Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> schrieb:
> On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 12:07:35 PM UTC-6, Thomas Koenig wrote:
>
>> If you want to look at what modern Fortran looks like,
>> you could look at the "programming idioms" web site,
>> it has quite a few examples of how to do things there.
>> See https://www.programming-idioms.org/cheatsheet/Fortran .
>
> It seems to have some mistakes.
>
> For example, where an example states that it creates
> a string variable s, and assigns to it a string of Japanese
> kana, in fact it seems the string variable cat is created
> and assigned that string value.

If you spot a mistake, you're free to correct it :-)

Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> schrieb:
> On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 11:49:09 AM UTC-6, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>
>> Modern fortran looks quite different from 1970's fortran.
>>
>> PROGRAM Parallel_Stored_Hello
>> USE OMP_LIB
>>
>> INTEGER :: thread_id
>>
>> !$OMP PARALLEL PRIVATE(thread_id)
>>
>> thread_id = OMP_GET_THREAD_NUM()
>> PRINT *, \u201cHello from process: \u201d, thread_id
>>
>> !$OMP END PARALLEL
>>
>> END
>
> Is that High Performance Fortran, a modified version of
> Fortran 90 where some of the important features needed
> for parallel programming aren't really part of the language,
> so they're added as special comments, with !$ in front?

No, it is OpenMP, a parallel threading model on top of Fortran,
C and C++ (it reads #pragma OMP in those other languages).

The Wikipedia articles on OpenMP don't have any Fortran
examples, guess I'll have to add them :-)

Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> schrieb:
> I doubt that any new projects are being written in Fortran. Most new
> stuff is written in C and C++.

*raises hand*

The are probably not written in FORTRAN, but Fortran is fine and
in widespread use in supercomputers etc.

On 16/03/2022 12.49, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> writes:

>> Is FORTRAN still being used in the science + engineering world? I
>> found it much easier to read than most of the languages that succeeded
>> it but in fairness it's been 20 years since I've read source code.
>
> Fortran is not widely used in modern engineering environments.
>
> Modern fortran looks quite different from 1970's fortran.
>
> PROGRAM Parallel_Stored_Hello
> USE OMP_LIB
>
> INTEGER :: thread_id
>
> !$OMP PARALLEL PRIVATE(thread_id)
>
> thread_id = OMP_GET_THREAD_NUM()
> PRINT *, \u201cHello from process: \u201d, thread_id
>
> !$OMP END PARALLEL
>
> END
>

Well, the " PRINT *," part looks familiar. The last line would
look more so if it was preceded by six blanks.

--
Michael F. Stemper
What happens if you play John Cage's "4'33" at a slower tempo?

"Michael F. Stemper" <michael.stemper@gmail.com> writes:
>On 16/03/2022 12.49, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> writes:
>
>>> Is FORTRAN still being used in the science + engineering world? I
>>> found it much easier to read than most of the languages that succeeded
>>> it but in fairness it's been 20 years since I've read source code.
>>
>> Fortran is not widely used in modern engineering environments.
>>
>> Modern fortran looks quite different from 1970's fortran.
>>
>> PROGRAM Parallel_Stored_Hello
>> USE OMP_LIB
>>
>> INTEGER :: thread_id
>>
>> !$OMP PARALLEL PRIVATE(thread_id)
>>
>> thread_id = OMP_GET_THREAD_NUM()
>> PRINT *, \u201cHello from process: \u201d, thread_id
>>
>> !$OMP END PARALLEL
>>
>> END
>>
>
>Well, the " PRINT *," part looks familiar. The last line would
>look more so if it was preceded by six blanks.

What, no sequence number?

On 3/16/2022 1:24 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> On 3/16/2022 12:24 PM, The Horny Goat wrote:
>> On Mon, 14 Mar 2022 11:20:44 -0500, Lynn McGuire
>> <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/13/2022 5:50 AM, Thomas Koenig wrote:
>>>> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> schrieb:
>>>>
>>>>> I will continue to do what I want to do
>>>>> which is love God, love my wife and family even if some of them are
>>>>> brown, and read my sf/f books.  And read an occasional engineering
>>>>> book
>>>>> and write some new software.
>>>>
>>>> See you on comp.lang.fortran, then :-)
>>>
>>> I hang out there almost daily.
>>>
>>> And I have written almost a thousand lines of new Fortran code in the
>>> last two weeks.  I plan to write more Fortran this week too.
>>
>> Is FORTRAN still being used in the science + engineering world? I
>> found it much easier to read than most of the languages that succeeded
>> it but in fairness it's been 20 years since I've read source code.
>
> My software dates back to 1969.  I have 850,000 lines of Fortran code
> and 500,000 lines of C++ code.
>
> I doubt that any new projects are being written in Fortran.  Most new
> stuff is written in C and C++.
>
> Lynn

And I forgot Python for new apps.

Lynn

On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 2:57:22 PM UTC-6, Michael F. Stemper wrote:

> Well, the " PRINT *," part looks familiar. The last line would
> look more so if it was preceded by six blanks.

Fortran 90 added a free-format option for Fortran.

John Savard

On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 3:10:35 PM UTC-6, Scott Lurndal wrote:

> What, no sequence number?

It was probablty typed into a file from a terminal (or on a PC),
so punched cards were not involved, thus rendering that
precaution redundant.

John Savard

On Friday, March 11, 2022 at 9:58:49 AM UTC-7, Paul S Person wrote:
> rOn Thu, 10 Mar 2022 16:00:40 -0600, Lynn McGuire
> <lynnmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On 3/10/2022 11:26 AM, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
> >> J. Clarke <jclarke...@gmail.com> wrote in
> >> news:njdk2hdupos5se1md...@4ax.com:

> >>> Many so-called "experts" cannot conceive of the concept of
> >>> "Republicans win".
>
> >> They broke when Queen Hillary was denied her god-given right to
> >> govern over us lesser subraces.
>
> >She may run again in 2024.
>
> Only in Donald Trump's wet dreams.
>
Actually, it was the voters of the United States of America that
would have given Hillary Clinton the right to be President of the
United States, except that members of a "lesser race" were
obstructed in getting to the polls.

The pandemic, leading to mail-in ballots, made voter suppression
almost impossible, leading to the so-called "stolen" election of 2020,
in which Trump was finally booted out, impeachment having failed
due to blatantly partisan behavior by Republicans in Congress.

The novel "The Mouse that Roared" had the Duchy of Grand Fenwick
come up with a bomb more powerful than the hydrogen bomb. Somehow
this allowed it to enforce world peace, ending the frightening nuclear
stalemate of the Cold War. I never could see how that was supposed to
actually work, since hydrogen bombs are sufficient to destroy a country.

Ah, but if I were magically granted such power in a magic wand...

First, of course, I would rescue the people of Ukraine, and end Russia's
(and China's) ability to ever again threaten any other country. The Chechens,
the Uighurs, the Tibetans would all be independent.

But then, as a second precautionary measure, I think I would have to partition
the United States of America into blue states and red states... and give the
blue states the nuclear capability.

Oh, yes. Vladimir Putin claimed to have gone into Ukraine to denazify it,
which seems to have been an effort on the part of Vladimir Putin to show that
he is even a better comedian than Ukraine's Jewish leader, Volodymyr
Zelenskyy.

Putin once again seems to be trying to show the world that Dr. Joseph Goebbels
is alive and hiding in Moscow; new news headline: Vladimir Putin says that
Joe Biden calling him a war criminal is "unforgivable".

Biden is unlikely to ask his forgiveness for stating the simple facts of the matter...

John Savard

On Wednesday, March 9, 2022 at 11:56:36 AM UTC-7, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> After all, the USA does not really
> have a dog in protecting central Europe from the Russians.

Fine. Just protect central Europe from the Russians long enough for them
to pay for their own strategic nuclear deterrent, out of their own pockets,
as big and powerful as the one the United States has to protect its own soil.

And on the diplomatic front, do what's needed to get the non-proliferation
treaty out of the way.

John Savard

On Wednesday, March 9, 2022 at 9:57:14 AM UTC-7, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Mar 2022 01:19:21 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca>
> wrote:

> >When the U.S. prevented a Russian invasion of the German Federal
> >Republic by stationing troops on West Germany's border with East
> >Germany, they did not invade and conquer the German Democratic
> >Republic to station their troops inside East Germany. The troops
> >protecting West Germany were stationed inside West Germany.
>
> They were there as part of the NATO plan for defending Western Europe
> fromt the Soviet Union. It was /not/ a USA-only plan.
>
> You really don't have /any/ idea what you are nattering on about, do
> you.
>
As was pointed out to me, Joe Biden is not "King of NATO". He can't
unilaterally add Ukraine to NATO.

But since what _counts_ about being a member of NATO is being
under the nuclear umbrella of the United States, it could have, on its
own, quickly enough to have prevented the current invasion, have
given Ukraine protection that was substatially equivalent to full membership
in NATO with Article 5 guarantees... all on its own.

John Savard

On Thursday, March 10, 2022 at 10:37:48 AM UTC-7, J. Clarke wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Mar 2022 06:36:50 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc
> <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:

> >Of course, the U.S. defense budget should not be paid for by U.S. taxpayers.
> >It is countries like Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia and China that have made it
> >necessary to _have_ one, so clearly the U.S. is owed quite a bit of money by
> >those countries.

> You're describing something called a "collection racket". Do you
> _really_ want the US to go there? How much tribute would Canada be
> paying? How would that affect _your_ taxes?

If I were describing a "protection racket", Canada would be paying money.

But from what I'm describing, Canada would only be called upon to pay...
if we counted the War of 1812. Well, impressing Americans into service
on British naval ships _was_ an act of aggression... but by Britain, not
Canada.

It just seems to me like simple justice. If foreign aggressors attack
democracies, the taxpayers of those innocent victims should not be
the ultimate ones to pay the bill. They should get all that they had to
spend back, with accrued interest, from the aggressors who are at
fault for the existence of the expense.

Of course, it may be wise to waive one's rights under some circumstances,
as the example of the Treaty of Versailles indeed shows. But it should not
be forgotten that this _is_ a generous act of waiving one's rights, which is...
revokable should the country in question *ever make trouble again*.

After the Soviet Union fell, Russia already had its chance to get off easy
once.

John Savard

On Thursday, March 17, 2022 at 6:31:04 AM UTC-6, J. Clarke wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 23:21:54 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
> <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:

> >As was pointed out to me, Joe Biden is not "King of NATO". He can't
> >unilaterally add Ukraine to NATO.
>
> >But since what _counts_ about being a member of NATO is being
> >under the nuclear umbrella of the United States, it could have, on its
> >own, quickly enough to have prevented the current invasion, have
> >given Ukraine protection that was substatially equivalent to full membership
> >in NATO with Article 5 guarantees... all on its own.
>
> Who appointed _you_ the arbiter of "what _counts_ about being a member
> of NATO"?
>
I am expressing a personal judgement about the aspect of NATO membership
that is most effective at preventing a country from being invaded and conquered
by Russia: being defended by the United States, which has a massive nuclear
arsenal in addition to conventional forces, as opposed to being defended by the
conventional forces of other European nations.

I would have thought, though, that this judgement is non-controversial, as it
states a rather obvious fact.

John Savard

On Thursday, March 17, 2022 at 6:28:54 AM UTC-6, J. Clarke wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 23:07:41 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
> <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:

> >But then, as a second precautionary measure, I think I would have to partition
> >the United States of America into blue states and red states... and give the
> >blue states the nuclear capability.

> Which makes you betterr than Putin because?

Oh, please. Ensuring the survival of liberty is not the same as
attempting to exterminate freedom wherever it exists in the
world. Some might even say it's the exact opposite.

John Savard

J Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> schrieb:
> On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 14:21:16 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
><jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>
>>On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 2:57:22 PM UTC-6, Michael F. Stemper wrote:
>>
>>> Well, the " PRINT *," part looks familiar. The last line would
>>> look more so if it was preceded by six blanks.
>>
>>Fortran 90 added a free-format option for Fortran.
>
> VS Fortran 2.0 has a free-format option.

VS Fortran is remarkable in adhering to a standard that was
superseded 31 years ago. I don't suppose you can take a standard
free form Fortran and compile it with that compiler.

On 2022-03-17, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> On Friday, March 11, 2022 at 9:58:49 AM UTC-7, Paul S Person wrote:
>> rOn Thu, 10 Mar 2022 16:00:40 -0600, Lynn McGuire
>> <lynnmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On 3/10/2022 11:26 AM, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
>> >> J. Clarke <jclarke...@gmail.com> wrote in
>> >> news:njdk2hdupos5se1md...@4ax.com:
>
>> >>> Many so-called "experts" cannot conceive of the concept of
>> >>> "Republicans win".
>>
>> >> They broke when Queen Hillary was denied her god-given right to
>> >> govern over us lesser subraces.
>>
>> >She may run again in 2024.
>>
>> Only in Donald Trump's wet dreams.
>>
> Actually, it was the voters of the United States of America that
> would have given Hillary Clinton the right to be President of the
> United States, except that members of a "lesser race" were
> obstructed in getting to the polls.
>
> The pandemic, leading to mail-in ballots, made voter suppression
> almost impossible, leading to the so-called "stolen" election of 2020,
> in which Trump was finally booted out, impeachment having failed
> due to blatantly partisan behavior by Republicans in Congress.

You do realize that the Black share of the electorate in 2020 was
*less* than it was in 2016? But why let mere facts interfere with
you arguments!

(The Hispanic share did increase, pretty much in line with the Hispanic
population growth in the 4 years.)

Chris

Chris Buckley <alan@sabir.com> writes:
>On 2022-03-17, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>> On Friday, March 11, 2022 at 9:58:49 AM UTC-7, Paul S Person wrote:

>You do realize that the Black share of the electorate in 2020 was
>*less* than it was in 2016?

Indeed - the GOP voter suppression activities in the deep south
were quite effective.

Trump still lost.

J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in
news:fql63hd3q798aakkhbrjjqln3lk6ncss6e@4ax.com:

> On Thu, 17 Mar 2022 05:58:01 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
> <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>
>>On Thursday, March 17, 2022 at 6:28:54 AM UTC-6, J. Clarke
>>wrote:
>>> On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 23:07:41 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
>>> <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> >But then, as a second precautionary measure, I think I would
>>> >have to partition the United States of America into blue
>>> >states and red states... and give the blue states the nuclear
>>> >capability.
>>
>>> Which makes you betterr than Putin because?
>>
>>Oh, please. Ensuring the survival of liberty is not the same as
>>attempting to exterminate freedom wherever it exists in the
>>world. Some might even say it's the exact opposite.
>
> The trouble is that you wouldn't recognize "liberty" if it beat
> you over the head with a durium cluebat. Your idea of "liberty"
> seems to be pretty much "do what Quadi says or die".
>
Very true. But really, is there another definition?

--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

Chris Buckley <alan@sabir.com> wrote in
news:j9h0rkFfphvU1@mid.individual.net:

> On 2022-03-17, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>> On Friday, March 11, 2022 at 9:58:49 AM UTC-7, Paul S Person
>> wrote:
>>> rOn Thu, 10 Mar 2022 16:00:40 -0600, Lynn McGuire
>>> <lynnmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >On 3/10/2022 11:26 AM, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
>>> >wrote:
>>> >> J. Clarke <jclarke...@gmail.com> wrote in
>>> >> news:njdk2hdupos5se1md...@4ax.com:
>>
>>> >>> Many so-called "experts" cannot conceive of the concept of
>>> >>> "Republicans win".
>>>
>>> >> They broke when Queen Hillary was denied her god-given
>>> >> right to govern over us lesser subraces.
>>>
>>> >She may run again in 2024.
>>>
>>> Only in Donald Trump's wet dreams.
>>>
>> Actually, it was the voters of the United States of America
>> that would have given Hillary Clinton the right to be President
>> of the United States, except that members of a "lesser race"
>> were obstructed in getting to the polls.
>>
>> The pandemic, leading to mail-in ballots, made voter
>> suppression almost impossible, leading to the so-called
>> "stolen" election of 2020, in which Trump was finally booted
>> out, impeachment having failed due to blatantly partisan
>> behavior by Republicans in Congress.
>
> You do realize that the Black share of the electorate in 2020
> was *less* than it was in 2016? But why let mere facts
> interfere with you arguments!

ar�gu�ment
/'�rgy?m?nt/

2. a reason or set of reasons given with the aim of persuading
others that an action or idea is right or wrong.
"there is a strong argument for submitting a formal appeal"

You misuse the word. Rather badly.

fan�ta�sy
/'fan(t)?se/

1. the faculty or activity of imagining things, especially things
that are impossible or improbable.
"his research had moved into the realm of fantasy"

--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote in
news:XAIYJ.167976$LN2.41076@fx13.iad:

> Chris Buckley <alan@sabir.com> writes:
>>On 2022-03-17, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>> On Friday, March 11, 2022 at 9:58:49 AM UTC-7, Paul S Person
>>> wrote:
>
>>You do realize that the Black share of the electorate in 2020
>>was *less* than it was in 2016?
>
> Indeed - the GOP voter suppression activities in the deep south
> were quite effective.
>
> Trump still lost.

If only because the Demcorats' voting fraud elsewhere (and coverup
after the fact) was better planned (due to extensive experience).

--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

On 17/03/2022 01.07, Quadibloc wrote:

> The novel "The Mouse that Roared" had the Duchy of Grand Fenwick
> come up with a bomb more powerful than the hydrogen bomb.

To quote from the back cover of the Bantam MMPB:

This book is about ... absent-minded Dr. Kokintz, U.S. atomic
scientist who invented the Quadium bomb, triggered by his
landlady's hairpin. The bomb was captured for Duchess
Gloriana XII by her expeditionary force of 20 longbowmen
who invaded the world's largest city under their flag where
one head says "Yes" and one "No," and frightened America
Civil Defense Workers who thought them men from Mars.

So it was an American scientist, working in the U.S. who came
up with the afore-mentioned bomb. It ended up in the Duchy's
possession because they took it.

It does seem improbable that everybody would behave themselves
just because this bomb could destroy the world, but in those
days we had the assumption that world leaders were rational.

Which leads to a YASID. Short story, probably read some time
between 1970 and 1990.

Everybody (literally) has some kind of device (possibly fastened
to an unbreakable collar) that they can use to blow up everything
(well, just the Earth). This leads to everybody (not just world
leaders) being on their best behavior, since picking on somebody
might "trigger" them to end it all, including you.

I think that eventually somebody discovers that the devices are
actually inoperative, but they've already served their purpose
and made everybody nice. I'm less sure of this part, but the
story makes absolutely no sense otherwise.

It suffers the same fatal flaw as does _The Mouse That Roared_,
which is that there are crazy people, and suicidal people
(think of de Camp's "Judgement Day"), and evil people in the
world.

Anybody remember this story?

--
Michael F. Stemper
Deuteronomy 24:17

"Michael F. Stemper" <michael.stemper@gmail.com> wrote in
news:t0vtm1$r4f$1@dont-email.me:

> On 17/03/2022 01.07, Quadibloc wrote:
>
>> The novel "The Mouse that Roared" had the Duchy of Grand Fenwick
>> come up with a bomb more powerful than the hydrogen bomb.
>
> To quote from the back cover of the Bantam MMPB:
>
> This book is about ... absent-minded Dr. Kokintz, U.S. atomic
> scientist who invented the Quadium bomb, triggered by his
> landlady's hairpin. The bomb was captured for Duchess
> Gloriana XII by her expeditionary force of 20 longbowmen
> who invaded the world's largest city under their flag where
> one head says "Yes" and one "No," and frightened America
> Civil Defense Workers who thought them men from Mars.
>
> So it was an American scientist, working in the U.S. who came
> up with the afore-mentioned bomb. It ended up in the Duchy's
> possession because they took it.
>
> It does seem improbable that everybody would behave themselves
> just because this bomb could destroy the world, but in those
> days we had the assumption that world leaders were rational.
>
I have never read the book (was it a novelation of the movie, or
was the movie based on it?), but I just watched the movie last
week, the premise was that most of the Duchy's income was from
their wine, and a US winery had come out with a cheap imitation
under a nearly trademark violating name, and protests went
unanswered. So, facing, bankrupty, they declared war on the US, and
sent their chainmail and longbow armed army to New York City with
the intent that they would surrender to the first authorities they
could find. Having lose a war with the US, they would then be given
lots and lots and lots of money to help them rebuild. (WWII was
still a fresh memory in 1959, so it was - in a satirical sense -
quite plausible.)

Wikipedia tells me the novel came out in 1955, so the move was an
adaptation. The plot summary is largely the same, though.

The important thing to remember is that the novel, and the move,
were comedic. Nitpicking over plausbility makes one look rather
silly.

--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

On 17/03/2022 13.47, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
> "Michael F. Stemper" <michael.stemper@gmail.com> wrote in
> news:t0vtm1$r4f$1@dont-email.me:
>
>> On 17/03/2022 01.07, Quadibloc wrote:
>>
>>> The novel "The Mouse that Roared" had the Duchy of Grand Fenwick
>>> come up with a bomb more powerful than the hydrogen bomb.
>>
>> To quote from the back cover of the Bantam MMPB:
>>
>> This book is about ... absent-minded Dr. Kokintz, U.S. atomic
>> scientist who invented the Quadium bomb, triggered by his
>> landlady's hairpin. The bomb was captured for Duchess
>> Gloriana XII by her expeditionary force of 20 longbowmen
>> who invaded the world's largest city under their flag where
>> one head says "Yes" and one "No," and frightened America
>> Civil Defense Workers who thought them men from Mars.
>>
>> So it was an American scientist, working in the U.S. who came
>> up with the afore-mentioned bomb. It ended up in the Duchy's
>> possession because they took it.
>>
>> It does seem improbable that everybody would behave themselves
>> just because this bomb could destroy the world, but in those
>> days we had the assumption that world leaders were rational.
>>
> I have never read the book (was it a novelation of the movie, or
> was the movie based on it?), but I just watched the movie last
> week, the premise was that most of the Duchy's income was from
> their wine, and a US winery had come out with a cheap imitation
> under a nearly trademark violating name, and protests went
> unanswered. So, facing, bankrupty, they declared war on the US, and
> sent their chainmail and longbow armed army to New York City with
> the intent that they would surrender to the first authorities they
> could find. Having lose a war with the US, they would then be given
> lots and lots and lots of money to help them rebuild. (WWII was
> still a fresh memory in 1959, so it was - in a satirical sense -
> quite plausible.)

Yeah, that's the same as the book.

> The important thing to remember is that the novel, and the move,
> were comedic. Nitpicking over plausbility makes one look rather
> silly.

I wasn't nitpicking, I was responding to Quadi's nit-pick (which
I had deleted). Hence the bit about "... but in those days ..."

--
Michael F. Stemper
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.

On 17/03/2022 10.54, J. Clarke wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Mar 2022 05:58:01 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
> <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>
>> On Thursday, March 17, 2022 at 6:28:54 AM UTC-6, J. Clarke wrote:
>>> On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 23:07:41 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
>>> <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>
>>>> But then, as a second precautionary measure, I think I would have to partition
>>>> the United States of America into blue states and red states... and give the
>>>> blue states the nuclear capability.
>>
>>> Which makes you betterr than Putin because?
>>
>> Oh, please. Ensuring the survival of liberty is not the same as
>> attempting to exterminate freedom wherever it exists in the
>> world. Some might even say it's the exact opposite.
>
> The trouble is that you wouldn't recognize "liberty" if it beat you
> over the head with a durium cluebat. Your idea of "liberty" seems to
> be pretty much "do what Quadi says or die".

Kind of like the way that the Pilgrims came here from England in search
of religious freedom. Which, as I understand it, meant "the freedom to
persecute those who don't believe as we do."

--
Michael F. Stemper
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.

On 3/17/2022 1:17 AM, Quadibloc wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 9, 2022 at 11:56:36 AM UTC-7, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>> After all, the USA does not really
>> have a dog in protecting central Europe from the Russians.
>
> Fine. Just protect central Europe from the Russians long enough for them
> to pay for their own strategic nuclear deterrent, out of their own pockets,
> as big and powerful as the one the United States has to protect its own soil.
>
> And on the diplomatic front, do what's needed to get the non-proliferation
> treaty out of the way.
>
> John Savard

I am continuously amazed that you think that the Russians will do
ANYTHING that is not in their own best interests.

Lynn