From: snow <snow@smoke.suba.com>
To: jf_avon@citenet.net (Jean-Francois Avon)
Message Hash: 6ec7c0c6c66fc054a5c58ef6d72a9e85cb87ece98f77cb9c24977efc716840ed
Message ID: <199609270146.UAA00509@smoke.suba.com>
Reply To: <9609251433.AB02026@cti02.citenet.net>
UTC Datetime: 1996-09-27 05:14:22 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 27 Sep 1996 13:14:22 +0800
From: snow <snow@smoke.suba.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 1996 13:14:22 +0800
To: jf_avon@citenet.net (Jean-Francois Avon)
Subject: Re: Hallam-Baker demands more repudiations or he'll write!
In-Reply-To: <9609251433.AB02026@cti02.citenet.net>
Message-ID: <199609270146.UAA00509@smoke.suba.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text
> On 25 Sep 96 at 5:59, Brian Davis wrote:
> > I disagree that that will be the response, but you should be willing
> > to allow one group of people to fight fire with fire.
> But generally, it has been found a much better solution to fight fire
> with water, and this is why I am not convinced of the ideological
> effectiveness of AP, although I don't doubt it's operationnal
> effectiveness at all.
Having been a firefighter for about 4 years, I can say that for
small fires water works quite a bit better. For larger fires (over a
hundred acres or so) setting a backfire, or burning out the fuel in the
direction the fire is probably going to go is a hell of a lot easier than
hauling millons and millions of gallons or blood^h^h^h^h^h water.
Petro, Christopher C.
petro@suba.com <prefered for any non-list stuff>
snow@smoke.suba.com
Return to September 1996
Return to “snow <snow@smoke.suba.com>”