From SilverOrange (who are also responsible for the excellent Mozilla site design), I learned the actual guy responsible for the Firefox/Thunderbird icons is freelance graphic designer Jon Hicks, found here.
I've just spent several minutes searching in vain for who designed the Firefox/Thunderbird logos. I think they're absolutely amazing, and whoever did it deserves huge props as well. Anyone know who did 'em?
Well, it's not like we just fucked up and picked some Lionel Hutz insurance agency out of the phone book. This was a scientific consulting firm, and I worked with a group of very talented scientists who spent most of their working days evaluating data. These were smart and skilled people, and they didn't come to a decision like this lightly.
The chosen plan was some kind of Blue Cross or Blue Shield "preferred" plan or something - I can't recall exactly, but it was definitely one of the largest insurers around. For medical, it was as good a deal as we could find, and overall it wasn't bad, as far as these things go. For vision and medical, I got a few comments from receptionists about how lucky I was to have such a good plan. It was only the dental that was a complete joke.
And while I wasn't really involved with finding health care plans, I remember the complaints from those who were. Apparently, there were only a few options even available to companies our size, and fewer still that were even relatively reasonably priced. The costs over the past 8 years had risen very considerably, and some insurers had pulled out of the state entirely. Among the handful of plans available, we chose the best one we could find, with a top insurer, because we felt it was worth it.
And so... that's what we got. Medical and vision apparently worked out well but were extremely expensive, and dental was just a complete waste of money, as far as I could tell.
At the last company I worked for (a small consulting firm), we had a meeting where we collectively chose the best health care plan we could find for the company. We all had full medical, dental, and vision benefits. I was under the impression that we had gotten some of the best coverage available, and even had some receptionists comment to that fact.
However, when it came to dental, we got screwed. I went to get my ancient fillings replaced, and was told it would cost something like $6-7000, and my "insurance" would only cover half. Furthermore, my "insurance company" was so bad at paying their bills, the dentist had hired a full-time person solely to try to get them to pay. It had gotten so bad that the dentist refused to honor the insurance... I would have to pay in full, then they would give me the appropriate paperwork, and I would have to seek restitution from my "insurance company."
Cut to: I go to Colombia. Guess what, they have the same high-tech dentists' offices as in the USA, some with bilingual dentists trained in the USA. And to replace my fillings only costs a few hundred bucks. Cash.
Let's see: $6-7000, plus a raftload of paperwork and headaches to try to get my worthless, deadbeat "insurance company" to pay up. Or, $1400 for airfare and an awesome week's vacation, plus dental work.
Or break the system for everybody. I sent an email to the TSA asking to please be put ON the list. I justified it because although I have a full-time job and generally have shit to do, I sympathize with leftists and protesters and peace activists. So even though I may not be doing any protesting or other such nefarious activities, I'm inclined to think they're OK, and it seems to me like that oughta be enough to get me on the watch list. I also told them that I have many friends who feel the same way, but I wasn't sure if it was my patriotic duty to give them their names, or if that'd be unamerican, and to please advise. I never heard back, but I continue to be allowed to board airplanes.
It also doesn't seem to work if you volunteer for the extra-special screening search. I always enjoy those. Some people get annoyed, but I just see it as an opportunity to annoy them. There is a legitimate argument that the screeners themselves are just doing their job, and it's a lousy job to have, and so on, so you shouldn't annoy them. But I figure the more we can annoy them, the more they're going to bitch amongst themselves, and hopefully over time the gripes will flow up the ladder to the decision-makers.
I'd really like to see more and more people added to these lists and subjected to the extra-moronic searches, and more people being annoying. Hopefully at some point the system would start to break down, and people would demand something better.
Typical of Moore's detractors, who dislike what he says yet cannot argue articulatly and must resort to the most trivial and banal of semantic attacks. Like the pathetic meatbags who whined about the Charlton Heston speeches being used "out of context" in Bowling for Columbine or the precise timeline of events in Roger and Me. I'm all for accuracy, too, but if you're going to use these semantic quibblings to dismiss entire arguments and points of view out of hand, then you're a cock.
The right loves to trash Moore for this idiotic bullshit, but notice how they never argue the real issues. You think he sucks, fine, then argue about what he's saying.
I saw the bit Moore did with Bill O'Reilly where O'Reilly baited him into that same semantic bullshit about whether or not Bush "lied" about WMDs. There's no shortage of solid reportage about how and why the WMD argument came into being, and I just saw the spinsanity.com guy on the Daily Show talking about how brilliant the Bush administration is about never letting themselves being cornered into an actual lie. As far as I know, it's not possible to trap the Bushies into a rock-solid semantically-accurate lie about WMDs, but take the time to read and it's painfully obvious what they were doing. It may be more accurate to call it deceptive, but I think wasting time debating the finer points and what-ifs of a "lie" detracts from what should be the real debate: did the administration "cook the books" (you know, in the Halliburton/Enron sense) in their case for war, and if so, was that appropriate?
Anyway, tell you what - we'll stop calling Moore a documentarian on the day that you stop calling Fox News "news."
And as far as your A) is concerned, Moore has an extensive bibliography on his website where you can check his references for yourself, and B) I'll tell you with a straight face that I don't see "fictional matter" in Moore's films, and if you'd care to point to specific examples of substantive fictional content, I'd like to see it. And by "substantive," I don't mean stupid shit like, "Moore made it seem like it was the South Park guys who made that animated short, when really it wasn't."
"Support the troops" is vitally important because not everybody does, and we need to be mindful of that fact.
Vitally important?
VITALLY IMPORTANT?!?
"The troops" have M16s and licenses to kill. What the fuck do they need from me?
I really don't get you people. Can I support one troop for just $1/day? Am I supposed to give them hot-oil rubdowns? Or do they just need to be held?
Support the troops, my ass. You want to support the troops, how about not sending them off on bullshit assignments to get killed and maimed for no good reason. You want to support the troops, how about fixing the VA and supporting some of the homeless vets I see every day around my apartment building. You want to support the troops, how about electing people that try to increase their pay and living conditions instead of decreasing it.
This "support the troops" business is such a blatant, bullshit rah-rah right-wing secret-code catchphrase that really means, "HUAH, we like it when our boys kill some little brown people somewhere." Screw you and your yellow ribbons and your "these colors don't run" and your "love it or leave it" and your hardons for killing, and fuck your phony-ass "support the troops."
Now, nobody's going to put me in jail for saying that, but guess what, they wouldn't let me say it on CNN, even without the profanity. And if I did, I'd be putting my life and well-being at very real risk from the hardcore wingnuts out there. Like the artist in Portland recently who dared to hang a painting of the Abu Ghraib abuses in a gallery. Fuckheads smashed up the gallery, and punched the WOMAN who owns the place in the face and threatened her life. It's not that anyone's risking jail time for saying things, it's the risk of nearly-retarded good ol' boys hopped up on phony, jingoistic bullshit like "support the troops" cracking their skulls. It's the risk of massive outcry and complaints that any mainstream media outlet would prefer to avoid in allowing these sentiments on the air. I'll leave the definition of fascism for the semantically inclined to chew on, but there is a de facto status quo that should give any professed lover of freedom pause.
I was lucky to catch the movie "Pripyat" at my local film society a few years ago. It's a black and white documentary about the Zone and some of the people who live there. They also tour Chernobyl and talk to some of the people who work there. It's a beautiful and amazing film, and well worth trying to hunt it down. It's a shame it didn't get a wider release. I remember the engineers who currently work at Chernobyl rarely even get paid... those guys are scrounging for food while operating a nuclear power plant. I suppose they could always eat the local mushrooms... it's the gamma that makes 'em extra tasty!
They're used for both. And yeah, the Russians now have very good star sensors (forget what they're called exactly) onboard, and my friend who works on this says they could use some kind of horizon or sun-earth reference as well. None of the other options are nearly as palatable as keeping the gyros working, but there are other options for keeping the station aloft properly.
A good friend of mine is one of the people responsible for this part of the station, and he was just explaining this problem to me last night. In the event that one more gyro fails, they've got other (less desirable, but functional) options, including Russian gear. We talked about all kinds of options... the short of it is, yes, the failure of this gyro is a major concern, but no, the station is not about to fall out of the sky.
Cripes, this story never ends. I'm that guy - just the other day I was eating lunch at a restaurant and two waitresses came over to ask if I was the foil apartment guy. But for all the infamy, this story never made/. Bummer. Anyway, Luke, the foiler, has some good pictures on his website:
And any gambler will look at the odds. Personally, I'd say the odds of Iraq dissolving into warring factions or being run by a brutal oppressive regime within a few years are very high, and the odds of a Germany or Japan style success are astronomically low.
A quick comparison check will of course show that the US government is preferable to Saddam's, but that doesn't necessarily mean that in the real world, us forcing a government on Iraq is going to produce results that are qualitatively 'better.' There are tons of variables in Iraq - political, cultural, economic, etc. - that need to be accounted for in advance if you're going to try to work out that equation. I honestly don't think anyone in a decision-making capacity on this thing bothered to do that - they naively assumed that, of course, our way is going to be better than Saddam, and with the shyster Chalabi there to egg them on, well...
But it's still difficult for me to believe that all these guys had such profound faith in the geopolitics of the thing. Maybe I'm too generous, but it seems doubtful that these guys really are that incredibly deluded. I can't shake the feeling that the meeting went something like this:
Wolfowitz: We all know Saddam's a bad guy and a real pain in our Israeli side, and we can easily take him out without anyone pitching a huge fit. We'll have a good shot at snipping OPEC's balls for good and casting a big, deep shadow across the rest of the region. Now, maybe we can transform the MidEast into a sane, happy place, or maybe we can't, but at least in the short run we'll be heroes and us and our golf buddies will be rich, rich, and rich.
Bush: Any chance it'll turn into a clusterfuck?
[Rummy, Perle, Wolfowitz and Cheney exchange sideways glances]
Wolfowitz: Mmmmnnooooo.
Bush: Woo-hoo! I wanna land on an aircraft carrier! Number one, make it so!
Cheney: Yeah, keep calling me that, Shrubby McDrunk.
The 'why this nation and not that one' questions are extremely easy to answer, indeed. Every situation has its own nuances, of course, but make a list of nations that don't play ball with US corporations and a list of our "enemies" and, for better and worse, draw your own conclusions. The business of America is business. We're happy to be China's best friend and vice versa as long as the Red Army continues to own most of everything and the money keeps flowing. I sleep better at night knowing that the Chinese Army, no matter the political rhetoric coming from Beijing, has a very vested interest in not messing with us. But the point is, all the happy nationalist rah-rah aren't-we-glorious-altruistic-Americans is a fat sack of lies. We don't embargo Cuba because Castro's a bad, bad man, or because they're communists, or because we want the Cuban people to be 'free' or any of that crap. We embargo them because they won't play ball. And it's the jingoistic BS that prevents us from discussing these policies rationally.
As far as WMDs being the thin justification for an attempted restructuring of the MidEast, that's the stated goal of the PNAC crowd, and anyone who can read knows the WMD and terrorist issues were laboriously hyped excuses. There are lots of other factors that surely went into the decision process -- Israel wanted to get rid of Saddam, and it'd be foolish to let that oil get out from under us, etc. etc. But the only people on the planet who still seem to believe the laughably implausible lies are Americans. And as long as those lies continue to be believed true, they effectively prevent discussion on the real questions: was it moral, ethical, cost-effective, or even very smart? These are good and interesting and necessary questions.
But look at the childish answers Americans settle for. Saddam was a bad guy, the world's a better place without him, he was a threat to everyone... all of these things designed to make us feel scared and then grateful that he's gone, and that's end of story. And this is the best the most powerful nation on the planet can do? Why can't we discuss the real questions rationally, in the open, without all the BS? It's downright embarassing and more than a little disturbing. What couldn't these guys get away with, as long as they wrapped it in a flag?
I applaud the way you care about all the world's citizens as equals. Most Americans care only about Americans, and screw everyone else. You are, then, no doubt as concerned about all the other tyrants and dictators and oppressors in the world. You may want to take a look at the human rights records of some of America's closest allies. And some of the nations that joined the "Coalition of the Willing" to oust Saddam. And take a look at some of our not-quite-close allies, but pals as long as the checks keep coming. Using human rights as a scale, who would you invade next?
Bonus question: why would the US government fine you $50,000 if you travel to Cuba, while China is A-OK? They both suffer under tyrannical regimes known for brutally crushing opposition and are known for human rights abuses. What's the dif?
This makes good financial sense. When I got a check card years ago, I ditched my credit cards because I hated the card companies so much, with all their little con games and general bullshit. No reason to feed the beast. I haven't had any problems with my check card so far, but these days, especially with electronic billing, it's tempting to pick up a regular card again and make it work in my favor. Thanks for the good post.
I agree. The normal people I know fantasize about flamethrowers and LAW rockets and railguns when they are angry. What's the point of fantasizing about small arms, when you can have a whole fantasy world of BFGs? Sheesh.
It's not the number of people that prevents the US from attacking China, it's that China is more than happy to do business with US corporations. You can have the worst human rights record, the most utter lack of freedom and democracy, and the US will be your best pal as long as you still play ball where the money is concerned.
Compare and contrast Cuba with China - why is one the great satan, and the other a preferred trading partner? Look at Saudi Arabia, Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Israel... compare with Iran, Syria, Libya, etc. Human rights, freedom, and democracy in other countries means nothing to the US... it's all about the dollar. The business of America is business, baby!
You can argue til the cows come home whether or not that's a good thing, and I frankly don't care, but it cheeses me off that Americans are so dumb that they still believe their government's BS. It's blatantly obvious... just come out and say it, dammit!
Hey now, I'm articulate, and I'll defend Point Break over Revolutions. Sorry, this was just a passing mention in your message, but defending Point Break is sort of a hobby of mine. Yes, I need to get out more.
But consider: Point Break is an amazing film. Not a "good" film, but still amazing. Take three of the worst actors in Hollywood - Keanu, Swayze, and Gary Busey - and write an inane script about surfing bank robbers, and somehow produce a loud, stupid, but thoroughly entertaining and fun film from start to finish. On paper, Point Break should be just about the worst movie ever made, but somehow it isn't. Director Kathryn Bigelow put enough into it that it not only works on its own level - it does what it set out to do, perfectly - but it also succeeds above and beyond with at least one of the best chase scenes ever filmed. And unlike Revolutions, there isn't really a dull moment.
Revolutions, on the other hand, tried to be deep sci-fi and failed miserably. Unlike Point Break, which took terrible actors and made them watchable in a fun, goofy way, the Wachowskis just let the bad actors suck and made the good actors suck, too (like Fishburne's big speech in Zion). There wasn't a single scene in Zion that was better than a shitty, boring episode of some Star Trek franchise show, except you got to see nipples during the rave. Even its action scenes, besides the burly brawl and the semi collision, were pretty dull. Some of the martial arts wire work, supposedly what the Matrix does so well, was awful and laughable, so it couldn't even succeed on its own level as well as Point Break.
I actually really liked the Architect scene, though - I thought it was good "Prisoner"-esque fun, and one of the high points of the movie. Still... as counterintuitive as it might seem, I'd argue that Kathryn Bigelow could teach the Wachowskis a few things.
You need to spend some time thinking about your phrase "religious rights." You seem to be a little confused about a very, very important American ideal.
I just picked up a Canon 3200 for my office - $20k, but we print a ton of color 11x17s. Try doing that at Kinko's. Our last copy job was $9k - I figured we could do it for less than $1k on the Canon, so it'll pay for itself over Kinko's fairly quickly. We're using the Ikon service agreement - they charge $0.085 per color copy for full service, including toner, but they don't differentiate between 8.5x11 and 11x17. Works for us.
A print job on the Canon can be set up to insert tabs, covers, slipsheets, etc. at the appropriate places, and then the job can be saved on the optional ImagePass module. Somebody wants a copy of a report, they can just walk up to the touchpad and bam, there it is.
It'll also do high-speed scanning of documents, and email you a PDF or JPG. It can pull addresses from an LDAP server.
Copying isn't as fast as I'd like it to be, but overall, it's a pretty amazing piece of equipment. I still keep my trusty old HPs online as backup.
Slashdot Mirror
Whew! Thanks!
From SilverOrange (who are also responsible for the excellent Mozilla site design), I learned the actual guy responsible for the Firefox/Thunderbird icons is freelance graphic designer Jon Hicks, found here.
I've just spent several minutes searching in vain for who designed the Firefox/Thunderbird logos. I think they're absolutely amazing, and whoever did it deserves huge props as well. Anyone know who did 'em?
Well, it's not like we just fucked up and picked some Lionel Hutz insurance agency out of the phone book. This was a scientific consulting firm, and I worked with a group of very talented scientists who spent most of their working days evaluating data. These were smart and skilled people, and they didn't come to a decision like this lightly.
The chosen plan was some kind of Blue Cross or Blue Shield "preferred" plan or something - I can't recall exactly, but it was definitely one of the largest insurers around. For medical, it was as good a deal as we could find, and overall it wasn't bad, as far as these things go. For vision and medical, I got a few comments from receptionists about how lucky I was to have such a good plan. It was only the dental that was a complete joke.
And while I wasn't really involved with finding health care plans, I remember the complaints from those who were. Apparently, there were only a few options even available to companies our size, and fewer still that were even relatively reasonably priced. The costs over the past 8 years had risen very considerably, and some insurers had pulled out of the state entirely. Among the handful of plans available, we chose the best one we could find, with a top insurer, because we felt it was worth it.
And so... that's what we got. Medical and vision apparently worked out well but were extremely expensive, and dental was just a complete waste of money, as far as I could tell.
At the last company I worked for (a small consulting firm), we had a meeting where we collectively chose the best health care plan we could find for the company. We all had full medical, dental, and vision benefits. I was under the impression that we had gotten some of the best coverage available, and even had some receptionists comment to that fact.
However, when it came to dental, we got screwed. I went to get my ancient fillings replaced, and was told it would cost something like $6-7000, and my "insurance" would only cover half. Furthermore, my "insurance company" was so bad at paying their bills, the dentist had hired a full-time person solely to try to get them to pay. It had gotten so bad that the dentist refused to honor the insurance... I would have to pay in full, then they would give me the appropriate paperwork, and I would have to seek restitution from my "insurance company."
Cut to: I go to Colombia. Guess what, they have the same high-tech dentists' offices as in the USA, some with bilingual dentists trained in the USA. And to replace my fillings only costs a few hundred bucks. Cash.
Let's see: $6-7000, plus a raftload of paperwork and headaches to try to get my worthless, deadbeat "insurance company" to pay up. Or, $1400 for airfare and an awesome week's vacation, plus dental work.
Like Mr. White says, ain't no choice at all.
Or break the system for everybody. I sent an email to the TSA asking to please be put ON the list. I justified it because although I have a full-time job and generally have shit to do, I sympathize with leftists and protesters and peace activists. So even though I may not be doing any protesting or other such nefarious activities, I'm inclined to think they're OK, and it seems to me like that oughta be enough to get me on the watch list. I also told them that I have many friends who feel the same way, but I wasn't sure if it was my patriotic duty to give them their names, or if that'd be unamerican, and to please advise. I never heard back, but I continue to be allowed to board airplanes.
It also doesn't seem to work if you volunteer for the extra-special screening search. I always enjoy those. Some people get annoyed, but I just see it as an opportunity to annoy them. There is a legitimate argument that the screeners themselves are just doing their job, and it's a lousy job to have, and so on, so you shouldn't annoy them. But I figure the more we can annoy them, the more they're going to bitch amongst themselves, and hopefully over time the gripes will flow up the ladder to the decision-makers.
I'd really like to see more and more people added to these lists and subjected to the extra-moronic searches, and more people being annoying. Hopefully at some point the system would start to break down, and people would demand something better.
Typical of Moore's detractors, who dislike what he says yet cannot argue articulatly and must resort to the most trivial and banal of semantic attacks. Like the pathetic meatbags who whined about the Charlton Heston speeches being used "out of context" in Bowling for Columbine or the precise timeline of events in Roger and Me. I'm all for accuracy, too, but if you're going to use these semantic quibblings to dismiss entire arguments and points of view out of hand, then you're a cock.
The right loves to trash Moore for this idiotic bullshit, but notice how they never argue the real issues. You think he sucks, fine, then argue about what he's saying.
I saw the bit Moore did with Bill O'Reilly where O'Reilly baited him into that same semantic bullshit about whether or not Bush "lied" about WMDs. There's no shortage of solid reportage about how and why the WMD argument came into being, and I just saw the spinsanity.com guy on the Daily Show talking about how brilliant the Bush administration is about never letting themselves being cornered into an actual lie. As far as I know, it's not possible to trap the Bushies into a rock-solid semantically-accurate lie about WMDs, but take the time to read and it's painfully obvious what they were doing. It may be more accurate to call it deceptive, but I think wasting time debating the finer points and what-ifs of a "lie" detracts from what should be the real debate: did the administration "cook the books" (you know, in the Halliburton/Enron sense) in their case for war, and if so, was that appropriate?
Anyway, tell you what - we'll stop calling Moore a documentarian on the day that you stop calling Fox News "news."
And as far as your A) is concerned, Moore has an extensive bibliography on his website where you can check his references for yourself, and B) I'll tell you with a straight face that I don't see "fictional matter" in Moore's films, and if you'd care to point to specific examples of substantive fictional content, I'd like to see it. And by "substantive," I don't mean stupid shit like, "Moore made it seem like it was the South Park guys who made that animated short, when really it wasn't."
If you read the bill instead of the lies and the propaganda, you'd know this.
For anyone who doesn't understand what an obnoxious and stupid comment this is, here's the text of the PATRIOT act.
"Twirlip of the Mist" hasn't read it, either.
"Support the troops" is vitally important because not everybody does, and we need to be mindful of that fact.
Vitally important?
VITALLY IMPORTANT?!?
"The troops" have M16s and licenses to kill. What the fuck do they need from me?
I really don't get you people. Can I support one troop for just $1/day? Am I supposed to give them hot-oil rubdowns? Or do they just need to be held?
Support the troops, my ass. You want to support the troops, how about not sending them off on bullshit assignments to get killed and maimed for no good reason. You want to support the troops, how about fixing the VA and supporting some of the homeless vets I see every day around my apartment building. You want to support the troops, how about electing people that try to increase their pay and living conditions instead of decreasing it.
This "support the troops" business is such a blatant, bullshit rah-rah right-wing secret-code catchphrase that really means, "HUAH, we like it when our boys kill some little brown people somewhere." Screw you and your yellow ribbons and your "these colors don't run" and your "love it or leave it" and your hardons for killing, and fuck your phony-ass "support the troops."
Now, nobody's going to put me in jail for saying that, but guess what, they wouldn't let me say it on CNN, even without the profanity. And if I did, I'd be putting my life and well-being at very real risk from the hardcore wingnuts out there. Like the artist in Portland recently who dared to hang a painting of the Abu Ghraib abuses in a gallery. Fuckheads smashed up the gallery, and punched the WOMAN who owns the place in the face and threatened her life. It's not that anyone's risking jail time for saying things, it's the risk of nearly-retarded good ol' boys hopped up on phony, jingoistic bullshit like "support the troops" cracking their skulls. It's the risk of massive outcry and complaints that any mainstream media outlet would prefer to avoid in allowing these sentiments on the air. I'll leave the definition of fascism for the semantically inclined to chew on, but there is a de facto status quo that should give any professed lover of freedom pause.
I was lucky to catch the movie "Pripyat" at my local film society a few years ago. It's a black and white documentary about the Zone and some of the people who live there. They also tour Chernobyl and talk to some of the people who work there. It's a beautiful and amazing film, and well worth trying to hunt it down. It's a shame it didn't get a wider release. I remember the engineers who currently work at Chernobyl rarely even get paid... those guys are scrounging for food while operating a nuclear power plant. I suppose they could always eat the local mushrooms... it's the gamma that makes 'em extra tasty!
They're used for both. And yeah, the Russians now have very good star sensors (forget what they're called exactly) onboard, and my friend who works on this says they could use some kind of horizon or sun-earth reference as well. None of the other options are nearly as palatable as keeping the gyros working, but there are other options for keeping the station aloft properly.
A good friend of mine is one of the people responsible for this part of the station, and he was just explaining this problem to me last night. In the event that one more gyro fails, they've got other (less desirable, but functional) options, including Russian gear. We talked about all kinds of options... the short of it is, yes, the failure of this gyro is a major concern, but no, the station is not about to fall out of the sky.
Cripes, this story never ends. I'm that guy - just the other day I was eating lunch at a restaurant and two waitresses came over to ask if I was the foil apartment guy. But for all the infamy, this story never made /. Bummer. Anyway, Luke, the foiler, has some good pictures on his website:
Meet Luke
Hey, I'm that friend who got covered in tinfoil... for all the press that story got, I was always a little disappointed it didn't make /.
Here's a link to some photos... second one down:
http://www.meetluke.com/NxAlbumList.asp
And any gambler will look at the odds. Personally, I'd say the odds of Iraq dissolving into warring factions or being run by a brutal oppressive regime within a few years are very high, and the odds of a Germany or Japan style success are astronomically low.
A quick comparison check will of course show that the US government is preferable to Saddam's, but that doesn't necessarily mean that in the real world, us forcing a government on Iraq is going to produce results that are qualitatively 'better.' There are tons of variables in Iraq - political, cultural, economic, etc. - that need to be accounted for in advance if you're going to try to work out that equation. I honestly don't think anyone in a decision-making capacity on this thing bothered to do that - they naively assumed that, of course, our way is going to be better than Saddam, and with the shyster Chalabi there to egg them on, well...
But it's still difficult for me to believe that all these guys had such profound faith in the geopolitics of the thing. Maybe I'm too generous, but it seems doubtful that these guys really are that incredibly deluded. I can't shake the feeling that the meeting went something like this:
Wolfowitz: We all know Saddam's a bad guy and a real pain in our Israeli side, and we can easily take him out without anyone pitching a huge fit. We'll have a good shot at snipping OPEC's balls for good and casting a big, deep shadow across the rest of the region. Now, maybe we can transform the MidEast into a sane, happy place, or maybe we can't, but at least in the short run we'll be heroes and us and our golf buddies will be rich, rich, and rich.
Bush: Any chance it'll turn into a clusterfuck?
[Rummy, Perle, Wolfowitz and Cheney exchange sideways glances]
Wolfowitz: Mmmmnnooooo.
Bush: Woo-hoo! I wanna land on an aircraft carrier! Number one, make it so!
Cheney: Yeah, keep calling me that, Shrubby McDrunk.
Bush: Sorry. Sir.
The 'why this nation and not that one' questions are extremely easy to answer, indeed. Every situation has its own nuances, of course, but make a list of nations that don't play ball with US corporations and a list of our "enemies" and, for better and worse, draw your own conclusions. The business of America is business. We're happy to be China's best friend and vice versa as long as the Red Army continues to own most of everything and the money keeps flowing. I sleep better at night knowing that the Chinese Army, no matter the political rhetoric coming from Beijing, has a very vested interest in not messing with us. But the point is, all the happy nationalist rah-rah aren't-we-glorious-altruistic-Americans is a fat sack of lies. We don't embargo Cuba because Castro's a bad, bad man, or because they're communists, or because we want the Cuban people to be 'free' or any of that crap. We embargo them because they won't play ball. And it's the jingoistic BS that prevents us from discussing these policies rationally.
As far as WMDs being the thin justification for an attempted restructuring of the MidEast, that's the stated goal of the PNAC crowd, and anyone who can read knows the WMD and terrorist issues were laboriously hyped excuses. There are lots of other factors that surely went into the decision process -- Israel wanted to get rid of Saddam, and it'd be foolish to let that oil get out from under us, etc. etc. But the only people on the planet who still seem to believe the laughably implausible lies are Americans. And as long as those lies continue to be believed true, they effectively prevent discussion on the real questions: was it moral, ethical, cost-effective, or even very smart? These are good and interesting and necessary questions.
But look at the childish answers Americans settle for. Saddam was a bad guy, the world's a better place without him, he was a threat to everyone... all of these things designed to make us feel scared and then grateful that he's gone, and that's end of story. And this is the best the most powerful nation on the planet can do? Why can't we discuss the real questions rationally, in the open, without all the BS? It's downright embarassing and more than a little disturbing. What couldn't these guys get away with, as long as they wrapped it in a flag?
I applaud the way you care about all the world's citizens as equals. Most Americans care only about Americans, and screw everyone else. You are, then, no doubt as concerned about all the other tyrants and dictators and oppressors in the world. You may want to take a look at the human rights records of some of America's closest allies. And some of the nations that joined the "Coalition of the Willing" to oust Saddam. And take a look at some of our not-quite-close allies, but pals as long as the checks keep coming. Using human rights as a scale, who would you invade next?
Bonus question: why would the US government fine you $50,000 if you travel to Cuba, while China is A-OK? They both suffer under tyrannical regimes known for brutally crushing opposition and are known for human rights abuses. What's the dif?
This makes good financial sense. When I got a check card years ago, I ditched my credit cards because I hated the card companies so much, with all their little con games and general bullshit. No reason to feed the beast. I haven't had any problems with my check card so far, but these days, especially with electronic billing, it's tempting to pick up a regular card again and make it work in my favor. Thanks for the good post.
I agree. The normal people I know fantasize about flamethrowers and LAW rockets and railguns when they are angry. What's the point of fantasizing about small arms, when you can have a whole fantasy world of BFGs? Sheesh.
It's not the number of people that prevents the US from attacking China, it's that China is more than happy to do business with US corporations. You can have the worst human rights record, the most utter lack of freedom and democracy, and the US will be your best pal as long as you still play ball where the money is concerned.
Compare and contrast Cuba with China - why is one the great satan, and the other a preferred trading partner? Look at Saudi Arabia, Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Israel... compare with Iran, Syria, Libya, etc. Human rights, freedom, and democracy in other countries means nothing to the US... it's all about the dollar. The business of America is business, baby!
You can argue til the cows come home whether or not that's a good thing, and I frankly don't care, but it cheeses me off that Americans are so dumb that they still believe their government's BS. It's blatantly obvious... just come out and say it, dammit!
You missed the point entirely. Of course it is.
Hey now, I'm articulate, and I'll defend Point Break over Revolutions. Sorry, this was just a passing mention in your message, but defending Point Break is sort of a hobby of mine. Yes, I need to get out more.
But consider: Point Break is an amazing film. Not a "good" film, but still amazing. Take three of the worst actors in Hollywood - Keanu, Swayze, and Gary Busey - and write an inane script about surfing bank robbers, and somehow produce a loud, stupid, but thoroughly entertaining and fun film from start to finish. On paper, Point Break should be just about the worst movie ever made, but somehow it isn't. Director Kathryn Bigelow put enough into it that it not only works on its own level - it does what it set out to do, perfectly - but it also succeeds above and beyond with at least one of the best chase scenes ever filmed. And unlike Revolutions, there isn't really a dull moment.
Revolutions, on the other hand, tried to be deep sci-fi and failed miserably. Unlike Point Break, which took terrible actors and made them watchable in a fun, goofy way, the Wachowskis just let the bad actors suck and made the good actors suck, too (like Fishburne's big speech in Zion). There wasn't a single scene in Zion that was better than a shitty, boring episode of some Star Trek franchise show, except you got to see nipples during the rave. Even its action scenes, besides the burly brawl and the semi collision, were pretty dull. Some of the martial arts wire work, supposedly what the Matrix does so well, was awful and laughable, so it couldn't even succeed on its own level as well as Point Break.
I actually really liked the Architect scene, though - I thought it was good "Prisoner"-esque fun, and one of the high points of the movie. Still... as counterintuitive as it might seem, I'd argue that Kathryn Bigelow could teach the Wachowskis a few things.
You need to spend some time thinking about your phrase "religious rights." You seem to be a little confused about a very, very important American ideal.
I just picked up a Canon 3200 for my office - $20k, but we print a ton of color 11x17s. Try doing that at Kinko's. Our last copy job was $9k - I figured we could do it for less than $1k on the Canon, so it'll pay for itself over Kinko's fairly quickly. We're using the Ikon service agreement - they charge $0.085 per color copy for full service, including toner, but they don't differentiate between 8.5x11 and 11x17. Works for us.
A print job on the Canon can be set up to insert tabs, covers, slipsheets, etc. at the appropriate places, and then the job can be saved on the optional ImagePass module. Somebody wants a copy of a report, they can just walk up to the touchpad and bam, there it is.
It'll also do high-speed scanning of documents, and email you a PDF or JPG. It can pull addresses from an LDAP server.
Copying isn't as fast as I'd like it to be, but overall, it's a pretty amazing piece of equipment. I still keep my trusty old HPs online as backup.
Hey, you forgot the link for "too much coffee, man," too.
Good times.
Well, I'll be damned. That IS a better mousetrap!