HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: drk@cs.uiuc.edu (David Kohr)
Subject: Re: ignorance
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept of Comp Sci, Urbana, IL
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 19:09:34 GMT


In article <C0IJJK.993@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> jewell@mace.cc.purdue.edu
(Larry Jewell) writes:
>If you can stop the circular logic and double-speak, you might make sense,
>but since you can't, you just sound stupider and stupider.

Where's the circular logic?  Where's the double-speak?  Show me FROM MY OWN
POSTINGS, and quit making up bullshit accusations.  The more you do this,
the more stupid YOU look.

>You want us to forget about men left behind

Show me where I said this.

Since you won't be able to do this (because I never said any such thing),
at the very least tell us why we should think in the first place that there
are any "men left behind" who are still alive.

>You piss people off with your wimpy postings about "overpublizing the
>issue"

No, it seems I piss YOU off, but you are either incapable of or unwilling
to respond in a coherent fashion, so you resort to name-calling.

>I would love to put you in the place of one of those men who were left
>behind and have them here to be having an actual life.

Once again: tell us why we should think there are any "men who were left
behind" who are still alive.

>You're wasting the one you've got.
>
>Larry J

Curses and insults don't help make your point.  If anything, they are a
sign of weakness (and a real waste of time).
-- 
Dave Kohr     CS Graduate Student     Univ. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Work: 3244 DCL, (217)333-6561  Home: (217)359-9350  E-mail: drk@cs.uiuc.edu
                   "One either has none or not enough."
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam,talk.politics.misc
From: drk@cs.uiuc.edu (David Kohr)
Subject: Re: Call for an end to the flame-war
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept of Comp Sci, Urbana, IL
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 00:08:13 GMT


In article <1993Jan12.102325.19005@wetware.com> drieux@wetware.com (drieux,
just drieux) writes:
>drk@cs.uiuc.edu (David Kohr) writes:
>] Happy now drieux?
>
>Only if you are Happy that I have been pointing out the fact that being a
>Stooge of the International Kommunist Konspiracy has clouded your ability
>to reason.

I'm asking you; don't answer a question with a question.

And it would be interesting if you would make at least some effort to back
up your claim that I am a "Stooge of the International Kommunist
Konspiracy", but I suppose that that would require too much effort on your
part (even taking into account your remarkable talent for fabrication), and
just might expose you to more well-deserved ridicule.

>ps: what makes even less sense of your position is your continued
>unwillingness to accept that even the Main Stream Communist in Vietnam are
>not defending your Party Line...

So what is my Party Line drieux?  You sure have mentioned it a lot, maybe
you should tell us what it is.
-- 
Dave Kohr     CS Graduate Student     Univ. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Work: 3244 DCL, (217)333-6561  Home: (217)359-9350  E-mail: drk@cs.uiuc.edu
                   "One either has none or not enough."
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: drk@cs.uiuc.edu (David Kohr)
Subject: More charges of Historical Revisionism by drieux
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept of Comp Sci, Urbana, IL
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 00:28:13 GMT


In article <1993Jan9.215834.9930@wetware.com> drieux@wetware.com (drieux,
just drieux) writes:
> I merely went wondering about the minor matter of how the Voting
> Population threw out the Two CongreCritters who had voted against the
> Gulf Of Tonkien Resolution.

And I pointed out several times that I never, ever said "a majority" (the
kind that wins elections) seriously doubted the threat posed by the
Vietnamese Communists, merely "a great many".  Therefore drieux's
"refutation" is simply wrong.

>But then again, he is, as he likes to point out, a Graduate Student, and
>Hence, clearly far more Learned the myself, a mere lowly PeeOn with a bit
>of learning, and some serious understanding about "Your Friend the M-14."

Poorly-written satire is merely another typical cowardly, puerile attempt
at character defamation, and is apparently a standard tactic of drieux's.
Perhaps cogent argument takes too much effort, and isn't as much fun?

>When we have attempted to point out to David that he can read new things
>that have been put out there from both NLF and NVA sources, these he does
>not wish to deal with....

In fact, I have "dealt with them", but do not reach the same conclusions
you do.  But you continually ignore this point, because it does not further
your efforts at character assassination.

And look, drieux has once again pulled the child's prank of cross-posting
to talk.politics.misc to expand the flame war!
-- 
Dave Kohr     CS Graduate Student     Univ. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Work: 3244 DCL, (217)333-6561  Home: (217)359-9350  E-mail: drk@cs.uiuc.edu
                   "One either has none or not enough."
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: drk@cs.uiuc.edu (David Kohr)
Subject: Re: Call for an end to the flame-war
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept of Comp Sci, Urbana, IL
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 00:13:31 GMT

In article <1993Jan12.101926.18952@wetware.com> drieux@wetware.com (drieux,
just drieux) writes:
>do you understand the notion of 'email harrasment' or is that beyond your
>understanding of netequette?

Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't realize it's not nice to tell you that discussions
about abortion and uncle drieux's "seastories" about (failed?) sexual
exploits have little to do with the Vietnam War.
-- 
Dave Kohr     CS Graduate Student     Univ. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Work: 3244 DCL, (217)333-6561  Home: (217)359-9350  E-mail: drk@cs.uiuc.edu
                   "One either has none or not enough."
From: Monte Olsen <olsenm@ucs.orst.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
Subject: Re: ignorance
Date: 7 Jan 1993 18:54:15 GMT
Organization: University Computing Services - Oregon State University
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: rostb-mac.ads.orst.edu
X-UserAgent: Nuntius v1.1.1d12
X-XXMessage-ID: <A771BD614701A710@rostb-mac.ads.orst.edu>
X-XXDate: Thu, 7 Jan 93 18:58:41 GMT

In article <C0GH84.IGy@cs.uiuc.edu> David Kohr, drk@cs.uiuc.edu writes:
>
>Based on his cross-posting of his article to talk.politics.misc, it seems
>fair to judge that drieux is much more interested in participating in a
>mindless flame-war than an intelligent discussion.
>-- 


Dave,
This is in response to your private Email. 

Judging by the previous post, it's fairly obvious to me that the mindless
appelation should fall on your shoulders, not Drieux's. Isn't it
interesting that each time he asks you to think beyond the boundaries you
seem to have established for your own, narrow, little mind, you take
umbrage.

Why don't you grow up, mature a little or shut up.

Monte
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: jewell@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Larry Jewell)
Subject: Re: ignorance
Organization: Purdue University
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 02:14:07 GMT

Dave, you're still clueless.  If you can stop the circular logic and
double-speak, you might make sense, but since you can't, you just sound 
stupider and stupider.

You want us to forget about men left behind and get flamed for that,
and rightfully so.  You piss people off with your wimpy postings about
"overpublizing the issue", and run crying to momma when someone points
out that you are a fool.  Too bad.

I would love to put you in the place of one of those men who were left
behind and have them here to be having an actual life.  You're wasting
the one you've got.

Larry J
-- 
#L.W. Jewell Moderator at the Veterans Information Site (veteran@cc.purdue.edu)#
#& WWII-L Listowner: "Sunday's horoscope is note worthy because of its strange,#
#sudden and wholly unpredictable and inexplicable occurrences, affecting all   #
#phases of life." "Your Horoscope" L.A. Evening Herald Express, Sat, 12/06/41  #
From: monaghan@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (N.O. Monaghan)
Newsgroups: alt.war
Subject: Re: Roman Army sizes
Date: 12 Jan 93 13:35:41 GMT
Organization: Glasgow University Computing Science Dept.

"Thomas J. Joyce" <tj06+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

>Does anyone have any good references for establishing how large ancient
>army (particularly Roman) troop sizes were? Along the lines of cohort, etc.

One book to have a look at would be Hans Delbru"ck: History of the Art
of War Volume I Antiquity which discusses the size of ancient armies
amongst other things, although it is somewhat dated.

Nils.
Newsgroups: alt.war,soc.women,alt.war.vietnam
From: bhv@areaplg2.corp.mot.com (Bronis Vidugiris)
Subject: Re: Revenge of The Women In Combat thing....
Organization: Motorola, CCR&D, CORP, Schaumburg, IL
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 17:13:07 GMT

In article <16B4FA337.SURGDM@mizzou1.missouri.edu> SURGDM@mizzou1.missouri.edu (Diane) writes:
)In article <1993Jan7.021039.6855@msc.cornell.edu>
)hillyard@msc.cornell.edu writes:
) 
)>About a month ago I watched some Iron Man
)>Triathlon (x miles swimming, 112 biking and then a full marathon), the top men
)>finished in 8 hours, the top women 10% later.  So when is this greater
)>endurance supposed to take effect?
) 
)Apples and oranges. You're saying that the men finished 10% faster than the
)women, but speed was not the issue. The women remained in competition 10%
)longer than the men. That sounds like more endurance to me.
) 
)Diane

That seems like a very poor definition of endurance.  As other posters have
suggested, a definition of 'more endurance' as the ability to perform at some
specified level for a longer period of time is much more logical.  The
interesting question is how to specify the level of 'performance' that must
be maintained.  Something that does not directly involve size seems ideal -
different specifications can probably be explored, which may or may not
reveal differences and/or general trends.  Running seems like a reasonable
place to start.

The problem with defining endurance as simply 'taking longer' is that
it tends to confuse endurance with being physically unfit.  The two are
not the same.
Xref: sparky alt.war:2353 soc.women:22295 alt.war.vietnam:722
From: Monte Olsen <olsenm@ucs.orst.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.war,soc.women,alt.war.vietnam
Subject: Re: Revenge of The Women In Combat thing....
Date: 7 Jan 1993 19:00:54 GMT
Organization: University Computing Services - Oregon State University
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: rostb-mac.ads.orst.edu
X-UserAgent: Nuntius v1.1.1d12
X-XXMessage-ID: <A771BEF11B02A710@rostb-mac.ads.orst.edu>
X-XXDate: Thu, 7 Jan 93 19:05:21 GMT

In article <16B4FA337.SURGDM@mizzou1.missouri.edu> Diane,
SURGDM@mizzou1.missouri.edu writes:
> 


Let's disassociate ourselves from the current era, then. My father, a
ball turret gunner on a B-24 in "THE BIG ONE," was shot down twice. Once
he was saved by Yugoslavian partisans. Many of these partisans were women
whose husbands had been killed by Germans. They fought shoulder to
shoulder with the men and, in my father's opinion, were extremely
forthright, both in handling allied flyers and helping them return to
safety, and in fighting the Germans.

The mountains of Yugoslavia are fairly rugged. These women did, according
to my father, who, BTW, could be considered a bit of a male chauvinist (I
suppose I am too), were admirable fighters.

Monte
Xref: sparky alt.war:2371 soc.women:22409
From: cowan@ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu (P.L. Cowan)
Newsgroups: alt.war,soc.women
Subject: Iditarod (was Revenge of The Women In Combat thing)
Date: 9 Jan 93 08:37:34 -0800
Organization: SSRL, Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Lab
NNTP-Posting-Host: ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu

In article <lksssjINNlmi@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM>, falk@peregrine.Sun.COM (Ed Falk) writes:
> In article <1993Jan7.200931.15296@octel.com> cathy@octel.com (Cathy Kearns) writes:
>>
>>As I remember, there was a few years where women won the Ididiron (sp?). 
>>(Isn't that a rather long and strenuous dog sled race across an artic 
>>region of Canada.)
> 
> The Iditarod, across Alaska (Iditarod is the name of a small town about
> halfway along the route.)  A long time ago, during an epidemic, emergency

> Susan Butcher won it three times in a row, came in second or third the
> next year, and won it again the year after that.
> 
> 		-ed falk, sun microsystems


I don't know the precise record, but in addition to Susan Butcher's string
of victories, another woman won it the year before Susan's first.

-- 
Paul Cowan     
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Please send replies, comments etc. (no flames thank you) to COWAN@ANL.GOV   
"If anyone disagrees with anything I say, I am quite prepared not only to
retract it, but also to deny under oath that I ever said it." Tom Lehrer
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.war,soc.women,alt.war.vietnam
From: jarthur@bnr.ca (John Thompson)
Subject: Re: Revenge of The Women In Combat thing....
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 14:30:14 GMT
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Richardson, Tx.


I don't want to seem anti-feminist or anything, but it seems to me that the
Iditarod winner is usually praised for their ability to train a winning team
of dogs.  Perhaps it would be more informative if we knew the gender of the
dogs!

As to who should be allowed in combat, I think anyone who thinks there's
glory to be won and really wants to fight should be allowed to give it a
try!  My experience was that about 99.9% of the male participants would
gladly have let a woman take their place at one time or another.
Newsgroups: alt.war
Subject: Re: Revenge of The Women In Combat thing.... 
From: mike@aloysius.equinox.gen.nz (Mike Campbell)
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 93 04:36:59 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Me? Organized?


In article <1993Jan7.021039.6855@msc.cornell.edu> hillyard@msc.cornell.edu writes:

  >  But I am somewhat skeptical of common claim 
  > that women have better endurance.  Looking at track and field (something with
  > nice, objective performance ratings), the difference between men's and women's
  > world class times are the same 10% from the 100m dash to the marathon.  Maybe 
  > a marathon isn't long enough?  About a month ago I watched some Iron Man 
  > Triathlon (x miles swimming, 112 biking and then a full marathon), the top men
  > finished in 8 hours, the top women 10% later.  So when is this greater 
  > endurance supposed to take effect?  [a quick note is that world class track 
  > times are about 10% different, as you go down in ability the difference 
  > widens, to about 20-30% for Div III times, for example.]

However what you are talking about in your post is SPEED, not 
endurance.  Have everybody run until they die - that measures 
endurance :-)

I've no idea which sex would have better endurance (as a general 
rule), but as another general rule - if someone can do it then I don't 
see any reason not to let them.



Mike Campbell, Christchurch, New Zealand
mike@aloysius.equinox.gen.nz 
Newsgroups: alt.war,soc.women,alt.war.vietnam
From: f12008ad@triton.unm.edu (Student Class Account)
Subject: Re: Revenge of The Women In Combat thing....
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 93 22:54:04 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

     I am of the crowd who believes that there are certainly many examples of
women who would perform well in combat.  There are women who are just as
physically and mentally able as the average foot soldier.  However, these
women are in the minority of the women currently serving in the armed forces.
Perhaps this is due to societal discrimination during childhood, but this is
not the issue.  The purpose of the military is to fight wars, not lead
societal reform.  The issue is:  can women serve in combat without lowering
the effectiveness of the armed forces.  I think they can if they are 
equally qualified and pass the same test, same training, and are held to the
same standards as men.  I do not think that these requirements would stand
up in the current political and legal systems.  Here are a couple of examples:

     In 1982, the army ammended its military entrance strength test to be
gender free (same strength requ despite sex).  The Woman's Equality Action
League said that the test unfairly discriminated against women because only
11% of women could pass the test, thus leaving the remaining 89% unqualified
for many combat support roles.  So the question is:  Would gender free 
requirements stand up politically or in court?  Today, women in the military
are not held to the same physical standards as men.  Their physical fitness
tests are scored on a different scale.  The fact is that gender free strength
requirements are discriminatory to women.  The average woman is not as strong
as the average man.  Exceptions abound, but the averages hold.

     What about the issue of pregnancy and child care?  Should women not be
allowed to have children while in the service to ensure that this is not
an issue?  I don't think the military will ever have the right to tell a
woman that she may not, under penalty of discharge, get pregnant.  So, the
issue remains.  In 1989, a woman filed suit against the Army demanding a
hardship discharge.  Her unit was being sent to South Korea and military
personnel were not allow to bring dependents.  She did not want anyone, 
including family members, but here to raise her child.  When she became
pregnant, the Army offered her a discharge (as was their policy twords all
pregnancies).  The woman could stay in the Army provided she sign a contract
to transfer with her unit without dependents in the eventuality that a conflict
should arise.  The Army paid for all of the medical bills, gave her extra
pay for dependents, and placed her on limited duty during her pregnancy. 
Despite the contract she won the suit and did not go with her unit.  Can
the armed forces fully integrate women so long as pregnancy and children can
be used to avoid unwanted transfers?

David Saville
f12008ad@triton.unm.edu
From: HADCRJAM@admin.uh.edu (MILLER, JIMMY A.)
Newsgroups: alt.war
Subject: Re: Revenge of The Women In Combat thing....
Date: 7 Jan 1993 18:47:50 GMT
Organization: University of Houston Administrative Computing
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: uhad2.admin.uh.edu
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.20

In <16B4FA337.SURGDM@mizzou1.missouri.edu> SURGDM@mizzou1.missouri.edu writes:

> In article <1993Jan7.021039.6855@msc.cornell.edu>
> hillyard@msc.cornell.edu writes:
>  
> >About a month ago I watched some Iron Man
> >Triathlon (x miles swimming, 112 biking and then a full marathon), the top men
> >finished in 8 hours, the top women 10% later.  So when is this greater
> >endurance supposed to take effect?
>  
> Apples and oranges. You're saying that the men finished 10% faster than the
> women, but speed was not the issue. The women remained in competition 10%
> longer than the men. That sounds like more endurance to me.

  In a race of equal length, I would think speed *is* a valid criteria for
determining endurance *at that level*.  Consider:  Does a person who WALKS a
marathon for 6 hours (or however long it would take to walk 26 miles) have 
*more* endurance than one who can JOG that far, or *less*, assuming that said 
person could not also jog the 26 miles?  Not being an expert, I'd go with the
jogger as having more endurance - at that distance level.  We could look at it
as each person has a static amount of energy they can generate, and how fast you
use it is a factor in how long you can go on, as well as how much you have to
start with.

  Now, I do see your point.  Men finishing faster in a race of x length doesn't
really mean much about *overall* endurance.  People who could beat the pants 
off me in 100-yard dashes used to fall apart halfway into a mile run...I'd
beat their best times by over a minute...And then where I could best a mara-
thoner for a mile or two, I'd fall apart at 2.5, and they'd keep going.

  I suppose a true "Ironperson" contest would simply continue until the last
competitor dropped of exhaustion.  Then we'd know! :-) (or has it been done?) 


semper fi,

Jammer Jim Miller 
Texas A&M University '89 and '91
********************************************************************************
* Speak for my employers?  They don't even know I exist!		       *
*"Become one with the Student Billing System. *BE* the Student Billing System."*
* "Power finds its way to those who take a stand.  Stand up, Ordinary Man."    *
*      ---Rik Emmet, Gil Moore, Mike Levine: Triumph 		               *
********************************************************************************
From: HADCRJAM@admin.uh.edu (MILLER, JIMMY A.)
Newsgroups: alt.war
Subject: Re: Iditarod (was Revenge of The Women In Combat thing)
Date: 10 Jan 1993 04:57:55 GMT
Organization: University of Houston Administrative Computing
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: uhad6.admin.uh.edu
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.20


 [A woman has won most of the recent Iditarods...]

  Remember, gang, we're talking about male/female endurance across a wide
spectrum.  *One* type of race, with a particular individual, does not a 
generalization disprove.  The original poster's notion of comparing
world-class runner times and such is a much more realistic approach for such a
range.  There will always be exceptions, though.  I reckon the question is 
really how *much* physical capability is enough.  And, to be truly equal,
women cannot be *allowed* to choose combat roles, they have to be *assigned*
them, just like thier male counterparts, or you will have a fertile ground
for some justified resentment on the part of the men.


semper fi,

Jammer Jim Miller 
Texas A&M University '89 and '91
********************************************************************************
* Speak for my employers?  They don't even know I exist!		       *
*"Become one with the Student Billing System. *BE* the Student Billing System."*
* "Power finds its way to those who take a stand.  Stand up, Ordinary Man."    *
*      ---Rik Emmet, Gil Moore, Mike Levine: Triumph 		               *
********************************************************************************
Xref: sparky alt.war:2344 soc.women:22259 alt.war.vietnam:714