I disagree with Pprt's stance not only because of what I have outlined above but primarily because his approach does not provide a solution to the problem, which is insuring the security of civilians on both sides. Essentially what his stance advocates is the blank check towards Israel's continued aggressive tactics when dealing with the Palestinian people, which have been going on for 60 years and have created more and more instability and friction between both parties, not less.

One cannot bomb and maim people into submission no matter what weapons you will use, the US tried to subdue Vietnam through massive bombing campaigns and failed, not because it was wrong in its military approach or didn't drop enough ordnance but because it did not create cooperation nor understand the local populace. The Israelis do. But their aim is not to live peacefully along side the Palestinian people as a stance of foreign policy but to create enough friction that will eventually justify a cohesive seizure of all the lands in Gaza and the West Bank. Or better yet keep infringing on Palestinians so they retaliate and they can seize more land.

This cannot be allowed to occur, as it would justify the brute force tactics in capturing and holding entire enclaves under the guise of assuring security. The argument has already been applied in America's intervention in Iraq which started as when the US sought to nullify WMDs in Iraq lest the smoking gun is a mushroom cloud. This is the same argument Russia has used in intervene in Georgia and South Ossetia. The same argument Germany used in capturing Czechoslovakia.

The Holy land is not mandated to one peoples over another.

EDIT: For clarification.

Wasn't so much the brute force of the wave as its height. It lifted the entire honkin'-ass ship up a few metres and dropped it - the bang was it bottoming out.

Honkin'-ass ships generally don't like that.

Maybe next time they'll think twice before intentionally endangering civilians.

You can't be a gentleman if you're dealing with brutes. You have to be twice as brutish.

If the husband had any sense at all, he'd teach it to say its name.

"What's your name?"
'awwk... Whipper!"
"Don't mind if I do!"
*SPANK*
"Ow! You brute! You terrible, terrible man! You... you... ask it its name again!"

A world without Islam would be a far more peaceful place. Other religions have had their rough patches and small scale catastrophes (most of them centuries ago) but only Islam, an inflexible, confrontational religion that craves revenge over forgiveness, still makes women second class citizens and was founded by a gigolo/warlord/pedophile (all true charges, so don't blame me) causes trouble wherever its followers gather in large numbers.

Muslims of all stripes, like the Soviets of old (and now new) seem to respect only brute force. We're celebrating diversity AND speaking their language when we threaten them with annihilation when their bad behavior persists.

I'd like Islam to evolve peacefully, but it's not going to happen, if history has anything to say about it.

It's going to take New York becoming Nuked York for moral and cultural relativists to wake up, and probably not even then.

Cette rage "brute" ne conduit pas nécessairement d'emblée à une transformation de la société ce qu'on malheureusement montré les révoltes de banlieues en France d'y il a quelques années

Now count how many levels that I smacked you back to oblivion
My heights olympian
I'm from the Caribbean, Barbados
All fatal
Styles that I construct and conduct in a manner like Banner
Sky scanner, eye jammer
40 miles above Highlander with my grammar
I shitted on Bush and tried to cap Santa
Rap vandalizer
Verbal brutalizer
Who's the wiser, me or he
Who moves to grow flesh in test tubes
I have mastered such degrees in less moves
My discipline
Envisioning
Ritalin
FDA approved, we lose
Medication taking brute forces
They battling and tallying losses
See how costless holocaust is?
Helicopters now replaced by flying saucers
Over the ghettos where some brothers are taught to bust shots
To get a lot of what is had by the haves not the have nots
Raps drop pun your brainstem
This is Lif aka codename Mayhem
What made you think that I wouldn't come back with a bloody axe
And some muddy facts over tracks?!

Up in the ghetto we're taught to bust shots
That's a bird in the bush and a fine line to walk
Get down, stay down
Hold up, back the fuck up
Get up, stay up
Hold up, back the fuck down
Brothers is taught to bust shots [repeated]

Fact one:
America don't give a fuck about you so get off it
I'm not a prophet they just want the profit
They make you want it so you cop it, soon you can't stop it
You're addicted
But low on doe so you get evicted

Fact two:
Darfur's in a state of emergency
It's genocide
Code red classified
If this was Kosovo it'd be over, bro
But it's brothers so it equals no coverage, mo' sufferage
People drawn and quartered
Castrated, slaughtered, burned, disgraced
Gang raped, displaced
While the rest of the world just turn face to chase
Some economic goals
Balance the lost souls
But live it up
We 'bout to burn in hell 'cause god knows

Fact three:
The Bush Administration's worth nothing
Just fuck 'em!
Throw 'em in the barrel, buck 'em!
Oh, you ain't know them flood waters was coming?
You can't smell that african blood running?
Oh, to y'all niggers is worthless or something?
Fuck Clinton too!
You ain't really down because you live uptown, bitch
Rwanda!
Check out what we're looking at here across water
In the ghettos, brothers and sisters, it's self slaughter
How could colonized minds lead to such uncivilized times?
Maybe the tribes were harmonious and you were erroneous
It's no fun
In fact, it's sin under the sun
And son, in the event you meet some cops just run
Or maybe walk real slow and lick shots at Po
Not with the gun this times, through intelligents lines
You see, they look strong externally, internally they're dying
Just elevate
When drama escalate, you just shine!

As neat as this is, it's not very efficient. With bernoulli's principle and lift you have nature helping keep the aircraft flying, but vector thrusting is just brute strength so it's quite the waste in fuel. Still useful to have around in a tight spot, but it doesn't exactly help the mpg.

"...natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed..."

Look in the mirror, Fred.

Strange how hateful men can be in the name of Christ.

I gave the midget AIDS.

In reply to this comment by thinker247:
Really? A link to Salt 'n Pepa? I'm not that kind of girl, you brute.

I hope blank's Mexican midget gives you midget AIDS.

In reply to this comment by kronosposeidon:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCV5yGKWjv4

In reply to this comment by thinker247:
Yeah, but I still look hot in a halter top, even if you do rush things a bit. *slow down...ouch*

In reply to this comment by kronosposeidon:
Watched it. You're lucky I didn't ban you for self-linking.

Really? A link to Salt 'n Pepa? I'm not that kind of girl, you brute.

I hope blank's Mexican midget gives you midget AIDS.

In reply to this comment by kronosposeidon:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCV5yGKWjv4

In reply to this comment by thinker247:
Yeah, but I still look hot in a halter top, even if you do rush things a bit. *slow down...ouch*

In reply to this comment by kronosposeidon:
Watched it. You're lucky I didn't ban you for self-linking.

"Does evil exist, and if it does, do we ignore it, do we negotiate with it, do we contain it, do we defeat it?"

That's such a simple-minded question. The word evil connotes a conflation of many separate problems that require different approaches. Most of these problems are far more complicated than simply being susceptible to McCain's brute force. You can't negotiate with an abstract staw-man, but you can negotiate with most people who have done harm. Obama gave a satisfactory answer.

I always hit arstechnica.com, slashdot.org, techdirt.com, and wired.com for security news. I like wired and arstechnica, they have obscure topics covered. Digg has a bit here and there but, its more about social networking.

Security is a fun place for the grey hats.

In reply to this comment by curiousity:
ahh... I didn't realize you meant it as a joke.

No problem, its cool to talk about these things.

Have you looked at the way that ZRTP (VoIP protocol by Phil Zimmermann) handles Man in the Middle attacks? Seems like it would be effective.

Of course, most of this is new to me. I'm working my way into the field. Getting down basic knowledge and skills while trying to get familiar with the security community.

Thanks for your response!

In reply to this comment by NordlichReiter:
All software is victim of Obfuscation in network security, and in cryptography it is better to obfuscate the passphrase. AES Encryption works, thats been proven its a government standard. However no encryption is safe from Man in the Middle. No software that you distribute is safe from reverse engineering.

Security through obscurity is a joke, ( i meant it as a joke). Once the application has made it to the testing phase it can be broken. As for as the Encryption you have to have the pass phrase to decrypt it. A 20 character pass phrase may take a while to brute force. Even though you know how the program works you still have to know the pass phrase, considering the hash is in someone else's memory.

In reply to this comment by curiousity:
I don't know C# yet. It's in the plan though.

I'm not a big fan of "security through obsurity." I'm not saying that your system is insecure just that I'm not a fan of the obsurity method for security in matters like this.

Kerckhoff's Principle

Bruce Schneier, author of Applied Cryptography, "if the strength of your new cryptosystem relies on the fact that the attacker does not know the algorithm's inner workings, you're sunk. If you believe that keeping the algorithm's insides secret improves the security of your cryptosystem more than letting the academic community analyze it, you're wrong. And if you think that someone won't disassemble your code and reverse-engineer your algorithm, you're naive."


In reply to this comment by NordlichReiter:
http://www.videosift.com/video/Philip-Zimmermann-on-PGP-Pretty-Good-Privacy#addcomment

hey do you know any thing about c# ?

I wrote an windows form that does basically the same thing as PGP, but its not as user friendly.(security through obscurity) I use an SMTP Server, AES encryption, creatable passphrase. This was a private project, that I havent uploaded to the creative commons area yet, I'm lazy.

Its really very easy, I used a couple of methods from C# friends to mash it together. Only problem is, some email banks.. (AOL ) do not like encrypted emails.

ahh... I didn't realize you meant it as a joke.

Have you looked at the way that ZRTP (VoIP protocol by Phil Zimmermann) handles Man in the Middle attacks? Seems like it would be effective.

Of course, most of this is new to me. I'm working my way into the field. Getting down basic knowledge and skills while trying to get familiar with the security community.

Thanks for your response!

In reply to this comment by NordlichReiter:
All software is victim of Obfuscation in network security, and in cryptography it is better to obfuscate the passphrase. AES Encryption works, thats been proven its a government standard. However no encryption is safe from Man in the Middle. No software that you distribute is safe from reverse engineering.

Security through obscurity is a joke, ( i meant it as a joke). Once the application has made it to the testing phase it can be broken. As for as the Encryption you have to have the pass phrase to decrypt it. A 20 character pass phrase may take a while to brute force. Even though you know how the program works you still have to know the pass phrase, considering the hash is in someone else's memory.

In reply to this comment by curiousity:
I don't know C# yet. It's in the plan though.

I'm not a big fan of "security through obsurity." I'm not saying that your system is insecure just that I'm not a fan of the obsurity method for security in matters like this.

Kerckhoff's Principle

Bruce Schneier, author of Applied Cryptography, "if the strength of your new cryptosystem relies on the fact that the attacker does not know the algorithm's inner workings, you're sunk. If you believe that keeping the algorithm's insides secret improves the security of your cryptosystem more than letting the academic community analyze it, you're wrong. And if you think that someone won't disassemble your code and reverse-engineer your algorithm, you're naive."


In reply to this comment by NordlichReiter:
http://www.videosift.com/video/Philip-Zimmermann-on-PGP-Pretty-Good-Privacy#addcomment

hey do you know any thing about c# ?

I wrote an windows form that does basically the same thing as PGP, but its not as user friendly.(security through obscurity) I use an SMTP Server, AES encryption, creatable passphrase. This was a private project, that I havent uploaded to the creative commons area yet, I'm lazy.

Its really very easy, I used a couple of methods from C# friends to mash it together. Only problem is, some email banks.. (AOL ) do not like encrypted emails.

All software is victim of Obfuscation in network security, and in cryptography it is better to obfuscate the passphrase. AES Encryption works, thats been proven its a government standard. However no encryption is safe from Man in the Middle. No software that you distribute is safe from reverse engineering.

Security through obscurity is a joke, ( i meant it as a joke). Once the application has made it to the testing phase it can be broken. As for as the Encryption you have to have the pass phrase to decrypt it. A 20 character pass phrase may take a while to brute force. Even though you know how the program works you still have to know the pass phrase, considering the hash is in someone else's memory.

In reply to this comment by curiousity:
I don't know C# yet. It's in the plan though.

I'm not a big fan of "security through obsurity." I'm not saying that your system is insecure just that I'm not a fan of the obsurity method for security in matters like this.

Kerckhoff's Principle

Bruce Schneier, author of Applied Cryptography, "if the strength of your new cryptosystem relies on the fact that the attacker does not know the algorithm's inner workings, you're sunk. If you believe that keeping the algorithm's insides secret improves the security of your cryptosystem more than letting the academic community analyze it, you're wrong. And if you think that someone won't disassemble your code and reverse-engineer your algorithm, you're naive."


In reply to this comment by NordlichReiter:
http://www.videosift.com/video/Philip-Zimmermann-on-PGP-Pretty-Good-Privacy#addcomment

hey do you know any thing about c# ?

I wrote an windows form that does basically the same thing as PGP, but its not as user friendly.(security through obscurity) I use an SMTP Server, AES encryption, creatable passphrase. This was a private project, that I havent uploaded to the creative commons area yet, I'm lazy.

Its really very easy, I used a couple of methods from C# friends to mash it together. Only problem is, some email banks.. (AOL ) do not like encrypted emails.