EAGLE Netlist conversion

Jim Thompson · Mar 2, 2005

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 18:47:50 -0500, Boris Mohar
<borism_-void-_@sympatico.ca> wrote:

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 16:36:45 -0700, Jim Thompson <thegreatone@example.com
wrote:

Canada has recently decided to withdraw from the North American
Missile Defense Agreement.

Today, Paul Martin, the Prime Minister of Canada, has declared we (the
USA) will have to ask permission before shooting down missiles (for
example, originating from North Korea) over Canadian airspace.

Bwahahahahaha!

With what army will PM Martin be enforcing such a ludicrous statement?

So every political statement that our prime minister makes has to be
enforced with a point of a gun? "Yeah, lets shoot a round over their bow to
see if they are friendly"

I just love it when sissies try to talk tough, Martin must be French
;-)

Seems Canada's principal worry should be whether the Koreans are
sufficiently competent to CLEAR Canadian airspace!

Korea is not your problem. It is you WANT for an enemy that is the problem.

Bye, bye, Toronto ;-)

...Jim Thompson

I see that you are cooking with wine again Jim.

480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax

Robert Monsen · Mar 2, 2005

Jim Thompson wrote:

Canada has recently decided to withdraw from the North American
Missile Defense Agreement.

Today, Paul Martin, the Prime Minister of Canada, has declared we (the
USA) will have to ask permission before shooting down missiles (for
example, originating from North Korea) over Canadian airspace.

Bwahahahahaha!

With what army will PM Martin be enforcing such a ludicrous statement?

Seems Canada's principal worry should be whether the Koreans are
sufficiently competent to CLEAR Canadian airspace!

Bye, bye, Toronto ;-)

...Jim Thompson

Considering the consistent failures of tests of the 'missle shield',
this is probably a prudent move. No telling where some 'anti-missle'
will land, or what airliner it'll decide to take out. The thing would
probably do more damage when it goes out of control than some imaginary
korean nuke would ever do.

http://www.theregister.com/2004/05/20/patriot_missile/

--
Regards,
Robert Monsen

"Your Highness, I have no need of this hypothesis."
- Pierre Laplace (1749-1827), to Napoleon,
on why his works on celestial mechanics make no mention of God.

John Stewart · Mar 2, 2005

Robert Monsen wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
Canada has recently decided to withdraw from the North American
Missile Defense Agreement.

Today, Paul Martin, the Prime Minister of Canada, has declared we (the
USA) will have to ask permission before shooting down missiles (for
example, originating from North Korea) over Canadian airspace.

Bwahahahahaha!

With what army will PM Martin be enforcing such a ludicrous statement?

Seems Canada's principal worry should be whether the Koreans are
sufficiently competent to CLEAR Canadian airspace!

Bye, bye, Toronto ;-)

...Jim Thompson

Considering the consistent failures of tests of the 'missle shield',
this is probably a prudent move. No telling where some 'anti-missle'
will land, or what airliner it'll decide to take out. The thing would
probably do more damage when it goes out of control than some imaginary
korean nuke would ever do.

http://www.theregister.com/2004/05/20/patriot_missile/

--
Regards,
Robert Monsen

"Your Highness, I have no need of this hypothesis."
- Pierre Laplace (1749-1827), to Napoleon,
on why his works on celestial mechanics make no mention of God.

Wrong Way Corrigan's ghost may still be with us. That way the missle will
destroy Lower California. Vincenti Fox will be a little
pissed!! JLS

Jim Thompson · Mar 2, 2005

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 20:17:12 -0500, John Stewart
<jh.stewart@sympatico.ca> wrote:

Robert Monsen wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
Canada has recently decided to withdraw from the North American
Missile Defense Agreement.

Today, Paul Martin, the Prime Minister of Canada, has declared we (the
USA) will have to ask permission before shooting down missiles (for
example, originating from North Korea) over Canadian airspace.

Bwahahahahaha!

With what army will PM Martin be enforcing such a ludicrous statement?

Seems Canada's principal worry should be whether the Koreans are
sufficiently competent to CLEAR Canadian airspace!

Bye, bye, Toronto ;-)

...Jim Thompson

Considering the consistent failures of tests of the 'missle shield',
this is probably a prudent move. No telling where some 'anti-missle'
will land, or what airliner it'll decide to take out. The thing would
probably do more damage when it goes out of control than some imaginary
korean nuke would ever do.

http://www.theregister.com/2004/05/20/patriot_missile/

--
Regards,
Robert Monsen

"Your Highness, I have no need of this hypothesis."
- Pierre Laplace (1749-1827), to Napoleon,
on why his works on celestial mechanics make no mention of God.

Wrong Way Corrigan's ghost may still be with us. That way the missle will
destroy Lower California. Vincenti Fox will be a little
pissed!! JLS

480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax

Spehro Pefhany · Mar 2, 2005

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 16:36:45 -0700, the renowned Jim Thompson
<thegreatone@example.com> wrote:

Canada has recently decided to withdraw from the North American
Missile Defense Agreement.

Not withdraw, just not actively join in, other than through NORAD.
Apparently it will make no practical difference in any case.

P.M. Martin currently heads a "minority government", meaning that he
has to be unusually sensitive to the wishes of the electorate. His
government would likely have fallen had he tried to ram such an
unpopular program through. Public opposition to participation is 3 to
2 in English Canada and 3 to 1 in Quebec. Democracy can be like that.

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

Robert Monsen · Mar 2, 2005

John Larkin wrote:

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 16:46:09 -0800, Robert Monsen
rcsurname@comcast.net> wrote:

Considering the consistent failures of tests of the 'missle shield',
this is probably a prudent move. No telling where some 'anti-missle'
will land, or what airliner it'll decide to take out. The thing would
probably do more damage when it goes out of control than some imaginary
korean nuke would ever do.

Kinetic impact is a silly way to kill an incoming nuke. The sensible
thing to do is pop up a clean megaton-level warhead of our own.
Anywhere within 50 miles would do, there's much less problem about
decoys (just vaporize everything) and there's absolutely no problem
about where it might land.

John

Yet another reason for the canucks to freak out about this whole thing.
An airburst would take out every computer, TV, radio, and telephone
within 100 miles, while letting the stupid V2 the koreans would probably
be using fly through to SF unscathed.

Actually, the best (only good?) idea to come out of star wars was
"brilliant pebbles", which are impact devices, thousands of them, which
swarm at anything they are aimed at. They are small enough to burn up
before they hit the ground. It was squashed by the Clinton gang in 93,
but was the frontrunner for missle defense under GHWB. Sure was nice not
to have anybody major gunning for us.

http://www.missilethreat.com/systems/bp_usa.html

--
Regards,
Robert Monsen

"Your Highness, I have no need of this hypothesis."
- Pierre Laplace (1749-1827), to Napoleon,
on why his works on celestial mechanics make no mention of God.

Luhan Monat · Mar 2, 2005

JeffM wrote:

:Since a "shot down" missile would probably land on Canada
:those Canucks better get started
n an "anti-anti-missile-missile" system.
: Dave
:

I just love it when sissies try to talk tough
Jim Thompson

Yeah, and it facinates me when Hawks talk about "Missle Defense":

*If* the Patriot has ever destroyed a booster,
http://216.239.63.104/search?q=cache:SEVKodRyajAJ:www.cdi.org/issues/bmd/Patriot.html+Patriot's-intercept-rate+zero-+*-average-*-three-interceptors-*-*-*-*-Scud
the warhead was left intact to impact near the original target.

The only time those boys can hit something in the South Pacific
is when they rig the test.
http://news.google.com/news?&q=missile+test+rigged

We need a defense system to deflect incomming insults.

--
Luhan Monat (luhanis 'at' yahoo 'dot' com)
"The future is not what it used to be..."
http://members.cox.net/berniekm

Tom Del Rosso · Mar 2, 2005

"Boris Mohar" <borism_-void-_@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:6cv9211ldunq5ca6ul526ff8i50ka0n9tu@4ax.com...

So every political statement that our prime minister makes has to be
enforced with a point of a gun? "Yeah, lets shoot a round over their bow
to
see if they are friendly"

I humbly request that you stand in the middle of a street and don't move
when a car comes toward you.

If you suggest that you would never do this unless forced to do so, then I
will accuse you of belligerence because you are requiring me to use force.

--

Reply in group, but if emailing add
2 more zeros and remove the obvious.

Brad Velander · Mar 2, 2005

Spehro,
Glad someone pointed out that it was not a withdrawal from
any existing agreement, just a decision to not join the new one.
So much for knowledgeable comments.
Now if we could only get that big irregularly shaped
bulls-eye below the 49th to move we could be threat free and not
need any defense except for those instances we take upon
ourselves willingly.

--
Sincerely,
Brad Velander

"Spehro Pefhany" <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote in
message news:5e6a21t3g17i82c22unho8risr7c9lghqk@4ax.com...

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 16:36:45 -0700, the renowned Jim Thompson
thegreatone@example.com> wrote:

Canada has recently decided to withdraw from the North
American
Missile Defense Agreement.

Not withdraw, just not actively join in, other than through
NORAD.
Apparently it will make no practical difference in any case.

P.M. Martin currently heads a "minority government", meaning
that he
has to be unusually sensitive to the wishes of the electorate.
His
government would likely have fallen had he tried to ram such an
unpopular program through. Public opposition to participation
is 3 to
2 in English Canada and 3 to 1 in Quebec. Democracy can be like
that.

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany

legg · Mar 2, 2005

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 16:36:45 -0700, Jim Thompson
<thegreatone@example.com> wrote:

Canada has recently decided to withdraw from the North American
Missile Defense Agreement.

Today, Paul Martin, the Prime Minister of Canada, has declared we (the
USA) will have to ask permission before shooting down missiles (for
example, originating from North Korea) over Canadian airspace.

Bwahahahahaha!

With what army will PM Martin be enforcing such a ludicrous statement?

Seems Canada's principal worry should be whether the Koreans are
sufficiently competent to CLEAR Canadian airspace!

Bye, bye, Toronto ;-)

Stick to what you're good at.

The US would get pretty hot under the collar if anybody fired missiles
over their territory, whether or not it was 'in defence'.

Such defence is more correctly conducted under current NORAD.

RL

legg · Mar 2, 2005

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 19:16:05 -0800, John Larkin
<jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandPLEASEtechnology.XXX> wrote:

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 16:46:09 -0800, Robert Monsen
rcsurname@comcast.net> wrote:

Considering the consistent failures of tests of the 'missle shield',
this is probably a prudent move. No telling where some 'anti-missle'
will land, or what airliner it'll decide to take out. The thing would
probably do more damage when it goes out of control than some imaginary
korean nuke would ever do.

Kinetic impact is a silly way to kill an incoming nuke. The sensible
thing to do is pop up a clean megaton-level warhead of our own.
Anywhere within 50 miles would do, there's much less problem about
decoys (just vaporize everything) and there's absolutely no problem
about where it might land.

That has been the intended defense tactic since 1950, though you seem
to have the effective radius and means of damage delivery a little
confused.

I don't think this method works well on ICBMs, for a number of
reasons.

RL

Jim Thompson · Mar 2, 2005

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 21:36:44 -0500, Boris Mohar
<borism_-void-_@sympatico.ca> wrote:

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 17:11:17 -0700, Jim Thompson <thegreatone@example.com
wrote:

...Jim Thompson

I see that you are cooking with wine again Jim.

"It is you WANT for an enemy that is the problem."

Than is not even a sentence. I rest my case
--

Boris Mohar

I was QUOTING someone else's nonsensical sentence back to them. Was
that you ?

480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax

John Larkin · Mar 2, 2005

On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 07:09:14 GMT, legg <legg@nospam.magma.ca> wrote:

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 19:16:05 -0800, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandPLEASEtechnology.XXX> wrote:

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 16:46:09 -0800, Robert Monsen
rcsurname@comcast.net> wrote:

Considering the consistent failures of tests of the 'missle shield',
this is probably a prudent move. No telling where some 'anti-missle'
will land, or what airliner it'll decide to take out. The thing would
probably do more damage when it goes out of control than some imaginary
korean nuke would ever do.

Kinetic impact is a silly way to kill an incoming nuke. The sensible
thing to do is pop up a clean megaton-level warhead of our own.
Anywhere within 50 miles would do, there's much less problem about
decoys (just vaporize everything) and there's absolutely no problem
about where it might land.

That has been the intended defense tactic since 1950, though you seem
to have the effective radius and means of damage delivery a little
confused.

You seem to have confused discussion with insulting.

The damage depends on the radius; ionization, vaporization, pulse
heating, radiation detonation of onboard explosives, seu
damage/scrambling of electronics, emp, stuff like that. It has a lot
higher probability of kill than impact.

I don't think this method works well on ICBMs, for a number of
reasons.

It allows miles-range kills (instead of meters-away misses) and helps
the decoy situation immensely. The whole point of ABMs is to sustain
deterrance.

John

Jim Thompson · Mar 2, 2005

On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 08:20:02 -0800, John Larkin
<jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandPLEASEtechnology.XXX> wrote:

On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 06:53:36 GMT, legg <legg@nospam.magma.ca> wrote:

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 16:36:45 -0700, Jim Thompson
thegreatone@example.com> wrote:

Canada has recently decided to withdraw from the North American
Missile Defense Agreement.

Today, Paul Martin, the Prime Minister of Canada, has declared we (the
USA) will have to ask permission before shooting down missiles (for
example, originating from North Korea) over Canadian airspace.

Bwahahahahaha!

With what army will PM Martin be enforcing such a ludicrous statement?

Seems Canada's principal worry should be whether the Koreans are
sufficiently competent to CLEAR Canadian airspace!

Bye, bye, Toronto ;-)

Stick to what you're good at.

The US would get pretty hot under the collar if anybody fired missiles
over their territory, whether or not it was 'in defence'.

So we should sacrifice entire cities to Canada's political
sensitivities?

John

480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax

John Larkin · Mar 2, 2005

On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 06:53:36 GMT, legg <legg@nospam.magma.ca> wrote:

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 16:36:45 -0700, Jim Thompson
thegreatone@example.com> wrote:

Canada has recently decided to withdraw from the North American
Missile Defense Agreement.

Today, Paul Martin, the Prime Minister of Canada, has declared we (the
USA) will have to ask permission before shooting down missiles (for
example, originating from North Korea) over Canadian airspace.

Bwahahahahaha!

With what army will PM Martin be enforcing such a ludicrous statement?

Seems Canada's principal worry should be whether the Koreans are
sufficiently competent to CLEAR Canadian airspace!

Bye, bye, Toronto ;-)

Stick to what you're good at.

The US would get pretty hot under the collar if anybody fired missiles
over their territory, whether or not it was 'in defence'.

So we should sacrifice entire cities to Canada's political
sensitivities?

John

Spehro Pefhany · Mar 2, 2005

On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 08:17:46 -0800, the renowned John Larkin
<jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandPLEASEtechnology.XXX> wrote:

The whole point of ABMs is to sustain deterrance.

Nah, to the extent they may work, they are a scheme to gain
first-strike capability over other countries, and thus make it easier
to threaten them with a first use of nuclear weapons or subject them
to conventional attack.

Submarines provide guaranteed survivable and robust response to an
enemy first strike, so the ABMs are most certainly not required for
that.

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

Jim Thompson · Mar 2, 2005

On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 12:00:51 -0500, Spehro Pefhany
<speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 09:19:17 -0700, the renowned Jim Thompson
thegreatone@example.com> wrote:

Yep, Canadian cities.

Actually we should just send all the beef back, quoting Spehro, that's
the way democracy works ;-)

...Jim Thompson

Don't "forget" to send all the oil, gas and electricity back too. ;-)

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany

480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax

Spehro Pefhany · Mar 2, 2005

On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 10:00:46 -0700, the renowned Jim Thompson
<thegreatone@example.com> wrote:

On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 12:00:51 -0500, Spehro Pefhany
speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 09:19:17 -0700, the renowned Jim Thompson
thegreatone@example.com> wrote:

Yep, Canadian cities.

Actually we should just send all the beef back, quoting Spehro, that's
the way democracy works ;-)

...Jim Thompson

Don't "forget" to send all the oil, gas and electricity back too. ;-)

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany

What percentage of our gross energy consumption would that be?

...Jim Thompson

About 17% of US crude oil imports (biggest supplier).

NAFTA was a lousy deal for Canada in that it ceded much sovereignty
over energy resources and investment review-- re-negotiating it is a
*good* idea (only 6 months notice required). Also to deal with
"issues" where the agreement is being systematically violated over a
period of years on behalf of US special interests such as softwood
lumber. What's the point of an agreement if the other side ignores it
at will while insisting on the terms beneficial to themselves?

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

Black · Mar 2, 2005

Who needs missiles when you can hijack a couple of airplanes to do the job
.....

"Jim Thompson" <thegreatone@example.com> wrote in message
news:bfu9211o4l5v2ton9578o82jkscnholr4f@4ax.com...

Canada has recently decided to withdraw from the North American
Missile Defense Agreement.

Today, Paul Martin, the Prime Minister of Canada, has declared we (the
USA) will have to ask permission before shooting down missiles (for
example, originating from North Korea) over Canadian airspace.

Bwahahahahaha!

With what army will PM Martin be enforcing such a ludicrous statement?

Seems Canada's principal worry should be whether the Koreans are
sufficiently competent to CLEAR Canadian airspace!

Bye, bye, Toronto ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

Spehro Pefhany · Mar 2, 2005

On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 17:00:04 GMT, the renowned "Michael A. Terrell"
<mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:

Spehro Pefhany wrote:

Don't "forget" to send all the oil, gas and electricity back too. ;-)

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany

Only if you send all the money back first!

In US dollars? Sure, there's an easy 300% return. ;-)

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

EAGLE Netlist conversion

Jim Thompson

Guest

Robert Monsen

Guest

John Stewart

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Spehro Pefhany

Guest

Robert Monsen

Guest

Luhan Monat

Guest

Tom Del Rosso

Guest

Brad Velander

Guest

legg

Guest

legg

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

John Larkin

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

John Larkin

Guest

Spehro Pefhany

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Spehro Pefhany

Guest

Black

Guest

Spehro Pefhany

Guest

Log in

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor