Re: THe OverRelational Manifesto (ORM)
From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 14:20:31 GMT
Message-ID: <PS52g.63669$VV4.1190711_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
>
> To think that England and France did nothing merely because they were
> being 'polite' can only be described as ignorance (or disregard) of the
> complexities of the situation - France's general election, Britain's
> socio-economic situation, their political relationships with USSR, etc.
> ad infinitum. I defy you to find me any reputable historian who will
> state that Hitler's entry into the demilitarized zone of the Rhineland
> (hardly the first of his repudiations of the Versaille Treaty) and the
> terrible mistake of not responding to it was solely down to
> 'politeness' or perhaps being too busy drinking earl grey tea?
>
> Honestly Bob, as an an analogy of how to respond to posters like neo
> this is way off. I have a great deal of respect of your knowledge of
> database theory - why don't we stick to that on c.d.t.
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 14:20:31 GMT
Message-ID: <PS52g.63669$VV4.1190711_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
JOG wrote:
>>JOG wrote: >> >> >>>paul c wrote: >>> >>> >>>>Marshall Spight wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>... >>>>>I still don't like name-calling, though. I still think it's >>>>>intellectually >>>>>unnecessary, and I still think ad-hominem reasoning is >>>>>logically invalid. >>>>>... >>>> >>>>A grand comparison compared to narrow db interests I'll admit, but WWII, >>>>at least part of it, might not have happened if Neville Chamberlain had >>>>been into ad-hominem logic instead of religious politeness. [snip] >>> >>>This is a ludicrous over-simplification. >> >>The german military command were ready to cut Hitler's throat when he >>re-occupied the Rheinland. They were simply waiting for France and >>England to present a credible threat in response to Hitler's foolish >>provocation. France and England were too polite to respond.
>
> To think that England and France did nothing merely because they were
> being 'polite' can only be described as ignorance (or disregard) of the
> complexities of the situation - France's general election, Britain's
> socio-economic situation, their political relationships with USSR, etc.
> ad infinitum. I defy you to find me any reputable historian who will
> state that Hitler's entry into the demilitarized zone of the Rhineland
> (hardly the first of his repudiations of the Versaille Treaty) and the
> terrible mistake of not responding to it was solely down to
> 'politeness' or perhaps being too busy drinking earl grey tea?
>
> Honestly Bob, as an an analogy of how to respond to posters like neo
> this is way off. I have a great deal of respect of your knowledge of
> database theory - why don't we stick to that on c.d.t.
With all due respect, the root cause of their failure was a legacy of pacifism and self loathing stemming from the stench and horror of no man's land 1914-18. That stench and horror were themselves the product of pig-headed stupidity on the part of the military leaders who refused to accept the abject strategic failure of 19th century tactics and command structures in the face of 20th century weaponry.
Marshall's religious opposition to certain words is symptomatic of that dangerous legacy. Received on Fri Apr 21 2006 - 16:20:31 CEST