| Submit your comments on this article |
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
| 1st strike on Iran 'gaining traction' |
| 2005-05-04 |
| Report urges U.S., Israel to consider pre-emptive attack against Tehran By Aaron Klein More mind games with the MM? A bit long, article at link |
| Posted by:Anonymous5089 |
| #16 Note that Russia still hasn't shipped the fuel rods, which it was supposed to have done months ago. |
| Posted by: someone 2005-05-04 19:34 |
| #15 I think you miss understand QED. ''That which was to be demonstrated'' is correct, but it means the preceding statement has proved/demonstrated what needed to be proved/demonstrtated prior to the statement. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2005-05-04 18:15 |
| #14 I would like an understanding of what was meant by the one comment to the effect that they needed a 100 % success in the attack. I could see like but need gets into a strange logical area. |
| Posted by: 3dc 2005-05-04 17:23 |
| #13 You mean Chief SohCahToa from Krakatoa? Man, when will it end? And I knew what M.A.D. stood for, just wondered what Q.E.D. stood for! Thanks all for taking me back to H.S. latin class! |
| Posted by: BA 2005-05-04 15:49 |
| #12 RC - That's CHIEF Sohcahtoa. ;) |
| Posted by: Laurence of the Rats 2005-05-04 2:40:06 PM |
| #11 Illegitimati non carborundum. Don't let the bastards grind you down. |
| Posted by: molokai_man 2005-05-04 14:34 |
| #10 Geometry teacher? Sohcahtoa. |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2005-05-04 14:19 |
| #9 Lol! Sheesh. I happily admit I thought it was usable in either a past or present tense - thus I had it precisely backwards since most of you indicate future tense. Thx for the corrections... All of them, lol! Um, what about the topic? Y'know the TOPIC thingy? What the article is about? Lol! |
| Posted by: .com 2005-05-04 12:37 |
| #8 ''Which was to be proved''...this from the same geometry teacher that gave my class, at the end of a proof, I.O.T.T.M.C.O. - and then turned around and waited for the class to ask..... Intuitively Obvious To The Most Casual Observer. © |
| Posted by: Bobby 2005-05-04 12:23 |
| #7 I always thought it meant ''Thus has it been demonstrated''... |
| Posted by: mojo 2005-05-04 11:58 |
| #6 It means ''That which was to be demonstrated''. Ya know, the future intensive command voice fricative thingy . . . |
| Posted by: AlmostAnonymous6392 2005-05-04 11:40 |
| #5 I think he meant Q.E.D. Quod Erat Demonstratum* Latin for ''That which is demonstrated'' *my spelling may be off, it's been a few years since I took Latin. |
| Posted by: DanNY 2005-05-04 09:59 |
| #4 M.A.D., or ''Mutually Assured Destruction'' was a cold-war term that meant that neither the US nor the Soviet Union could launch a nuclear strike without receiving an equally destructive retaliation, ''destroying'' both sides. (I have hypothesized that M.A.D. has been enlarged into an anti-proliferation threat. By agreement among the major nuclear powers, it would work this way: if a country like Iran were to use a nuclear weapon aggressively, then their entire country would be attacked with airburst neutron bombs, killing all lifeforms, but leaving little contamination and not destroying buildings and other property. Then that now sterilized country would be given to the victim nation as ''reparations''. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2005-05-04 09:42 |
| #3 Q.E.D., .com? I've been off away from computer for a while. Please ''enlighten'' me as to what that means. |
| Posted by: BA 2005-05-04 09:30 |
| #2 Ironic, isn't it? M.A.D. only works if the parties to it are sane. Q.E.D. |
| Posted by: .com 2005-05-04 08:47 |
| #1 Khamenei has many times stated he would ''vaporize the Zionist entity'' if Iran obtained a nuclear bomb. Words occasionally have consequences Mr.MM, now that you're on the verge of being able to make good on your threat, I certainly hope yours gets YOU vaporized in the very near future. |
| Posted by: JerseyMike 2005-05-04 07:57 |