The U.S. government is operating secretive prisons in Eastern Europe and not so secretively in Guantanamo where they are holding people without charge or trail, and apparently in many cases engaged in low grade or maybe even high grade torture.
Three squares, a Quran, a prayer mat, and the direction to Mecca. Doesn't get any better than that for Jihadists.
A big percentage of those people are doing hard time for drug related antisocial behavior.
The dope smokers always reveal themselves.
The U.S. government apparently is increasingly piping massive amounts of digital communication in to the NSA where they are largely able to spy on whatever they feel like since there is very little judicial oversight now since the Bush administration circumvented the FISA court.
Hasn't put much of a crimp in overseas communications, unless you are trying to contact your sister cell in Hamburg.
As nearly as I can tell if a 19 year old boy tries to strike up a romantic involvement with a 16 year old girl on the Internet there is a risk he will be arrested in an FBI sting or put on the TV in a sting by some TV news organization looking for some sensational reality TV.
Makes for great television. Perhaps sexual predators will think twice.
All in all this is basically the same kind of repression, spying, censorship and social standards enforcement as that the Chinese are doing, the only thing that is different is the scope and the degree.
Pope Benedict has warned us about the dangers of moral relativism. Perhaps you should read some of his stuff.
One of the big knocks against China is they would seize people's property and give it to developer cronies of the party. Well recently the Supreme Court authorized seizing people homes to turn them over to a drug company to build a new office complex.
This court decision was indeed disturbing. But here in the US we have a legislative branch that can correct the actions of a rogue court. This is entirely lacking in China.
All in all I wouldn't get all holier than thou about how bad the Chinese are and how good the U.S. is.
If I were you I'd try to do something about your self-loathing.
NASA is fully preoccupied with finishing the space station for our international partners and developing the CEV and new lunar landing infrastructure. NASP, X-33, Boeing's Supersonic Airliner.. There will be no major expendatures on yet another pie in the sky aerospaceplane. The justification is pretty weak - Tokyo to L.A. It sounds more like a bumbling attempt to grab technology from the US.
There is no such thing as friends, only aligned interests.
You do realise you're a psychopath?
I am a Reagan (a bellicose Irishman!) Republican. We have been called mean, uncaring, greedy, etc. I prefer the term clear thinking. I think empathy is misplaced on our enemies. Perhaps that's why you think I am a psychopath. Empathy is something that can be exersized after a conflict. It doesn't help in winning them.
Sigh. There are many more and better equipped Iranians than Serbs. They even have their own sizeable airforce.
I don't want to get into a pssiung fight about air forces. Most experts would agree it is not an area where Iran enjoys an advantage.
Yes, that will never breed any terrorists...
I think you are mistaken to think these people are bred. Islamo-fascists need a target for their hate to deflect introspection of their own shortcomings. If it was not the US it would be Israel or Europe. I am thankful they have not focused further afield as they surely would if left alone. All the rats in one trap!
Except kicking McArthur into retirement and the US out of the north.
Yet the stragic result was zero for the older Mr. Kim as your response readily admits, not to mention the pointless death and distruction wrought in the conflict. I still hope that his own people will hang "Dear Leader" on a meathook like Mussilini.
What makes Iraq a nation worth "building" and Korea not? Wouldn't have anything to do with oil, would it? See now, this is why the US has no friends any more.
I prefer to call it "economic potential" in an underperforming region. There is no such thing as friends, only aligned interests.
And if you had read the original comment fully, you would realise that US forces would be burned out of Iraq by the now heavily armed insurgents if that strategy were pursued.
Try reading something other than the new York Times. Zarqawi's display of firearms prowess in last week's video was particularly impressive. We are up against clowns who attack civilians who hate them.
um, perhaps the end of our civilization and the biggest species extinction in 64my is considered a pressing concern?
You should refrain from hyperbole. It may make you feel good, but it simply hurts your cause.
There is an error in your logic. (Sagan list: Non sequitur)
The march on Washington types are a) not getting listened to at all by the current government, and b) certainly not in charge of handing out current federal NSF & Energy Dept monies. This is why private organizations (such as Greenpeace) feel the need to fund some basic research themselves -- to overcome the current "don't fund it and they can't prove it'll happen" policies.
I have another theory. The climate left consumes "research" at such a high rate they find it more efficient to produce their own.
two more fun facts for ya:
I had forgotten, but the Federal Gov't has operated a fishing boat buy-back program in Maine for the last 10 years or so. The fish just aren't there, people can't sell their boats, all their money is tied up in the boat mortgage, all they can do is put more and more effort on the fewer and fewer fish.... All is not happy dolphins at sunsets in the Gulf of Maine.
I am well aware of the dynamics that have caused the crisis in fishing in the northeastern US. The territory extension to 200 mi and overinvestment in capacity caused the financial problems you outlined. The crisis point was some years ago. From a sport fishing point of view things are pretty cheery. Happiness abounds among the sea mammals of the Gulf of Maine.
If you want "runaway feedback cycles" and a real doomsday scenario which hasn't been picked up much outside the journals, check out what happens if the crystal methane hydrate deposits melt from the deep oceans. If we get the continental fringes up to 4 degC, they melt in a possible exothermic feedback cycle releasing more methane into the air than you can shake China's smokestacks at... And the deep waters at the high lats have already risen 1 degC.
Part of the standard Kyotoist litany is the catastrophy awaiting by decomposing methane clathrate. Methane clathrate is simply the result of normal constant outgassing of natural gas from sediments. A miniscule percentage of outgased methane is buffered in it. What should be of greater concern is what happens to the 95% that goes directly into solution or is outgased into the atmosphere. Ofcourse it is not a great concern, unless you are a Bermuda Triangle theorist. Watch out, there are CO2 clathrates on the ocean bottons as well. Clathrate breakdown happens constantly. It is in equilibrium. Equilibrium shifts. You cannot control it.
This is "just" a theory, but the precautionary principal points to this as certainly one worth invsesting a few bucks & grey hairs on.
Few bucks? I can only wonder what the bill might be for the full program! Kyoto would cost the US $1T over 10 years. For that we would reduce CO2 emissions enough reduce global average temperature by 0.05 deg C. Sweet. I have labeled this "Economic Jonestown". Pass the Kool-Aid.
During the Serbian-Croatian conflict they spotted your much vaunted stealth bombers and incoming missiles by tracking the holes in the cellphone network coverage.
The Serbs downed one F-117 with a lucky shot. They were otherwise pounded into submission. A fair trade I'd say. The genocide ended. Chalk up another win for the US Air Force.
I believe the building part of that equation is a little behind schedule. The destruction went well, however.
I am no fan of long occupation if it can be avoided. I prefer Runsfeld's strategy of shot & scoot.
And where is your fire and gusto for North Korea? Oh yes, you can't attack them because they are already nuclear armed. And would cream the US up and down the peninsula if they tried.
Kim is an isolated and entrenched regional problem. The US can do little to influence one man who keeps its people living in the stone age. His nukes and millions of potential refugees are more of a problem for China than us. If he makes big trouble, like attacking the south, he will get blasted. The status quo is fine so long as Kim is not allowed to export too much. The US should let the regional powers Japan and China deal with it instead of continuing to allow China to protract the negotiations and get Kim his best deal. I don't know why you think Kim and the Chinese would do any better than last time when they collectively lost 1/2 million men for no gain. Cheer for the tyrants if you want to. Uncle Sam will stay on top of them.
Also they have no oil.
Indeed they have nothing or worth at all.
Well Iran will be nuclear armed one way or the other before too long, so you'd best suck it up, my friend, because the US is in no state to invade anyone right now or for the immediate future.
The US, Europe, and Israel don't see it that way. Who is talking about invasion? Their nuclear facilities and weapons assets are sitting ducks. Targeted strikes are all that are needed. We have plenty of forces available for that.
Tanenbaum's research is correct, in that a Microkernel architecture is more secure, easier to maintain, and just all around better. The problem is that early Microkernel architectures killed the concept back when most of the OSes we use today were being developed.
Your words ring hollow considering there is no real microkernel alternative. Nothing is pretty secure and maintainable! In the 20 years the AT has been blathering on about them he is still flogging Minix, a childs immitation of an OS. One would have hoped that in that the profundity of his ideas would have inspired some some group to develop a suitable one.
One can only wonder why AT suddenly feels emboldened. Perhaps it is the perceived bugginess of the 2.6 kernel. Nothing a bug fixing cycle or 2 won't cure.
Not as impressive as the development of the Zulfiqar main battle tank or the Raad-2 self propelled artillery.
The goal of US military action in Iran is the destruction nuclear facilities and of large ground based military hardware, no matter how good it is. Iran has no answer to stealth, and precision munitions. They know this.
Iraq had little to no anti aircraft weaponary, unlike Iran.
To use anti-aircraft weaponry it must be revealed with radar. Turning on radar during a US attack has been shown to be suicidal.
So you have figured out how to bomb mines then? Good work, I'd patent that and retire if I was you. Meantime, I'd take a look at one example [newsmax.com] of many. FTFA:
The US has been minesweeping the gulf for decades. A more potent threat is shore based missile batteries.
"I think it would be problematic for any navy to face a combination of mines, small boats, anti-ship cruise missiles, torpedoes, coastal artillery, and Silkworms," said retired Navy Commander Joseph Tenaglia, CEO of Tactical Defense Concepts, a maritime security company. "This is a credible threat."
This is a fair accessment. Any navy commander worth spit would not underestimate his enemy. The US Navy 5th Fleet is stationed nearby in the UAE. I like our chances.
So the US isn't interfering with Iraq in any significant fashion...
No, we are nation building there. Iraqis will decide their own fate. They can either unite and be a prosperous country or slouch toward radical islam. Their choice.
It certainly is. That would be called "war".
Is that worse than being tormented by a bunch of fanatics for the next 25 years? Iran with a bomb is intolerable. I say lets have it done!
Over the last year, they've developed their tactics of 'asymmetrical' war,
Yes, their development of the C4 vest and the IED are particularly impressive.
Iran designs and produces its brands of fighter and tank, among other things, some of which it exports to other countries. Initial developments in every field of military technology were carried out with the technical support of Russia, China, and North Korea to lay the foundations for future industries.
These items will make fine targets for US precision weapons as they did in Iraq.
Iran controls the northern coast of the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow waterway through which oil tankers must navigate, and could sink ships, mine sea routes or bomb oil platforms.
Any threats to shipping would be short lived. After about 2 weeks of bombing there would be no significant Iranian hardware on the Persion Gulf coast.
Although the Bush administration charges that Tehran already has been interfering in Iraq, many Iranians brush off the low-level infiltration as minor
Nonetheless there are interfering and should answer for it.
But don't worry, a war would be over by christmas, right? Thats why the American government was openly discussing a nuclear option recently, much to the horror of the rest of the world...
The only horror has been Ahmedinejad openly threatening Israel with nuclear destruction. The mullahs need to be reminded that the nuclear option is not open to them even if they obtain a device. No one is suggesting that the US invade Iran. Thoroughly working over its nuclear and military infrastructure is another matter.
On a related note, I have a lot of friends inside Iran, both male and female, and I have been continually surprised at how open minded, educated and free-thinking they are, especially the women.
All the more reason to aggressively oppose the mullahs. Somehow I don't believe that the treatment of women in Iran is as rosey as you say. Are they not still forced to wear headscarves, forced to marry, have less access to jobs?
but those problems are being resolved over time. As for their nuclear program, they simply see it as a response to American aggression. And they are right.
Seems to me the problem with the Iranian leadership is growing. Something has to give.
That's because the primary purpose of this program, like so many others, is to transfer vast amounts of money from the federal treasury to certain politically cooperative industries. Like Star Wars before it, I doubt that there is anyone in the Bush administration that cares one iota whether it has any real military value or even whether it ever "works" or not. The real (political) value is in the spending itself.
The corrupt process of patronage you describe would not have yielded the startling advances in weapons in the last 25 years. For all their faults Pentagon weapons programs performed very well in the post Vietnam era. The purpose of Star Wars spending was to pressure the Soviet Union politically and economically. It worked. The thickening hedge of ballistic missle defenses being deployed in Taiwan, Japan, Israel, Europe, and the US are also testiment to the foresight and effectiveness of Reagan era military planners.
some Congressional Democrats and other experts fault the research as potential fuel for an antisatellite arms race that could ultimately hurt this nation more than others because the United States relies so heavily on military satellites, which aid navigation, reconnaissance and attack warning
This is to say military planners should blissfully ignore enemy military surveillance and navigation satellites flying overhead while they are used to target our forces. Why? Do we want to be nice to our adversary and even the playing field? Democrat military planning at its best.
I don't mind folks with other points of view, but you'd have better luck convincing me of your points if you used valid arguments. Carl Sagan wrote a good primer on the subject:
I had the good fortune of taking Carl Sagan's seminar on Carbon in the Solar System in 1985. He was a very skeptical thinker. One wonders what he would think of the current debate? On one hand he was one of the first to recognise the greenhouse effect as an explanation of Venus radio emissions. He might have aligned himself with the Kyotoists. On the other hand he hated imprecision and strong conclusions that aren't fully justified. He was a complex guy.
I do know a lot of oceanographers and climatologists (hell, I am one); I think it would be wise for you to continue to separate the scientists from the activist groups on "both sides" (as started this thread). From my perspective though the "both sides" folks are well outside the bulk of the science.
Climatology has been so thoroughly politicised that scientists and activists are not easily distinguished. The reason is that fear and hysteria generate press, political pressure, and therefore funding urgency. Also green activists readily identify with the subject matter and hysteria, much moreso than with more esoteric fields. Now there is a runaway feedback cycle! You would think that with its foundations in thermodynamics and fluid mechanics climatology would be a more precise and less controversial field. The sheer complexity of the full climate system probably defeats that notion and leaves too much room for crackpots.
Just out of interest what percentage of the total money you made last year was your tax bill?
I am making the point that anyone who pays their taxes unwittingly contributes to many dubious charitable causes. For all I know Greenpeace receives federal grants. The percentage I give beyond that is between me and the IRS. If that smells bad to you, try pulling your head out of your ass.
A single set of photos has been taken of this critter in the wild. Nothing more to know, time to close the book and move on!
Not at all. I am just pointing out that Greenpeace is not an innovator or indeed have any competence in this area. They are not a scientific organisation at all. They are good at harassing shipping from small inflatable motor boats. The Yemeni Al-Qaida terror cell that hit the USS Cole had similar skills.
You may not like Greenpeace, but before you go attacking them, what the hell have you done for your fellow Earthlings? And what's your scientific credibility to judge their entire organization, eh?
I paid my taxes. I gave 40% of all of the money I made last year to contribute to the greater good of society. That includes funding wasteful spending on eco-pseudoscience. I also made additional contributions to Catholic Charities and the FSF! I judge Greenpeace by their past behaviors: extremism, hyperbolic rhetoric, eco-terror...
Personally, I think they have an important role to play as some sort of balance to the "trade groups", self serving politicians, and FOX TVs of the world.
The left often complains about the FOX News rise to dominance. You need to understand that by hijacking the mainstream press over the past 30 years the left manufactured them. The great silent majority now has a fair and balanced news source and doesn't have to sift the words of Dan Rather.
Global fish stocks are crashing, fisheries management has been an abect failure worldwide, and it looks like this is the year that Japan will have bribed enough land-locked 3rd world nations to gain control of the IWC and reinstate commercial whaling. "Marine science is already in more capable hands." hmph. not by much.
A great success story has been US management of the Bering Sea fisheries. They are healthy and productive. I have recently gone cod fishing in the gulf of Maine. No problems there. Finback Whales lounging on the surface, Bottle Nose Dolphins cavorting in our boat wake, monster cod stuffed with krill. Quite a sight. How the rest of the world manages their fisheries, I don't know.
I highly recommend reading the non-partisan PEW report on the state of the world's oceans,
I'll do that, but there is no such thing as a non-partisan in the fields of oceanography or climatology.
The ship will become part of the ongoing University of the Azores research program intended to establish greater scientific knowledge of the importance of deep-sea habitats and marine life.
Giant squid have already been photographed in their natural habitat by Japanese scientists. Greenpeace is a radical political organisation with little scientific credibility. Marine science is already in more capable hands. One can only wonder about their real motivations.
After months of confronting whalers and pirates...
Bear in mind that $150 dollars probably means a lot more in the Chinese economy than it does here in the U.S.
Indeed it does. The average working Chinese is much poorer than he should be. The Chinese government sets the exchange rates relative to other currencies artificially low, to encourage exports and employment. This is blatant currency manipulation and is against WTO rules. The Japanese public has been similarly willing to be screwed for decades as well. We in America are enjoying the free lunch they provide. But the behavior hurts the working class in the United States and should be curbed. Economic competition would work better without market distortion.
America's recent dismal showing in the ACM Programming finals may be more than just a bad year
Duke sends a bunch of ill-prepared, second stringers to a programming competition, gets crushed, and I am supposed to worry about the decline of CS? I think an A teams from one of many elite US institutions would do better. I also would like to remind people of some outstanding recent domestic achievements. Maybe things aren't that bad.
You see the word "whining" used on this site a lot used in response to sharp criticism. It is a sure sign that the author has exhausted any counter argument and is looking for a face saving way out. You should avoid using the word as a substitute for thought.
You're like the internet debate equivalent of an emo kid.
Emo kid? Amusing! I had to look it up. No, I grew up watching the 60's counter culture wreck this country and then watched Reagan fix it. I am Reagan conservative through and through. Blind corporatism which is apparently your comfort zone is a relatively new phenomenon. Your response does nothing but confirm my observation. I prefer the Jeffersonian philosophy of the role of the informed, sceptical individual.
Are $50,000 simulators and $4,500 sensor vests driving a wedge between golf's haves and have-nots? That's the question posed by the WSJ, who reports that a new generation of expensive high-tech tools is stoking a costly arms race among golfers looking for an edge in a sport that already has an elitist reputation.
If you play golf regularly you see how ridiculous this notion is. Golf is the most honest test of skill in all of sports. There is no faking a good score or hiding a bad one. The advantage of the new balls and drivers doesn't mean much to anyone but a low handicapper. It'll make a +3 a scratch. Thats it. If you don't understand the swing no technical gizmos will understand it for you. The idiots that layout 10K on equipment and lessons are invariably high handicappers. Put them in a competative situation and they forget their lessons and still shoot 90. Good players with lesser equipment will laugh rather than be jealous. That said hyped up equipment are wrecking the game at the higher level because some of the best classic courses are too short for competition. You will see a deadened standard ball in major golf within 5 years.
Did you think that Slashdot was conceived by the internet via immaculate conception?
Slashdot is a business. They are paid by advertisers in exchange for my attention. When they lose my attention pulling their silly shit, I go elsewhere. I posted in hope that someone who runs the site would read it and benefit.
It's precisely this attitude of being entitled to stuff other people created that makes socialists so annoying.
What is worse is being a fatalistic slave to the status quo who is inexplicably compelled to offer every orifice to your corporate masters. For that you take solice in being a good capitalist. But is that behavior American?
Slashdot Mirror
The U.S. government is operating secretive prisons in Eastern Europe and not so secretively in Guantanamo where they are holding people without charge or trail, and apparently in many cases engaged in low grade or maybe even high grade torture.
Three squares, a Quran, a prayer mat, and the direction to Mecca. Doesn't get any better than that for Jihadists.
A big percentage of those people are doing hard time for drug related antisocial behavior.
The dope smokers always reveal themselves.
The U.S. government apparently is increasingly piping massive amounts of digital communication in to the NSA where they are largely able to spy on whatever they feel like since there is very little judicial oversight now since the Bush administration circumvented the FISA court.
Hasn't put much of a crimp in overseas communications, unless you are trying to contact your sister cell in Hamburg.
As nearly as I can tell if a 19 year old boy tries to strike up a romantic involvement with a 16 year old girl on the Internet there is a risk he will be arrested in an FBI sting or put on the TV in a sting by some TV news organization looking for some sensational reality TV.
Makes for great television. Perhaps sexual predators will think twice.
All in all this is basically the same kind of repression, spying, censorship and social standards enforcement as that the Chinese are doing, the only thing that is different is the scope and the degree.
Pope Benedict has warned us about the dangers of moral relativism. Perhaps you should read some of his stuff.
One of the big knocks against China is they would seize people's property and give it to developer cronies of the party. Well recently the Supreme Court authorized seizing people homes to turn them over to a drug company to build a new office complex.
This court decision was indeed disturbing. But here in the US we have a legislative branch that can correct the actions of a rogue court. This is entirely lacking in China.
All in all I wouldn't get all holier than thou about how bad the Chinese are and how good the U.S. is.
If I were you I'd try to do something about your self-loathing.
Emancipation of women in Iran compares favourably to US allies in the Arabic world like Saudi Arabia
That's not saying much.
NASA is fully preoccupied with finishing the space station for our international partners and developing the CEV and new lunar landing infrastructure. NASP, X-33, Boeing's Supersonic Airliner.. There will be no major expendatures on yet another pie in the sky aerospaceplane. The justification is pretty weak - Tokyo to L.A. It sounds more like a bumbling attempt to grab technology from the US.
There is no such thing as friends, only aligned interests.
You do realise you're a psychopath?
I am a Reagan (a bellicose Irishman!) Republican. We have been called mean, uncaring, greedy, etc. I prefer the term clear thinking. I think empathy is misplaced on our enemies. Perhaps that's why you think I am a psychopath. Empathy is something that can be exersized after a conflict. It doesn't help in winning them.
Sigh. There are many more and better equipped Iranians than Serbs. They even have their own sizeable airforce.
I don't want to get into a pssiung fight about air forces. Most experts would agree it is not an area where Iran enjoys an advantage.
Yes, that will never breed any terrorists...
I think you are mistaken to think these people are bred. Islamo-fascists need a target for their hate to deflect introspection of their own shortcomings. If it was not the US it would be Israel or Europe. I am thankful they have not focused further afield as they surely would if left alone. All the rats in one trap!
Except kicking McArthur into retirement and the US out of the north.
Yet the stragic result was zero for the older Mr. Kim as your response readily admits, not to mention the pointless death and distruction wrought in the conflict. I still hope that his own people will hang "Dear Leader" on a meathook like Mussilini.
What makes Iraq a nation worth "building" and Korea not? Wouldn't have anything to do with oil, would it? See now, this is why the US has no friends any more.
I prefer to call it "economic potential" in an underperforming region. There is no such thing as friends, only aligned interests.
And if you had read the original comment fully, you would realise that US forces would be burned out of Iraq by the now heavily armed insurgents if that strategy were pursued.
Try reading something other than the new York Times. Zarqawi's display of firearms prowess in last week's video was particularly impressive. We are up against clowns who attack civilians who hate them.
um, perhaps the end of our civilization and the biggest species extinction in 64my is considered a pressing concern?
You should refrain from hyperbole. It may make you feel good, but it simply hurts your cause.
There is an error in your logic. (Sagan list: Non sequitur) The march on Washington types are a) not getting listened to at all by the current government, and b) certainly not in charge of handing out current federal NSF & Energy Dept monies. This is why private organizations (such as Greenpeace) feel the need to fund some basic research themselves -- to overcome the current "don't fund it and they can't prove it'll happen" policies.
I have another theory. The climate left consumes "research" at such a high rate they find it more efficient to produce their own.
two more fun facts for ya: I had forgotten, but the Federal Gov't has operated a fishing boat buy-back program in Maine for the last 10 years or so. The fish just aren't there, people can't sell their boats, all their money is tied up in the boat mortgage, all they can do is put more and more effort on the fewer and fewer fish. ... All is not happy dolphins at sunsets in the Gulf of Maine.
I am well aware of the dynamics that have caused the crisis in fishing in the northeastern US. The territory extension to 200 mi and overinvestment in capacity caused the financial problems you outlined. The crisis point was some years ago. From a sport fishing point of view things are pretty cheery. Happiness abounds among the sea mammals of the Gulf of Maine.
If you want "runaway feedback cycles" and a real doomsday scenario which hasn't been picked up much outside the journals, check out what happens if the crystal methane hydrate deposits melt from the deep oceans. If we get the continental fringes up to 4 degC, they melt in a possible exothermic feedback cycle releasing more methane into the air than you can shake China's smokestacks at ... And the deep waters at the high lats have already risen 1 degC.
Part of the standard Kyotoist litany is the catastrophy awaiting by decomposing methane clathrate. Methane clathrate is simply the result of normal constant outgassing of natural gas from sediments. A miniscule percentage of outgased methane is buffered in it. What should be of greater concern is what happens to the 95% that goes directly into solution or is outgased into the atmosphere. Ofcourse it is not a great concern, unless you are a Bermuda Triangle theorist. Watch out, there are CO2 clathrates on the ocean bottons as well. Clathrate breakdown happens constantly. It is in equilibrium. Equilibrium shifts. You cannot control it.
This is "just" a theory, but the precautionary principal points to this as certainly one worth invsesting a few bucks & grey hairs on.
Few bucks? I can only wonder what the bill might be for the full program! Kyoto would cost the US $1T over 10 years. For that we would reduce CO2 emissions enough reduce global average temperature by 0.05 deg C. Sweet. I have labeled this "Economic Jonestown". Pass the Kool-Aid.
During the Serbian-Croatian conflict they spotted your much vaunted stealth bombers and incoming missiles by tracking the holes in the cellphone network coverage.
The Serbs downed one F-117 with a lucky shot. They were otherwise pounded into submission. A fair trade I'd say. The genocide ended. Chalk up another win for the US Air Force.
I believe the building part of that equation is a little behind schedule. The destruction went well, however.
I am no fan of long occupation if it can be avoided. I prefer Runsfeld's strategy of shot & scoot.
And where is your fire and gusto for North Korea? Oh yes, you can't attack them because they are already nuclear armed. And would cream the US up and down the peninsula if they tried.
Kim is an isolated and entrenched regional problem. The US can do little to influence one man who keeps its people living in the stone age. His nukes and millions of potential refugees are more of a problem for China than us. If he makes big trouble, like attacking the south, he will get blasted. The status quo is fine so long as Kim is not allowed to export too much. The US should let the regional powers Japan and China deal with it instead of continuing to allow China to protract the negotiations and get Kim his best deal. I don't know why you think Kim and the Chinese would do any better than last time when they collectively lost 1/2 million men for no gain. Cheer for the tyrants if you want to. Uncle Sam will stay on top of them.
Also they have no oil.
Indeed they have nothing or worth at all.
Well Iran will be nuclear armed one way or the other before too long, so you'd best suck it up, my friend, because the US is in no state to invade anyone right now or for the immediate future.
The US, Europe, and Israel don't see it that way. Who is talking about invasion? Their nuclear facilities and weapons assets are sitting ducks. Targeted strikes are all that are needed. We have plenty of forces available for that.
Tanenbaum's research is correct, in that a Microkernel architecture is more secure, easier to maintain, and just all around better. The problem is that early Microkernel architectures killed the concept back when most of the OSes we use today were being developed.
Your words ring hollow considering there is no real microkernel alternative. Nothing is pretty secure and maintainable! In the 20 years the AT has been blathering on about them he is still flogging Minix, a childs immitation of an OS. One would have hoped that in that the profundity of his ideas would have inspired some some group to develop a suitable one.
One can only wonder why AT suddenly feels emboldened. Perhaps it is the perceived bugginess of the 2.6 kernel. Nothing a bug fixing cycle or 2 won't cure.
Not as impressive as the development of the Zulfiqar main battle tank or the Raad-2 self propelled artillery.
The goal of US military action in Iran is the destruction nuclear facilities and of large ground based military hardware, no matter how good it is. Iran has no answer to stealth, and precision munitions. They know this.
Iraq had little to no anti aircraft weaponary, unlike Iran.
To use anti-aircraft weaponry it must be revealed with radar. Turning on radar during a US attack has been shown to be suicidal.
So you have figured out how to bomb mines then? Good work, I'd patent that and retire if I was you. Meantime, I'd take a look at one example [newsmax.com] of many. FTFA:
The US has been minesweeping the gulf for decades. A more potent threat is shore based missile batteries.
"I think it would be problematic for any navy to face a combination of mines, small boats, anti-ship cruise missiles, torpedoes, coastal artillery, and Silkworms," said retired Navy Commander Joseph Tenaglia, CEO of Tactical Defense Concepts, a maritime security company. "This is a credible threat."
This is a fair accessment. Any navy commander worth spit would not underestimate his enemy. The US Navy 5th Fleet is stationed nearby in the UAE. I like our chances.
So the US isn't interfering with Iraq in any significant fashion...
No, we are nation building there. Iraqis will decide their own fate. They can either unite and be a prosperous country or slouch toward radical islam. Their choice.
It certainly is. That would be called "war".
Is that worse than being tormented by a bunch of fanatics for the next 25 years? Iran with a bomb is intolerable. I say lets have it done!
Over the last year, they've developed their tactics of 'asymmetrical' war,
Yes, their development of the C4 vest and the IED are particularly impressive.
Iran designs and produces its brands of fighter and tank, among other things, some of which it exports to other countries. Initial developments in every field of military technology were carried out with the technical support of Russia, China, and North Korea to lay the foundations for future industries.
These items will make fine targets for US precision weapons as they did in Iraq.
Iran controls the northern coast of the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow waterway through which oil tankers must navigate, and could sink ships, mine sea routes or bomb oil platforms.
Any threats to shipping would be short lived. After about 2 weeks of bombing there would be no significant Iranian hardware on the Persion Gulf coast.
Although the Bush administration charges that Tehran already has been interfering in Iraq, many Iranians brush off the low-level infiltration as minor
Nonetheless there are interfering and should answer for it.
But don't worry, a war would be over by christmas, right? Thats why the American government was openly discussing a nuclear option recently, much to the horror of the rest of the world...
The only horror has been Ahmedinejad openly threatening Israel with nuclear destruction. The mullahs need to be reminded that the nuclear option is not open to them even if they obtain a device. No one is suggesting that the US invade Iran. Thoroughly working over its nuclear and military infrastructure is another matter.
On a related note, I have a lot of friends inside Iran, both male and female, and I have been continually surprised at how open minded, educated and free-thinking they are, especially the women.
All the more reason to aggressively oppose the mullahs. Somehow I don't believe that the treatment of women in Iran is as rosey as you say. Are they not still forced to wear headscarves, forced to marry, have less access to jobs?
but those problems are being resolved over time. As for their nuclear program, they simply see it as a response to American aggression. And they are right.
Seems to me the problem with the Iranian leadership is growing. Something has to give.
How is this effort different than peekabooty?
That's because the primary purpose of this program, like so many others, is to transfer vast amounts of money from the federal treasury to certain politically cooperative industries. Like Star Wars before it, I doubt that there is anyone in the Bush administration that cares one iota whether it has any real military value or even whether it ever "works" or not. The real (political) value is in the spending itself.
The corrupt process of patronage you describe would not have yielded the startling advances in weapons in the last 25 years. For all their faults Pentagon weapons programs performed very well in the post Vietnam era. The purpose of Star Wars spending was to pressure the Soviet Union politically and economically. It worked. The thickening hedge of ballistic missle defenses being deployed in Taiwan, Japan, Israel, Europe, and the US are also testiment to the foresight and effectiveness of Reagan era military planners.
some Congressional Democrats and other experts fault the research as potential fuel for an antisatellite arms race that could ultimately hurt this nation more than others because the United States relies so heavily on military satellites, which aid navigation, reconnaissance and attack warning
This is to say military planners should blissfully ignore enemy military surveillance and navigation satellites flying overhead while they are used to target our forces. Why? Do we want to be nice to our adversary and even the playing field? Democrat military planning at its best.
I don't mind folks with other points of view, but you'd have better luck convincing me of your points if you used valid arguments. Carl Sagan wrote a good primer on the subject:
I had the good fortune of taking Carl Sagan's seminar on Carbon in the Solar System in 1985. He was a very skeptical thinker. One wonders what he would think of the current debate? On one hand he was one of the first to recognise the greenhouse effect as an explanation of Venus radio emissions. He might have aligned himself with the Kyotoists. On the other hand he hated imprecision and strong conclusions that aren't fully justified. He was a complex guy.
I do know a lot of oceanographers and climatologists (hell, I am one); I think it would be wise for you to continue to separate the scientists from the activist groups on "both sides" (as started this thread). From my perspective though the "both sides" folks are well outside the bulk of the science.
Climatology has been so thoroughly politicised that scientists and activists are not easily distinguished. The reason is that fear and hysteria generate press, political pressure, and therefore funding urgency. Also green activists readily identify with the subject matter and hysteria, much moreso than with more esoteric fields. Now there is a runaway feedback cycle! You would think that with its foundations in thermodynamics and fluid mechanics climatology would be a more precise and less controversial field. The sheer complexity of the full climate system probably defeats that notion and leaves too much room for crackpots.
Just out of interest what percentage of the total money you made last year was your tax bill?
I am making the point that anyone who pays their taxes unwittingly contributes to many dubious charitable causes. For all I know Greenpeace receives federal grants. The percentage I give beyond that is between me and the IRS. If that smells bad to you, try pulling your head out of your ass.
A single set of photos has been taken of this critter in the wild. Nothing more to know, time to close the book and move on!
Not at all. I am just pointing out that Greenpeace is not an innovator or indeed have any competence in this area. They are not a scientific organisation at all. They are good at harassing shipping from small inflatable motor boats. The Yemeni Al-Qaida terror cell that hit the USS Cole had similar skills.
You may not like Greenpeace, but before you go attacking them, what the hell have you done for your fellow Earthlings? And what's your scientific credibility to judge their entire organization, eh?
I paid my taxes. I gave 40% of all of the money I made last year to contribute to the greater good of society. That includes funding wasteful spending on eco-pseudoscience. I also made additional contributions to Catholic Charities and the FSF! I judge Greenpeace by their past behaviors: extremism, hyperbolic rhetoric, eco-terror...
Personally, I think they have an important role to play as some sort of balance to the "trade groups", self serving politicians, and FOX TVs of the world.
The left often complains about the FOX News rise to dominance. You need to understand that by hijacking the mainstream press over the past 30 years the left manufactured them. The great silent majority now has a fair and balanced news source and doesn't have to sift the words of Dan Rather.
Global fish stocks are crashing, fisheries management has been an abect failure worldwide, and it looks like this is the year that Japan will have bribed enough land-locked 3rd world nations to gain control of the IWC and reinstate commercial whaling. "Marine science is already in more capable hands." hmph. not by much.
A great success story has been US management of the Bering Sea fisheries. They are healthy and productive. I have recently gone cod fishing in the gulf of Maine. No problems there. Finback Whales lounging on the surface, Bottle Nose Dolphins cavorting in our boat wake, monster cod stuffed with krill. Quite a sight. How the rest of the world manages their fisheries, I don't know.
I highly recommend reading the non-partisan PEW report on the state of the world's oceans,
I'll do that, but there is no such thing as a non-partisan in the fields of oceanography or climatology.
LOL!
The ship will become part of the ongoing University of the Azores research program intended to establish greater scientific knowledge of the importance of deep-sea habitats and marine life.
Giant squid have already been photographed in their natural habitat by Japanese scientists. Greenpeace is a radical political organisation with little scientific credibility. Marine science is already in more capable hands. One can only wonder about their real motivations.
After months of confronting whalers and pirates...
It takes one to know one.
"you know, thats just called thetheory of evolution."
Why is that not an accurate statement? Is there something that sets it apart from other physical theories?
Bear in mind that $150 dollars probably means a lot more in the Chinese economy than it does here in the U.S.
Indeed it does. The average working Chinese is much poorer than he should be. The Chinese government sets the exchange rates relative to other currencies artificially low, to encourage exports and employment. This is blatant currency manipulation and is against WTO rules. The Japanese public has been similarly willing to be screwed for decades as well. We in America are enjoying the free lunch they provide. But the behavior hurts the working class in the United States and should be curbed. Economic competition would work better without market distortion.
Forgive nasty comment. Anyone who puts their butt on the line in a difficult competition has my respect.
America's recent dismal showing in the ACM Programming finals may be more than just a bad year
Duke sends a bunch of ill-prepared, second stringers to a programming competition, gets crushed, and I am supposed to worry about the decline of CS? I think an A teams from one of many elite US institutions would do better. I also would like to remind people of some outstanding recent domestic achievements. Maybe things aren't that bad.
Are you back again for another whoopin'? Well, if you insist.
Simplified: constructive criticism good, whining bad.
You see the word "whining" used on this site a lot used in response to sharp criticism. It is a sure sign that the author has exhausted any counter argument and is looking for a face saving way out. You should avoid using the word as a substitute for thought.
You're like the internet debate equivalent of an emo kid.
Emo kid? Amusing! I had to look it up. No, I grew up watching the 60's counter culture wreck this country and then watched Reagan fix it. I am Reagan conservative through and through. Blind corporatism which is apparently your comfort zone is a relatively new phenomenon. Your response does nothing but confirm my observation. I prefer the Jeffersonian philosophy of the role of the informed, sceptical individual.
Are $50,000 simulators and $4,500 sensor vests driving a wedge between golf's haves and have-nots? That's the question posed by the WSJ, who reports that a new generation of expensive high-tech tools is stoking a costly arms race among golfers looking for an edge in a sport that already has an elitist reputation.
If you play golf regularly you see how ridiculous this notion is. Golf is the most honest test of skill in all of sports. There is no faking a good score or hiding a bad one. The advantage of the new balls and drivers doesn't mean much to anyone but a low handicapper. It'll make a +3 a scratch. Thats it. If you don't understand the swing no technical gizmos will understand it for you. The idiots that layout 10K on equipment and lessons are invariably high handicappers. Put them in a competative situation and they forget their lessons and still shoot 90. Good players with lesser equipment will laugh rather than be jealous. That said hyped up equipment are wrecking the game at the higher level because some of the best classic courses are too short for competition. You will see a deadened standard ball in major golf within 5 years.
Did you think that Slashdot was conceived by the internet via immaculate conception?
Slashdot is a business. They are paid by advertisers in exchange for my attention. When they lose my attention pulling their silly shit, I go elsewhere. I posted in hope that someone who runs the site would read it and benefit.
It's precisely this attitude of being entitled to stuff other people created that makes socialists so annoying.
What is worse is being a fatalistic slave to the status quo who is inexplicably compelled to offer every orifice to your corporate masters. For that you take solice in being a good capitalist. But is that behavior American?