If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#941
|
|||
|
|||
Ride an SUB not an SUV
"Bill" > wrote in message . net... > Nate Nagel wrote: >> George Conklin wrote: >>> >>> Quick.....call up Toyota and tell them about this. >>> >>> >> >> They're probably evaluating them already. An ultra-cap does have some >> advantages over the batteries. >> >> nate >> > They should be. It's the best thing I have seen in capacitors for quite a > while. At least someone knows what an ultra-cap is. I don't know... Aren't those the same thing Dr. Emmett Brown was using in 1985? -Amy |
Ads |
#942
|
|||
|
|||
Ride an SUB not an SUV
Amy Blankenship wrote:
> "Bill" > wrote in message > . net... >> Nate Nagel wrote: >>> George Conklin wrote: >>>> Quick.....call up Toyota and tell them about this. >>>> >>>> >>> They're probably evaluating them already. An ultra-cap does have some >>> advantages over the batteries. >>> >>> nate >>> >> They should be. It's the best thing I have seen in capacitors for quite a >> while. At least someone knows what an ultra-cap is. > > I don't know... Aren't those the same thing Dr. Emmett Brown was using in > 1985? > > -Amy > > Not FLUX capacitors. Time storage in a bottle? Bill Baka |
#943
|
|||
|
|||
Ride an SUB not an SUV
"Bill" > wrote in message t... > Amy Blankenship wrote: >> "Bill" > wrote in message >> . net... >>> Nate Nagel wrote: >>>> George Conklin wrote: >>>>> Quick.....call up Toyota and tell them about this. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> They're probably evaluating them already. An ultra-cap does have some >>>> advantages over the batteries. >>>> >>>> nate >>>> >>> They should be. It's the best thing I have seen in capacitors for quite >>> a while. At least someone knows what an ultra-cap is. >> >> I don't know... Aren't those the same thing Dr. Emmett Brown was using in >> 1985? >> >> -Amy > Not FLUX capacitors. > Time storage in a bottle? If I could save Time in a bottle The first thing that Id like to do Is to save every day Til Eternity passes away Just to spend them with you Don't take it personally, Bill... It's just a song ;-) |
#944
|
|||
|
|||
Ride an SUB not an SUV
Amy Blankenship wrote:
> "Bill" > wrote in message > t... >> Amy Blankenship wrote: >>> "Bill" > wrote in message >>> . net... >>>> Nate Nagel wrote: >>>>> George Conklin wrote: >>>>>> Quick.....call up Toyota and tell them about this. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> They're probably evaluating them already. An ultra-cap does have some >>>>> advantages over the batteries. >>>>> >>>>> nate >>>>> >>>> They should be. It's the best thing I have seen in capacitors for quite >>>> a while. At least someone knows what an ultra-cap is. >>> I don't know... Aren't those the same thing Dr. Emmett Brown was using in >>> 1985? >>> >>> -Amy >> Not FLUX capacitors. >> Time storage in a bottle? > > If I could save Time in a bottle > The first thing that Id like to do > Is to save every day > Til Eternity passes away > Just to spend them with you > > Don't take it personally, Bill... It's just a song ;-) > > I know, the tune came up in my head. That was a good time for me when that song came out. Time flies when you aren't looking. Bill (rained out day of reminiscence) Baka |
#946
|
|||
|
|||
Iraq responsibility was promoting "smart growth"
dgk > wrote in
: > On 07 May 2007 20:03:24 GMT, Chris > wrote: > (Matthew T. Russotto) wrote in : >> >>> In article >, >>> Clark F Morris > wrote: >>>> >>>>The US took on a responsibility to those who cooperated with it after >>>>the invasion. How it treats those people may determine how US troops >>>>are treated in the future. Many people are risking their lives daily >>>>to make Iraq work. I for one don't want to see them left to the >>>>tender mercies of the various groups directing the suicide bombers. >>> >>> Iraq can't work. As soon as the US leaves, the civil war will heat up >>> full time and continue until some group hostile to the US comes out on >>> top. This is inevitable, unless the US maintains the occupation >>> indefinitely. >>> >> >>I think that is the US governmaents intent > > That was unclear. Do you think the intent is to have a group hostile > to US interests come out on top, or to have a permanent occupation. I > can make a case for either. > > The permanent occupation is a likely goal, because we are, after all, > building 14 permanent bases including the "US Embassy", actually one > huge base. This will give the US control of the oil. > > However a hostile government is also a plus, depending on how one > defines US interests. If the interests are those of the average > American, this is a bad thing. But if you're talking about corporate > interests, then an enemy is great. After the collapse of the Soviet > Union, it was looking like we could actually get a reduction in > military spending, I think we were hoping for something called a > "peace dividend". > > That, however, was a threat to the corporations that make their > obscene profits from the war industries; that's what Eisenhower was > referring to with his "military-industrial complex" speech. So, we > needed another enemy. They tried using Gadaffi but even they couldn't > blow him up into a real threat. > > Of course, we managed to blow Iran into a huge threat now, so perhaps > we can just take Iraq and still have Iran as a boogyman. Yes, that's a > good plan. Something that Republicans and Democrats can agree on, > since they both feed off the GE-NBC-Etc corporate teat. Hmm, let's > see, yes, combining large "defense" industries with the dominant media > companies! What a great idea. > You hit the nail......... -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
#947
|
|||
|
|||
Iraq responsibility was promoting "smart growth"
On 07 May 2007 20:03:24 GMT, Chris > wrote:
(Matthew T. Russotto) wrote in : > >> In article >, >> Clark F Morris > wrote: >>> >>>The US took on a responsibility to those who cooperated with it after >>>the invasion. How it treats those people may determine how US troops >>>are treated in the future. Many people are risking their lives daily >>>to make Iraq work. I for one don't want to see them left to the >>>tender mercies of the various groups directing the suicide bombers. >> >> Iraq can't work. As soon as the US leaves, the civil war will heat up >> full time and continue until some group hostile to the US comes out on >> top. This is inevitable, unless the US maintains the occupation >> indefinitely. >> > >I think that is the US governmaents intent That was unclear. Do you think the intent is to have a group hostile to US interests come out on top, or to have a permanent occupation. I can make a case for either. The permanent occupation is a likely goal, because we are, after all, building 14 permanent bases including the "US Embassy", actually one huge base. This will give the US control of the oil. However a hostile government is also a plus, depending on how one defines US interests. If the interests are those of the average American, this is a bad thing. But if you're talking about corporate interests, then an enemy is great. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, it was looking like we could actually get a reduction in military spending, I think we were hoping for something called a "peace dividend". That, however, was a threat to the corporations that make their obscene profits from the war industries; that's what Eisenhower was referring to with his "military-industrial complex" speech. So, we needed another enemy. They tried using Gadaffi but even they couldn't blow him up into a real threat. Of course, we managed to blow Iran into a huge threat now, so perhaps we can just take Iraq and still have Iran as a boogyman. Yes, that's a good plan. Something that Republicans and Democrats can agree on, since they both feed off the GE-NBC-Etc corporate teat. Hmm, let's see, yes, combining large "defense" industries with the dominant media companies! What a great idea. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Pic of YOUR ride?? | 4X4PLAY | Jeep | 42 | January 10th 06 11:33 PM |
My Ride New Pic | Spike | Ford Mustang | 15 | October 14th 05 09:49 PM |
My ride... | Spike | Ford Mustang | 8 | October 11th 05 12:59 AM |
'03 Ion Ride | teem | Saturn | 5 | April 20th 05 01:20 AM |
Taken for a ride? | Dan | Mazda | 3 | February 9th 05 10:29 PM |