Re: Every spam is sacred
On Thu, 12 Jun 2003 20:21, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> This is called terrorism. You fight innocent people to make them
> support another ISP, by fear.
I think it's more like economic sanctions. No-one changes ISP out of fear,
they do so out of a practical desire to get their mail delivered. Just as
governments sometimes change their policy out of a practical desire to get
their products exported when they face sanctions.
> Like a Ben Laden would kill 3000 innocent people to make the USA
> government change his policy in Africa.
> (indeed, I'm not saying that killing someone is equal to squish his
> mails)
Bin Laden's stated aim was to get the US bases removed from Saudi Arabia, I
don't recall him making an issue out of Africa. As the bases in question
will apparently be moved to Iraq it seems that he is getting what he wants.
> We're definitely in the era of "collateral damage" (term invented
> during the Gulf War in 1999 about Iraqi citizens, if I'm correct) but
> I'm not sure we should be glad of it.
See the snippet from `dict "collateral damage"` below. It seems that the term
has been in use for a long time (it was also widely used in the cold war).
{collateral damage}, (Mil.) damage caused by a military
operation, such as a bombing, to objects or persons not
themselves the intended target of the attack.
[1913 Webster +PJC]
--
http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
Reply to: