[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 24, 2:03 pm, "ScottW" wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in oglegroups.com...





On Oct 24, 11:35 am, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
wrote:
On Oct 24, 11:08 am, "ScottW" wrote:

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in
ooglegroups.com...

On Oct 23, 10:39 pm, "ScottW" wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in
ooglegroups.com...

On Oct 23, 3:47 pm, "ScottW" wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in
Here's the question for you 2pid:

Do you 'think' JFK would have lied to Congress, would have told his
advisors what to tell him, would've been ultimately concerned with
"keeping everybody 'on the Johnson [Kennedy] team'", would have
secretly sent in combat troops in dribs and drabs until we were
actually committed before anybody knew what was happening, would
have
been as open to the machinations of the JCOS and others, would have
been ultimately concerned with loyalty and presenting a united
front...

Maybe that's a question for you... my question is much simpler..
would Kennedy have pulled out of Vietnam in '65 or sent in
the troops? All the rest of your pontification is irrelevant to
this fundamental question.

Without understanding how the combat troops were sent, 'discussing'
this with you is irrelevant.

Another in a long list of absurd proclamations.

Really, 2pid. I saw someone say that you're an engineer. Is that true?

Here, a formula:

X + Y = Z

What are the values of each, 2pid?

Take your time.

Thanks for proving my point. You remain irrelevant.

What's the matter? Not smart enough to do it?

OK, 2pid, I'll help you out he

(Kennedy's actions, policies, and positions) + (Johnson's actions,
policies, and positions) = (combat troops deployed and mired in
Vietnam)

We know the value of "Z": combat troops were deployed and mired in
Vietnam.

We (actually, I) know the value of "Y": Johnson's actions, policies,
and positions.

We have only a partial record of "X": We know Kennedy's stated
positions and policies. He did not live long enough to act.

Would it be easier for you to solve for the value of "X" knowing the
other two values? How is total ignorance of one of the values (and one
of the two values that we absolutely know) helpful in solving the
problem?

Even at math you suck.
If Z is fixed as you've done and X and Y are variables you
ask, what is X as Y goes to zero?
That's really dumb. I don't think you really want to know.

Even simple illustrations are over your head? Wow.

I didn't fix "Z", you did. That was fixed, IYO, by the Diem coup.

"X" or "Y" cannot go down to zero. That's impossible, which makes your
question irrelevant.

We've been 'discussing' "X". So, IYO, is understanding "Y" unimportant
in understanding "Z" (considering it's the only variable we know *for
sure*), and might it also be helpful to look at differences in "X" and
"Y" to see how things very likely would have been very different?

You see, 2pid, I have a different conclusion than you do. But you have
taken only part of one variable and "fixed" the conclusion.

I'm trying to communicate with you in a form that you can communicate
in. Complex English was proven inadequate long ago.