Slashdot Mirror
Soldiers Call for Engineering Tech Support
chuckfucter writes "Wired news writes that soldiers in the battlefield now have their own army of geek advisers whom they can contact whenever they need technical support. The stakes are much higher here, with troops asking about the structural integrity of bridges, roads, dams and airfields: Can this structure be safely used after sustaining damage from bombings?"
And if it is on the field, the responses would need to be realtime, too.
It may make the difference between life and death.
This doesn't suprise me, with all the money being spend on the army, it makes an awful lof of sence to give the army all the tools they need. the better prepared the army, the better they can protect us.
Give it a few months and they'll outsource it to India like all the other tech support jobs.
Is the first bridge over a river the one that sinks deepest into the riverbed?
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
The article states clearly that the support is for engineering type problems.
Article?!? Wait a minute, this is slashdot after all...
"Wired news writes that soldiers in the battlefield now have their own army of geek advisers whom they can contact whenever they need technical support. "
Ummm, wouldn't that be the Army Corp. of Engineers?
In heavy Indian accent... "Thank you for calling the United States Army Tech support line, what is the problem today?" "excuse me i can't understand what your saying..." "I said what seems to be the problem today sir?" "I still can't make that out." "Sir, how can I help you?" "Umm well...OH MY GOD WERE UNDER ATTA....*line goes dead*" yup....how long before someone running for office has this outsourced to save the tax payers money?
Look at the last thumbnail in that article, hes got a panasonic toughbook in his lap
Damn i've always wanted one of those, looks like another one in the helicopter picture
I'd always thought the military had some special laptops designed specifically for them, but i guess just like the police in vancouver they use those toughbooks
When we start fighting India?
"No sir, you cannot cross that stream. Yes, I know it looks very shallow but it's actually the ocean. Yes, sir, the ocean."
Wheel in the sky keeps on turnin'.
So has anyone ever seen how long it takes to get a building checked out by a civil engineer and now your telling me people are going to do it over the phone whithout even seeing the damage to the beams?
The world wide left? How about the world wide non-mentally handicapped? Clinton gets a BJ in office and they try to impeach him. At worst, an intern got a lifelong stigma. Bush lied about WMDs in Iraq, leading to the deaths of thousands of US Soldiers and innocent Iraqis and he gets re-elected?
WHAT THE FUCK?!
Wheel in the sky keeps on turnin'.
Back in March, the selective service began planning the procedures for a "Speical Skills" draft, which is a hypothetical draft of "Americans with special skills in computers and foreign languages."
"Talking to the manpower folks at the Department of Defense and others, what came up was that nobody foresees a need for a large conventional draft such as we had in Vietnam," said Richard Flahavan, a spokesman for the Selective Service System. "But they thought that if we have any kind of a draft, it will probably be a special skills draft."
Just to clarify: they're not talking about actually drafting such workers yet; they just want procedures in place if they do need to do a draft. (This strikes me as somewhat ominous, in spite of their claims that it's a remote possiblity, but that could be my own paranoia.)
They already have the procedures in place to draft medical workers (up to age 44!) if it ever becomes necessary. The article doesn't say, but I would anticipate that an IT worker draft would have a similar age spread.
This article was back in March; anybody have any more recent news?
such as what they're doing in the areas of signal security and preventing interceptions/jamming of transmissions on the battlefield. How do they authenticate who's talking to who? How do they keep the enemy from listening in?
--- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
These are the same folks who designed most of the dams under the TVA. They designed the steel mesh "tires" on the MOON ROVER, for pete's sake! I'm 40 years old and even I was a kid when that was happening.
It's a way cool place to tour if you're in the area. Don't know if they still have the hangar-size scale model of the san francisco bay but if they don't there's sure to be something equally impressive occupying that space.
This might be a bit OT here but whenever I read some /. article and Military or Army in the Subject then it scares and worries me. I am worried that my work (contribution and efforts) on Open Source and Free Software is being abused by the Military / Army for hightech equipment which helps killing other people. This indirectly makes me a supporter of an organization.
To be more concrete, I am a muslim citicen and thus grown up. I also do work on Open source and Free Software projects as many other people over this world do. By knowing that the Military or Army uses my Software or parts/code of it for their technological equipment such as Radar, Rocket, or Equipment Systems is scary for me. Knowing that this material is being used to kill my own people in other muslim countries.
I would really like to vote for a new way of thinking in this direction whether Open Source and Free Software should be abused in such a way. Supporting the War machinery that causes pain and disaster to other human beings is not supportive.
A lot of people have made comments about the possibility of this being outsourced. While most of the comments are meant to be funny, I think it is definitely possible that it could be outsourced. Remember that the philosophy of Bush and Rumsfeld et al. is that the US army should be *small* and practically every function of the US army that doesn't involve holding a gun and shooting should be outsourced (mainly to private US companies like Halliburton). Actually, considering that even some US government staff in Iraq are guarded by private guards, even holding a gun and shooting is outsourced to some degree. I've read articles that said that in the first Gulf War something like 1 in 100 of the people working for the US army were private contractors, but in the second Gulf War, something like 1 in 10 are from private (US) companies. As events in Iraq show, even things like interrogation of prisoners is conducted by private contractors.
Of course a major problem with this is that you can't order engineers from a private company to go out under fire to fix a bridge/power plant etc. while you can with army engineers. The other major problem is who will punish private contractors who say torture prisoners or accidentally (or even deliberately) kill or injure civilians. If they are in the army they could be investigated and court-martialed, but I think for private contractors it is much murkier. I think the general rule is that they are under the rules of the local government, but well, in a lot of these places, local government is hardly existent or very corrupt.
Over how many years?
America killed at least 100,000 in 2 years. I'd be willing to say America has the higher rate of killing Iraqi civillians.
Yeah, that's called PROGRESS!
stuff
Over how many years?
:-/
Who gives a damn? The guy used nerve gas on his own city, pushed little kids out of helicopters, randomly terrorized his people with the police force, turned a blind eye to his kids raping women, and a lot of other crap that the body count just doesn't do justice to!
America killed at least 100,000 in 2 years. I'd be willing to say America has the higher rate of killing Iraqi civillians.
Listen up, you sanctimonious son of a bitch: The US troops aren't killing people. The remnants of Saddam's forces are. Just like they've done for the last two DECADES. Only now, assholes like you blame it on people like my brother who are PROTECTING people over there. He nearly lost his life protecting Iraqis on MANY occasions. And you know what? The IRAQIS are THANKFUL he's there. In fact, civilian support is one of the few things that keeps him alive.
So get off your GODDAMN high horse, and recognize that the US has actually DONE A GOOD THING. You can argue with the reasons for starting the war, but don't you DARE blame deaths caused by Saddam's regime on our troops.
Ok moderators, I've said my peace. Do your worst.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Rather than have these "geek consultants" off site and ready for call-in support, why not just train soldiers with engineering backgrounds? I think a geek with technical prowess coupled with decent physical training under his/her belt would r0x0r anyone's b0x0rs :D
You don't know how many times Ive had to throw that at people. It sickens me when people say that Americans killed 100,000 people.
You know I see posts like this EVERY DAY. The guy on the other side of the spectrum who is saying "US troops don't belong" are actually doing your brother a favor.
The more heroic you make the troops, the more righteous it becomes for the administration to send more people down there. It's just better to tell them all they don't belong, so they can all come home.
If you think there will be less terrorists when U.S troops leave the region, you are crazy. We all respect the troops no doubt. But let's face it, we just made 10x more enemies.
Hey dumbass he isn't jumping to conclusions, his brother is in Iraq for god's sake... And maybe you didn't read what he said, but US troops arent going in Iraq with the intention of killing civilians, nor are they bombing them. He was also saying that the VAST MAJORITY of those 100,000 deaths where from Iraqi militants and not from US troops. Even better, show me some statistics, how many were killed by US troops directly/indirectly then show me how many were killed by Insurgents directly/indirectly. Until you do that, please stop the BS.
Nice to see that Slashdot found the cool geek angle to the wholesale murder of civilians. But will the apache helicopters bombing faluja be running linux? Well done nerds.
You may not know of this, but there is something called a "background check". They go and visit all the people you've met for the past ten years of your life and interview them. They peruse records you don't even know that exist. They tap your phones, watch your email, know when and what you are doing at all times.
I'm sorry, but you can't slip through this unless you are bona fide an American citizen who has never said anything bad about the country and has never associated with those who have.
The radical sect of Islam would either see you dead or "reverted" to Islam.
Now tell me how many would have been killed if Saddam was still in power these past 2 years.
Who gives a damn? The guy used nerve gas on his own city, pushed little kids out of helicopters, randomly terrorized his people with the police force, turned a blind eye to his kids raping women, and a lot of other crap that the body count just doesn't do justice to!
And all that was OK as long as Saddam was Washington's little puppetman. As soon as the puppet didn't follow its master, then suddenly he became the most evil man after Hitler.
Je ne parle pas francais.
Thanks for calling the USMC technical support line.
If you have been shot, press "1".
If you have been bayoneted, press "2".
If you want to shoot someone else, press "3".
If you want to talk to a human being, a real nerdy type, the type you jock military type assholes used to bully in high school then you can kiss my safe, bunkered, hairy corn-fed ass. Yeah, not so clever now are you? Right, now Ive got your attention, lets talk about that wedgy you gave me in sixth grade...
That sucks in contrast to the US, well.. you see, saddam did take almost 10 years to do that.
OTOH, Bush himself probably has the blood of 100,000 on his hands in just 2 years.
Online backup with Mozy, sounds like Ozzie, but more!
Ok, fine.
During Sadam's 8,000 day rule in power, ke killed around 600,000 people. That works out to 75 people killed per day.
So for two years, the number of civilian deaths (assuming he kept at the same rate) would be 54,750. Which is slightly more than half of 100,000.
stuff
http://www.iraqbodycount.net/database/ now compare it to if that many people would have died BTW, even if the 100,000 people numbers are true, you should realize that they also said they took into account natural deaths. And People Die yearly, thousands do naturally.
It's on wired for god's sake!
If an iraqi fighter DOES give that order like you said.. then.. well, the US has superior tanks and planes don't they?
Slashdot is just helping to remove the imbals and hax from this war! We are still doing a good thing!
Online backup with Mozy, sounds like Ozzie, but more!
Mind you, you're still right about the entertainment value of liberal histrionics. Every bit as funny as the antics of conservatives during the Clinton administration.
That's all that liberals and conservatives are really good for anyway.
IBC takes its data from major news networks, read their methodology page. The major new networks get their data from the military largely. The military is not obligated to report civilian death and under Colin Powel they have obscured the true count.
By the way, IBC also has stated that "the spreading violence in Iraq, which has made it all but impossible for journalists to move around safely, has undermined its method." source
stuff
"MOAB penetrates deep underground"
Massive Ordinance AERIAL Burst.
Most of the rest of what you've said, the AWACS thing with facial recognition, is a bunch of fake shit too.
Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
The US has plenty of defences on it's own soil, at least for any kind of real threat. As you mention, Canada and Mexico are no threat. Canada is the US's largest trade partner (and vice versa). Both Mexico and Canada have nothing to gain and everything to lose from attacking the US. The US will step up to defend either from an attack, and even both combine do not have a military force that poses any kind of serious threat. Never mind that the three nations are on very good terms (you don't usually even need a passport at the borders).
So where does that leave attacks from? The ocean. Well there's a big problem with trying that: the US satalites, radar, etc will notice your force. You then get to play with one or more carrier fleets and a whole mess of attack submarines. There is just no nation that could realisticly expect to get a force across the ocean without it being sunk. Russia would probably have the best chance, but even then it's doubtful.
Then, even if you could get near the coast, you have the Air Guard and Coast Guard to cope with. They are not an insignificant force, especially given the US's excellent planes and information capabilities.
Also, this all ignores the real issue that the US has a ton of global range, extremely high-yield nuclear weapons. There are tons of missles with global range, as well as bombs that can be stuck on B2s (also global range). Any serious attempt to invade the US would result in massive retaliation.
At this point, a direct conventional military attack against the US is a non-issue, even ignoring the treaties with other nations. There just isn't a nation that has the ability to do it, much less stands to gain anything from doing it.
Any attack against the US is likely to be a terror-type attack: A few people using whatever they can sumggle in or get their hands on to cause as much damage as possible. Unfortunately, the military can't do anything about that in the US itself. They don't patrol the streets normally, or participate in investigations.
It's certianly arguable if the US should be out fighting wars in other nations, but it's not like that is a worry for hte US being invaded.
Hehe. Although I am rather a left-leaning European who's severely disappointed by the results (I want back the USA I liked!), I found your post most entertaining. Maybe it's because I do have colleagues, who did come unhinged at work the next day... Anyway, thanks for the chuckle.
The owls are not what they seem
We have these "tools" as our bargaining chips. "I'll see your nuclear program and raise you certain death if you fail to meet our demands of disarmament. Worse, we'll capture you and parade you before the world, and then hold a trial where you are convicted and executed. You can drop out of this game now, or you can try to raise the bet, or you can call."
Carthago delenda est.
KFG
Youre ignoring the main point - Saddam was behind Sept 11 ;)
Two ways to end the war: (1) Kill all terrorists. (2) Convert to Islam. Unfortunately, diplomacy is not a part of either
You, sir, are an idiot.
The KKK are to christianity what these 'muslim terrorists' are to islam.
"Hang on Bubbah, that may be a black church, but it's a _christian_ black church, better not burn it".
As for killing all the terorrists:
Terrorists hide among the civilians
Killing terrorists means 'collateral damage'
Having your brother/father/mother/neighbour killed by the 'great Satan USA' is about the best recruiting tool there is for terrorists!
You are part of the problem. Please stop.
I seem to remember he had plenty of help from the world's arms dealing community
So when those US jets are dropping ordinance in Falluja (A city with a 300K people), the bombs are designed to exclusively home in on insurgents or not blow up when noncombatants are in its blast radius?
Sure. (Dumbass.)
And when multinational corporate news networks report that soldiers shot up the occupants of a car at a checkpoint, that's a flat out lie? Or do those dead civilians not count?
There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
"Carthage must be destroyed!", ever heard of Google?
lupus est homo homini
Please hold
...
Thank you for waiting. All our technicians are helping other customers, but your call is important to us.
...
Hello, Internet Tech support. This is -- *CLICK*
Yeah, right.
As a former Army Engineer officer, and former structural engineer, I'm a little skeptical of this article.
Engineer units and officers, who are already organic to Battalion (500ish troops) and above, are trained to do this sort of thing (bridge load surveys). For very complicated structures, I can see a need to contact a consultant "in garrison" somewhere who can do a more advanced structural model, but I'd think that would be quite the exception.
I think the article is misleading. The Army has had to evaluate the strength of existing bridges for years--since WWI or before--and has trained and integrated units and leaders with the capability to do so. Before 2004, tank commanders didn't just guess about whether a given friendly or enemy bridge would hold their vehicle.
The radar is so powerful and the computers onboard so good that they identify every object on the ground.. I hear rumors that they can read newspapers lying on the ground
You expect me to believe that they can discern newsprint using radar?
It's official. Most of you are morons.
Protect us from who, you ask?!
Terrorists blend into the very fabric of our society, spreading their atheistic dogma which undermines the sanctity of marriage and murdering of our babies.
The only fairly reliable way to smoke them out is to hold an election and watch for Kerry signs in their yards. These blimps will help locate those signs.
Oh, we'll get you my pretty and your little dog too!
.
"You have liberated me from thought."
Mind you, you're still right about the entertainment value of liberal histrionics. Every bit as funny as the antics of conservatives during the Clinton administration. That's all that liberals and conservatives are really good for anyway.
Ha, ha, remember when Clinton lied about sex? That was pretty funny when the conservatives went into hysterics over it and it was funny when they couldn't understand why the rest of the country didn't give a shit.
Ha, ha, remember when Bush lied about war? That was pretty funny when the liberals went into hysterics over it and it was funny when they couldn't understand why the rest of the country didn't give a shit.
Or not.
the Bastard Operator From Hell, and a full new bunch of front war stories.
DON'T PANIC
that's not in danger of being outsourced to our friends in foreign lands...
Says the western jackass who'd cry without the low-cost conveniences that the cheap oil economy provides.
The problem with people like you caught up in idealology is that you don't think of the big picture. You'd be selling apples on the street if the US pulled out of the middle east. And your precious arab children would be living under an fundamentalist theocracy.
Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
Brave men an women out there need help and they get these guys.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur. :-)
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Notice how as the armies of the world get more advanced and better weapons, that certain tactics that were used in the past that killed many more innocents, are no longer used. Take carpet bombing for example. How many times, during previous wars, have certain areas been bombed, with thousands of pieces of ordinance, with no regard as to where the individual bombs fell? Now, we have smart weapons that can take out one specific building, with minimal impact to the surrounding area. Yes, there are times that the intelligence is incorrect and the wrong building is targeted, and innocents die. BUT, there are far fewer innocents being killed nowadays, then in the days of past. Also, I would recon that more innocents have been killed by their own people (i.e. suicide bombers) than have been killed by the US military.
Your precious OIL is not worth ONE childs life
of course not, it's worth at least two.
But hating soldiers or people who work for the government indicates an immature view of human society.
Those who implement evil policies are just as bad as those who make them. Every man has a conscience for a reason, and refusing to use it because your boss tells you not to is not an excuse. It didn't work in Nuremburg, nor should it work anywhere else.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Listen up, you sanctimonious son of a bitch: The US troops aren't killing people. The remnants of Saddam's forces are. Just like they've done for the last two DECADES. Only now, assholes like you blame it on people like my brother who are PROTECTING people over there. He nearly lost his life protecting Iraqis on MANY occasions. And you know what? The IRAQIS are THANKFUL he's there. In fact, civilian support is one of the few things that keeps him alive.
/. at least 3 times. I have come to trust you as someone who I don't always agree with, but is reasonable, and can explain his positions. I wouldn't ask most people this, but...
I am curious about the civilian support. I have seen at least a half dozen blogs from Iraqi civilians, all of them have been very critical of the bush administration (one is even mentioned in another reply to your post). Bush has won, the plans aren't going to change becasue of what I think, or say at this point, but I would like to feel better about what is going on.
I know you Batman, we have had constructivly discussed desagreements on
Are any Iraqis who support the US mission in Iraq blogging?
As it is right now, all evidence leaving the country of through channels other than the US military and western journalists seems to indicate that Iraqis are very critical of the occupation/liberation/whatever you want to call it.
I would like a different point of view, I want to read first hand opinions that support what you, and many other relatives of troops say.
Thanks,
TamMan2000
"I'll have a Guinness, no wait, make that a Coors Light" -Grad student I work with, who shall remain anonymous...
So you're saying that if some CIA jackasses 20 years ago convinced the president that Saddam was "good enough", no future president should ever be able to call bullshit on it? The duplicity in Washington is a totally separate issue from whether Saddam was a murderous prick that deserved an ass kicking, yet you bring up the former as some sort of counter to the latter. Bravo, that's a really fucking lucid argument.
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
Recorded voice: "Hello, welcome to US Centcom Technical Support! For bridge demolition assistance press one, for bridge construction press two, for assistance clearing a blocked road, press three, for help defusing a roadside bomb, press four. If you need to call in an airstrike, please hang up and dial..."
It's good to use your head, but not as a battering ram.
Yes. Yes, it was. But really, now. You have in front of you a whole smorgasboard of examples of the right's overpowering fear of freedom and personal responsibility, and the only thing you can come up with is the non-issue of Monica Lewinsky?
Ha, ha, remember when Bush lied about war? That was pretty funny when the liberals went into hysterics over it and it was funny when they couldn't understand why the rest of the country didn't give a shit.
Bah. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day. And having blundered into a semi-lucid position on this particular issue does not excuse the left of the hypocrisy in which it engages with the same vigor and regularity as the right.
Besides, most of the liberal arguments against the war are just as weak as the conservative arguments supporting it.
Left and right are identical in practice. Both seek to use the government as a tool for social engineering, and both are perfectly willing to run roughshod over the Constitution to achieve their goals.
Colin Powell has a history of covering up civilian casualties...
scroll down to My Lai...
"I'll have a Guinness, no wait, make that a Coors Light" -Grad student I work with, who shall remain anonymous...
So what? Who cares what you think? We're the USA and we're powerful.
Actually AWACS is for tracking AIRCRAFT - JSTARS is the equivilent for tracking stuff on the ground - different optimization
a rs /
t m
http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/jst
http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/jstars.h
-- 73 de KG2V For the Children - RKBA! "You are what you do when it counts" - the Masso
We'll just have remove all the collateral damage that's messing up the place.
If the occupation of Iraq is wrong, why haven't any nations applied military force to counteract it?
I believe Iraq has.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Because of a rare display of maturity on the Slashdot editor's part?
By the taping of my glasses, something geeky this way passes
Quit whining like a baby, secure that shit and proceed private!! ;P
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
Catus Petasatus was a life altering mind blower.
KFG
Well, there is a video feed, so the engineers "at home" CAN see the damage. There is a checklist of needed information. The people on the ground probably include some type of combat engineers (who would be making these decisions ANYWAY). It is merely a way of augmenting their knowledge.
So I don't see the problem. It merely lessens the risk to troops. There is also a LARGE difference between a building being checked by an engineer for LONG TERM safety versus IS IT SAFE FOR THE SHORT TERM (they don't need to LIVE there). Different acceptable risk levels.
Of course, if you had READ THE ARTICLE...
In the field, it's known as the Mother Of All Bombs.
True Story
.
considering most tech support folks are rather stressed, i wouldn't wanna know the effects of giving support that may cost people their lives
All the torrents you could want.
Us Military:Hello is anyone there? Indian Help Desk: Yes SIR, This is Microsoft help desk. What would you like to do today SIR? Us Military:OMG, I don't know whats wrong man!! A gernade blew up my laptop. Indian Help Desk: Yes SIR, will you please press your pointer device thing on the start bar. Us Military: What he hell you talking about (bombs wizzing by, gun fire). My laptop, it is blown up! Indian Help Desk: Ok SIR, I understand your situaltion. If your start bar is not available for use sir please click on My Computer. Us Military: Oh no... argggg, the the insurgents got me, (static). Indian Help Desk: SIR are you there? (static).. Ok, have a good day sir and thank you for calling microsoft. Next Caller:Hello, this is George W Bush.. Indian Help Desk:Hello SIR, This is Microsoft help desk. What would you like to do today SIR? Bush: Uh my s...s..tart b.u.t.t.o.n, I just noticed it; and I am worried that it is a weapon of terrorism. Indian Help Desk:Ok SIR, please click on My Computer.
What does that have to do with anything? The REAL meaning to the name is what I said.
Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
Also, I would recon that more innocents have been killed by their own people (i.e. suicide bombers) than have been killed by the US military.
You'd reckon, but you'd be wrong.
Catus Petasatus was a life altering mind blower.
;-)
1. That's Cattus Petasatus (you missed a 't').
2. Hey, it's Latin. If it's in Latin, it is profound. Even if it's something as ridiculous as the Cat in the Hat.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
So, your article proves nothing, except that Iraqi civilians have died, in great numbers. I do not think that civilian deaths are good. They are the most crass, base things on the face of the planet, but you must realize that these insurgrents and "Freedom Fighters" are hurting civilians as well as the military. Until you come up with a stat from a reliable source that says XXXX number were killed by U.S. forces, and XXXX were killed by insurgents, then you have nothing to stand on at the moment.
There's a link in that article to a site that has totals and incident-by-incident breakdowns as well as analyses. Civillian deaths caused by US forces account for something like 90+ % of the total. There's a reason such information isn't readily available from the mainstream press.
Way to single out and clasp onto a tenuous nibblet of quotation for the sake of your earlier postulation. You totally harmed your credibility by doing that, rather than being compelling. I can scarcely believe you did that with such apparent vigor.
Mod grandparent up. The news article doesn't have anything informative, but some of the sites it links to do.
Typical deluded (stupid) American.
And if you aren't, then you can pretty much understand the response.
There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
You're article merely mentions civilian deaths, not US civilian deaths.
That do US civilian deaths have to do with Iraqi civilian deaths? Or did you ruin the sentence in your haste and actually mean US-caused civilian deaths?
"Again" I'm not properly informed? I've never even spoken to you before that post. You also failed to follow up on the article's sources, and you accuse me of being uninformed?
I'd point out the linked sources in the article, but another poster has beaten me to it.
And for the love of God, it's "your". "You're" means "you are" and is not appropriate where you've used it.
I feel as if I've just bitten on a troll. Oh well.
Have you cared to read the database from the site you have now linked? That site includes both insurgent and US-military caused deaths. Read the database for an incident-by-incident breakdown. How does a car bomb, intended for a US convoy, that ends up killing Iraqi civilians count against the US? The US forces did not kill those individuals. The database is riddled with numerous similar instances. On just the first page I counted 10+ instances where the "weapon" was listed as either "car bomb" or "roadside bomb". Last time I checked, the American forces are not using such tactics. You are harming your credibility by not actually reading your own source and researching in depth. Instead, you take a number off the front page whose sole purpose is to be sensational. Sensationalism is all that people like you are able to use to try to make your point. You come out with some statistic that makes you look good, but ignores many sides of the story. Now, come out and truly, truly show me one thing that shows why Iraq as a whole is worse off now than it was under Saddam's cruel rule, and you might be able to make some headroom.
Instead, you take a number off the front page
Um, no he didn't. Unless it's written in the post using a font size too small for me to see... The site certainly does have a count on the front page, but the grandparent made no reference to it. And who's made any argument that Iraq is better or worse off now? Only that the US military seems to be the biggest killer of civilians at the moment.
Sensationalism, my foot. You're being presumptious.
I can see in the site's database that terrorist attacks tend to cause low numbers of casualties per incident compared to US military action. Just a couple mistargeted bombs kill off enough civvies to render all the insurgents' car bombs insignificant. There are analyses right on the site which cover this. The US was way ahead at last count.
Have you cared to read the database from the site you have now linked?
Why yes, I have. I've also read the various discourse available on the site as well as breakdown and statistical analysis also available on the site.
How does a car bomb, intended for a US convoy, that ends up killing Iraqi civilians count against the US?
It doesn't, and I never said it did. What you seem to ignore is the fact that these casualty counts are small compared to those caused by US military action.
On just the first page I counted 10+ instances where the "weapon" was listed as either "car bomb" or "roadside bomb".
And one US offensive on that same page completely dwarfs all those casualties combined. It's quite obvious that you've got very selective senses.
You are harming your credibility by not actually reading your own source and researching in depth. Instead, you take a number off the front page whose sole purpose is to be sensational.
On the contrary, I have read the source. It's you who has not. You've simply skimmed perhaps the first couple pages of the database, saw something that at first glance looked like it corroborated your position, and then rode with it. And when did I ever refer to the tally on that site's front page? Never? That's right. I'm not responsible for how a website organizes its headlines, and I deliberately made no reference to that tally because it was not relevent to the subject of who is killing more civilians.
You're fabricating your own references to sensationalism and then for some inconceivable reasion, arguing them against yourself... Don't speak to me of credibility when have none yourself.
You come out with some statistic that makes you look good, but ignores many sides of the story.
Don't hand me that; this is precisely what you have been doing. I couldn't care less how I "look" on a faceless forum. I gave you a source of information and you cherry-picked partial statistics and then presented it to me as if I wouldn't notice what you ignored/left out.
Now, come out and truly, truly show me one thing that shows why Iraq as a whole is worse off now than it was under Saddam's cruel rule
What on God's green Earth led you to believe I'm arguing this at all? All I'm doing is informing you that the evidence supports what the other poster told you; that the US military is the cause of most of the civilian deaths in Iraq.
Christ... Yeah, you go on making shit up and arguing points no one brought up. Asshat.
Just to clarify: they're not talking about actually drafting such workers yet; they just want procedures in place if they do need to do a draft. (This strikes me as somewhat ominous, in spite of their claims that it's a remote possiblity, but that could be my own paranoia.)
They already have the procedures in place to draft medical workers (up to age 44!) if it ever becomes necessary. The article doesn't say, but I would anticipate that an IT worker draft would have a similar age spread.
I hate to burst your paranoia bubble but none of this is new. They seem to modernizing old plans that go back to at least World War 2, and modernizing old plans is something routine for the Pentagon. You mention medical workers but various other specialties have been dipped into as well. During WW2 my great grandfather was in his 30s, with a wife and several kids. Under normal circumstances he would not be drafted. However he was licensed and had experience with a particular type of electrical generator that the Army was using. The only thing that prevented him from being drafted due to his specialty was that he was already working in the powerplant of an Army installation. The local officer in charge had to write a letter stating that he was essential to their operations.
i'm sure someone like IBM Global Services would do it cheaper and better. Not.