Crippled
-
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
1980's wasn't it? Can't remember anything in more recent Honduras history though.
Yes. I can only assume that the policy of not closing US bases in foreign parts once opened applies to unacknowledged ones to, although I'm certain there are no longer 25,000 troops and mecenaries out there. My point is that there are plenty of places from which 'Kim Ill Jock' can launch a medium range missile full of nuclear material he no longer has any use for, right into Red's back yard and the only thing George or Condi can do about it is sign the cheques to pay for it happening.
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
isn't Negreponte now involved in some Africa policy?
I've not heard about that. I'd be interested if you have any info. He's a dangerous man.
Nothing is exactly what it seems but everything with seems can be unpicked.
-
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
1980's wasn't it? Can't remember anything in more recent Honduras history though.
Yes. I can only assume that the policy of not closing US bases in foreign parts once opened applies to unacknowledged ones to, although I'm certain there are no longer 25,000 troops and mecenaries out there. My point is that there are plenty of places from which 'Kim Ill Jock' can launch a medium range missile full of nuclear material he no longer has any use for, right into Red's back yard and the only thing George or Condi can do about it is sign the cheques to pay for it happening.
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
isn't Negreponte now involved in some Africa policy?
I've not heard about that. I'd be interested if you have any info. He's a dangerous man.
Nothing is exactly what it seems but everything with seems can be unpicked.
Matthew Faithfull wrote:
My point is that there are plenty of places from which 'Kim Ill Jock' can launch a medium range missile full of nuclear material he no longer has any use for, right into Red's back yard
That doesn't worry me because I've lined my walls with aluminum foil (it's much prettier than the JFK assassination newspaper clippings with yarn attaching connected words that was there before). The government doesn't want you to know, but foil is actually nuclear proof when arranged in a certain pattern. If you want details on the pattern, let me know as I'm always eager to help a brother in the revolution.
Anybody rape your wife yet? -IAmChrisMcCall
-
There are some documents linked here http://merln.ndu.edu/index.cfm?secID=244&pageID=3&type=section [^] including this from April 2007 [^]
Hmm, so bland it makes me wonder if that's what he really went for. I guess he's semi-retired these days and keeping his head down as ever. I just hope he doesn't scupper any chance of a descent outcome in Darfur, if there ever is such a chance. Still it makes sense when there's a genocide going on to put a man on the ground who's so familiar with the 'Equador option'.
Nothing is exactly what it seems but everything with seems can be unpicked.
-
We are building a railgun for the US Navy in Scotland[^]. Probably wouldn't be a good idea to fire that one in a BBC studio.
Cool video, no sound in the office :(. I guess it was it just a warm up though cause your gun is about 3 times the size of the 1980s one and your projectile is way bigger and more aerodyanimc aswell. Unless that was Chinese space armour you were firing at or the projectile was made of glass I would have expected way more damage, like a four foot crater in the end of the target. Anyway I guess that's all still classified.;)
Nothing is exactly what it seems but everything with seems can be unpicked.
-
The U.S. military believes it has dealt devastating and perhaps irreversible blows
to al-Qaeda in Iraq in recent months, leading some generals to advocate a declaration
of victory over the group, which the Bush administration has long described as the most
lethal U.S. adversary in Iraq.
...
The deployment of more U.S. and Iraqi forces into AQI strongholds in Anbar province and
the Baghdad area, as well as the recruitment of Sunni tribal fighters to combat AQI
operatives in those locations, has helped to deprive the militants of a secure base of
operations, U.S. military officials said. "They are less and less coordinated, more and
more fragmented," Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, the second-ranking U.S. commander in
Iraq, said recently. Describing frayed support structures and supply lines, Odierno
estimated that the group's capabilities have been "degraded" by 60 to 70 percent since
the beginning of the year.And the missle defense shield that liberals claimed just two years ago was technically impossible is operational. Now when will we focus on the "impossible" task of tackling illegal immigration.
Anybody rape your wife yet? -IAmChrisMcCall
None of the criticisms of the missile defense shield that I've seen claimed it was impossible, just that building counters to the shield are orders of magnitude cheaper then building the shield itself. It becomes a war of military complex spending and we are picking the side with a significant disadvantage, at least when we played that game with the soviets we chose a close to equal arena .
This blanket smells like ham
-
Rob Graham wrote:
OBTW, didn't we declare victory in Iraq several YEARS ago? Why are we doing it (prematurely) again?
You mean "Mission Accomplished"? Get over it and look up "mission" in the dictionary.
Anybody rape your wife yet? -IAmChrisMcCall
Red Stateler wrote:
Get over it and look up "mission" in the dictionary.
Look, it's good news, and welcome. It may however be premature - we've had good news before, and had decreases in the attacks before, but they always came back. I'd rather the just keep quiet until there is no possible doubt. It's much more destructive to brag too early, and end up destroying their credibility when things go sour again (which I expect they will as we near the election). The simple truth is that we will be tied up in Iraq for half a decade or more to come. That might have been avoidable but for some of the bad decisions made under Bremer's watch, but now it's not. "Mission accomplished" was one of the most politically stupid events in the grossly mismanaged war. Lets not add any similar ones.
-
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
dan neely wrote: laser based systems Wasn't that a Ronald Reagan idea?
Originally yes. Making a suitable laser was significantly harder than was thought at the time and we're only now getting there. We've had a Boeing 767(??) with a suitably powerful chemical laser for a few years and are getting close to meeting energy output requirements for solid state (laser diode) systems which would run on electricity instead of consuming large quantities of industrial chemicals. Solid state systems have a major advantage in that they more compact, IIRC much more efficient, and just need a high voltage connection to the power grid/really large generator and won't run out of 'ammo' after a few dozen(?) shots. http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/military/abl/index.html[^]
-- If you view money as inherently evil, I view it as my duty to assist in making you more virtuous.
I thought the problem with lasers was they're fantastic in space, no attenuation due to atmosphere but require power plants too big to actually be put into space at viable cost. On the ground the power is no problem but the laser powered required because of atmospheric interference is ridiculous. The 767 get's around this by having less atmosphere to worry about and enough carrying capacity for a more or less sufficient power plant?
Nothing is exactly what it seems but everything with seems can be unpicked.
-
The U.S. military believes it has dealt devastating and perhaps irreversible blows
to al-Qaeda in Iraq in recent months, leading some generals to advocate a declaration
of victory over the group, which the Bush administration has long described as the most
lethal U.S. adversary in Iraq.
...
The deployment of more U.S. and Iraqi forces into AQI strongholds in Anbar province and
the Baghdad area, as well as the recruitment of Sunni tribal fighters to combat AQI
operatives in those locations, has helped to deprive the militants of a secure base of
operations, U.S. military officials said. "They are less and less coordinated, more and
more fragmented," Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, the second-ranking U.S. commander in
Iraq, said recently. Describing frayed support structures and supply lines, Odierno
estimated that the group's capabilities have been "degraded" by 60 to 70 percent since
the beginning of the year.And the missle defense shield that liberals claimed just two years ago was technically impossible is operational. Now when will we focus on the "impossible" task of tackling illegal immigration.
Anybody rape your wife yet? -IAmChrisMcCall
Red Stateler wrote:
that liberals claimed
What liberals? The same ones that promote Multiculturalism? By the way you never explained your position on that.... what up? I mean you seem to relish any opportunity to post in the SB for the purpose of demonstrating your superiority and I gave you a great one so what's the problem?
-
Red Stateler wrote:
Get over it and look up "mission" in the dictionary.
Look, it's good news, and welcome. It may however be premature - we've had good news before, and had decreases in the attacks before, but they always came back. I'd rather the just keep quiet until there is no possible doubt. It's much more destructive to brag too early, and end up destroying their credibility when things go sour again (which I expect they will as we near the election). The simple truth is that we will be tied up in Iraq for half a decade or more to come. That might have been avoidable but for some of the bad decisions made under Bremer's watch, but now it's not. "Mission accomplished" was one of the most politically stupid events in the grossly mismanaged war. Lets not add any similar ones.
Rob Graham wrote:
Look, it's good news, and welcome. It may however be premature - we've had good news before, and had decreases in the attacks before, but they always came back. I'd rather the just keep quiet until there is no possible doubt. It's much more destructive to brag too early, and end up destroying their credibility when things go sour again (which I expect they will as we near the election). The simple truth is that we will be tied up in Iraq for half a decade or more to come. That might have been avoidable but for some of the bad decisions made under Bremer's watch, but now it's not.
It's not bragging, but IS clear evidence that the enemy is defeatable (something many argue is an impossibility). It's certainly not over by any stretch, but the "surge" has clearly made a demonstrable impact.
Rob Graham wrote:
"Mission accomplished" was one of the most politically stupid events in the grossly mismanaged war. Lets not add any similar ones.
It wasn't stupid, but the exploitation of it was. The US had just overthrown Iraq in a couple of days with minimal casualties. The mission was most certainly accomplished and the whining over it was pure and useless propaganda.
Anybody rape your wife yet? -IAmChrisMcCall
-
Red Stateler wrote:
that liberals claimed
What liberals? The same ones that promote Multiculturalism? By the way you never explained your position on that.... what up? I mean you seem to relish any opportunity to post in the SB for the purpose of demonstrating your superiority and I gave you a great one so what's the problem?
led mike wrote:
What liberals?
You fall comfortably into that category.
Anybody rape your wife yet? -IAmChrisMcCall
-
Matthew Faithfull wrote:
AQI, a fiction created by the 'intelligence' services, was nothing more than a convenient excuse and a way of maintaining the false impression of a link between Iraq and Afghanistan, Iraq and 9/11, where none ever existed. Once the straw man enemy is no longer needed it will fade away to be replaced with a newer more frightenening media hyped bogey man to justify US bases next to the world largest oil reserves and profits for Halliburton et al. You'd better hope most Americans are still fooled by this ruse because if not you may find that 'operational' missile shield has unexpected holes after all.
I'm performing an informal survey. Could you tell me which brand of "aluminum" foil you use?
Anybody rape your wife yet? -IAmChrisMcCall
-
None of the criticisms of the missile defense shield that I've seen claimed it was impossible, just that building counters to the shield are orders of magnitude cheaper then building the shield itself. It becomes a war of military complex spending and we are picking the side with a significant disadvantage, at least when we played that game with the soviets we chose a close to equal arena .
This blanket smells like ham
Andy Brummer wrote:
None of the criticisms of the missile defense shield that I've seen claimed it was impossible, just that building counters to the shield are orders of magnitude cheaper then building the shield itself.
Initially the complaints were that it was technically infeasible. Once it was technically proven through testing, it was deemed overcomeable. But if it's either, why are the Soviets so concerns about it?
Anybody rape your wife yet? -IAmChrisMcCall
-
led mike wrote:
What liberals?
You fall comfortably into that category.
Anybody rape your wife yet? -IAmChrisMcCall
-
I am sitting down, you leftist pig.
Anybody rape your wife yet? -IAmChrisMcCall
-
leckey wrote:
Not exactly an impartial report. I am skeptical.
The military is not, despite left-wing accusations, a political organization. They have been very frank regarding challenges in the past and there is demonstrable evidence (namely the sharp reduction in attacks) that verify their claim.
Anybody rape your wife yet? -IAmChrisMcCall
Let's see...Abu Garib (however you spell it) cover-up, the former head of the war now saying it's a disaster, secret torture areas across the world. Oh, and how they count secretarian deaths in Iraq. If it's Sunni on Sunni it's not counted nor if they shoot the person from the front. Anyone can manipulate the facts by not explaining all the facts to make the situation look better. I don't think it's a political organization, but I think every time Congress comes up to vote for more money for the military it's always good news, and we're on the right track.
Hey! I finally found a picture of myself!
-
Red Stateler wrote:
Could you tell me which brand of "aluminum" foil you use?
Why, is there a problem with the brand you use?
led mike wrote:
Why, is there a problem with the brand you use?
Yes, it's too tungsteny.
Anybody rape your wife yet? -IAmChrisMcCall
-
I am sitting down, you leftist pig.
Anybody rape your wife yet? -IAmChrisMcCall
-
Let's see...Abu Garib (however you spell it) cover-up, the former head of the war now saying it's a disaster, secret torture areas across the world. Oh, and how they count secretarian deaths in Iraq. If it's Sunni on Sunni it's not counted nor if they shoot the person from the front. Anyone can manipulate the facts by not explaining all the facts to make the situation look better. I don't think it's a political organization, but I think every time Congress comes up to vote for more money for the military it's always good news, and we're on the right track.
Hey! I finally found a picture of myself!
-
I thought the problem with lasers was they're fantastic in space, no attenuation due to atmosphere but require power plants too big to actually be put into space at viable cost. On the ground the power is no problem but the laser powered required because of atmospheric interference is ridiculous. The 767 get's around this by having less atmosphere to worry about and enough carrying capacity for a more or less sufficient power plant?
Nothing is exactly what it seems but everything with seems can be unpicked.
The biggest problem with atmospheric effects is blooming as the air is heated and becomes turbulent. This can be mitigated via adaptive optic systems, although higher altitude systems will always have an advantage there. High altitude also allows for longer lines of sight to give a larger engagement bubble. The THEL (theater high energy laser) or whatever they've renamed it as this week isn't intended as a strategic system though. Instead it would cover a limited area by engaging the warheads during the rentry phase (maybe anything flying roughly overhead), it's primary prey would be scuds and katushas (russian rocket artillery). Depending on it's cycle rate it could even be used to stop artillery strikes, systems using high speed conventional guns have done this in tests.
-- If you view money as inherently evil, I view it as my duty to assist in making you more virtuous.
-
I thought the problem with lasers was they're fantastic in space, no attenuation due to atmosphere but require power plants too big to actually be put into space at viable cost. On the ground the power is no problem but the laser powered required because of atmospheric interference is ridiculous. The 767 get's around this by having less atmosphere to worry about and enough carrying capacity for a more or less sufficient power plant?
Nothing is exactly what it seems but everything with seems can be unpicked.
They use chemical lasers, there's similar ground based technology for artillery defence[^]. I guess its effectiveness will depend a lot on weather conditions.