"fact of the matter is that enforcing a no-fly zone is nearly impossible without boots on the ground."
O RLY? I smell BS.
"you have to go through and find the AA sites and verify that they are down"
Something tells me you can verify that without boots on ground. Or do you think that all claims in recent days about complete control in air and free flying almost without impunity (for coalition forces) are bogus and unsubstantiated? Do you ever heard about satellites, drones, radar etc? Good grief.
So, I stand by my assertion. If you really think you have to go personally to airstriked AA site to be sure it is down, you are an idiot. Of course, I can agree to alternative intepretation: you are not idiot, you just spew rethorical bullshit.
What makes you think that "military didn't have a plan in place"? All that I seen on media indicates that everything was put on motion just after annoucement of results of voting.
Hey, maybe you are one of these idiots that think no fly zone can be deployed in 15 minutes?
Hey idiot. Read from my lips: occupation is impossible without foregin boots on ground. And this is specifically forbidden according to resolution.
What is whit these retards lately that cannot read simple english sentences?
Yeah, and worldwide dramatical incerase in terrorist attacks (Iraq NOT included) after that have nothing to do with it, no sireee. Not to mention state of USA reputation.
I said it earlier and I will say it again: USA itseld did more to growth of terrorists and USA haters than these nuts could ever dream on their own.
With spewing such inane idiocy, no wonder you're AC.
"Someone else is same or worse" is shittiest defense that I ever seen and very, very popular among various hipocrites, nationalists, dictature apologists and various other folks that consider Reality highly optional.
What got my attention is a little unusual use, because usually this defense is used by USA crimes apologists.
"Falcon is supposedly at least 5 years out, so we're looking at 2016"
Last I heard, SpaceX claimed that they can fly humans 3 years after NASA ordering it. So 2014, if we optimistically assume that SpaceX would start in this year and have no delays... ok, I give it, maybe 2016 is realistic.
This is panspermia propaganda piece. Interstellar, of course (interplanetary would be too sane and too plausible). They are not as crackpotey as, say, creationists, but after gems like cosmic life cycle in molecular clouds I consider them strictly outside of mainstream science.
I am sorry, but what? Propaganda piece for panspermia announces that someone discovered "evidence of extraterritorial life in a meteorite" ? No shit. Somehow I doubt this will stand scrunity...
Yeah, when he started saying that "I was willing to defend the idea that my first creatures were really alive", I instantly stopped treating him seriously. Yes, he said it in past tense, but this kind of mistake is very bad and casts shadow on everything that he claims that he is trying to do.
I mean, sure, maybe he will produce some interesting toy/tool. But this will not be life, artifical or not. This require many levels of emergence, and not any kind of emergence.
Take rock. It is product of emergent properties of laws of physics, that create time and space, elementary partices and reactions between them, atoms and compounds. Yet for all of its complexity, it is not alive. Our current efforts in a-life are comparable at most to biological viruses.
"what thousands of American soldiers' lives and trillions of dollars were lost trying to do for Iraq and Afghanistan."
You seem to think that USA goals for Iraq and Afghanistan includes democracy or freedom of speech or whatever. Wrong.
"Manning and Wikileaks have done for the rest of the middle east"
In fact, if USA wanted it, democracy would happened at mideast long ago. USA aren't powerless. USA just choose differently.
Soo... Yemen bullshits its own people about some "embarassing" (read: with civilian killed) attacks performed by most free country in world, that wanted it to be covered by Yemen.
"how this would aid the enemy."
Yeah, murdering someone greatly helps with relatives deciding how much they like murderer. This is how enemy was aided - by USA itself. Of course, as usual, messenger (Wikileaks/Manning) is shot.
Suicidally stupid strategy of USA for figthing terrorism by feeding it and growing it as much as possible was well known long ago - but latest happenings in mid-east highlighted this retardicon.
I am sorry, but I cannot discuss with that level of detachment from reality. I will address only one, in my opinion most important point of this post - justification for supporting dictatorships. After that, I will probably give up.
"The US supports countries, rarely do they support the actual leaders of the countries"
Phrase "US supports countries" is menanigless. I do not know what it is supposed to mean, but this seems to sound positive and good to you. Ergo: propaganda.
"except when the alternative is worse."
I know very well boogeyman of islam radicalism as justification for supporting dictatorships by one of biggest democracies (if perpeptual two-party duopoly could be called that, but I digress again) in world. Still disguisting hipocrisy.
"If the US didn't support Egypt as a country,"
Again with the word salad.
"the people would have been against us, against our ideals and concepts of human rights, freedom, and democracy, and the people of Egypt probably would have never done anything to break away from the dictators."
Some notes:
1. Funny that you talk only about Egypt, what with rest, especially Saudi Ariabia? Do you want to pretend that Egypt was only one dictatorship supported by USA?
2. Many people are against USA (not "concepts of human rights, freedom, and democracy" - you do not have monopoly on that, get it?), because your goverment support dictatorships that deny these very things to their people.
3. By supporting dictatorships and retarded interventions USA have done for growth of fanatical islam terrorists more than they themself could dream ever. Direct religious reasons for USA hate are in miniority - but other reasons, like hiportitical policy of USA and consequences of it, are good in recruiting for radical islam. Thus, USA policy is suicidally stupid, flourishing and spreading things that you were supposed to prevent.
Good luck in wondering why half of world does not like or outright hate USA or its goverment. Bye.
"Egypt was an ally."
And brutal dictatorship. Nice allies you have.
"We sold them weapons. Non-lethal weapons and it was a private company not the US."
Newsflash: USA have very much to say about exporting this kind (or any kind for that matter) of things elsewhere. Do you say that private company in USA can export anything anywhere and is above USA law?
"It seems to me that that investment payed off pretty well if you actually pay attention."
I agree that Egyptian army protected protesters. I don't think this was intention of USA, when they was spending 1,3bln$ anually for Egypt military. So this was not any "investment" - by using this word, you suggest that USA somehow did it specifically to help impossible to predict (and unwanted anyway) changes in Egypt. This is lie.
- "And it is not only one dictatorship helped up by USA, but I digress."
- "So is the US supposed to invade and overthrow the dictators?"
False dilemma fallacy use noted.
"Since when is the US supposed to be roaming the earth imposing it's wishes on all countries and their governments?"
Hey, USA themself are worlds policeman wannabe (that they do piss poor job is beside point). So yeah, they are supposed to do it and they do it. There is only one little teensy weensy problem with it: what they say (ya know drill: freedom, democracy, free speech, human rights and other strings of letters like that) does not match with what they do. There is word for this in English: hipocrisy.
"your accusations are baseless and do not match reality."
Wut? Fact that USA goverment, backs and supports many dictators now and in past is widely known and undisputed fact. Do you deny this fact?
"was there a point that got dropped in there somewhere?"
Yes. That I consider USA goverment as bunch of hipocrites and moral bankrupts. Why I think that was explained above.
Slashdot Mirror
"fact of the matter is that enforcing a no-fly zone is nearly impossible without boots on the ground."
O RLY? I smell BS.
"you have to go through and find the AA sites and verify that they are down"
Something tells me you can verify that without boots on ground. Or do you think that all claims in recent days about complete control in air and free flying almost without impunity (for coalition forces) are bogus and unsubstantiated? Do you ever heard about satellites, drones, radar etc? Good grief.
So, I stand by my assertion. If you really think you have to go personally to airstriked AA site to be sure it is down, you are an idiot. Of course, I can agree to alternative intepretation: you are not idiot, you just spew rethorical bullshit.
Another retard that thinks "hey, someone else are bad too or even worse" is good defense. Newsflash for you: no, it is not.
Drink Google kool aid, drink.
What makes you think that "military didn't have a plan in place"? All that I seen on media indicates that everything was put on motion just after annoucement of results of voting.
Hey, maybe you are one of these idiots that think no fly zone can be deployed in 15 minutes?
If this is any consolation, war on Reality is just going fine.
If WW3 would happen, you will not ask stupidly for it on Slashdot, you will run for your life.
Hey idiot. Read from my lips: occupation is impossible without foregin boots on ground. And this is specifically forbidden according to resolution.
What is whit these retards lately that cannot read simple english sentences?
Another idiot that cannot read simple english. Which word from "all necessary measures short of an invasion" you do not understand?
Wikileaks did not start it. It add some fuel to fire, sure, but it DID NOT START IT.
In other words, you are glad that there are more terrorists and USA haters.
If you are from USA or like USA, you are batshit insane.
Yeah, and worldwide dramatical incerase in terrorist attacks (Iraq NOT included) after that have nothing to do with it, no sireee. Not to mention state of USA reputation.
I said it earlier and I will say it again: USA itseld did more to growth of terrorists and USA haters than these nuts could ever dream on their own.
With spewing such inane idiocy, no wonder you're AC.
Hey retard, saying "USA commited cirmes" does NOT equal saying "North Korea is cool place to live".
"Someone else is same or worse" is shittiest defense that I ever seen and very, very popular among various hipocrites, nationalists, dictature apologists and various other folks that consider Reality highly optional.
What got my attention is a little unusual use, because usually this defense is used by USA crimes apologists.
One of reasons of cost (after Soyuz being monopoly soon for at least few years) is NASA-specific requirements.
"Falcon is supposedly at least 5 years out, so we're looking at 2016"
Last I heard, SpaceX claimed that they can fly humans 3 years after NASA ordering it. So 2014, if we optimistically assume that SpaceX would start in this year and have no delays... ok, I give it, maybe 2016 is realistic.
"Why"?
Pork.
Most cranks aren't even right, let alone proving it...
I do both often. While there is alternative to maximize button - doubleclick on title bar - lack of min button woud be rather hampering.
This is panspermia propaganda piece. Interstellar, of course (interplanetary would be too sane and too plausible). They are not as crackpotey as, say, creationists, but after gems like cosmic life cycle in molecular clouds I consider them strictly outside of mainstream science.
I am sorry, but what? Propaganda piece for panspermia announces that someone discovered "evidence of extraterritorial life in a meteorite" ? No shit.
Somehow I doubt this will stand scrunity...
Yeah, when he started saying that "I was willing to defend the idea that my first creatures were really alive", I instantly stopped treating him seriously. Yes, he said it in past tense, but this kind of mistake is very bad and casts shadow on everything that he claims that he is trying to do.
I mean, sure, maybe he will produce some interesting toy/tool. But this will not be life, artifical or not. This require many levels of emergence, and not any kind of emergence.
Take rock. It is product of emergent properties of laws of physics, that create time and space, elementary partices and reactions between them, atoms and compounds. Yet for all of its complexity, it is not alive. Our current efforts in a-life are comparable at most to biological viruses.
"what thousands of American soldiers' lives and trillions of dollars were lost trying to do for Iraq and Afghanistan."
You seem to think that USA goals for Iraq and Afghanistan includes democracy or freedom of speech or whatever. Wrong.
"Manning and Wikileaks have done for the rest of the middle east"
In fact, if USA wanted it, democracy would happened at mideast long ago. USA aren't powerless. USA just choose differently.
Soo... Yemen bullshits its own people about some "embarassing" (read: with civilian killed) attacks performed by most free country in world, that wanted it to be covered by Yemen.
"how this would aid the enemy."
Yeah, murdering someone greatly helps with relatives deciding how much they like murderer. This is how enemy was aided - by USA itself. Of course, as usual, messenger (Wikileaks/Manning) is shot.
Suicidally stupid strategy of USA for figthing terrorism by feeding it and growing it as much as possible was well known long ago - but latest happenings in mid-east highlighted this retardicon.
I am sorry, but I cannot discuss with that level of detachment from reality. I will address only one, in my opinion most important point of this post - justification for supporting dictatorships. After that, I will probably give up.
"The US supports countries, rarely do they support the actual leaders of the countries"
Phrase "US supports countries" is menanigless. I do not know what it is supposed to mean, but this seems to sound positive and good to you. Ergo: propaganda.
"except when the alternative is worse."
I know very well boogeyman of islam radicalism as justification for supporting dictatorships by one of biggest democracies (if perpeptual two-party duopoly could be called that, but I digress again) in world. Still disguisting hipocrisy.
"If the US didn't support Egypt as a country,"
Again with the word salad.
"the people would have been against us, against our ideals and concepts of human rights, freedom, and democracy, and the people of Egypt probably would have never done anything to break away from the dictators."
Some notes:
1. Funny that you talk only about Egypt, what with rest, especially Saudi Ariabia? Do you want to pretend that Egypt was only one dictatorship supported by USA?
2. Many people are against USA (not "concepts of human rights, freedom, and democracy" - you do not have monopoly on that, get it?), because your goverment support dictatorships that deny these very things to their people.
3. By supporting dictatorships and retarded interventions USA have done for growth of fanatical islam terrorists more than they themself could dream ever. Direct religious reasons for USA hate are in miniority - but other reasons, like hiportitical policy of USA and consequences of it, are good in recruiting for radical islam. Thus, USA policy is suicidally stupid, flourishing and spreading things that you were supposed to prevent.
Good luck in wondering why half of world does not like or outright hate USA or its goverment. Bye.
"Egypt was an ally."
And brutal dictatorship. Nice allies you have.
"We sold them weapons. Non-lethal weapons and it was a private company not the US."
Newsflash: USA have very much to say about exporting this kind (or any kind for that matter) of things elsewhere. Do you say that private company in USA can export anything anywhere and is above USA law?
"It seems to me that that investment payed off pretty well if you actually pay attention."
I agree that Egyptian army protected protesters. I don't think this was intention of USA, when they was spending 1,3bln$ anually for Egypt military. So this was not any "investment" - by using this word, you suggest that USA somehow did it specifically to help impossible to predict (and unwanted anyway) changes in Egypt. This is lie.
- "And it is not only one dictatorship helped up by USA, but I digress."
- "So is the US supposed to invade and overthrow the dictators?"
False dilemma fallacy use noted.
"Since when is the US supposed to be roaming the earth imposing it's wishes on all countries and their governments?"
Hey, USA themself are worlds policeman wannabe (that they do piss poor job is beside point). So yeah, they are supposed to do it and they do it. There is only one little teensy weensy problem with it: what they say (ya know drill: freedom, democracy, free speech, human rights and other strings of letters like that) does not match with what they do. There is word for this in English: hipocrisy.
"your accusations are baseless and do not match reality."
Wut? Fact that USA goverment, backs and supports many dictators now and in past is widely known and undisputed fact. Do you deny this fact?
"was there a point that got dropped in there somewhere?"
Yes. That I consider USA goverment as bunch of hipocrites and moral bankrupts. Why I think that was explained above.