[jgeralnik]

  the first Gulf War in Iraq was won because a Lisp application took care that US soldiers had everything from toilet paper, ammunition to gasoline

The word because means that if there was no Lisp application the war would not have been won. This is almost certainly false, even if the Lisp application did make things easier.

[lispm]

without that application, nobody would have been there.

[qu4z-2]

Without that application, there would have been another.

[lispm]

It wasn't.

[pretoriusB]

That "it wasn't" doesn't mean that "it could not have been" (which was the point the other guy made).

This is more than an elementary logical mistake on your part, this is pure crazy.

By the same logic all those COBOL and Java applications that are deployed for something major (from banking to taxation to multi-national logistics) prove that COBOL and Java are as good as Lisp (and irreplaceable at that, seeing that "there wasn't something else deployed in their place").

What app was used in ONE war doesn't matter at all to explain which language is better than another.

Lots of far more crucial operation than the logistics in a minor war held by a superpower to a small third world country, used other languages. For example, NASA missions used assembly and C.

Does that prove anything relate to the suitability of those languages in general?

Quit the BS Lisp-proselytisation with bogus arguments and hand-waiving.

[LispShmisp]

Well, if you go as far as to say that without Lisp nobody would have been there... Is it fair to say that Lisp started the war?

[mturmon]

"Thisp aggression will not stand."

[pretoriusB]

LOL! "Coalition for Peace Against LISP".