8 posts • joined Wednesday 6th June 2012 18:42 GMT
Manned fighter aircraft were clearly the most effective weapons platform for the past 40+ years and are likely to be the most effective of the next decade. Beyond that their cost effectiveness is in doubt.
The USA and to a lesser extent Russia have clear dominance over any likely enemy when it comes to air power. However if we learn the lessons of history we can see that other countries are looking at ways of nullifying this advantage.
In the same way that air power made Battleships irrelevant in WWII, we should expect other countries who cannot hope to match the power of the USAF to look to missiles and drones to defend themselves.
Developing and maintaining drones and missiles that can swarm against manned fighters is something that many countries can hope to achieve. These countries know that they could never train or maintain a manned force capable of resisting the USA. This leaves them with the choice of either surrendering to the demands and whims of Washington & Moscow or developing/buying a capability to deter attack.
The future drones don't need to be as good as a highly trained western pilot in the latest fighter, it just needs to present a serious risk to said pilot. This risk that can be increased by the fact that the drones/missiles will be much cheaper and probably expendable in combat situations.
A free market in politicians
If you want to push an agenda in the most corrupt country in the world you have to expect to get your hands dirty.
If you expect to influence American politicians/ elected Judges/ elected Police Chiefs etc you have to bribe them with suitable campaign contributions. This means either notes in brown envelopes or paying for something they want on their behalf.
Of course if you did this in another country you would be convicted of corruption and end up behind bars.
On-line stores already have a significant advantage in not having to pay for retail sites or staff. The additional tax advantage makes it impossible for physical stores to compete.
With regards to E-bay. I'm not sure how they are treated in tax law but it would be easy enough for then to note the % tax to be paid by a customer based on where the buyer is. They already show me what a bid costs in real money rather than the $ the seller might be getting so telling me the sales tax I'll be paying should be easy enough.
Of course it will mean paying more for some purchases but that's just because we currently get a short term benefit in screwing over local retailers.
If Twitter didn't keep a copy of posts after the user has asked to delete them then there would be no problem. There would be nothing there to be handed over if Twitter behaved as users expected it to rather than trying to retain everything after it has served it's intended purpose.
The good old US of A shows once again that it has the best justice that money can buy.
Fortunately I will not buy any more Apple hardware (only got an old 2nd gen ipod) and will now close down my iTunes account as I've already ripped everything I've bought to a more usable format.
Goodbye and good riddance to Apple, rotten to the core.
UN has a better track record than USA
The UN has a much better track record on these issues than the USA.
If you look at the work of the UPU as delivering fair and effective international postal traffic you can see how it has managed to resist the vested interests of big players for over 100 years. The same can't be said of the USA which bends to the whim of whatever well paying lobbyist is stuffing the brown envelopes.
The USA would find there would be much less support for changes if it would just leave the Internet alone and stop trying to impose it's internal agendas on the rest of the world.
So the Queen makes her kid a Field Marshal, Admiral of the Fleet and Marshal of the Royal Air Force. Treating the uniform and those that have earned their stripes with contempt.
If our politicians (even those that have served) started awarding themselves military rank and playing dress-up in uniforms they would be subject to well earned ridicule and contempt. But then such stupidity comes as no surprise.
Pay the fine and go after the contractor
I assume the contractor the NHS was paying was responsible for doing the job correctly.
They failed and landed their customer with a big fine. I'd be very surprised if the NHS couldn't go after the contractor for the fine and any other expense they can think of. Then maybe the contractor would be even more careful about which subcontractor they employed.
- Facebook offshores HUGE WAD OF CASH to Caymans - via Ireland
- Microsoft teams up with Feds, Europol in ZeroAccess botnet zombie hunt
- Justin Bieber BEGGED for a $200k RIM JOB – and got REJECTED
- Review Bigger on the inside: WD’s Tardis-like Black² Dual Drive laptop disk
- Inside Steve Ballmer’s fondleslab rear-guard action