Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #88473 > unrolled thread
| Started by | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-06-28 00:36 -0400 |
| Last post | 2026-07-07 07:51 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 99 — 11 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-28 00:36 -0400
[HK01]IBM研發首款0.7nm晶片 指甲大小塞滿1000億電晶體 效能飆升50% "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-06-29 00:01 +0800
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-28 18:09 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-06-29 13:11 +0800
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-29 01:39 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-06-29 19:20 +0800
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-29 12:57 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-30 05:14 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-06-30 21:51 +0800
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-30 12:06 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-30 18:51 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2026-06-30 17:58 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-01 01:15 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-01 10:15 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-30 23:51 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-01 03:16 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-01 10:05 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-01 17:43 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-01 20:23 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-02 01:57 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-02 16:48 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-02 21:32 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-02 18:15 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-03 11:03 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-04 09:32 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-07-04 17:06 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-04 19:24 +0200
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-04 18:20 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-04 23:37 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-04 19:20 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-07-04 20:28 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-04 20:47 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-05 00:33 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-04 20:42 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-04 23:51 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-05 06:57 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-05 13:38 +0200
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-04 23:45 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-05 10:49 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-06 00:33 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-06 13:19 +0200
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-06 12:39 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-08 07:49 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-08 12:04 +0200
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-08 11:10 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-08 17:43 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-08 19:02 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-08 20:37 +0200
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-09 01:16 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-08 17:41 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-07-08 17:53 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-09 01:21 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-08 19:02 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-08 20:41 +0200
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-09 01:24 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-09 09:16 +0200
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-09 07:35 +0000
[OT] NATO politics [Was: Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip] "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-09 09:52 +0200
Re: [OT] NATO politics [Was: Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip] Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-09 09:00 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-06 12:32 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-01 00:48 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-30 23:45 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer.... physics? "quantum"? "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-07-01 12:24 +0800
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-01 03:13 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is quantitative philiosphy? "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-07-01 15:29 +0800
Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is quantitative philiosphy? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-01 04:22 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is quantitative philiosphy? "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-07-01 23:41 +0800
Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is quantitative philiosphy? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-02 01:56 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is FLAT? "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-07-02 14:04 +0800
Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is FLAT? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-02 16:50 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is FLAT? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-02 21:26 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is FLAT? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-02 18:11 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2026-06-30 22:09 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-01 03:29 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-01 10:11 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-01 10:08 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-08 07:46 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-08 12:05 +0200
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-08 11:13 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-08 23:15 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-09 01:20 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-09 11:52 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-30 16:27 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-30 12:18 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-30 17:32 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-30 23:40 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-01 02:53 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-01 10:01 +0100
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-01 00:17 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-30 23:37 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-01 02:33 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-30 23:28 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-01 02:04 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2026-07-01 04:33 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-29 01:34 -0400
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-07 01:21 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-07 04:14 +0000
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-07 08:31 +0200
Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-07-07 07:51 -0700
Page 3 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 Next page →
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-06 13:19 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nb1haoFpadpU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88702 |
On 2026-07-06 06:33, c186282 wrote:
> On 7/5/26 05:49, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 05/07/2026 04:45, c186282 wrote:
>>> Putin, well, seems to think HE is the only one
>>> privy to the Thoughts Of Gawd. We've seen people
>>> like that before - but they didn't have a huge
>>> army or nuclear arsenal.
>>>
>>
>> Neither, it turns out, does Putin.
>
> Well, he DID have a huge army - now about
> a million short. They're forcibly recruiting
> prison inmates and teenagers now.
>
> STILL has a massive nuclear arsenal - kinda
> limits what outsiders can do.
>
>> Consider:
>> You are a paranoid minority supported dictator on fear of your own
>> minions and the West.
>> If NATO decides to take you, it can. You don't realise that the last
>> thing NATO wants is to have to run Russia.
>
> "NATO" can't take Russia, and won't even try.
>
> It is in pure, panic, 'defense', mode now and
> due to a very long "Let America Deal With It"
> attitude couldn't fight its way out of a wet
> paper bag. Europe would be easier for Putin
> to crack than Ukraine. The Euros would just
> piss themselves, drop their pants and bend
> over to Vlad.
The USA did not want Europe to be capable of defending itself, and
actively worked to enforce this. Why? Because then Europe would be a
competitor to the USA empire. The USA preferred an Europe that no longer
had imperialistic goals.
Thus countries inside the NATO took a model in which each country
specialized in some type of military. No country has all types. To
actually do something all countries have to act in coordination.
And no country, except France, has nucs of their own (yes, we tried).
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-06 12:39 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <112g45o$1skbq$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #88709 |
On 06/07/2026 12:19, Carlos E. R. wrote: > On 2026-07-06 06:33, c186282 wrote: >> On 7/5/26 05:49, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>> On 05/07/2026 04:45, c186282 wrote: >>>> Putin, well, seems to think HE is the only one >>>> privy to the Thoughts Of Gawd. We've seen people >>>> like that before - but they didn't have a huge >>>> army or nuclear arsenal. >>>> >>> >>> Neither, it turns out, does Putin. >> >> Well, he DID have a huge army - now about >> a million short. They're forcibly recruiting >> prison inmates and teenagers now. >> >> STILL has a massive nuclear arsenal - kinda >> limits what outsiders can do. >> >>> Consider: >>> You are a paranoid minority supported dictator on fear of your own >>> minions and the West. >>> If NATO decides to take you, it can. You don't realise that the last >>> thing NATO wants is to have to run Russia. >> >> "NATO" can't take Russia, and won't even try. >> >> It is in pure, panic, 'defense', mode now and >> due to a very long "Let America Deal With It" >> attitude couldn't fight its way out of a wet >> paper bag. Europe would be easier for Putin >> to crack than Ukraine. The Euros would just >> piss themselves, drop their pants and bend >> over to Vlad. > > The USA did not want Europe to be capable of defending itself, and > actively worked to enforce this. Why? Because then Europe would be a > competitor to the USA empire. The USA preferred an Europe that no longer > had imperialistic goals. USA made more money by taking Europe's defence budgets and spending it on American kit, which it turned out wouldn't work against Russia if the US president was getting a kickback USA got strategic bases across the world for peppercorn rents. Far cheaper than aircraft carriers Europe doesn't have Imperialistic goals apart from maybe the Germans. The rest of us have the T shirts > > Thus countries inside the NATO took a model in which each country > specialized in some type of military. No country has all types. To > actually do something all countries have to act in coordination. > > And no country, except France, has nucs of their own (yes, we tried). > Britain does. The missiles may be US but the warheads are not. > -- “Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.” H.L. Mencken, A Mencken Chrestomathy
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-08 07:49 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <112kvdt$3ee5r$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #88709 |
On Mon, 6 Jul 2026 13:19:52 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote: > The USA did not want Europe to be capable of defending itself, and > actively worked to enforce this. Why? Because then Europe would be a > competitor to the USA empire. The USA preferred an Europe that no > longer had imperialistic goals. Maybe such subtleties of weltpolitik are a bit beyond the mental capacity of the current 🇺🇸 President, because he seems to be unaware of that, or has forgotten ...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-08 12:04 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nb6llmFk3psU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88768 |
On 2026-07-08 09:49, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Jul 2026 13:19:52 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>
>> The USA did not want Europe to be capable of defending itself, and
>> actively worked to enforce this. Why? Because then Europe would be a
>> competitor to the USA empire. The USA preferred an Europe that no
>> longer had imperialistic goals.
>
> Maybe such subtleties of weltpolitik are a bit beyond the mental
> capacity of the current 🇺🇸 President, because he seems to be unaware
> of that, or has forgotten ...
He is an imbecile. A dangerous one. Today I woke up to hear he has
cancelled the understanding memo with Iran (fuel prices going up again),
and something about breaking commercial relationship with Spain.
Me, I would retaliate by closing all USA bases in the EU. The USA needs
them more than us.
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-08 11:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <112l7md$3glqf$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #88775 |
On 08/07/2026 11:04, Carlos E. R. wrote: > He is an imbecile. A dangerous one. Today I woke up to hear he has > cancelled the understanding memo with Iran (fuel prices going up again), > and something about breaking commercial relationship with Spain. > > Me, I would retaliate by closing all USA bases in the EU. The USA needs > them more than us. The problem - as you have already identified - is that Delirium Tremens is so stupid that he has no idea why the USA needs those bases. He never thought that restricting use of US weapons would lead to everybody cancelling their purchase. He never thought that effectively withdrawing from NATO would lead him exposed in the middle east. In fact, his epitaph should read HE NEVER THOUGHT. -- The difference bweteen a psychopath and a saint is that the psychpoath takes what he can and gives only what he must, but the saint gives everything he can and takes only what he needs.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-08 17:43 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nb7gibFodpbU5@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88777 |
On Wed, 8 Jul 2026 11:10:21 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 08/07/2026 11:04, Carlos E. R. wrote: >> He is an imbecile. A dangerous one. Today I woke up to hear he has >> cancelled the understanding memo with Iran (fuel prices going up >> again), >> and something about breaking commercial relationship with Spain. >> >> Me, I would retaliate by closing all USA bases in the EU. The USA needs >> them more than us. > > The problem - as you have already identified - is that Delirium Tremens > is so stupid that he has no idea why the USA needs those bases. The US doesn't need those bases or the other 100 or so throughout the world.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-08 19:02 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <112m3c0$3qiib$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #88783 |
On 08/07/2026 18:43, rbowman wrote: > On Wed, 8 Jul 2026 11:10:21 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > >> On 08/07/2026 11:04, Carlos E. R. wrote: >>> He is an imbecile. A dangerous one. Today I woke up to hear he has >>> cancelled the understanding memo with Iran (fuel prices going up >>> again), >>> and something about breaking commercial relationship with Spain. >>> >>> Me, I would retaliate by closing all USA bases in the EU. The USA needs >>> them more than us. >> >> The problem - as you have already identified - is that Delirium Tremens >> is so stupid that he has no idea why the USA needs those bases. > > The US doesn't need those bases or the other 100 or so throughout the > world. Then why is it using them to attack Iran? -- "A point of view can be a dangerous luxury when substituted for insight and understanding". Marshall McLuhan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-08 20:37 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nb7jn7Fk3pvU5@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88791 |
On 2026-07-08 20:02, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 08/07/2026 18:43, rbowman wrote:
>> On Wed, 8 Jul 2026 11:10:21 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> On 08/07/2026 11:04, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>> He is an imbecile. A dangerous one. Today I woke up to hear he has
>>>> cancelled the understanding memo with Iran (fuel prices going up
>>>> again),
>>>> and something about breaking commercial relationship with Spain.
>>>>
>>>> Me, I would retaliate by closing all USA bases in the EU. The USA needs
>>>> them more than us.
>>>
>>> The problem - as you have already identified - is that Delirium Tremens
>>> is so stupid that he has no idea why the USA needs those bases.
>>
>> The US doesn't need those bases or the other 100 or so throughout the
>> world.
>
> Then why is it using them to attack Iran?
>
And why is Trump angry about it?
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-09 01:16 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nb8b3qFsia9U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88791 |
On Wed, 8 Jul 2026 19:02:40 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 08/07/2026 18:43, rbowman wrote: >> On Wed, 8 Jul 2026 11:10:21 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> >>> On 08/07/2026 11:04, Carlos E. R. wrote: >>>> He is an imbecile. A dangerous one. Today I woke up to hear he has >>>> cancelled the understanding memo with Iran (fuel prices going up >>>> again), >>>> and something about breaking commercial relationship with Spain. >>>> >>>> Me, I would retaliate by closing all USA bases in the EU. The USA >>>> needs them more than us. >>> >>> The problem - as you have already identified - is that Delirium >>> Tremens is so stupid that he has no idea why the USA needs those >>> bases. >> >> The US doesn't need those bases or the other 100 or so throughout the >> world. > > Then why is it using them to attack Iran? There is a hell of a gap between 'need' and 'want to dominate the world'. The US could achieve self sufficiency in many area and maintain neutral relations with others. One change Trump made that corresponds to reality is renaming the Dept. of Defense Dept. of War.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-08 17:41 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nb7gdqFodpbU4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88775 |
On Wed, 8 Jul 2026 12:04:37 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote: > On 2026-07-08 09:49, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: >> On Mon, 6 Jul 2026 13:19:52 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote: >> >>> The USA did not want Europe to be capable of defending itself, and >>> actively worked to enforce this. Why? Because then Europe would be a >>> competitor to the USA empire. The USA preferred an Europe that no >>> longer had imperialistic goals. >> >> Maybe such subtleties of weltpolitik are a bit beyond the mental >> capacity of the current 🇺🇸 President, because he seems to be unaware of >> that, or has forgotten ... > > He is an imbecile. A dangerous one. Today I woke up to hear he has > cancelled the understanding memo with Iran (fuel prices going up again), > and something about breaking commercial relationship with Spain. > > Me, I would retaliate by closing all USA bases in the EU. The USA needs > them more than us. He also said Spain is composed of very, very bad people who are shirking their responsibilities to NATO and we aren't going to play with you anymore.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-08 17:53 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <J8w3S.34040$S_l2.17628@fx06.iad> |
| In reply to | #88782 |
On 2026-07-08, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: > On Wed, 8 Jul 2026 12:04:37 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote: > >> On 2026-07-08 09:49, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 6 Jul 2026 13:19:52 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote: >>> >>>> The USA did not want Europe to be capable of defending itself, and >>>> actively worked to enforce this. Why? Because then Europe would be a >>>> competitor to the USA empire. The USA preferred an Europe that no >>>> longer had imperialistic goals. >>> >>> Maybe such subtleties of weltpolitik are a bit beyond the mental >>> capacity of the current 🇺🇸 President, because he seems to be unaware of >>> that, or has forgotten ... >> >> He is an imbecile. A dangerous one. Today I woke up to hear he has >> cancelled the understanding memo with Iran (fuel prices going up again), >> and something about breaking commercial relationship with Spain. >> >> Me, I would retaliate by closing all USA bases in the EU. The USA needs >> them more than us. > > He also said Spain is composed of very, very bad people who are shirking > their responsibilities to NATO and we aren't going to play with you > anymore. He says that about everybody. -- /~\ Charlie Gibbs | No artificial \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | intelligence was X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | used in the creation / \ if you read it the right way. | of this post.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-09 01:21 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nb8bd8Fsia9U4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88788 |
On Wed, 08 Jul 2026 17:53:45 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > On 2026-07-08, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: > >> On Wed, 8 Jul 2026 12:04:37 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote: >> >>> On 2026-07-08 09:49, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: >>> >>>> On Mon, 6 Jul 2026 13:19:52 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote: >>>> >>>>> The USA did not want Europe to be capable of defending itself, and >>>>> actively worked to enforce this. Why? Because then Europe would be a >>>>> competitor to the USA empire. The USA preferred an Europe that no >>>>> longer had imperialistic goals. >>>> >>>> Maybe such subtleties of weltpolitik are a bit beyond the mental >>>> capacity of the current 🇺🇸 President, because he seems to be unaware >>>> of that, or has forgotten ... >>> >>> He is an imbecile. A dangerous one. Today I woke up to hear he has >>> cancelled the understanding memo with Iran (fuel prices going up >>> again), >>> and something about breaking commercial relationship with Spain. >>> >>> Me, I would retaliate by closing all USA bases in the EU. The USA >>> needs them more than us. >> >> He also said Spain is composed of very, very bad people who are >> shirking their responsibilities to NATO and we aren't going to play >> with you anymore. > > He says that about everybody. Sooner or later...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-08 19:02 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <112m3aq$3qiib$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #88782 |
On 08/07/2026 18:41, rbowman wrote: > He also said Spain is composed of very, very bad people who are shirking > their responsibilities to NATO and we aren't going to play with you > anymore. That sounds about the right mental age, yes. Cue Violet Elizabeth Bott... "I'll thcream and thcream until I'm thick" -- When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men in a society, over the course of time they create for themselves a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it. Frédéric Bastiat
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-08 20:41 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nb7juaFk3psU4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88782 |
On 2026-07-08 19:41, rbowman wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Jul 2026 12:04:37 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>
>> On 2026-07-08 09:49, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
>>> On Mon, 6 Jul 2026 13:19:52 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>
>>>> The USA did not want Europe to be capable of defending itself, and
>>>> actively worked to enforce this. Why? Because then Europe would be a
>>>> competitor to the USA empire. The USA preferred an Europe that no
>>>> longer had imperialistic goals.
>>>
>>> Maybe such subtleties of weltpolitik are a bit beyond the mental
>>> capacity of the current 🇺🇸 President, because he seems to be unaware of
>>> that, or has forgotten ...
>>
>> He is an imbecile. A dangerous one. Today I woke up to hear he has
>> cancelled the understanding memo with Iran (fuel prices going up again),
>> and something about breaking commercial relationship with Spain.
>>
>> Me, I would retaliate by closing all USA bases in the EU. The USA needs
>> them more than us.
>
> He also said Spain is composed of very, very bad people who are shirking
> their responsibilities to NATO and we aren't going to play with you
> anymore.
The NATO agreement is for defence. Nothing in it for attacking another
country from scratch. When that needs to be done, there is a previous
negotiation.
And Spain does fulfil its agreed responsibilities with the NATO.
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-09 01:24 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nb8bi3Fsia9U5@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88793 |
On Wed, 8 Jul 2026 20:41:14 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote: > And Spain does fulfil its agreed responsibilities with the NATO. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/why-spain-is-not- meeting-nato-spending-targets/ Deep pockets, short arms.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-09 09:16 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nb9069FnapU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88801 |
On 2026-07-09 03:24, rbowman wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Jul 2026 20:41:14 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>
>> And Spain does fulfil its agreed responsibilities with the NATO.
>
> https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/why-spain-is-not-
> meeting-nato-spending-targets/
>
> Deep pockets, short arms.t
We meet the agreed roles. We don't care about the spending targets, as
we (the nato) did not agree to those. The target was then calculated as
2.1%, and we did a huge effort to finally achieve that one.
(most of it not purchasing things from the USA, of course)
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-09 07:35 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <112nivk$7c16$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #88806 |
On Thu, 9 Jul 2026 09:16:25 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote: > We meet the agreed roles. We don't care about the spending targets, > as we (the nato) did not agree to those. The target was then > calculated as 2.1%, and we did a huge effort to finally achieve that > one. > > (most of it not purchasing things from the USA, of course) I just realized ... when Trump makes a big noise about NATO members spending more on defence, he was likely expecting that a lot of that expenditure would go to benefit the US arms industry ... You naughty country, you 🇪🇸, not living up to his expectations ...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-09 09:52 +0200 |
| Subject | [OT] NATO politics [Was: Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip] |
| Message-ID | <nb929gF1fs5U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88808 |
On 2026-07-09 09:35, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Jul 2026 09:16:25 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>
>> We meet the agreed roles. We don't care about the spending targets,
>> as we (the nato) did not agree to those. The target was then
>> calculated as 2.1%, and we did a huge effort to finally achieve that
>> one.
>>
>> (most of it not purchasing things from the USA, of course)
>
> I just realized ... when Trump makes a big noise about NATO members
> spending more on defence, he was likely expecting that a lot of that
> expenditure would go to benefit the US arms industry ...
>
> You naughty country, you 🇪🇸, not living up to his expectations ...
Absolutely.
We did things like increasing the size of the military, increasing their
salaries, building more ships and tanks, and many things I forget, with
just a small bit of USA weapons ;-)
In practical terms, you have to consider that the government is a
coalition of parties, and other parties external to it. In the coalition
the majority are socialists, and others are communists and look alike.
Green party too, perhaps. These want us to just leave the NATO, and stop
military expenditure.
The government can not double the military expenditure because it
doesn't have the support, no matter what. If Trump pressures us, there
are parties in the government voting to leave the NATO (and stop aiding
Ukraine to force them to negotiate). Trump can obviate his parliament,
but that is not the case in other countries.
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-09 09:00 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] NATO politics [Was: Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip] |
| Message-ID | <112nnuh$8rdh$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #88812 |
On Thu, 9 Jul 2026 09:52:16 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote: > In practical terms, you have to consider that the government is a > coalition of parties, and other parties external to it. In the > coalition the majority are socialists, and others are communists and > look alike. Green party too, perhaps. These want us to just leave > the NATO, and stop military expenditure. Democracy in action! Not something the USA understands -- to them, “freedom” seems to mean “agreeing with the USA”. > The government can not double the military expenditure because it > doesn't have the support, no matter what. If Trump pressures us, > there are parties in the government voting to leave the NATO (and > stop aiding Ukraine to force them to negotiate). Trump can obviate > his parliament, but that is not the case in other countries. They don’t really have a “Parliament” in the USA. They can’t really decide if it’s supposed to be a “democracy” or not -- which should come as no surprise, considering how poorly it functions as one.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-06 12:32 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <112g3p2$1skbq$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #88702 |
On 06/07/2026 05:33, c186282 wrote: > On 7/5/26 05:49, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> On 05/07/2026 04:45, c186282 wrote: >>> Putin, well, seems to think HE is the only one >>> privy to the Thoughts Of Gawd. We've seen people >>> like that before - but they didn't have a huge >>> army or nuclear arsenal. >>> >> >> Neither, it turns out, does Putin. > > Well, he DID have a huge army - now about > a million short. They're forcibly recruiting > prison inmates and teenagers now. > A drunk football crowd dith not an army nake > STILL has a massive nuclear arsenal - kinda > limits what outsiders can do. > So HE says. No one knows the truth. Fissionable nuclear materials decay until they wont fission any more >> Consider: >> You are a paranoid minority supported dictator on fear of your own >> minions and the West. >> If NATO decides to take you, it can. You don't realise that the last >> thing NATO wants is to have to run Russia. > > "NATO" can't take Russia, and won't even try. > NATO *could* take Russia, but what then would they do with it? Like Iraq and Afghanistan, you end up with a problem, not a solution > It is in pure, panic, 'defense', mode now and > due to a very long "Let America Deal With It" > attitude couldn't fight its way out of a wet > paper bag. Europe would be easier for Putin > to crack than Ukraine. The Euros would just > piss themselves, drop their pants and bend > over to Vlad. > You really have listened to Putin and Trump far too much. In fact you are describing Russia, and the USA. Both increasingly failed states. >> You cant do the all out war thing. But what you can do is spin a >> legend. The legend of the madness of dictators who will push the red >> button if threatened. You can fund every single radical left or right >> political group in your enemies ranks from Black lives matter to pro >> Lifers. >> >> You can fund any group spreading the pretended horror of nuclear war, >> weapons and power stations. > > Umm ... nothing really "pretended" about nuclear > war. Russia WOULD give it a shot, different sort > of mind-set. They're hard-asses in a sense most > of the 'west' can't even comprehend now. Russia > has always been a horrible place - and thus bred > stoics and fatalists. > I can't argue with pure Belief, >> Meanwhile you do a huge military on the cheap. A few nuclear tests >> show you have the Bomb, and a few missile runs show you have the >> delivery. >> >> The rest on parade in Red Square might as well be cardboard. They're >> not real. They are there to support the legend of a militarily >> powerful nation armed with nuclear weapons it is not afraid to use. > > Sounds like you're REALLY trying to fool yourself. > Don't project what you see in a mirror onto other people >>> "Quiet competence" doesn't get it DONE. Gotta >>> be Out Front - or ELSE. >>> >> Oh, but it does. You just don't notice it happening. > > We notice it NOT happening. > Well not right now, because you dont have any. > Bureaucratic functionaries as 'leaders' - every time > we get some the USA/west goes further down the drain. > >>> As for a "small state" - while I'd kinda LIKE that >>> I'm just not sure it's viable anymore - more an >>> 1800s agri-nation sentiment. >>> >> Of course it is possible. > > Um, no. That time has passed. The (slave-owning) > "gentleman farmers" are LONG dead and "over there" > is 25 ICBM minutes away from "right here". > Your brainwashing is superb in its completeness >> The incoherent parochialism, of the American Indoctrinated is not of >> particular concern to ROW... > > Ignorant, esp deliberately ignorant, populations > are a grave danger to themselves and others and > cannot do 'democracy' in any form. > We have wrt to the USA, noted this... -- No Apple devices were knowingly used in the preparation of this post.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web