twilight2000-digest Thursday, March 9 2000 Volume 1999 : Number 129 The following topics are covered in this digest: RE: Different eras (specifically WW2) RE: Different eras-Recon RPG Re: Different eras-Recon RPG LET'S MAKE A DEAL RE: LET'S MAKE A DEAL Re: Retribution was Laws of War Re: China vs. Taiwan Re: Conversions Target ID was AT4 Re: Retribution was Laws of War Re: Retribution was Laws of War Re: Laws of War Re: Retribution was Laws of War Re: China v. Taiwan Re: Retribution was Laws of War Re: Laws of War Re: China v. Taiwan Re: China vs. Taiwan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 18:42:09 -0500 From: "Garcia, Abel" Subject: RE: Different eras (specifically WW2) Dan, I know that this is an old one but T2K's designer Frank Chadwick designed the definitive miniatures game for W.W.II called _COMMAND_DECISION_. This has *EVERY* weapon, vehicle, and air craft, for all the belligerents -well worth the bucks for W.W.II gamers! Abel - -----Original Message----- From: Daniel Coffin [mailto:jersey_devil_79@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2000 9:17 PM To: twilight2000@lists.imagiconline.com Subject: Re: Different eras (specifically WW2) Hello- does anyone know where I can find desciptions of Soviet small arms/support weapons? I've been working on a number of historically based mini-campaigns, the first of which is set in Stalingrad. The site that was mentioned earlier had good information, just not exactly what I was looking for. If anyone was interested, I'd be glad to distribute my gaming materials once I'm done. After Stalingrad I'm planning three more WWII scenarios, one during the "Battle of the Bulge", another during Guadalcanal, and then a French Resistance campaign set in Paris. Thanks, Daniel Coffin __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 18:49:56 -0500 From: "Garcia, Abel" Subject: RE: Different eras-Recon RPG - -----Original Message----- From: OrrinLadd@aol.com [mailto:OrrinLadd@aol.com] I'm holding my copy of Recon by RPGInc copyright 1982 by Joe F. Martin. orrin *************************************************************************** Orrin, Is your copy the "Little Black Book" that came with a HOG screen? Are you willing to part with this item? Abel *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 18:59:29 EST From: OrrinLadd@aol.com Subject: Re: Different eras-Recon RPG In a message dated 03/08/2000 3:52:04 PM Pacific Standard Time, agarcia@US.RHODIA.COM writes: << Orrin, Is your copy the "Little Black Book" that came with a HOG screen? Are you willing to part with this item? Abel >> Yes my copy is the "Little Black Book" with ref's screen. No way am I willing to part with it, unless you're willing to pay an obscene amount of money. If ya are, email me, let's make a deal. orrin *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 19:28:29 -0500 From: "Garcia, Abel" Subject: LET'S MAKE A DEAL Orrin, I'm interested in your LBB w/HOG screen; What kind of shape is it in? What other Recon RPG Inc items do you have? Abel - -----Original Message----- From: OrrinLadd@aol.com [mailto:OrrinLadd@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2000 5:59 PM To: twilight2000@lists.imagiconline.com Subject: Re: Different eras-Recon RPG In a message dated 03/08/2000 3:52:04 PM Pacific Standard Time, agarcia@US.RHODIA.COM writes: << Orrin, Is your copy the "Little Black Book" that came with a HOG screen? Are you willing to part with this item? Abel >> Yes my copy is the "Little Black Book" with ref's screen. No way am I willing to part with it, unless you're willing to pay an obscene amount of money. If ya are, email me, let's make a deal. orrin *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 19:36:33 -0500 From: "Garcia, Abel" Subject: RE: LET'S MAKE A DEAL Sorry for the wide bandwidth on this when I replied to Orrin's personal address for some reason it goes wide... - -----Original Message----- From: Garcia, Abel [mailto:agarcia@US.RHODIA.COM] Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2000 6:28 PM To: 'twilight2000@lists.imagiconline.com' Subject: LET'S MAKE A DEAL *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 17:30:05 -0800 From: "Corey Wells" Subject: Re: Retribution was Laws of War > > > Corey Wells wrote: > > > > > Dude, I wasn't talking blind vengeance. I'm talking real justice: you > > know, with a court, and judges, and lawyers, maybe a jury (I understand > > tribunals often don't have them.) > > Thus if there was enough evidence to convict, then these people would have > been convicted, I believe the thread was suggesting that these criminals got > away because the perspective countries let them go free. I was suggesting that > if you want to convict, then it must be done ASAP in the 50's and 60's, the > chances of conviction generally decrease with the passage of time. > > > > > > > Try taking the perspective a little closer. You were a couple generations > > removed from your family's experiences. Are you married, have children? > > What if they were slaughtered wholesale. Think you'd still be blase about > > it? > > > > I am not blasé, but again, if the current evidence is not there, what are you > going to do about it? Without evidence for a conviction you have blind justice. > Thus the posies, the courts in these countries will not convict, so what are YOU > going to do about it? (Nothing, I bet) I don't mean to be nasty here, but lets > be honest. > > > > > Leaving things to karma is stupid. Not everyone believes in that. > > If the courts fail to give one justice, and you have not witnessed the > killings FIRST hand, to seek vengeance yourself, then to find Peace you may have > to look to religion. Karma, etc. You can not hang or imprison people you only > suspect are guilty!! What if you made a mistake, then their family wants revenge > on you and thus the cycle continues, and more innocent people die, the blood > shed has to stop somewhere. > > Steve > One thing... Some of these people have witnessed it. It's not simply a matter of conviction, but often arrest. If we were to take him in the US, especially New York, and I think California, we can now force a genetic test. That has bee the problem so far. There is enough evidence on the man, the problem has been (supposedly) sufficiently showing that this 80 year old is the same person. I know that some states now have court ordered testing. Forcibly if need to. We can hold the person down, pull out his arm, and draw blood. Apparently, in Australia, this couldn't be done. And that's okay. I applaud Australia for taking a stand on individual rights. But it keeps being said that there isn't enough evidence. There is plenty. The only real problem (and it's a big one) is a matter of identification. And as in my first paragraph, there are ways of taking care of that. My understanding is that they have some samples from the Nazi officer, but haven't been able to obtain samples from the elderly man to make a comparison. And you do sound blase. It sounds like if you're immediate family gets slaughtered, you won't care anymore after 40 or 50 years. And there is one good reason to not stop looking or trying to bring them to court: examples. The next "ethnic cleanser" or Hitler can look and say : "As long as they don't catch me within a few decades, I'll get away with it." We must show those who might consider committing atrocities, that we will never stop going after them. As it is, the bloodshed would end. The most these guys will get now is life in prison. Which would be short anyhow. But it would at least show the victims, victims anywhere, that we care and will never give up. You basically propose a statute of limitations on some of the most heinous crimes. Here in the US, a simple, single murder (there is no simple murder, but compared to genocide...) has no statute of limitations. Would that not seem unbalanced to you? And again, not everyone is religious. So saying that they should just let it go to a "religious" idea, well, is arrogant of you. I say is for everyone else who might be thinking it: Don't force your religious views on me! Cor __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 17:49:25 -0800 From: "Corey Wells" Subject: Re: China vs. Taiwan > I'm banking on pride of the emerging world power. Throughout the 19th > Century, China was colonized or occupied by various powers. Then at the > beginning of the 20th Century, they lost land to the Japanese (Manchuria and > Taiwan) at the end of the Sino-Japanese War. China has not been what it > considers whole for over 100 years. That is a lot of pride for a > civilization that has existed for over 2000 years. To go off on a tangent, > Chinese society is a bit chauvanistic. The Chinese word for China means > "Middle Country". Back in the day, the Chinese considered themselves to be > the middle of the world and everyone else revolved around them. I'm sure > attitudes have changed today, but some still lingers in the mother country. > > Besides, I don't think the Russians, despite their woeful economic state, > would sell land they claim is theirs to what they consider to be an enemy. > Would the U.S.A. sell any of it's territory? > > Orrin I don't know if the US would. But we would be looking at sparsely populated areas there in the far east. And probably not overly resource rich (might be some oil, other resources, but what good are they if Russia doesn't have the funds to and equipment to get at them?) And remember, Russia did sell a vast track of land once, only about 100 years ago. That's how we got Alaska. Chung Kuo actually means Middle Kingdom. China is a western name, and was derived from the Chin Dynasty. As it is, most civilizations, including western, had at one time thought of themselves as the center of the Universe. At that time for China, they were. The known world did revolve around them. They knew of people located only immediately outside there borders. So, it would appear as thought China was in the center. Makes sense in that case. I don't think their pride would be such a big issue. Not anymore than most any large nation. The majority of the people come from peasant stock. They are use to being in some form subjugated. That's a bit extreme, but basically, they're use to having someone controlling them. The current leadership has raised through communism. So, they most likely don't have an imperialistic pride anymore. And they have been playing smart. There was a book written where China jumped ahead of the handover, and took Hong Kong quickly with force. That didn't happen, but rather it kind of was a whimper. Chinese pride has traditionally been centristic. I think that's the word. They do not look outward, but inward. And Chinese history never shows them as whole. Even without outside invaders, they have often been divided within by warlords. That is a more likely scenario if the Central Government loses it's grip. Then you might see a particularly ambitious warlord try to grab land now in Russia, to prove his power. It has been my opinion for the past 5 years that China is slowly moving towards a more democratic form of government. They would do it now, but they are afraid after seeing what Russia has gone through. So they are taking it slow, and deliberate. It can be only another decade, but I say definitely within 50 years (I should still be alive to see it!) After that, history will probably show that the leaders now are already thinking it, planning it, and it has been their attention. Of course they're keeping tight lipped about it, even showing like the opposite. They don't want chaos. They want an orderly transition, maybe even one that won't be noticed until long after it's happened. Think about it. Communism is really an economic system. In fact, ideally, it should be exercised under a political system such as democracy. The true idea is that the people own everything, and decide everything. It's never been practiced as such. But regardless, even as a political system, Communism has always been an economic system as well. But China has been experimenting, successfully, with free enterprise. And they are expanding the programs. How can Communism and Free Enterprise coexist? They can't. Once China phases out the majority of they're government industries, they will no longer be Communist. May still be a form of dictatorship, more likely like a type of oligarchy. But they will no longer be Communist. Cor __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 10:47:02 +0800 From: "Ballistix" Subject: Re: Conversions This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0055_01BF89B4.CD5B6220 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Well I'm not sure how much I can help with the vehicle conversions, there should be someone on the list however that can help. I do however have a copy of Edge of the Sword vol 1. This has a listing of heaps of weapons,=20 and the how to do weapon conversions for a heap of systems including TW2K. For anyone out there wanting a really good book on weapons etc. I'd recommend this book big time. Ballistix ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Corey Wells=20 To: twilight2000@lists.imagiconline.com=20 Sent: Wednesday, 8 March 2000 18:12 Subject: Re: Conversions Does anyone know of a method (or downloadable or viewable resource) = converting v1 stats to v2? I'm not just talking character sheets (I = think those would be fairly easy, just a little work. But, I'm talking = about weapon and vehicle stats. I have some v1 books (Soviet Vehicle = Guide, Krakow, Airlords, the such) that I haven't gotten v2 copies of = yet. But, I've been playing v2. Maybe I should go back to v1, since I = have most of what I'm looking for in that (except maybe the Heavy = Weapons Guide.) Cor - ------=_NextPart_000_0055_01BF89B4.CD5B6220 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Well I'm not sure how much I can help with = the
vehicle conversions, there should be = someone
on the list however that can help.
 
I do however have a copy of Edge of the = Sword
vol 1. This has a listing of heaps of weapons, =
and the how to do weapon conversions = for
a heap of systems including TW2K.
 
For anyone out there wanting a really good = book
on weapons etc. I'd recommend this book = big
time.
Ballistix
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Corey Wells=20
To: twilight2000@lists.imagiconli= ne.com=20
Sent: Wednesday, 8 March 2000 = 18:12
Subject: Re: Conversions

 
 
Does anyone know of a method (or = downloadable or=20 viewable resource) converting v1 stats to v2?  I'm not just = talking=20 character sheets (I think those would be fairly easy, just a little=20 work.  But, I'm talking about weapon and vehicle stats.  I = have=20 some v1 books (Soviet Vehicle Guide, Krakow, Airlords, the such) = that I=20 haven't gotten v2 copies of yet.  But, I've been playing = v2. =20 Maybe I should go back to v1, since I have most of what I'm looking = for in=20 that (except maybe the Heavy Weapons Guide.)
 
Cor
- ------=_NextPart_000_0055_01BF89B4.CD5B6220-- *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 10:59:36 +0800 From: "Ballistix" Subject: Target ID was AT4 > As a side note for role-playing, the M72 is the LOUDEST weapon > I have ever personnally shot. It's more like a recoilless rifle than a > rocket when firing (even if it is technically a rocket). My right ear > would ring for 5 minutes after I shot one, and that's with wearing ear > plugs! It doesn't have much of a flame or smoke trail and would not > be very easy to backtrack to the shooter. I'm not sure if this is similar to the weapon used by the Australian army at the moment (66mm SRAW), although from the description I'd have to say it is. Remember with tracing back to the enemy that you can use the origin of the sound as well. Also if you stand back from someone firing one of these things you can see that they end up surrounded in a fine dust cloud. It's not too noticable on the range but it sure sticks out in the bush. Ballistix *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 11:10:34 +0800 From: "Ballistix" Subject: Re: Retribution was Laws of War > testing. Forcibly if need to. We can hold the person down, pull out his > arm, and draw blood. Apparently, in Australia, this couldn't be done. And > that's okay. I applaud Australia for taking a stand on individual rights. I have to agree on this one, we do have DNA testing however. However I think you hit the nail on the head below... > But it keeps being said that there isn't enough evidence. There is plenty. > The only real problem (and it's a big one) is a matter of identification. Even with DNA testing you need a sample from the time period or from the specific place to compare it to. > And as in my first paragraph, there are ways of taking care of that. My > understanding is that they have some samples from the Nazi officer, but > haven't been able to obtain samples from the elderly man to make a > comparison. Ok I've just spoken to my father (who's a recently retired police officer). and apparently DNA testing in Australia has been stopped by civil libertarians. >From what he said there should be some legislation changes being made to introduce this Australia wide. If they have DNA samples and other evidence then I'm sure we would agree to extradite the person. On a side note in Australia it was found that a person was charged with murder, convicted and hung. When we first introduced DNA testing they conducted testing on the alleged murderer and on some hair samples found at the crime scene. It works out that an innocent man was hung. Hence the reson for care when prosecuting. Ballistix *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 20:00:57 -0800 From: "Corey Wells" Subject: Re: Retribution was Laws of War > > Ok I've just spoken to my father (who's a recently retired police officer). > and apparently DNA testing in Australia has been stopped by civil > libertarians. > From what he said there should be some legislation changes being made > to introduce this Australia wide. > > If they have DNA samples and other evidence then I'm sure we would agree > to extradite the person. > > On a side note in Australia it was found that a person was charged with > murder, convicted and hung. When we first introduced DNA testing they > conducted testing on the alleged murderer and on some hair samples > found at the crime scene. It works out that an innocent man was hung. > > Hence the reson for care when prosecuting. > > Ballistix > It's too late for extradition, he's already flown. The last I heard (a few months at least) they don't know where he's at. I understand the need for care. That's why DNA is as helpful (can be) for defence as it can be for prosecution. One of our founding fathers (I believe it was) said that it was better that 100 guilty men go free than an innocent man be punished. But this doesn't work in practice, and the public wouldn't want it to. It's a nice sentiment, but doesn't work in the real world. Such a thing does bring up another idea: an truly guiltless man has nothing to hide. I agree that forced DNA sampling can be an invasion of privacy. But if the people are looking at me hard, and won't let up, and I know I'm not the one, I'd agree to testing. Heck, I'd demand a testing. For one thing, besides clearing myself and getting rid of them, the person that really committed the crime is going about uninvestigated. They aren't spending much time and resources looking for someone else while they're sitting on me. So I'd be helping them out to finding the real person by giving them a sample and settling that it isn't me. He wouldn't do that. Doesn't that say something? Cor __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2000 23:48:56 -0500 From: Scott David Orr Subject: Re: Laws of War At 10:29 AM 3/8/00 PST, Brandon Cope wrote: >After WWII, a Japanese (or maybe German) submarine commander was sentenced >to death for the tactics he used at sea. This was reduced to life after the >US Navy told the tribunal it had used the same tactics. > I haven't heard this one. I know that some of the Germans were tried on charges of firing on civilian shipping without warning (that's the crime committed in submarine warfare), but that they werne't convicted of it, precisely because the Allies (esp. the U.S.) did the same thing. I sort of doubt a Japanese captain would have been convicted of this, because the Japanese rarely attacked merchant ships--they used their subs almost excluseivly against warships (and also for running messages and transporting things), but it's possible. >Basically, war crimes trials are just another way to get revenge on a >loosing nation in war (usually a nation that started the war). By calling >them war crimes trials we can make our selves feel good about it (since >revenge is politically incorrect). > That doesn't really explain the cases where a country has tried its own soldiers for such crimes, does it? Scott Orr *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2000 23:04:25 -0600 From: Steve Subject: Re: Retribution was Laws of War Corey Wells wrote: > One thing... Some of these people have witnessed it. It's not simply a > matter of conviction, but often arrest. If we were to take him in the US, > especially New York, and I think California, we can now force a genetic > test. That has bee the problem so far. There is enough evidence on the > man, the problem has been (supposedly) sufficiently showing that this 80 > year old is the same person. Fine, once you genetically test the person and you have convicting evidence then proceed. > <<>> > And you do sound blase. It sounds like if you're immediate family gets > slaughtered, you won't care anymore after 40 or 50 years. Again, this is not what I have said. You should have quoted me if I said this. I did state that you must prosecute these people immediately, and not wait. As far a me being blasé, that hurts. It is not the case. I just don't want another innocent person to die, enough blood has been spilled, you must be certain without a reasonable doubt. > And there is one good reason to not stop looking or trying to bring them to > court: Corey, I agree with you here, I never said do not prosecute these b@stards, I said again, that it must be done ASAP and the longer you wait the more detrimental to your case. > You basically propose a statute of limitations on some of the most heinous > crimes. Here in the US, a simple, single murder (there is no simple murder, > but compared to genocide...) has no statute of limitations. Would that not > seem unbalanced to you? I would never suggest a statute of limitations, period. I think we are agreed that these people must be prosecuted . All I am trying to state is that you MUST HAVE THE RIGHT PERSON WITHOUT DOUBT IN A COURT OF LAW and the longer you wait... ..the more difficult. > And again, not everyone is religious. So saying that they should just let it > go to a "religious" idea, well, is arrogant of you. I say is for everyone > else who might be thinking it: Don't force your religious views on me! I am not a religious person, and I did not quote scripture and anything of that sort. What I did say is that at some point if you cannot get this vengeance that you want so bad, don't execute the wrong person in blind rage. After you have done everything humanly possible to get justice, sometimes you will not get justice or it will come too late. PERHAPS, just PERHAPS one could take some comfort that these people will get what they deserve be it Karma or whatever you want to call it, would you agree? . I did not state that you should give up, but it is arrogant of you, what have you done to bring these people to justice other that just TALK?? You keep dodging this question. I suspect that is not much, answer me this, honestly what could you personally do this many years later? To Paraphrase: a) How many times must I say you must have no reasonable doubt and evidence enough to convict. b) The longer you wait, generally the more difficult it is to convict c) If everything HUMANLY POSSIBLE fails to get justice, Perhaps, just perhaps these horrible people will get their dues, I simply hope so, I do not think this is being arrogant. Steve *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 00:13:41 -0500 From: Scott David Orr Subject: Re: China v. Taiwan At 09:07 AM 3/9/00 +1300, Andrew Tiffany wrote: >At 02:31 8/03/00 -0500, you wrote: >>At 02:06 AM 3/8/00 EST, Damage169@cs.com wrote: >>> >>>Also, to comment on the relationship between Taiwan and the PRC, until >Nixon >>>became US president, the US had considered Taiwan to be the legitimate >>>government of all of China, forced into exile on the last unoccupied >>province >>>of their country. Once Nixon went to the PRC, the way the US responded to >>>Taiwan was that it was a permanently separated province of the nation of >>>China, just as Panama had once been a province of Colombia but was now a >>>separate nation. IIRC, even the UN considers Taiwan to be a generally >>>independent nation, but not quite, as Taiwan has not been given voting >>nation >>>status. I may be wrong, but I do not believe so. >>> >>I suspect the only real reason they're not recognized as an independent >>country is that they haven't asked to be. It would help of course if China >>accepted it, but once you've been de facto indepdent for this long, usually >>other countries will recognize you. > >Taiwan has been after a seat in the UN ever since they got kicked out as >teh representative for China and the PRC took their place. In fact, I'm >pretty the Nationlaist President who took the Nationalist army to Taiwan, >Chiang Kai-Shek (sp) was one of the men who helped formulate the idea of >the modern UN after WWII. >Of course with PRC on the security council, they can veto Taiwan's >membership forever and a day (I believe membership is a security council >vote?) > I'm not familiar with this. Have then been after a real seat, or an observer seat like the PLO? I can't imagine them asking for a real seat except for the China seat. I don't think the Security Council has any power over who's accepted as a member, but I'm not a UN expert. Scott Orr *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 20:25:22 -0800 From: "Jesse LaBranche" Subject: Re: Retribution was Laws of War > Such a thing does bring up another idea: an truly guiltless man has nothing > to hide. I agree that forced DNA sampling can be an invasion of privacy. > But if the people are looking at me hard, and won't let up, and I know I'm > not the one, I'd agree to testing. Heck, I'd demand a testing. For one > thing, besides clearing myself and getting rid of them, the person that > really committed the crime is going about uninvestigated. They aren't > spending much time and resources looking for someone else while they're > sitting on me. So I'd be helping them out to finding the real person by > giving them a sample and settling that it isn't me. > He wouldn't do that. Doesn't that say something? > Cor Well, on this end- I'd have to say only on a very very loose scale. I wouldn't ask for a test either. In fact, I'd fight it tooth and nail, but that has nothing to do with desire or the privacy issue. I'm a certified anglophobiac (think I got the spelling right). Most people get the translation wrong or can't find it and I've seen many a person in the medical field not know what this is off the top of their heads, so I'll go ahead and clarify while I'm at it... A condition involving a morbid (say deathly) fear of needles, and to lesser extents- blades or edged objects. The literal tranlation comes out to be a "fear of edges" but should have been "fear of points" really. Anyway, I could tell you several horror stories about having the condition but that's probably not the point here. There can be many many issues as to why he wouldn't submit to the testing. Just take an instance that this man MIGHT be innocent. As an 80 year old man shunted from country to country, always hearing that you're a killer or "allegedly" a killer, standing accused of the most heinuous crimes in history- hated by so many people, are you so sure that you would not balk and run every time that the issue came up just to save yourself the pain? Would you, in this case, be thinking rationally and logically enough to go ahead and take the testing, go through the interrogations, and deal with the courts to clear your name? Before answering that- realize that there are many accused of much lesser crimes who would not. Also, I believe that there were a fair amount of "witch hunts" involved at the end of the war- he may have seen plenty of that type of event and just be scared to trust his life to a court. Please realize that I am not defending this man. I don't really know who you are talking about and have as much antipathy for "inhumans" as the rest of the world- I am just tossing out some food for thought. Later. Jesse. vanquer@email.msn.com ICQ. 8004143 *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 20:28:39 -0800 From: "Jesse LaBranche" Subject: Re: Laws of War > >Basically, war crimes trials are just another way to get revenge on a > >loosing nation in war (usually a nation that started the war). By calling > >them war crimes trials we can make our selves feel good about it (since > >revenge is politically incorrect). > That doesn't really explain the cases where a country has tried its own > soldiers for such crimes, does it? > Scott Orr Good point Scott, although in playing Devil's advocate (Love that movie BTW :-), I'd suggest that many countries would undoubtedly try their own only when it got "hot" enough from external pressure that it was the easier solution to an international problem. Later. Jesse. vanquer@email.msn.com *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 00:31:07 -0500 From: Scott David Orr Subject: Re: China v. Taiwan At 06:01 PM 3/8/00 EST, OrrinLadd@aol.com wrote: >In a message dated 03/07/2000 11:30:28 PM Pacific Standard Time, >sdorr@ix.netcom.com writes: > ><< As an aside: Taiwan really has very little history as a province of China. > My understanding is that China only controlled it for a short period in > the early 20th century (maybe the late 19th also?), and that before that it > was independent, while after that it was controlled by Japan. > >> > >A brief historical summary of Taiwan: Taiwan was part of Imperial China first >settled by Fukien immigrants. Around 1590 it was colonized by Portugal, who >gave it the name Ilsa Formosa, who were subsequently followed by the Dutch >and Spanish. Formosa is an older name for Taiwan, by the way. Japan gained >control of the island around 1900's when China ceded control of the island >after the Sino-Japanese War. There was a revolt by the Chinese living there >who briefly formed a "Republic of Taiwan" which was crushed by the Japanese. >From 1900 until 1945 it was a Japanese colony, several thousand Taiwanese >males were drafted into the Imperial Japanese Army during WWII, serving as >labor troops on the islands. After the defeat of the Japanese, the island >was returned to the Nationalist Chinese government, who would flee there at >the end of the Civil War in 1949. > Which means that in modern history it's been under Chinese rule, what 4 years? Scott Orr *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 01:11:16 -0500 From: Scott David Orr Subject: Re: China vs. Taiwan At 05:49 PM 3/8/00 -0800, Corey Wells wrote: > >I don't think their pride would be such a big issue. Not anymore than most >any large nation. The majority of the people come from peasant stock. They >are use to being in some form subjugated. That's a bit extreme, but >basically, they're use to having someone controlling them. The current >leadership has raised through communism. So, they most likely don't have an >imperialistic pride anymore. And they have been playing smart. There was a >book written where China jumped ahead of the handover, and took Hong Kong >quickly with force. That didn't happen, but rather it kind of was a >whimper. > I'll have to take issue with this: there's a huge stress in contemporary Chinese thinking on China "taking its right place in the world," by which they mean that other countries should respect China as a superpower and bow to Chinese wishes. I'm not a China expert, but from the bit of Chinese thinking I've seen, they have very unrealistic expectations about how the world is going to react to their various moves (I guess this comes from being insular for so long). Scott Orr *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ End of twilight2000-digest V1999 #129 *************************************