Re: Job Offer

On Tue, 18 Mar 2025 05:44:41 -0400, zen cycle
<funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:

On 3/17/2025 9:00 PM, John B. wrote:

On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 11:22:38 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:
 

On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 14:10:39 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:
>

On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 22:40:26 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:

Education can also be a weapon.  Education can be used for the general
good and for personal benefit.  However, it can also be used for evil
and personal detriment.  For example, I consider working on military
devices and weapons of mass destruction to be in the latter category.

>
Why ever did you immigrate to the U.S.  At war with someone.some where
for 90% or more of their history. Even Israel has to stretch to keep
up with them :-)

>
Immigration to US wasn't my decision.  I was 5 or 6 years old when my
parents dragged me kicking and screaming to the land where the streets
are paved with gold.  Actually, after WWII and the concentration
camps, the US looked much better than all the other countries that had
been trashed by WWII.  Almost every displaced Jew wanted to relocate
to Israel after WWII.  Most of my relatives went to Israel.  A few
idiots went back to Poland or worse.  The problem was that the British
"owned" Israel and didn't like the idea of a mass Jewish exodus to the
promised land.  They didn't allow immigration to Israel until 1948,
the year I was born:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandatory_Palestine>
>
What's different about US wars is that most of them involved fighting
someone else's war or revolution as a result of entangled alliances.
Other countries had the same problem, but were generally smart enough
to default on their promises when the results of a war or revolution
were not guaranteed.
>

Drivel:  I have a headache and need to stop writing.

 
Read some history. The bulk of U.S. "wars" were not defense from
attack, but rather the opposite.

>
I'm pretty sure that's what Jeff wrote.

Sorta.  I never mentioned defensive or offensive wars.  I meant was
that the US was the hired gun for conflicts started by other nations.
The US likes to present itself as a "peace keeper".  That means it has
the legal right and military muscle to interfere in any conflict that
might result in something unfavorable to the US.  Again, notice that
there's no mention of attack or defense.  It's been like that since
the Monroe Doctrine:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monroe_Doctrine>
"It holds that any intervention in the political affairs of the
Americas by foreign powers is a potentially hostile act against the
United States."

"most of them involved fighting someone else's war or revolution as a
result of entangled alliances"

Yep, that's what I wrote.  However, the rest of the paragraph is
equally important. 

The entangled alliances problem is what caused WWI to grow so quickly.
The US wisely recognized the problem and avoided such alliances prior
to WWII.  The US would never have been involved in a global war if
Germany hadn't declared war on the US which didn't require any tangled
alliances.  The rest is the domino effect.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domino_effect>

I have the book "The Atlas of Modern Warfare" by Cook and Stevenson
(1978).
<https://www.amazon.com/-/es/Chris-Cook/dp/0399121730>
It describes most of the known alliances that eventually propagated
wars.  It doesn't matter who or what starts a war.  What's important
is how various countries get dragged into the war.  The book is
thoroughly out of date, but still interesting reading.  The first
hundred pages is on the various international conflicts.  The 2nd 100
pages is on the weaponry used.




--
Jeff Liebermann                 jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272      http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann      AE6KS    831-336-2558