Sorry A. The Bay of Pigs was an attempt by Cuban exiles at a counter-revolution supported by the US, not a US invasion and annexation. You may consider it splitting hairs, but the details on this one matter.
The Bay of Pigs was an attempt by Cuban exiles at a counter-revolution supported by the US, not a US invasion and annexation. Grenada was a US invasion, but the territory was not annexed and US forces left.
I agree, it is interesting how people falsify (and distort) information to suit their needs. I in fact meant to say "Ukraine" because Crimea was legally part of Ukraine when Russian forces invaded. Russia has previously acknowledged Ukraine's control over Crimea since Russia leased military bases there. You don't lease someone from someone that doesn't own it. You can tell it was an invasion since the national government did not authorize Russian troops to take control of Crimea. A referendum that is scheduled for the future is not effective today. Where is your usual outrage about not obeying the rule of law? Instead you are making excuses for Russian aggression and obfuscating the truth. It appears that you are willing to abandon logic when it suits your needs.
You have a history of outrages against the truth, crank theories, and foolish notions. Now you are proving to be an apologist for Russian aggression. No wonder you are so disaffected against your own country.
I wasn't aware that the Supreme Soviet continued to meet after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Or is that an oblique reference to Russia? I suppose in a way it fits, but that should worry everyone.
Russia has lots of local "shopping" to do yet - Ukraine proper, Moldova, etc., before it is free to look at anything else. And the US isn't finished budget cutting and disarming yet. Besides, other desirable properties may be made available in the meantime. The UK keeps flirting with total nuclear disarmament.
I assume for some type of political advantage by the progressives and the participating countries who rather the US be held fully accountable.
Not "accountable," but "blamed."
There were many large "anti-War" demonstrations in 1991 when the US led coalition was preparing to remove Saddam's army from Kuwait after Iraq invaded and annexed it. The streets pretty much empty of protests after Saddam's invasion.
So, any protests going on in the West about Russia's invasion of Crimea, and threats against Ukraine? Or are we saving all our energy for when NATO needs to defend itself? I assume the protesters will find their signs by then.
Maybe they are following orders of the elected government, not the coup leaders.
You mean the governments in Moscow, both Russian, and the former government of Ukraine that was removed by Ukraine's parliament. (Why do you think they fled to Moscow on the eve of a Russian invasion?)
There isn't any question that our views differ, and it isn't a "slight" difference. The US invaded Afghanistan in a legitimate act of self defense after a series of attacks on diplomatic posts and military units culminating in the 9/11 attacks. As to Iraq, maybe you could explain to me why you think ordinary Iraqis would want to continue being subjected to Saddam's government? I believe there are hundreds of mass graves that have been found since the invasion, and that is before you get to the question of mass killings with chemical weapons. Iraq was a brutal dictatorship before the invasion, and now it is a functioning even if troubled parliamentary democracy, and US combat forces left long ago. In neither case was their a coup that the US invaded after. And unlike Crimea, Iraq committed hundreds of acts of war against the US before it acted.
So yes, our views are different. My views at least have an identifiable association with history as opposed to being some sort of self-loathing anti-American political fringe rubbish.
I'm not sure how much I would like to fight a Russian MRR on the offense.
Depending on the country you live in there may not be an option in the not too distant future. That is assuming Russia needs more than Spetsnaz and airborne forces to seize control.
Could you refresh me about which conflict it was that the US invaded a peaceful neighbor and annexed some of its territory to itself by force of arms? I can't think of any examples.
There were many reasons for Finland's relative success that don't apply today to this conflict, and if you don't understand that you are in the realm of magical thinking. I will also point out that as glorious as Finland's resistance was, Finland actually lost that war and had some of its territory taken by the Soviet Union and added to the Russian Soviet Republic.
Ukraine cannot, as a practical matter, do anything about Russia.
The Ukrainians also remember what happed to them the last time Moscow was really unhappy with them. And oddly enough Putin is a former career KGB secret police officer.
How about they only get to save data on "known bad" plates - expired, no insurance, stolen, warrants, etc.? That isn't so much data, and it isn't like there isn't CPU power to waste these days. The plate readers they use now on police cars are loaded with lists like that. You get a match, it gets saved. If not, it gets deleted.
The terrorists had little to do with this. Government has been going down this road for some time. Sometimes there is opposition, like this, sometimes it gets cheered on, like "healthcare reform" and digitization. The end result in either case is more electronic records available to the government, and less privacy for you.
That may be, but he is PM, isn't he? And don't be surprised if he gets reelected. He has plenty of supporters. There are growing numbers of people in Europe with views similar to his.
Two things. First, "stovepipes" has decades of use in describing the sort of IT systems mentioned in the article.
Second, as far as I can see even when used in reference to intelligence it tends to be used in a generally similar manner, not as "cherry picking."
There are several examples in the Wikipedia article and they don't appear to support your usage. One might "cherry pick" data from a "stovepipe," but that isn't necessarily implied as far as I see.
Stovepiping (also stove piping) is a metaphorical term which recalls a stovepipe's function as an isolated vertical conduit, and has been used, in the context of intelligence, to describe several ways in which raw intelligence information may be presented without proper context. It is a system created to solve a specific problem. The lack of context may be due to the specialized nature, or security requirements, of a particular intelligence collection technology. It also has limited focus and data within is not easily shared.
Stovepipes are what emerges when you keep building single purpose systems without integrating them, and often with no thought of integration. It doesn't tend to be a good thing since related data can exist in different systems with no easy way to relate it. It has historically been a real problem in both government and industry.
In short your answer is pure BS, or as you put it, "a specific desired answer regardless of the facts."
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry A. The Bay of Pigs was an attempt by Cuban exiles at a counter-revolution supported by the US, not a US invasion and annexation. You may consider it splitting hairs, but the details on this one matter.
The Bay of Pigs was an attempt by Cuban exiles at a counter-revolution supported by the US, not a US invasion and annexation. Grenada was a US invasion, but the territory was not annexed and US forces left.
I agree, it is interesting how people falsify (and distort) information to suit their needs. I in fact meant to say "Ukraine" because Crimea was legally part of Ukraine when Russian forces invaded. Russia has previously acknowledged Ukraine's control over Crimea since Russia leased military bases there. You don't lease someone from someone that doesn't own it. You can tell it was an invasion since the national government did not authorize Russian troops to take control of Crimea. A referendum that is scheduled for the future is not effective today. Where is your usual outrage about not obeying the rule of law? Instead you are making excuses for Russian aggression and obfuscating the truth. It appears that you are willing to abandon logic when it suits your needs.
You have a history of outrages against the truth, crank theories, and foolish notions. Now you are proving to be an apologist for Russian aggression. No wonder you are so disaffected against your own country.
It had nothing to do with Russia, until someone needed a villain.
Russia seems to have volunteered for that role by invading Ukraine, your friends not withstanding.
I wasn't aware that the Supreme Soviet continued to meet after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Or is that an oblique reference to Russia? I suppose in a way it fits, but that should worry everyone.
The only Political pricks that can send your son to war are right here in the good old USA.
No, I'm pretty sure that despite your loathing of the US that Russia has a vote too. Just ask Ukraine.
Ukraine used to have ICBMs and Crimea.
Russia has lots of local "shopping" to do yet - Ukraine proper, Moldova, etc., before it is free to look at anything else. And the US isn't finished budget cutting and disarming yet. Besides, other desirable properties may be made available in the meantime. The UK keeps flirting with total nuclear disarmament.
I assume for some type of political advantage by the progressives and the participating countries who rather the US be held fully accountable.
Not "accountable," but "blamed."
There were many large "anti-War" demonstrations in 1991 when the US led coalition was preparing to remove Saddam's army from Kuwait after Iraq invaded and annexed it. The streets pretty much empty of protests after Saddam's invasion.
So, any protests going on in the West about Russia's invasion of Crimea, and threats against Ukraine? Or are we saving all our energy for when NATO needs to defend itself? I assume the protesters will find their signs by then.
Maybe they are following orders of the elected government, not the coup leaders.
You mean the governments in Moscow, both Russian, and the former government of Ukraine that was removed by Ukraine's parliament. (Why do you think they fled to Moscow on the eve of a Russian invasion?)
The alaska thing is straw man, it was sold to the US.
Russia keeps the receipts and has an expansive view on return policies.
I assume that the Supreme Soviet approved those actions.
There isn't any question that our views differ, and it isn't a "slight" difference. The US invaded Afghanistan in a legitimate act of self defense after a series of attacks on diplomatic posts and military units culminating in the 9/11 attacks. As to Iraq, maybe you could explain to me why you think ordinary Iraqis would want to continue being subjected to Saddam's government? I believe there are hundreds of mass graves that have been found since the invasion, and that is before you get to the question of mass killings with chemical weapons. Iraq was a brutal dictatorship before the invasion, and now it is a functioning even if troubled parliamentary democracy, and US combat forces left long ago. In neither case was their a coup that the US invaded after. And unlike Crimea, Iraq committed hundreds of acts of war against the US before it acted.
So yes, our views are different. My views at least have an identifiable association with history as opposed to being some sort of self-loathing anti-American political fringe rubbish.
I'm not sure how much I would like to fight a Russian MRR on the offense.
Depending on the country you live in there may not be an option in the not too distant future. That is assuming Russia needs more than Spetsnaz and airborne forces to seize control.
Where? That doesn't describe Iraq. That doesn't describe Afghanistan. Your statement is false.
Could you refresh me about which conflict it was that the US invaded a peaceful neighbor and annexed some of its territory to itself by force of arms? I can't think of any examples.
There were many reasons for Finland's relative success that don't apply today to this conflict, and if you don't understand that you are in the realm of magical thinking. I will also point out that as glorious as Finland's resistance was, Finland actually lost that war and had some of its territory taken by the Soviet Union and added to the Russian Soviet Republic.
Ukraine cannot, as a practical matter, do anything about Russia.
The Ukrainians also remember what happed to them the last time Moscow was really unhappy with them. And oddly enough Putin is a former career KGB secret police officer.
That is a load of bull.
The 1973 Fire, National Personnel Records Center
They are still recovering from that one.
Experts Recover Military Personnel Records 40 Years After Fire
Depending on the question that can simply be a training issue.
How about they only get to save data on "known bad" plates - expired, no insurance, stolen, warrants, etc.? That isn't so much data, and it isn't like there isn't CPU power to waste these days. The plate readers they use now on police cars are loaded with lists like that. You get a match, it gets saved. If not, it gets deleted.
The terrorists had little to do with this. Government has been going down this road for some time. Sometimes there is opposition, like this, sometimes it gets cheered on, like "healthcare reform" and digitization. The end result in either case is more electronic records available to the government, and less privacy for you.
That may be, but he is PM, isn't he? And don't be surprised if he gets reelected. He has plenty of supporters. There are growing numbers of people in Europe with views similar to his.
Two things. First, "stovepipes" has decades of use in describing the sort of IT systems mentioned in the article.
Second, as far as I can see even when used in reference to intelligence it tends to be used in a generally similar manner, not as "cherry picking."
There are several examples in the Wikipedia article and they don't appear to support your usage. One might "cherry pick" data from a "stovepipe," but that isn't necessarily implied as far as I see.
Stovepiping (also stove piping) is a metaphorical term which recalls a stovepipe's function as an isolated vertical conduit, and has been used, in the context of intelligence, to describe several ways in which raw intelligence information may be presented without proper context. It is a system created to solve a specific problem. The lack of context may be due to the specialized nature, or security requirements, of a particular intelligence collection technology. It also has limited focus and data within is not easily shared.
Stovepipes are what emerges when you keep building single purpose systems without integrating them, and often with no thought of integration. It doesn't tend to be a good thing since related data can exist in different systems with no easy way to relate it. It has historically been a real problem in both government and industry.
In short your answer is pure BS, or as you put it, "a specific desired answer regardless of the facts."