12Bravo wrote on 01/09/13 at 20:10:08:



You see that would make a decent argument ... if the ones who have served are actually not part of the Military industrial complex.

Much like the gun nuts answer to all the gun related violence ... more guns.
Life is like calculus.

Say x is the number of lets say taco's available to "a" - a constant number of people. How many taco's would they eat - I'll guess x. - But if I want to be glib about it, I'll say its a function of x
OK so if you change the number of taco's ... so x is variable.
How many taco's will they eat as x varies ... easy my friends, its rate of change is = differential of the function of x/differential of x - you see we dont need to know the number exactly at any given point.
And if x->0 aka, there are nearly no taco's ... you'd not eat ... any taco's.

That I would guess works that same way with guns ... or bullets. The whole gun nut argument is that ... that cant be possible, its not a solution, we will shoot it down. Ping pongs are dangerous and killing people. we need our guns to shoot ping pongs when ping pongs attack. Not to mention when soccers and hockeys attack.

Cool.
Srinath.

Actually, my basic premise is that the best war is the one not fought.  The second best war, the one fought somewhere else.  The worst kind is where your home town gets blown up , occupied and then levelled.  Speaking of King of the Hill and Wales...is that where the Englishman climbed up a hill and came down from a mountian (a rather neat movie I thought).  

We need 14 aircraft carriers but couldn't manage to keep a few planes off the coast of Libyia?????