Like the poster said above about the Police in NYC. Times have changed.
In the past, it was us against them, because there wasn't an widely reguarded outside threat. Now there is.
So people can either keep bitching about the past and all the "injustices". Or they can realize that Now isn't like it was Before 9.11.01.
Times have changed. I've known for a while that the Taliban and Militantist Terrorist groups were bad, but I didn't know how bad. And the attacks on 9.11.01 wern't the final release, it's a step up.
So I'd say - let bygones be bygones and step upto the plate and help the Gov and Mil if they need help and you are willing. But don't bitch about what happened before, cause it was a different world.
The Anti-Terror thing in the House and Senate is already being ripped apart by the Committees, I doubt it'll get to a floor vote.
"Workers have never been more powerless, their tenure more fragile."
That's an out and out lie.
Workers during the start of the Industrial Revolution and up to the 1920s had no rights. No sick leave, no family leave, no workman's comp, no ergonomics, no disability, no insurance, no prevailing wage, no holiday time. Layoffs came with no advanced warning, heck back then you couldn't even have the warning of knowing what the stock price was doing.
There were no labor relations boards, no legal recourse, no comp time...nothing but the punch-clock and the 5 o'clock whistle, and the knowledge that if you didn't go in the next day there were 5 or 10 immigrants fresh off the boat or train waiting to take your job.
Again Katz has forgot that there was a world before 1990 and he ignores history. People have it good now compared to one hundred years ago, a fact that Labor Unions lament as thier Union rolls decrease.
I paid 10,000 dollars cash for my used Chevy C/K-1500 4x4 truck just last spring.
Same for when I tossed out 3500 for my new Mitsubishi big-screen. When I buy computers, I go to the local Apple dealer and throw cash down on the counter.
If I don't have the money in my pocket to buy something, I don't buy it. Never have, never will, when I go and buy that Impala SS I've been looking at, I'll pay for it in cash too.
The US have fought in ground wars, "peace-keeping" and extractions recently.
1. Gulf War was 10 years ago - Didn't go badly
2. Somalia was 7 years ago - Didn't go that badly
3. Occupation of Haiti was 6 years ago and lasted for 2 years - Went very well
4. Bosnia has been going on for 6 years now. SEALs and Green Berets have had some action there - Has gone well
5. Kosovo has been going on for 2 years now - has gone well
That coupled with bi-annual desert operations in Egypt (Bright Star) and annual exercises with South Korea says to me that US does well on the ground.
Even the Korean war...50 years go, went badly at first - being out numbered 5 and 10 to 1 will do that, but after the retreat from the North in December of '50, the UN forces stopped the Chinese and Koreans cold.
"Look what an RPG did to a BlackHawk in Somalia. The idea of fighting a motivated enemy in his own back yard should give one pause."
Yep. In "Blackhawk Down" they talk about this, and the fact that hundreds of RPGs went flying in the air before they got a lucky hit. That was an urban setting, there's cover there, there isn't out in the bush. Ever hear Blackhawks or Apaches flying past? You can't tell what direction they are coming from in the daytime or at night. In Somolia there were Tangos sitting there with radios telling the fellas downtown when the UH-60s and OH-6s were taking off from the American compound, it's not going to be the same in Afghanistan.
"DO you really think we can be more successful in Afghanistan?"
Yep I do. Because the Americans and British SF going in here better equipment, better training and a knowledge of the Afghani fighters because they trained them in the 1980s.
I'm sure you read my post, but I'm not sure you understand it.
In this situation modern weaponry will provide advantages. Airmobile (Helicopter) helicopter forces will make the rugged nature of the geography less of an issue that pundits would have you believe. FLIR/Nightvision and drones will give the Allied forces advantages that the Afghanis do not have, nor did the Soviets or British. The Soviets tried to use Airmobile forces in the 80s, but it was thier first time and they didn't learn from the US in Vietnam. By contrast, the US have used massive helicopter assaults for the last 30 years (Operation Pegasus in Vietnam, Granada, elements of Just Cause in Panama, Desert Storm and bi-annual Bright Star exercises in Egypt.)
Since Vietnam the United States has worked hard on Light Infantry, the 25th Infantry (Light) and the 10th Infantry (Mountain) have considerable experiance in rough terran, operating in Hawaii, Korea, upstate New York, Bosnia and Kosovo. I'll wager that those "Light Fighters" from the 10th can climb mountains with the best of the Taliban, and the British bring the Gurkhas to the table, and those fellas grewup climbing mountains that make Afghanistan look like foothills.
The Gulf War was not a "phony war" Saddam made the same choices he made against Iran, choices that worked against hordes of infantry and American tanks, and I'm sure that he had some leftover Soviet advisors tell him that's the way to beat the Americans. But they didn't understand mobility, navigation with GPS or Nightvision. On the first nights of the War, Iraq did try to contest the air, but he got knocked down, F-15s and F-18s will do that to you, but the Taliban only has some claptrap MiG-21s...not an issue there.
You can always learn from the past. Even operations like Just Cause and Somolia will have taught the United States and Allies many things about mobile warfare and anti-insurgant fighting.
It's funny (in the funny-strange way) that when you hear about weapons of Vietnam...
The NVA will say how they liked captured M-16s more than thier AK-47s, and LAW rockets better than RPG-7s.
The Americans liked the AK-47 better than the M-16 and the RPG better than the LAW...
While the Americans did make the fixes to the M-16 to make it a world-class battle rifle, the Soviets dropped the cartridge on the AK to one like that M-16's and replaced the RPG-7 with the RPG-16 which is basicly a LAW while the US went to a larger man-pack rocket (Swedish and Isreali made) - like the older RPG-7s.
Personally I prefer the M-16/AR-15, but the price of Czech AK-74s is too good to pass up.
Right now I'm saving my pennies for an M-1 Scout rifle.
The Taliban and Al-Qaeda isn't just about US Foreign Policy or the US support of Israel.
It's something much more. It's about a cluster of dangerous persons that have a dangerous agenda. Al-Qaeda wants to overthrow Islamic nations and establish an very dangerous form of extreme Islam on a billion people. The Taliban is throwing signs on the clothes of Hindus just like the Nazis did to Jews, Quakers and homosexuals.
The Taliban does things to women that would make Himmler and Gobbels go white with shock.
It is about Good and Evil. Sorry but you need to check your facts.
I will say that the US Army wasn't technologically superiour in Vietnam.
The US Army and Marines were switching standard battle rifles (M-14 to M-16) while the NVA were using long-time standard rifles (AK-47). The United States Army was using a new APC (M-113) and a new Light Tank (M-551 Sheridan), both of which had bad teething problems.
The early M-16s were junk, very easy to jam and the full auto feature caused alot of problems in green troops. Since then the M-16 and M-4 have become very high quality battle rifles.
The Army was also learning how to use helicopters in a gunship and APC mode, which also caused alot of problems, that and the fact that the early UH-1s and AH-1s were single engined and had no armor. And at the time the United States had very limited UAV and remote sensing abilites.
Since Vietnam the US has done the following.
1. Established Mountain or Light Infantry units. The 10th Infantry at Fort Drum New York are veterans of Somolia and Bosnia.
3. The UH-60 Blackhawk and AH-64 Apache/Longbow are not your father's helicopters. Both are twin engined and armored to withstand 14.5mm direct hits and 23mm flak, lessons of the Soviet war in Afghanistan. Both have "high/hot" capabilites the Vietnam era helos didn't have.
4. Special Forces have evolved very far since MACV-SOG/Seal Teams and Desert One. Every special forces operation teaches them many things.
5. Fort Irwin and the National Training Center - The Afghanis know how to defeat a Soviet style army, the United States has the "Best Regiment in the Russian Army" at the NTC. The United States knows how to defeat Soviet doctrine and how to fight Soviet style, and helped fight them for 8 years, they know what the Afghanis know and what the Afghanis can do.
6. Remote Sensing - The United States and NATO have made increadable strides in remote sensing in the last 30 years. Mortars fired can be targeted and counter battery fire can land on the attacker before his shells have hit the ground. Night vision will allow helos and ground troops to operate at night and in the snow where the Soviets buttoned up at night.
And there is a level of motivation at work. Was the United States motivated to fight in World War Two before the Ruben James or Pearl Harbor? No. But after that, a volunteer force, the United States Marine Corp, was more than motivated to fight in the Solomans, New Guinea and Burma for long periods of time with few reenforcments or supplies. Likewise, volunteer units like the Airborne and Rangers were able to accomplish great feats while under incredable opposition. At the Battle of the Bulge, while conscript units and National Guard units buckled under pressure from the Germans, units like the 101st stood thier ground.
The United States has deep reserves of Regular military both Army and Marines. Deep reserves of National Guards (many of whom fought in Iraq) and deep reserves of Army and Marine Reserves...all whom are volunteers.
"Too bad we aren't learning from the British and Soviet mistakes."
How do we know that the United States military isn't learning from British and Soviet mistakes?
The British attempted to take Afghanistan over 100 years ago, and you can not compare an army before aviation, remote sensing and mechnization to a modern army.
Same goes for the Soviets. The Soviets were an army of conscripts and as Afghanistan, Iraq and Vietnam show you, a conscript army isn't the same as a volunteer army. Also, the Soviets hadn't fought since WW2 or 1959-60 against the Chinese, albeit in Bridgade sized clashes. And like the Americans in Vietnam, an army that rusty will have problems.
Micheal should look to the SAS's exploits in Iraq in '91 and the Desert Rats in '40-'41 for examples of what a small cadre of highly trained and motivated fighters can do againt increadable odds. Or even look at Blackhawk Down for an indication of what Rangers and Delta Force can accomplish in a poorly planned mission. I'm sure that all the lessons learned in Afghanistan in the 80s by Delta Force and CIA as well as those lessons learned in Iraq, Somalia, Bosnia and Sierra Leone by the Rangers, Delta, SAS, Force Recon and SEALs will be taken to heart.
Back when Desert Storm was still Desert Storm, all you heard were bags o' wind talking about how the United States Military was a paper tiger and couldn't invade Iraq because Iran couldn't invade Iraq in 8 years of fighting. Then when it turned into Desert Storm, they told us how many thousands of men would die because the M-1 used too much gas and was too complicated to use or because it was designed for Europe. Same thing is going on now, people are declaring the United States and United Kingdom beaten before they've had a chance to fire a shot back in anger. It's FUD.
All those soldiers are volunteers, give them a chance to prove themselves or be beaten.
Re:Not a reliable weapons system yet
on
Robots Go To War
·
· Score: 2
Actually, the Hunter UAV is a reliable Hellfire system.
"More recently, the US Army has carried out similar evaluations. In 1997, a Hunter UAV carrying a laser designator illuminated targets for attack by Paveway guided bombs and Hellfire air-to-surface missiles released from other platforms. All three of the former and nine of the latter struck their targets."
There's alot of interest in these RPVs in the US and NATO.
http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/uav.htm
Israel started to use them in the late 70s and 80s for Counter Battery imaging of Syrian and Hezbollah artillery. Then the US started a really horrible project called Aquila in the 80s that failed. By the Gulf War the Navy was using Israeli drones for real time imaging of targets for the 8 and 16 inch guns.
http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/hunter.ht m
http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/pioneer.h tm
Global Hawk is really neat
http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/global_ha wk.htm
It can launch from Nevada, fly to Australia and then loiter for a spell before refueling. And it can transmit images to other aircraft or sats at 50-275 megabits per second. Australia is looking at the Global Hawk for recon on the north.
http://www.janes.com/defence/air_forces/news/mis c/ globalhawk010427_1_n.shtml
Recently the USAF and Army are testing RPVs for firing Sidewinder, Stinger and Hellfire missiles at a range of airborne and ground targets.
http://www.janes.com/aerospace/military/news/idr /i dr010817_2_n.shtml
"IAI recently teamed with Raytheon Missile Systems to promote Cutlass (Combat UAV Target Locate and Strike System), which mates the Harpy air vehicle with a guidance system based on the US company's seekers for the AIM-9X and ASRAAM air-to-air missiles coupled with an automatic target-recognition and classification system. Other similar defense-suppression drones include the ARW-10 Lark developed by Kentron in South Africa."
"This has also allowed the formation of armies without a single physical location. Its troops are scattered around the globe, making it difficult for the United States to simply "invade."'
Imperial Japan. The IJA had troops scattered from Burma to Timor to Alaska to Central China to nearly Midway on thousands of islands. The United States, UK, Australia and Royal Dutch were able to isolate them, eliminate them or by-pass them. The same thing can be done to terrorists.
1. Stop the export of drugs from Pakistan and Afghanistan. Begin air dropping of suppiles to the people in Afghanistan clearly marked as from the US/NATO.
2. Begin air mobile operations against known terrorist camps in Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq, Sudan, Pakistan. Take out the leadership and the organization will wither and die. Look at the decapitation of Ayran Nation, KKK and other White-power groups in the US and Canada. The KKK was all but elimated in the US for 40 years twice. It can happen to the Terrorists groups.
3. While war is a classical pursuit, it isn't always rooted in the notions of borders and terrain, the French learned that in Spain in the 1810s, the Germans learned that in Russia and Balkins in the 1940s and the US learned that in Vietnam in the 1960s. The Russians didn't learn that in Afghanistan in the 1980s or Chechyna in the 1990s.
Lawarence Welk played at my grandfather and grandmother's wedding in South Dakota in 1948.
I like Bluegrass too, the Hayseed Dixie covers of AC/DC are very good, I wonder if Clear Channel will ban them as well.
I think the Clear Channel thing is nuts, and I'm glad that alot of Clear Channel PDs and DJs are going out of thier way to play the banned songs today.
1. "Given that the human face recognition performed by the check-in agents did not keep the hijackers out, there is no reason to think that computer face recognition would help."
Jeez, that's like saying that a human can't keep track of 20,000 messages at a time so computers can't either. No honestly, while I do not agree with face cams on the street or in public places, I can agree with them in airports, because it's been widely held that it isn't unconstitutional to withhold some civil liberties to protect the Public.
2. "Meanwhile, Congress hurried to pass a resolution giving Bush unlimited power to use military force in retaliation for the attacks. Retaliation may be justified, if the perpetrators can be identified and carefully targeted, but Congress has a duty to scrutinize specific measures as they are proposed. Handing the president carte blanche in a moment of anger is exactly the mistake that led the United States into the Vietnam War."
That's just out and out bullshit too. That's not what led the United States into Vietnam, that's what got Marines there, but the Gulf of Tonkin resolution and Congress's recent vote are not the same. The Gulf of Tonkin was a slippery slope into war, Congress basicly voted for war, just like they did in 1812, 1846, 1861, 1898, 1917 and 1941. Not the same as the Gulf of Tonkin.
3. "But that won't stop the agencies that have always wanted to do more surveillance from pushing this plan now, and many other plans like it. To stop them will require public opposition."
Stallman must have missed US Government class in high school and college. Just because Congress votes on something and the President signs it, doesn't mean it will be there forever, the Supreme Court will decide that. There are some wacky congress-critters out there, but I doubt that this long battle about crypto and people tracking will slip in under the guise of "Public Safety".
That was one big FUD piece there, and yep, I think Stallman was out there.
There will likely be alot of disrupted PR events in the coming months, it's not going to just be Apple.
As for the next killer app/machine coming from SGI...ha. Thier stock is currently trading at 40 cents a share and are about to be delisted from the NASDAQ.
Apple has shipped many times more machines in the last two years than SGI has, sorry but if anyone is getting a nail in the coffin, it's SGI.
As a firm believer in the seperation of church and state as held in the Constitution of the United States, I feel that it's fine to declare a "National Day of Prayer and Remeberance." See if you don't pray or ain't the praying type, you can remeber. And praying is pretty damned non-denominational...
In the Constitution it says...
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
The President's asking for a day of prayer and remeberance does not violate the 1st Amendment. As for removing religious interferance or endorsement, look at a Dollar bill, it says "In God We Trust."and it has Masonic symbolism.
The US and South Korea said, we will sign the ban on mines if you let us have 10 years to come up with a non-mine way to defend South Korea. They were told 'No." The US also wanted a clause for the Claymore - a tactical mine very useful for clearing obsticles, defending camps at night and for clearing mines. They were told "No." So don't blame the US, blame the inflexability of the people doing that mine treaty.
"Do you think the Serbian paramilitaries could have done as much damage to Kosovo if NATO troops had gone in?"
I think the Serbian paramilitaries would have done a good imitation of the SS and would have been killing and murdering more than they did had NATO been on the ground.
Slashdot Mirror
Like the poster said above about the Police in NYC. Times have changed.
In the past, it was us against them, because there wasn't an widely reguarded outside threat. Now there is.
So people can either keep bitching about the past and all the "injustices". Or they can realize that Now isn't like it was Before 9.11.01.
Times have changed. I've known for a while that the Taliban and Militantist Terrorist groups were bad, but I didn't know how bad. And the attacks on 9.11.01 wern't the final release, it's a step up.
So I'd say - let bygones be bygones and step upto the plate and help the Gov and Mil if they need help and you are willing. But don't bitch about what happened before, cause it was a different world.
The Anti-Terror thing in the House and Senate is already being ripped apart by the Committees, I doubt it'll get to a floor vote.
"Workers have never been more powerless, their tenure more fragile."
That's an out and out lie.
Workers during the start of the Industrial Revolution and up to the 1920s had no rights. No sick leave, no family leave, no workman's comp, no ergonomics, no disability, no insurance, no prevailing wage, no holiday time. Layoffs came with no advanced warning, heck back then you couldn't even have the warning of knowing what the stock price was doing.
There were no labor relations boards, no legal recourse, no comp time...nothing but the punch-clock and the 5 o'clock whistle, and the knowledge that if you didn't go in the next day there were 5 or 10 immigrants fresh off the boat or train waiting to take your job.
Again Katz has forgot that there was a world before 1990 and he ignores history. People have it good now compared to one hundred years ago, a fact that Labor Unions lament as thier Union rolls decrease.
I paid 10,000 dollars cash for my used Chevy C/K-1500 4x4 truck just last spring.
Same for when I tossed out 3500 for my new Mitsubishi big-screen. When I buy computers, I go to the local Apple dealer and throw cash down on the counter.
If I don't have the money in my pocket to buy something, I don't buy it. Never have, never will, when I go and buy that Impala SS I've been looking at, I'll pay for it in cash too.
The US have fought in ground wars, "peace-keeping" and extractions recently.
1. Gulf War was 10 years ago - Didn't go badly
2. Somalia was 7 years ago - Didn't go that badly
3. Occupation of Haiti was 6 years ago and lasted for 2 years - Went very well
4. Bosnia has been going on for 6 years now. SEALs and Green Berets have had some action there - Has gone well
5. Kosovo has been going on for 2 years now - has gone well
That coupled with bi-annual desert operations in Egypt (Bright Star) and annual exercises with South Korea says to me that US does well on the ground.
Even the Korean war...50 years go, went badly at first - being out numbered 5 and 10 to 1 will do that, but after the retreat from the North in December of '50, the UN forces stopped the Chinese and Koreans cold.
"Look what an RPG did to a BlackHawk in Somalia. The idea of fighting a motivated enemy in his own back yard should give one pause."
Yep. In "Blackhawk Down" they talk about this, and the fact that hundreds of RPGs went flying in the air before they got a lucky hit. That was an urban setting, there's cover there, there isn't out in the bush. Ever hear Blackhawks or Apaches flying past? You can't tell what direction they are coming from in the daytime or at night. In Somolia there were Tangos sitting there with radios telling the fellas downtown when the UH-60s and OH-6s were taking off from the American compound, it's not going to be the same in Afghanistan.
"DO you really think we can be more successful in Afghanistan?"
Yep I do. Because the Americans and British SF going in here better equipment, better training and a knowledge of the Afghani fighters because they trained them in the 1980s.
I'm sure you read my post, but I'm not sure you understand it.
In this situation modern weaponry will provide advantages. Airmobile (Helicopter) helicopter forces will make the rugged nature of the geography less of an issue that pundits would have you believe. FLIR/Nightvision and drones will give the Allied forces advantages that the Afghanis do not have, nor did the Soviets or British. The Soviets tried to use Airmobile forces in the 80s, but it was thier first time and they didn't learn from the US in Vietnam. By contrast, the US have used massive helicopter assaults for the last 30 years (Operation Pegasus in Vietnam, Granada, elements of Just Cause in Panama, Desert Storm and bi-annual Bright Star exercises in Egypt.)
Since Vietnam the United States has worked hard on Light Infantry, the 25th Infantry (Light) and the 10th Infantry (Mountain) have considerable experiance in rough terran, operating in Hawaii, Korea, upstate New York, Bosnia and Kosovo. I'll wager that those "Light Fighters" from the 10th can climb mountains with the best of the Taliban, and the British bring the Gurkhas to the table, and those fellas grewup climbing mountains that make Afghanistan look like foothills.
The Gulf War was not a "phony war" Saddam made the same choices he made against Iran, choices that worked against hordes of infantry and American tanks, and I'm sure that he had some leftover Soviet advisors tell him that's the way to beat the Americans. But they didn't understand mobility, navigation with GPS or Nightvision. On the first nights of the War, Iraq did try to contest the air, but he got knocked down, F-15s and F-18s will do that to you, but the Taliban only has some claptrap MiG-21s...not an issue there.
You can always learn from the past. Even operations like Just Cause and Somolia will have taught the United States and Allies many things about mobile warfare and anti-insurgant fighting.
It's funny (in the funny-strange way) that when you hear about weapons of Vietnam...
The NVA will say how they liked captured M-16s more than thier AK-47s, and LAW rockets better than RPG-7s.
The Americans liked the AK-47 better than the M-16 and the RPG better than the LAW...
While the Americans did make the fixes to the M-16 to make it a world-class battle rifle, the Soviets dropped the cartridge on the AK to one like that M-16's and replaced the RPG-7 with the RPG-16 which is basicly a LAW while the US went to a larger man-pack rocket (Swedish and Isreali made) - like the older RPG-7s.
Personally I prefer the M-16/AR-15, but the price of Czech AK-74s is too good to pass up.
Right now I'm saving my pennies for an M-1 Scout rifle.
The Taliban and Al-Qaeda isn't just about US Foreign Policy or the US support of Israel.
It's something much more. It's about a cluster of dangerous persons that have a dangerous agenda. Al-Qaeda wants to overthrow Islamic nations and establish an very dangerous form of extreme Islam on a billion people. The Taliban is throwing signs on the clothes of Hindus just like the Nazis did to Jews, Quakers and homosexuals.
The Taliban does things to women that would make Himmler and Gobbels go white with shock.
It is about Good and Evil. Sorry but you need to check your facts.
I will say that the US Army wasn't technologically superiour in Vietnam.
The US Army and Marines were switching standard battle rifles (M-14 to M-16) while the NVA were using long-time standard rifles (AK-47). The United States Army was using a new APC (M-113) and a new Light Tank (M-551 Sheridan), both of which had bad teething problems.
The early M-16s were junk, very easy to jam and the full auto feature caused alot of problems in green troops. Since then the M-16 and M-4 have become very high quality battle rifles.
The Army was also learning how to use helicopters in a gunship and APC mode, which also caused alot of problems, that and the fact that the early UH-1s and AH-1s were single engined and had no armor. And at the time the United States had very limited UAV and remote sensing abilites.
Since Vietnam the US has done the following.
1. Established Mountain or Light Infantry units. The 10th Infantry at Fort Drum New York are veterans of Somolia and Bosnia.
3. The UH-60 Blackhawk and AH-64 Apache/Longbow are not your father's helicopters. Both are twin engined and armored to withstand 14.5mm direct hits and 23mm flak, lessons of the Soviet war in Afghanistan. Both have "high/hot" capabilites the Vietnam era helos didn't have.
4. Special Forces have evolved very far since MACV-SOG/Seal Teams and Desert One. Every special forces operation teaches them many things.
5. Fort Irwin and the National Training Center - The Afghanis know how to defeat a Soviet style army, the United States has the "Best Regiment in the Russian Army" at the NTC. The United States knows how to defeat Soviet doctrine and how to fight Soviet style, and helped fight them for 8 years, they know what the Afghanis know and what the Afghanis can do.
6. Remote Sensing - The United States and NATO have made increadable strides in remote sensing in the last 30 years. Mortars fired can be targeted and counter battery fire can land on the attacker before his shells have hit the ground. Night vision will allow helos and ground troops to operate at night and in the snow where the Soviets buttoned up at night.
This isn't your father's war.
Actually no.
That didn't happen in the Gulf War did it?
And there is a level of motivation at work. Was the United States motivated to fight in World War Two before the Ruben James or Pearl Harbor? No. But after that, a volunteer force, the United States Marine Corp, was more than motivated to fight in the Solomans, New Guinea and Burma for long periods of time with few reenforcments or supplies. Likewise, volunteer units like the Airborne and Rangers were able to accomplish great feats while under incredable opposition. At the Battle of the Bulge, while conscript units and National Guard units buckled under pressure from the Germans, units like the 101st stood thier ground.
The United States has deep reserves of Regular military both Army and Marines. Deep reserves of National Guards (many of whom fought in Iraq) and deep reserves of Army and Marine Reserves...all whom are volunteers.
"Too bad we aren't learning from the British and Soviet mistakes."
How do we know that the United States military isn't learning from British and Soviet mistakes?
The British attempted to take Afghanistan over 100 years ago, and you can not compare an army before aviation, remote sensing and mechnization to a modern army.
Same goes for the Soviets. The Soviets were an army of conscripts and as Afghanistan, Iraq and Vietnam show you, a conscript army isn't the same as a volunteer army. Also, the Soviets hadn't fought since WW2 or 1959-60 against the Chinese, albeit in Bridgade sized clashes. And like the Americans in Vietnam, an army that rusty will have problems.
Micheal should look to the SAS's exploits in Iraq in '91 and the Desert Rats in '40-'41 for examples of what a small cadre of highly trained and motivated fighters can do againt increadable odds. Or even look at Blackhawk Down for an indication of what Rangers and Delta Force can accomplish in a poorly planned mission. I'm sure that all the lessons learned in Afghanistan in the 80s by Delta Force and CIA as well as those lessons learned in Iraq, Somalia, Bosnia and Sierra Leone by the Rangers, Delta, SAS, Force Recon and SEALs will be taken to heart.
Back when Desert Storm was still Desert Storm, all you heard were bags o' wind talking about how the United States Military was a paper tiger and couldn't invade Iraq because Iran couldn't invade Iraq in 8 years of fighting. Then when it turned into Desert Storm, they told us how many thousands of men would die because the M-1 used too much gas and was too complicated to use or because it was designed for Europe. Same thing is going on now, people are declaring the United States and United Kingdom beaten before they've had a chance to fire a shot back in anger. It's FUD.
All those soldiers are volunteers, give them a chance to prove themselves or be beaten.
Actually, the Hunter UAV is a reliable Hellfire system.
r /i dr010817_2_n.shtml
http://www.janes.com/aerospace/military/news/id
"More recently, the US Army has carried out similar evaluations. In 1997, a Hunter UAV carrying a laser designator illuminated targets for attack by Paveway guided bombs and Hellfire air-to-surface missiles released from other platforms. All three of the former and nine of the latter struck their targets."
There's alot of interest in these RPVs in the US and NATO.
t m
h tm
a wk .htm
s c/ globalhawk010427_1_n.shtml
r /i dr010817_2_n.shtml
http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/uav.htm
Israel started to use them in the late 70s and 80s for Counter Battery imaging of Syrian and Hezbollah artillery. Then the US started a really horrible project called Aquila in the 80s that failed. By the Gulf War the Navy was using Israeli drones for real time imaging of targets for the 8 and 16 inch guns.
http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/hunter.h
http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/pioneer.
Global Hawk is really neat
http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/global_h
It can launch from Nevada, fly to Australia and then loiter for a spell before refueling. And it can transmit images to other aircraft or sats at 50-275 megabits per second. Australia is looking at the Global Hawk for recon on the north.
http://www.janes.com/defence/air_forces/news/mi
Recently the USAF and Army are testing RPVs for firing Sidewinder, Stinger and Hellfire missiles at a range of airborne and ground targets.
http://www.janes.com/aerospace/military/news/id
"IAI recently teamed with Raytheon Missile Systems to promote Cutlass (Combat UAV Target Locate and Strike System), which mates the Harpy air vehicle with a guidance system based on the US company's seekers for the AIM-9X and ASRAAM air-to-air missiles coupled with an automatic target-recognition and classification system. Other similar defense-suppression drones include the ARW-10 Lark developed by Kentron in South Africa."
Interesting stuff no doubt.
I've seen it Blue-Screen.
I've seen it blue-screen straight out of the box from Dell and Gateway.
I've seen Windows 2000 not only blue-screen, but I've seen them reboot themselves when Windows Media Player or Quicktime start to play video clips.
I've seen Windows 2000 blue-screen when a USB keyboard is plugged into them.
It's better than NT or 9x, but it still sucks.
The DoD have given neat names to operations in the past. It dates to 1964.
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/ops/index.html
Joint Guardian
Allied Force / Noble Anvil
Determined Force
Cobalt Flash
Shining Hope
Sustain Hope / Allied Harbour
Provide Refuge
Nomad Vigil
Nomad Endeavor
Deny Flight
Decisive Endeavor / Decisive Edge
Decisive Guard / Deliberate Guard
Deliberate Forge
Those are just a few.
That's working under the assumption that there are flights to Europe at the last minute.
As events last week pointed out so well, you can't assume anything anymore.
I'm going to argue some points.
"This has also allowed the formation of armies without a single physical location. Its troops are scattered around the globe, making it difficult for the United States to simply "invade."'
Imperial Japan. The IJA had troops scattered from Burma to Timor to Alaska to Central China to nearly Midway on thousands of islands. The United States, UK, Australia and Royal Dutch were able to isolate them, eliminate them or by-pass them. The same thing can be done to terrorists.
1. Stop the export of drugs from Pakistan and Afghanistan. Begin air dropping of suppiles to the people in Afghanistan clearly marked as from the US/NATO.
2. Begin air mobile operations against known terrorist camps in Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq, Sudan, Pakistan. Take out the leadership and the organization will wither and die. Look at the decapitation of Ayran Nation, KKK and other White-power groups in the US and Canada. The KKK was all but elimated in the US for 40 years twice. It can happen to the Terrorists groups.
3. While war is a classical pursuit, it isn't always rooted in the notions of borders and terrain, the French learned that in Spain in the 1810s, the Germans learned that in Russia and Balkins in the 1940s and the US learned that in Vietnam in the 1960s. The Russians didn't learn that in Afghanistan in the 1980s or Chechyna in the 1990s.
I like Polka.
Lawarence Welk played at my grandfather and grandmother's wedding in South Dakota in 1948.
I like Bluegrass too, the Hayseed Dixie covers of AC/DC are very good, I wonder if Clear Channel will ban them as well.
I think the Clear Channel thing is nuts, and I'm glad that alot of Clear Channel PDs and DJs are going out of thier way to play the banned songs today.
Freakin' Stairway to Heaven is on the list.
It has NOTHING to do with violence or dying or anything...well maybe shopping. But thats it.
Idiotic list and idiotic Clear Channel Communications.
1. "Given that the human face recognition performed by the check-in agents did not keep the hijackers out, there is no reason to think that computer face recognition would help."
Jeez, that's like saying that a human can't keep track of 20,000 messages at a time so computers can't either. No honestly, while I do not agree with face cams on the street or in public places, I can agree with them in airports, because it's been widely held that it isn't unconstitutional to withhold some civil liberties to protect the Public.
2. "Meanwhile, Congress hurried to pass a resolution giving Bush unlimited power to use military force in retaliation for the attacks. Retaliation may be justified, if the perpetrators can be identified and carefully targeted, but Congress has a duty to scrutinize specific measures as they are proposed. Handing the president carte blanche in a moment of anger is exactly the mistake that led the United States into the Vietnam War."
That's just out and out bullshit too. That's not what led the United States into Vietnam, that's what got Marines there, but the Gulf of Tonkin resolution and Congress's recent vote are not the same. The Gulf of Tonkin was a slippery slope into war, Congress basicly voted for war, just like they did in 1812, 1846, 1861, 1898, 1917 and 1941. Not the same as the Gulf of Tonkin.
3. "But that won't stop the agencies that have always wanted to do more surveillance from pushing this plan now, and many other plans like it. To stop them will require public opposition."
Stallman must have missed US Government class in high school and college. Just because Congress votes on something and the President signs it, doesn't mean it will be there forever, the Supreme Court will decide that. There are some wacky congress-critters out there, but I doubt that this long battle about crypto and people tracking will slip in under the guise of "Public Safety".
That was one big FUD piece there, and yep, I think Stallman was out there.
There will likely be alot of disrupted PR events in the coming months, it's not going to just be Apple.
As for the next killer app/machine coming from SGI...ha. Thier stock is currently trading at 40 cents a share and are about to be delisted from the NASDAQ.
Apple has shipped many times more machines in the last two years than SGI has, sorry but if anyone is getting a nail in the coffin, it's SGI.
I'd bet that it was because there would be logistics problems right now with the backlog of flights steming from last weeks events.
As a firm believer in the seperation of church and state as held in the Constitution of the United States, I feel that it's fine to declare a "National Day of Prayer and Remeberance." See if you don't pray or ain't the praying type, you can remeber. And praying is pretty damned non-denominational...
In the Constitution it says...
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
The President's asking for a day of prayer and remeberance does not violate the 1st Amendment. As for removing religious interferance or endorsement, look at a Dollar bill, it says "In God We Trust."and it has Masonic symbolism.
That was really well said.
During my life I've always taken "bow your head and pray" as "shut up and look serious".
And I thought Slashdot did a very good job this week. I woulda emailed Taco that, but I figured there was enough traffic over the Internet.
Really good job guys. Between Slashdot and Drudge I felt as informed as a guy can be.
On the Mine Treaty.
The US and South Korea said, we will sign the ban on mines if you let us have 10 years to come up with a non-mine way to defend South Korea. They were told 'No." The US also wanted a clause for the Claymore - a tactical mine very useful for clearing obsticles, defending camps at night and for clearing mines. They were told "No." So don't blame the US, blame the inflexability of the people doing that mine treaty.
"Do you think the Serbian paramilitaries could have done as much damage to Kosovo if NATO troops had gone in?"
I think the Serbian paramilitaries would have done a good imitation of the SS and would have been killing and murdering more than they did had NATO been on the ground.