan, funding mujahedeen, iran contras, war on drugs etc. Basically governments (note the plural) have been getting in the way of space development for 60 years because they want to reserve it for military and use it as a sink for funding so they can take it away from space to give to other fields when they need to. In other words, NASA, the RSA in Russia and ESA have basically been getting in the way by virtue of keeping space as an exclusive club on behalf of their government sponsors. (ESA is a private corporation but is directly funded by European governments).
		+
		+	:Fourth, many people have little or no faith in NASA returning to the moon because NASA is an arm of the US government which itself does not seem interested in anything other than raising revenue. There is also the element of corruption that exists within all governments worldwide. Representatives all over the world seem to do very well for themselves while in government, mostly by becoming high paid chairpersons of large corporations.
		+
		+	:I personally do not see government or government agencies as the answer to our return to the moon problems. In fact government seems to be causing most of the everyday problems we have in the world today that are stifling growth in certain areas.
		+
		+	:-- [[User:Mdelaney\|Mdelaney]] 03:11, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

	----		----

@@ Line 56: / Line 56: @@
 ----
-A poor person with a plane ticket funded by a rich fanatic could cause all kinds of havoc on arrival, especially if given various materials by an existing cell.
+A poor person with a plane ticket funded by a rich fanatic could cause all kinds of havoc on arrival, especially if given various materials by an existing cell.  Don't discount the poor true believers.
---[[User:Miros1|Rose/Miros]] 15:31, 16 August 2007 (UTC)====
+--[[User:Miros1|Rose/Miros]] 15:31, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

@@ Line 22: / Line 22: @@
-If this article does not up set you, you simply have not been paying attention to our present reality.
+If this article does not upset you, you simply have not been paying attention to our present reality.
 ----
@@ Line 46: / Line 46: @@
 The poor and disenfranchised are going to laugh in your face when you tell them they are going to fail.  Their lives are so horrid that the only way out they can see is to earn rewards in the next life, and get there a little early.  Since you cannot absolutely prove that they're wrong, you're not going to convince them.  Or are you going to override the circuits for religion too?
-[[User:Miros1|Rose/Miros]] 01:05, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
+--[[User:Miros1|Rose/Miros]] 01:05, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
 ----
@@ Line 55: / Line 55: @@
 ----

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:47, 14 August 2007
Line 47:		Line 47:

	[[User:Miros1\|Rose/Miros]] 01:05, 14 August 2007 (UTC)		[[User:Miros1\|Rose/Miros]] 01:05, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
		+
		+	----
		+
		+	You are exactly correct. This approach is specifically for technically educated people. Technically educated people can fly airplanes into American buildings. The street poor can throw rocks and bottles in foreign slums. The damage technically educated people can do is exponentially higher than poor people.
		+
		+	--[[User:Jriley\|Jriley]] 12:47, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
		+
		+	----

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:05, 14 August 2007
Line 44:		Line 44:
	I think the only terrorists this approach is likely to Disempower are the fairly well educated, fairly well off, which is the minority of the terrorists.		I think the only terrorists this approach is likely to Disempower are the fairly well educated, fairly well off, which is the minority of the terrorists.

−	The poor and disenfranchised are going to laugh in your face when you tell them they are going to fail. Their lives are so horrid that the only way out they can see is to earn rewards in the next life, and get there a little early. Since you cannot prove ~~beyond a reasonable doubt~~ that they're wrong, you're not going to convince them.	+	The poor and disenfranchised are going to laugh in your face when you tell them they are going to fail. Their lives are so horrid that the only way out they can see is to earn rewards in the next life, and get there a little early. Since you cannot absolutely prove that they're wrong, you're not going to convince them. Or are you going to override the circuits for religion too?
		+
		+	[[User:Miros1\|Rose/Miros]] 01:05, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:03, 14 August 2007
Line 41:		Line 41:

	----		----
		+
		+	I think the only terrorists this approach is likely to Disempower are the fairly well educated, fairly well off, which is the minority of the terrorists.
		+
		+	The poor and disenfranchised are going to laugh in your face when you tell them they are going to fail. Their lives are so horrid that the only way out they can see is to earn rewards in the next life, and get there a little early. Since you cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they're wrong, you're not going to convince them.

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:23, 13 August 2007
Line 28:		Line 28:
	One of the main reasons we do not now have an aggressive Return to the Moon program is the extremely high cost of the War on Terror. Not only are most of the available funds being used up but we are running up high debts what will last for decades.		One of the main reasons we do not now have an aggressive Return to the Moon program is the extremely high cost of the War on Terror. Not only are most of the available funds being used up but we are running up high debts what will last for decades.

−
	NASA is being cut back and the number of young people hired and trained is falling off. The period between the retirement of the Shuttle and the first lunar flights will particularly dangerous to our space fairing capabilities.		NASA is being cut back and the number of young people hired and trained is falling off. The period between the retirement of the Shuttle and the first lunar flights will particularly dangerous to our space fairing capabilities.

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:21, 13 August 2007
Line 18:		Line 18:

	:-- [[User:Mdelaney\|Mdelaney]] 15:24, 13 August 2007 (UTC)		:-- [[User:Mdelaney\|Mdelaney]] 15:24, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
		+
		+	== Terrorism and returning to the Moon ==
		+
		+
		+	If this article does not up set you, you simply have not been paying attention to our present reality.
		+
		+	----
		+
		+	One of the main reasons we do not now have an aggressive Return to the Moon program is the extremely high cost of the War on Terror. Not only are most of the available funds being used up but we are running up high debts what will last for decades.
		+
		+
		+	NASA is being cut back and the number of young people hired and trained is falling off. The period between the retirement of the Shuttle and the first lunar flights will particularly dangerous to our space fairing capabilities.
		+
		+	For our return to the Moon, this war is the elephant in the pallor. If we do not address this problem, we are not going.
		+
		+	An alternative to an endless war must be found. Understanding buy-in to enable disempowerment of terrorist is one possible path. It is one that can be understood and supported by technically trained people. It can be our contribution to this effort. And it is very, very cheap.
		+
		+	-----
		+
		+	Why this approach has a good chance of working is a little more technically and socially complicated. I will take the action item to write up an implementation section for this article next week.
		+
		+	--[[User:Jriley\|Jriley]] 21:21, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
		+
		+	----