Ahem A Rivet's Shot said:
> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 13:26:16 -0500
> Richard Robinson <richardR@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot said:
>
>> > Well now perhaps if the requirement for declaring war was that
>> > the declarer must lose their head it might go a long way to curtailing
>> > the practice.
>>
>> Put 'em up front when the shooting starts. They used to, didn't they ?
>
> Yep it certainly used to be the case that if you wanted people to
> charge into battle for you then you had to be in front and when you went
> down they went home. There seems to be a lot to be said for it, but I note
> that in those days they *did* go out in front quite a lot so it's probably
> not the deterrent I'd like to hope it was.

Never mind deterrence, just think "Darwin".

>> Less drastic was an early-80s piece in New Scientist: "Psychiatrists For
>> Peace". All national leaders with access to a Big Red Button has a
>> psychiatrist keeping an eye on them, so that if they show any signs of
>> pushing it they get sectioned as self-evidently MAD.
>
> Simpler, just wire the BRB to their pacemaker (give them one even
> if they don't need it) and let them know that they will be the first
> victim and their courage will be honoured - don't tell them that they'll be
> the *only* victim and don't tell anyone else how they died.

*laughter*

--
Richard Robinson
"The whole plan hinged upon the natural curiosity of potatoes" - S. Lem

My email address is at http://qualmograph.org.uk/contact.html

On 29/03/2022 08:27, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>
> When I look at right now (being most of my life) I breathe sighs of
> relief as we dodge bullet after bullet and don't quite get round to wiping
> ourselves out. As a child, adolescent and young adult I expected us to lose
> this game, in 1980 I would not have taken odds on seeing 2000. Since 1990 I
> have been increasingly optimistic about our long term future.
>
> The current horror in the Ukraine feels like it might become another
> nail in the coffin of war - no matter how it comes out the cost to Russia
> will be far greater than any possible gain. It probably already has been.

If sanctions continue to be imposed on Russia until they withdraw, pay
reparations, and turn Putin over for trial as a war criminal, that might
help. Just as long as there isn't then what Russians would perceive as
deliberate humiliation.

> if the Ukrainians turn out to be the people who teach the Russians
> that war is bad idea then we should celebrate them throughout the rest of
> history. That's the only outcome I would call a win, sadly I suspect
> they'll only manage to emphasise the point - but we can hope.
>
> Time was we accepted the cold war as the price of preventing an
> unstoppable wave of Soviet Union tanks sweeping across the whole of Europe.
> That the remnants of that force now fails to sweep across a tiny fraction of
> Europe is good - that they tried is TERRIBLE.

The question has been asked - what's the point of Nato now there's no
Warsaw Pact? I think that Russia has managed to demonstrate the need for
Nato very adequately, which was possibly not one of the desired outcomes.

> My only real fear is that they will be even more stupid and lash
> out with nukes before they give up. I really really hope that doesn't
> happen and I don't think it will because I'm pretty sure Russia can't
> credibly threaten MAD, but if it does then climate issues and trying
> to feed ten billion will seem like problems we'd really like to have.

I think that if Putin does try and launch, one of his subordinates will
assassinate him to prevent it.

On 29/03/2022 20:21, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 13:26:16 -0500
> Richard Robinson <richardR@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot said:
>
>>> Well now perhaps if the requirement for declaring war was that
>>> the declarer must lose their head it might go a long way to curtailing
>>> the practice.
>>
>> Put 'em up front when the shooting starts. They used to, didn't they ?
>
> Yep it certainly used to be the case that if you wanted people to
> charge into battle for you then you had to be in front and when you went
> down they went home. There seems to be a lot to be said for it, but I note
> that in those days they *did* go out in front quite a lot so it's probably
> not the deterrent I'd like to hope it was.

I'm not sure about the "went home" bit. I don't think there was a
concept of prisoners of war then, so your survival if you were on the
losing side depended on your speed over the ground.

On 29/03/2022 21:50, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> On 29-Mar-22 19:26, Richard Robinson wrote:
>
>> Less drastic was an early-80s piece in New Scientist: "Psychiatrists For
>> Peace". All national leaders with access to a Big Red Button has a
>> psychiatrist keeping an eye on them, so that if they show any signs of
>> pushing it they get sectioned as self-evidently MAD.
>>
>> It never got taken seriously, though ...
>
> Good.  Is there much evidence that the people who go into the
> psychiatric profession are themselves stable and sane?

In the same way as doctors are dedicated to the well-being of their
patients? That Dr Shipman, such a nice man.

On 30/03/2022 01:15, Mike Fleming wrote:
> I think that if Putin does try and launch, one of his subordinates will
> assassinate him to prevent it.

Or somewhere the chain of command will break down if they think he's the
agressor.

Tone

On 29/03/2022 21:50, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> Is there much evidence that the people who go into the psychiatric
> profession are themselves stable and sane?

I lived with a psychotherapist for a couple of years.

She was brilliant at helping folks deal with their behavioural problems,
but was hopeless at dealing with her own.

Good shag though.

Tone

On 30/03/2022 01:23, Mike Fleming wrote:
> On 29/03/2022 21:50, Sam Plusnet wrote:
>> On 29-Mar-22 19:26, Richard Robinson wrote:
>>
>>> Less drastic was an early-80s piece in New Scientist: "Psychiatrists For
>>> Peace". All national leaders with access to a Big Red Button has a
>>> psychiatrist keeping an eye on them, so that if they show any signs of
>>> pushing it they get sectioned as self-evidently MAD.
>>>
>>> It never got taken seriously, though ...
>>
>> Good.  Is there much evidence that the people who go into the
>> psychiatric profession are themselves stable and sane?
>
> In the same way as doctors are dedicated to the well-being of their
> patients? That Dr Shipman, such a nice man.
>
His patients all gooved so too.

--
Rusty Hinge
To err is human. To really foul things up requires a computer and the BOFH.

On Tuesday, March 29, 2022 at 7:32:52 PM UTC-5, RustyHinge wrote:
> On 30/03/2022 01:23, Mike Fleming wrote:
> > On 29/03/2022 21:50, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> >> On 29-Mar-22 19:26, Richard Robinson wrote:
> >>
> >>> Less drastic was an early-80s piece in New Scientist: "Psychiatrists For
> >>> Peace". All national leaders with access to a Big Red Button has a
> >>> psychiatrist keeping an eye on them, so that if they show any signs of
> >>> pushing it they get sectioned as self-evidently MAD.
> >>>
> >>> It never got taken seriously, though ...
> >>
> >> Good. Is there much evidence that the people who go into the
> >> psychiatric profession are themselves stable and sane?
> >
> > In the same way as doctors are dedicated to the well-being of their
> > patients? That Dr Shipman, such a nice man.
> >
> His patients all gooved so too.
>
> --
> Rusty Hinge
> To err is human. To really foul things up requires a computer and the BOFH.

Deep carpeting is really the best.

On 30/03/2022 01:24, Tone wrote:
> On 30/03/2022 01:15, Mike Fleming wrote:
>> I think that if Putin does try and launch, one of his subordinates
>> will assassinate him to prevent it.
>
> Or somewhere the chain of command will break down if they think he's the
> agressor.
>
Not verified, but I hope the story I heard recently about some submarine
commanders disabling the radio link to Moscow at the height of the Cold
War is true.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> writes:

> Yep it certainly used to be the case that if you wanted people to
> charge into battle for you then you had to be in front and when you went
> down they went home. There seems to be a lot to be said for it, but I note
> that in those days they *did* go out in front quite a lot so it's probably
> not the deterrent I'd like to hope it was.

Henry V was the last one to do that was he not?

And BTW, didn't he get a binding agreement that would make HM queen
of France?

--
Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada

Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> writes:

> Is there much evidence that the people who go into the
> psychiatric profession are themselves stable and sane?

It was an aphorism when I was in school that people who undertook
undergraduate majors in psychology did so because they were obsessed
with the question, "Why am I so shpxrq up?"

Then (in that era) they found out that psychology was about rats.

I have no notion of how this may have influenced the current
population of clinica psychologists and psychiatrists.

--
Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada

On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 06:32:36 +0100
John Williamson <johnwilliamson@btinternet.com> wrote:

> On 30/03/2022 01:24, Tone wrote:
> > On 30/03/2022 01:15, Mike Fleming wrote:
> >> I think that if Putin does try and launch, one of his subordinates
> >> will assassinate him to prevent it.
> >
> > Or somewhere the chain of command will break down if they think he's the
> > agressor.
> >
> Not verified, but I hope the story I heard recently about some submarine
> commanders disabling the radio link to Moscow at the height of the Cold
> War is true.

There were also stories of drills where fights broke out and people
got shot instead of missiles being (dummy) launched, but it only takes one
to obey orders and launch for there to be an awful mess that will take
centuries to clean up if there's anyone left to do it.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/

On 2022-03-29, Nick Odell <nick@themusicworkshop.plus.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 13:26:16 -0500, Richard Robinson
><richardR@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>>Ahem A Rivet's Shot said:
>>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 15:13:35 +0100
>>> "Nicholas D. Richards" <nicholas@salmiron.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Unlikely, due to a simple expedient adopted by Henry VII and completed
>>>> by Henry VIII. They simply separated the heads from the bodies of any
>>It never got taken seriously, though ...
>
> Shades of the fully automated airliner with just a man and a dog in
> the cockpit....
>
>
> Nick

Shades of the 737 that crashed recently in china

--
greymausg@mail.com
That's not a mousehole!

On 2022-03-29, Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
> On 29-Mar-22 19:26, Richard Robinson wrote:
>
>> Less drastic was an early-80s piece in New Scientist: "Psychiatrists For
>> Peace". All national leaders with access to a Big Red Button has a
>> psychiatrist keeping an eye on them, so that if they show any signs of
>> pushing it they get sectioned as self-evidently MAD.
>>
>> It never got taken seriously, though ...
>
> Good. Is there much evidence that the people who go into the
> psychiatric profession are themselves stable and sane?
>
>

I know that some have serious personal problems. Well, I would consider
them so. Everyone has some less dangerous. How would such people be
chosen, or by who. Boris? There is a Latin quote about it.

--
greymausg@mail.com
That's not a mousehole!

On 2022-03-30, Tone <tone@email.com> wrote:
> On 29/03/2022 21:50, Sam Plusnet wrote:
>> Is there much evidence that the people who go into the psychiatric
>> profession are themselves stable and sane?
>
> I lived with a psychotherapist for a couple of years.
>
> She was brilliant at helping folks deal with their behavioural problems,
> but was hopeless at dealing with her own.
>
> Good shag though.
>
> Tone
>
>
Shag as in deep carpet?.

--
greymausg@mail.com
That's not a mousehole!

On 30/03/2022 09:03, maus wrote:
> On 2022-03-30, Tone <tone@email.com> wrote:
>> On 29/03/2022 21:50, Sam Plusnet wrote:
>>> Is there much evidence that the people who go into the psychiatric
>>> profession are themselves stable and sane?
>>
>> I lived with a psychotherapist for a couple of years.
>>
>> She was brilliant at helping folks deal with their behavioural problems,
>> but was hopeless at dealing with her own.
>>
>> Good shag though.
>>
>> Tone
>>
>>
> Shag as in deep carpet?.
>

Yes, on that too.

Tone

On 30 Mar 2022 08:03:40 GMT
maus <maus@dmaus.org> wrote:

> On 2022-03-30, Tone <tone@email.com> wrote:
> > On 29/03/2022 21:50, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> >> Is there much evidence that the people who go into the psychiatric
> >> profession are themselves stable and sane?
> >
> > I lived with a psychotherapist for a couple of years.
> >
> > She was brilliant at helping folks deal with their behavioural
> > problems, but was hopeless at dealing with her own.
> >
> > Good shag though.
> >
> Shag as in deep carpet?.

Carpet tends to burn no matter how deep DAMHIK.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/

In article <jahm4kFp8caU2@mid.individual.net>, Mike Fleming
<mike@tauzero.co.uk> on Wed, 30 Mar 2022 at 01:21:39 awoke Nicholas
from his slumbers and wrote
>On 29/03/2022 20:21, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 13:26:16 -0500
>> Richard Robinson <richardR@privacy.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot said:
>>
>>>> Well now perhaps if the requirement for declaring war was that
>>>> the declarer must lose their head it might go a long way to curtailing
>>>> the practice.
>>>
>>> Put 'em up front when the shooting starts. They used to, didn't they ?
>>
>> Yep it certainly used to be the case that if you wanted people to
>> charge into battle for you then you had to be in front and when you went
>> down they went home. There seems to be a lot to be said for it, but I note
>> that in those days they *did* go out in front quite a lot so it's probably
>> not the deterrent I'd like to hope it was.
>
>I'm not sure about the "went home" bit. I don't think there was a
>concept of prisoners of war then, so your survival if you were on the
>losing side depended on your speed over the ground.

Survival depended upon, amongst other things, your ransom value. In
quality armour with your coat of arms on your surcoat, would see you
paroled and sent back to the rear. None of those, your head or chest
would be stoved in, if you were lucky.

Shakespeare's Richard III, who appears to have led from the front, was
not even fast enough over the ground.

Some Russian generals appear to have been leading from the front <cough>
which is not the best place to lead from in the case of modern war.
--
0sterc@tcher -

"Où sont les neiges d'antan?"

Nicholas D. Richards said:
> In article <jahm4kFp8caU2@mid.individual.net>, Mike Fleming
><mike@tauzero.co.uk> on Wed, 30 Mar 2022 at 01:21:39 awoke Nicholas
> from his slumbers and wrote
>>On 29/03/2022 20:21, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 13:26:16 -0500
>>> Richard Robinson <richardR@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot said:
>>>
>>>>> Well now perhaps if the requirement for declaring war was that
>>>>> the declarer must lose their head it might go a long way to curtailing
>>>>> the practice.
>>>>
>>>> Put 'em up front when the shooting starts. They used to, didn't they ?
>>>
>>> Yep it certainly used to be the case that if you wanted people to
>>> charge into battle for you then you had to be in front and when you went
>>> down they went home. There seems to be a lot to be said for it, but I note
>>> that in those days they *did* go out in front quite a lot so it's probably
>>> not the deterrent I'd like to hope it was.
>>
>>I'm not sure about the "went home" bit. I don't think there was a
>>concept of prisoners of war then, so your survival if you were on the
>>losing side depended on your speed over the ground.
>
> Survival depended upon, amongst other things, your ransom value. In
> quality armour with your coat of arms on your surcoat, would see you
> paroled and sent back to the rear. None of those, your head or chest
> would be stoved in, if you were lucky.
>
> Shakespeare's Richard III, who appears to have led from the front, was
> not even fast enough over the ground.
>
> Some Russian generals appear to have been leading from the front <cough>
> which is not the best place to lead from in the case of modern war.

I think that was the point, wasn't it, that there'd be less of it if
more of them did ?

That WW1 phrase about "Lions led by donkeys" is surreal - if you see a
pack of lions following along behind a donkey, what do you expect to
happen next ?

--
Richard Robinson
"The whole plan hinged upon the natural curiosity of potatoes" - S. Lem

My email address is at http://qualmograph.org.uk/contact.html

On 30 Mar 2022 07:57:52 GMT, maus <maus@dmaus.org> wrote:

>On 2022-03-29, Nick Odell <nick@themusicworkshop.plus.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 13:26:16 -0500, Richard Robinson
>><richardR@privacy.net> wrote:
>>
>>>Ahem A Rivet's Shot said:
>>>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 15:13:35 +0100
>>>> "Nicholas D. Richards" <nicholas@salmiron.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Unlikely, due to a simple expedient adopted by Henry VII and completed
>>>>> by Henry VIII. They simply separated the heads from the bodies of any
>>>It never got taken seriously, though ...
>>
>> Shades of the fully automated airliner with just a man and a dog in
>> the cockpit....
>>
>>
>> Nick
>
>Shades of the 737 that crashed recently in china

Sadly, that cockpit didn't appear to have had the dog.

In some circles they are saying that this is all looking very much
like Germanwings 9525 but with a Chinese airliner in Chinese territory
I don't have a lot of confidence that the real answers will come out.

Nick

On 30/03/2022 00:40, Richard Robinson wrote:
> Nick Odell said:
>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 21:50:09 +0100, Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 29-Mar-22 19:26, Richard Robinson wrote:
>>>
>>>> Less drastic was an early-80s piece in New Scientist: "Psychiatrists For
>>>> Peace". All national leaders with access to a Big Red Button has a
>>>> psychiatrist keeping an eye on them, so that if they show any signs of
>>>> pushing it they get sectioned as self-evidently MAD.
>>>>
>>>> It never got taken seriously, though ...
>>>
>>> Good. Is there much evidence that the people who go into the
>>> psychiatric profession are themselves stable and sane?
>>
>> Quis psychiatriet ipsos psychiatres sort of thing?
>
> Who would look for such evidence, and evaluate it ?
>
>

Don't psychiatrists have to undergo regular psychiatric examination?

--
Chris Elvidge
England

On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 15:04:56 +0100, Chris Elvidge <chris@mshome.net>
wrote:

>On 30/03/2022 00:40, Richard Robinson wrote:
>> Nick Odell said:
>>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 21:50:09 +0100, Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 29-Mar-22 19:26, Richard Robinson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Less drastic was an early-80s piece in New Scientist: "Psychiatrists For
>>>>> Peace". All national leaders with access to a Big Red Button has a
>>>>> psychiatrist keeping an eye on them, so that if they show any signs of
>>>>> pushing it they get sectioned as self-evidently MAD.
>>>>>
>>>>> It never got taken seriously, though ...
>>>>
>>>> Good. Is there much evidence that the people who go into the
>>>> psychiatric profession are themselves stable and sane?
>>>
>>> Quis psychiatriet ipsos psychiatres sort of thing?
>>
>> Who would look for such evidence, and evaluate it ?
>>
>>
>
>Don't psychiatrists have to undergo regular psychiatric examination?

That's certainly the impression I got from listening to shows like All
In The Mind on BBC Radio 4 but I didn't have a cod-Latin phrase handy
to explain that.

Nick

On 2022-03-30, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On 30 Mar 2022 08:03:40 GMT
> maus <maus@dmaus.org> wrote:
>
>> On 2022-03-30, Tone <tone@email.com> wrote:
>> > On 29/03/2022 21:50, Sam Plusnet wrote:
>> >> Is there much evidence that the people who go into the psychiatric
>> >> profession are themselves stable and sane?
>> >
>> > I lived with a psychotherapist for a couple of years.
>> >
>> > She was brilliant at helping folks deal with their behavioural
>> > problems, but was hopeless at dealing with her own.
>> >
>> > Good shag though.
>> >
>> Shag as in deep carpet?.
>
> Carpet tends to burn no matter how deep DAMHIK.
>

Not real wool carpets.

--
greymausg@mail.com
That's not a mousehole!

On 2022-03-30, Richard Robinson <richardR@privacy.net> wrote:
> Nicholas D. Richards said:
>> In article <jahm4kFp8caU2@mid.individual.net>, Mike Fleming
>><mike@tauzero.co.uk> on Wed, 30 Mar 2022 at 01:21:39 awoke Nicholas
>> from his slumbers and wrote
>>>On 29/03/2022 20:21, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 13:26:16 -0500
>>>> Richard Robinson <richardR@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>
>> Shakespeare's Richard III, who appears to have led from the front, was
>> not even fast enough over the ground.
>>
>> Some Russian generals appear to have been leading from the front <cough>
>> which is not the best place to lead from in the case of modern war.
>
>
> I think that was the point, wasn't it, that there'd be less of it if
> more of them did ?
>
>
> That WW1 phrase about "Lions led by donkeys" is surreal - if you see a
> pack of lions following along behind a donkey, what do you expect to
> happen next ?
>

The Military theory at the time was that the Generals would be affected
by the deaths and suffering of the front line troops, so the idea was
that they would make the plans in places well away from the front line,
and do something else while the attack was going on. Maybe go fishing.

--
greymausg@mail.com
That's not a mousehole!

On 2022-03-30, Chris Elvidge <chris@mshome.net> wrote:
> On 30/03/2022 00:40, Richard Robinson wrote:
>> Nick Odell said:
>>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 21:50:09 +0100, Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 29-Mar-22 19:26, Richard Robinson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Less drastic was an early-80s piece in New Scientist: "Psychiatrists For
>>>>> Peace". All national leaders with access to a Big Red Button has a
>>>>> psychiatrist keeping an eye on them, so that if they show any signs of
>>>>> pushing it they get sectioned as self-evidently MAD.
>>>>>
>>>>> It never got taken seriously, though ...
>>>>
>>>> Good. Is there much evidence that the people who go into the
>>>> psychiatric profession are themselves stable and sane?
>>>
>>> Quis psychiatriet ipsos psychiatres sort of thing?
>>
>> Who would look for such evidence, and evaluate it ?
>>
>>
>
> Don't psychiatrists have to undergo regular psychiatric examination?
>
Yes, by other psychiatrists :)

I knew a man who worked in a [loony bin]. He used say that dealing with
alternative views of the world would eventually make anyone crazy.

In the original Bedlam, they charged admission for casual visitors

--
greymausg@mail.com
That's not a mousehole!