Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Brentai]

I'd be outraged if I didn't work on the in-flight entertainment system used by 80% of the world's airlines. 

[SCD]

On the Saudi Peninsula Theatre, Al Shabab in Somalia has succeeded in running out the last major food program, the WFP BBC Link.  Sadly in 06 when the islamists took over most of Somalia, they did it right and by right, much better than the shortsighted do-gooders at the UN could ever pull off. 

I recall reading a work of a Gonzo Journalist by the name of PJ O'Rourke in a book "all the troubles in the world" how the world ended up sending (to this day) plenty of food to a nation which has the means to produce plenty of food (fertile land), where aid agencies piled into fortresses, came out once in awhile to distribute raw foodstuffs, which they eventually turned over to armed thugs as it was too dangerous for them to do it personally anymore, leading to what I interpreted a nation of armed beggars. 

The "lads" (literal interpretation of Al Shabab) agree, and last time the Islamists (last group again) took over, they got the airport and the seaport up and running within a year of taking Mogadishu.  Of course, their rule was through an iron fist, and what lead to their downfall was they pissed off Ethiopia, and in turn the Yanks. 

This would spread AQ's influence from Yemen/Saudi Arabia (the mountainous rural areas) to Somalia again.  On the bright side, the six-figure-earning heads of the WFP can now save some serious coin on operations and save some food for disaster-related food shortages as opposed to government(or lack thereof) induced famine. 

[Mongrel]

False alarm or quick redaction (you decide): books once again a-ok.

[SCD]

More a "on the bus off the bus" caused by lack of clarity of orders from the top.  I see this type of action a lot.

[Thad]

Yeah, that was my immediate reading of the situation: you can't possibly list every single item that is allowed on a plane.  The list was intended as partial but also to include obvious items; one very obvious item was foolishly omitted and someone assumed all which is not explicitly enumerated was banned.  (Of course, knowing the general competence of airport security officials, they themselves could easily make that error in logic; saying "Security officials are allowed to exercise their own judgement" is pretty much a joke since these are people who confiscate things like GI Joe-size toy guns.  It is not a job that typically attracts people with great critical reasoning skills.)

Tangentially, this precise issue was central in the debate about whether the US Constitution should have a Bill of Rights: proponents said that we needed to list basic freedoms on paper so the government wouldn't deny them; critics said that the government would interpret anything not on the list as okay to deny.  As compromise we got the Ninth Amendment, which states that just because something isn't explicitly granted in the Constitution doesn't mean it isn't a right.

Of course, that's pretty damn vague and frequently ignored.  (I remember a few years back Limbaugh arguing that "there's no right to privacy explicitly enumerated in the Constitution," conveniently omitting the fact that the Constitution DOES say, using those exact words, that that doesn't mean there's no such right.)  But it's still a pretty great amendment.

[SCD]

Thanks for that tidbit  .  I'll read more on the 9th when I can

[Royal☭]

Of course, that's pretty damn vague and frequently ignored.  (I remember a few years back Limbaugh arguing that "there's no right to privacy explicitly enumerated in the Constitution," conveniently omitting the fact that the Constitution DOES say, using those exact words, that that doesn't mean there's no such right.)  But it's still a pretty great amendment.

There is a certain amount of cruel irony now in conservatives twisting the 9th and 10th to actually DENY there is a right to health care, though.

[Büge]

Military care packages, for Women.

I think addressing the high incidence of sexual assault in the military would be a better use of Nancy Pelosi's time. And provide more peace of mind than this month's Cosmo.

[Büge]

Oh yeah, to all the ladies getting these boxes of makeup and lady speed stick: don't get knocked up or they'll clap you in irons.

[Büge]

Same goes for single moms who can't deploy due to lack of childcare.

[Brentai]

If only there were some way to stop people from not wanting to sign up.

[SCD]

A competent USA public servant of war speaks on Iran.

[Mongrel]

I think any western military action, and possibly even any Israeli military action would be a grave mistake at this juncture. The current regime is becoming more unstable, though perhaps not on a daily basis.

For the Theocracy to truly be defeated, they need to be brought down internally. Persians are notorious for their unbelievably venemous resentment of any 'foreign meddling' and any blatant foreign aggression - even something as small as an Osirak-type strike - will strengthen the regime and the military to the massive detriment of any homegrown reformers.

Twice before, Iran has come close to throwing out the mullahs, once in the mid-eighties and again in the early 90's. The first time, the Iraq war boosted the Ayatollah, the second time it was Western saber-rattling (specifically, the 'Axis of Evil' speech... I'm not even kidding on that, it was a big driver of votes for Ahmadinejad.

The single best weapon anyone has against the mullahs is the Iranian people themselves. The problem is that the west must resist the temptation to intervene.

Highly relevant: Persian Nuclear scientist killed in mysterious bomb blast.

Now I don't know that this was the work of 'foreign agents' or if the guy's wife (or even the regime) just didn't like him and the government's just taking advantage of the situation, but even stuff this small causes a big furor.

EDIT: More details in today's Globe.

Also very relevant: Saw an article elsewhere that claimed the projections for Iran having a bomb have been pushed back to five years or more, though I can't seem to find it. this editorial seems to have seen the same report (and seems to parrot my view), but doesn't mention the source for the new figures. If correct, it means the west has at least some time to wait.

[SCD]

Understood.  The old people are reluctant to believe that the neoShah is going to be brought down in this round, but I can see that the extremist factions are starting to come to light.  Needless to say, it's going to be a manhattan kind of day in Iran for a little while. 

On Israel:  Osairak is out of the cards right now.  Too much dispersion, not enough concrete intelligence or incompetence on Iran's side.  Unlike Syria, Iran isn't silly enough to keep all their eggs in one basket.  You need American military might to put a dent into their gig.  Only the Americans have that.

Realistically, the Israelis right now are putting their weight into defensive measures.  Fucking with Iran means that they have to deal with HA.  The IDF would be loathe to deal with that unless they get ROE to burn down every last village in southern Lebanon (it's the only way to be sure).  For now, it's less expensive and makes more sense in the long run to build up some sort of an "Iron Dome" while choking the Gazans into submission through ensuring that the well extends low enough to hit the water table(Think Alesia, only with well-meaning NGO's squeezing in food aid and medical assistance). 

[Mongrel]

HA? Hezbollah?

Also, Iran almost certainly has their facilities buried and dispersed BECAUSE of Osirak (Operation Orchard also provided a solid reminder 26 years later that the Israelis had no qualms about a repeat).

Also, LOL Alesia.

[Transportation]

Iran doesn't even need a warhead, really. Japan has the capacity to begin production quite quickly. That would be all they need to increase their strategic power in the region. Also significantly less stupid than a nuclear test.

And proper democracy in Iran would be nice and all, but it has absolutely nothing to do with stopping their nuclear program considering Mousavi's statements and the general attitude towards it.

It's all up to the Iranians if they want nukes or not at this point. Short of an actual test, the U.S. is ham-stringed from bombing Iran unless it wants Iraq times a billion levels of prestige loss. Israel's situation is identical as they'd have to go over Iraq, whose airspace is de facto U.S. territory at this point and thus making it the U.S.'s decision again.

[Mongrel]

Iran doesn't even need a warhead, really. Japan has the capacity to begin production quite quickly. That would be all they need to increase their strategic power in the region. Also significantly less stupid than a nuclear test.

And proper democracy in Iran would be nice and all, but it has absolutely nothing to do with stopping their nuclear program considering Mousavi's statements and the general attitude towards it.

It's all up to the Iranians if they want nukes or not at this point. Short of an actual test, the U.S. is ham-stringed from bombing Iran unless it wants Iraq times a billion levels of prestige loss. Israel's situation is identical as they'd have to go over Iraq, whose airspace is de facto U.S. territory at this point and thus making it the U.S.'s decision again.

I'd agree that they don't need a warhead. But I have no idea what you meant by the Japan comment. Did you start one thought and let it finish as another? 

And yes, ultimately if the people of Iran decide they want a nuke, they'll keep trying to get one, democracy or no. But it would be pretty stupid to assume that relations with the rest of the world wouldn't improve at least a little if the government was not comprised of people who need to continually 'stir the pot' to stay in power. Right now it's a bit of a vicious cycle: threaten the US etc, they worry they need to threaten back. Toss the desire for a true deterrent into the mix and there you go.

I'd also like to think that external relations would also genuinely improve under a democracy, but I understand that can't be counted on. I'd give it better than even odds though.

[Transportation]

Re: Japan comment

It was meant to be an example of another country that is a "virtual nuclear power." Could have used a transition sentence.

[Mongrel]

Right, I got that, but Japan isn't really a useful comparison to Iran because they can basically flip a switch and 'go live' if they wanted, whereas Iran is under significant import restrictions (of varying effectiveness), is under international duress (and fairly intense scrutiny), and has an active interest in being an aggressor or threat (if only as a deterrent, though this can certainly be debated).

What I'm not sure I get is what you wanted to say they had as an alternate option. Garden-variety WMD's? A large conventional barrage?

[SCD]

Mongrel:  your thoughts on the assassinated scientist appear to be wrong.  Will wait to let dust settle.  He looks a bit too green to be with the nukes.