[ExI] QRE: barack W. obama

[*Nym*]

2009/9/29 Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com>:
> 2009/9/29 spike <spike66 at att.net>:
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
>>> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Emlyn
>>> ...
>>>
>>> I agree with what (I think) Stefano is saying. If you've got
>>> no way to legally detain these people, then let them go...
>>
>> Emlyn, what consequences could you imagine from doing that?  What message
>> would you be sending to the other aspiring terrorists?
>
> What message are you sending now? How does that compare? Surely the
> whole sending-a-message idea has been exposed as a clusterf**k by now.
>
>>> ...precedent being set here is far worse for the US than the
>>> danger posed by a handful of people...
>>
>> It isn't the handful of people that is a danger, it is the loud and clear
>> message that the US will not defend itself from terror.
>
> You can defend yourself from terror by calming down. It's an emotion.
>
> This kind of detention and warfare and what not would likely be more
> about defending yourself from hostile people intent on doing you harm.
>
> I think the world is largely clear on the idea that the US will defend
> itself against such people.

Just an idea, would it not be possible to construct small one or two
seater aircraft, powered by jet engines? These could perhaps be
capable of three or four times the top speed of large passenger
aircraft. If they were equipped with guns or rocket powered devices,
then they could be used to intercept and/or force down hijacked
aircraft, minimising the damage caused by such attacks.

I know it sounds like science fiction, but I envisage a day when
developed nations will defend themselves against attack using fleets
of high-speed monoplanes!

Heavy splashings,
Thee Nymphomation

'If you cannot afford an executioner, a duty executioner
will be appointed to you free of charge by the court'