From: bill.sloman@ieee.org   
      
   On 6/02/2026 8:26 pm, Liz Tuddenham wrote:   
   > Bill Sloman  wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 6/02/2026 1:52 am, Liz Tuddenham wrote:   
   >>> Don Y  wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> I fully expect this to happen during Trump's administration.   
   >>>> He probably realizes he won't be able to do anything about it,   
   >>>> especially after his designs on other foreign countries and   
   >>>> alienation of his main allies.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> ["No, you haven't been ATTACKED by China so Article 5 doesn't   
   >>>> require us to come to your aid..."]   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Of course, more and more manufacturing is TRYING to be on-shored.   
   >>>> But, I suspect that is nowhere near enough to address the   
   >>>> potential of Taiwan going off-line -- even briefly.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> I'm thinking back to how screwed up the supply chain got during   
   >>>> COVID and wonder what manufacturers and investors will do when   
   >>>> the future is far less certain than a "pandemic".   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Opinions?   
   >>>   
   >>> We have sleepwalked into this and the few who have raised the alarm have   
   >>> been (and still are being) ignored and ridiculed.   
   >>>   
   >>> There is a wider problem: we have become 'travel junkies' and rely too   
   >>> much on transport.  "I can get it cheaper from..." doesn't take into   
   >>> account the hidden costs such as liability to supply disruption, loss of   
   >>> control over the design and the fundamental need to teach underlying   
   >>> principles and train people in making things themselves.   
   >>>   
   >>> We haven't got the factories.   
   >>> We haven't got the machines.   
   >>> We haven't got the people who know how to operste the machines.   
   >>> We haven't got the machines to make the machines.   
   >>> We haven't got the people who know how to make the machines   
   >>> We haven't got the material.   
   >>> We haven't got the undustry to make the materials.   
   >>>   
   >>> In the thrall of Greenwash we have simply exported the 'dirty' jobs to   
   >>> other countries and then added to the pollution by shipping the goods   
   >>> back.   
   >>>   
   >>> If Russia could do to the UK what it is doing to Ukraine, the country   
   >>> would have to surrender within a week.   
   >>   
   >> If the UK ignored the fact that it has it's own nuclear weapons and the   
   >> means to deliver them.   
   >   
   > Has it?  I thought they were dependent on the U.S. for delivery.   
      
   The ballistic missiles were manufactured in the US, but they do seem to   
   be under UK control. The proposition that the US engineered in secret   
   backdoors to let them disable the weapons if they were pointed at a   
   target that the US hadn't approved is one that every conspiracy theory   
   nut would bring forward, but UK military security is even deeper into   
   daft conspiracy theories than internet lunatics.   
      
   >> Putin might be mad enough to do that, but a   
   >> single surgical strike taking him out might lead to his replacement by   
   >> somebody somewhat saner.   
   >   
   > ...or someone even more extreme with the same hinterland of sycophants.   
      
   Sycophants do tend to cluster around the target of their flattery, so   
   taking out Putin would take out most of them.   
      
   Regular assassination does tend to be a bit too selective, but a larger   
   scale strike could take out quite a few of the me-too's.   
      
   --   
   Bill Sloman, Sydney   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)