Off Topic: NMD/Environment was: (Re: Ada and the NMD)

["Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org>]

This is all drifting way off topic and into the realm of political opinions.

Let me ask this though (now that I have marked the subject line as off
topic):

If the Kyoto treaty is such a wonderful thing, why don't the Europeans just
go ahead and sign it themselves? Why do they need us to sign it for them?
Why shouldn't the US make its own decisions about what is in the best
interest of the US and all the rest of the world can do the same? If France,
Germany, England, et alia, all *love* this treaty so much and think it is in
their best interest, well, let them put their John Handcock on the bottom
line.

Or is this some version of the "Misery Loves Company" rule?

BTW: I like the observation about "solutions" - It seems that if one
disagrees with a solution proposed by certain groups then there is some sort
of automatic condemnation as being against the *goals* of that group. Maybe
I disagree with a *lot* of opinions about how to cure crime, poverty,
unemployment, disease and ignorance. But that doesn't mean that by that same
fact, I must be in *favor* of crime, poverty, unemployment, disease and
ignorance.

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com
Web:      http://www.mcondic.com/


"James Rogers" <jimmaureenrogers@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:3B9795E1.54B12E70@worldnet.att.net...
>
> I think you have been listening to too much propaganda and drivel
> on the news.
>
> The current US government cares deeply about the environment. It
> simply does not agree with certain international political "solutions".
>
> The US abandonment of the Kyoto treaty is not actually far from the
> EU position. In the EU politicians give verbal support for the
> Kyoto treaty but somehow fail to provide the funding necessary for
> its implementation. In the US we simply state that the Kyoto treaty is
> fundamentally flawed and will not be ratified.
>
> Any agreement to save our environment must be based upon scientific
> evidence and scientifically sound environmental management programs.
> Unfortuntely, treaties such as the one developed at the Kyoto
> conference are more about political attempts to control first world
> economies than about sound scientific efforts.
>
> President Bush has made it clear that he is willing to work for the
> improvement of the environment, so long as agreements are based
> upon a sound scientific foundation.
>