Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2006:October:18 Wednesday <Tuesday, Thursday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2006/10/18-21 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44851 Activity:kinda low
10/17   There are times I wish Democrats can just take a stance and stand
        firm, like John Murtha:
        http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/pa12_murtha/PRwashpostoped.html
        \_ Who coined the phrase "nattering nabobs of negativism"? 'Cos that's
           what goes through my head whenever I hear GOP name-calling.
           Also, a thought-provoking piece. Thank you.
           \_ Spiro Agnew.  Whose name anagrams to "grow a penis."  -tom
              \_ Is the anagram important for some reason?  Is this anything
                 like spinning a record backwards to hear Satan speak?
                 \_ To win the game you must kill john romero
              \_ I seem to recall reading somewhere that it was FDR.  -John
        \_ hasn't Hillary held a pretty firm stance over the last 2 years?
           \_ She has always had a firmly nuanced stand on all issues, which
              may or may not depend on her current audience, the polls and
              public mood, or other possible factors or non-factors as
              politically appropriate.  Until such time as the stance may or
              may not need to change according to the blowing winds.  Yes,
              she has been absolutely firm in her stance for at least a week.
              Unless she hasn't.
              \_ Yes, we should all be like fucking George W Bush,
                 despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, "We
                 did the right thing, Sir!".
                 \_ One thing being bad doesn't make the other thing good.
                    The current admin is over January 2009.  I'd prefer the
                    next admin be one that has a world view that goes beyond
                    the current news/polling cycle *and* does it right.  What
                    is so wrong with that?  Clinton is not that person.
                    \_ observating from outside of USA, I have to inform you
                       that current administration's world view is pretty
                       fucked up and what happen today is merely a reflection
                       of that.  There is a reason why US stance in the world
                       is at the all-time-low and majority of people, even
                       Europeans, think that USA is a greater threat to the
                       security of the world than Islamic Extremelism.
                       \_ Here's the thing: I really don't care what the rest
                          of the world thinks beyond how it directly has a
                          negative impact on this country.  The rest of the
                          world doesn't have to like us.  They can hate us
                          as much as they want so long as they keep doing
                          business with us the rest of their feelings don't
                          amount to much in my book.  So you might ask (and if
                          not I'm telling you anyway) what does matter to me?
                          Dead Americans matter.  The problem with Iraq is not
                          the initial invasion, it is the poor post-invasion
                          planning, the namby pamby Vietnam style execution of
                          the war on the ground, and general lack of balls.
                          Wars are not about winning hearts and minds.  They
                          are about killing the enemy until they break.  No
                          war has ever been won by winning over the general
                          populace of the target nation.  None.  Ever.  If they
                          didn't have the balls to go in, kill everyone who
                          needed killing, set up a puppet government and get
                          the hell out they never should have gone in in the
                          first place.  Back to the EU opinion thing for a
                          moment: the EU is demographically doomed.  Their
                          opinion regarding the ever growing Islamic extremist
                          threat all around them vs. their ridiculous "we hate
                          daddy/USA because we want to be super powers again,
                          too!" is useless.  If they don't get their act
                          together their culture will be subsumed and cease to
                          exist as such by the end of this century.  This is a
                          unique time in the world's history.  Never before
                          have so many people had such freedom and power on an
                          individual level.  It is the rest of the world
                          beyond the West that is normal for human history and
                          if our culture is not vigorously defended this time
                          will be remembered as nothing more than that few
                          extra years it took to crush the non-believers.  You
                          are at war whether you like it or not.  Your enemies
                          are not short term politicians you don't like.  I
                          find the "USA is the greatest threat to world peace!"
                          slogan childish and historically poorly informed.
                          I'm glad I'm young enough that I think I'll get to
                          see exciting sweeping changes across the world but
                          old enough that I should be dead before it gets
                          really bad.
                          \_ I hereby dub thee "wordcount".
                             \- if you are say a poor person in say malawi and
                                madonna isnt about to adopt you, frankly your
                                life, both in terms of possible upside or
                                downside is going to be more affected by
                                the united states than it is by nkorea, cuba,
                                bolivia, libya etc. when the US pushes its own
                                agenda in something like the doha trade round,
                                or spews out pollution at a per capita rate
                                far above everybody else, it has real con-
                                sequences for people, just as US research into
                                medicine and agriculture in the past had real
                                benefits. yes, this is not "i am going to
                                steal your land and rape your women" type of
                                "old style" adverse consequences but
                                nonetheless self-serving free trades regimes,
                                self-serving ip regimes etc have real
                                consequnces. for some people it has to do with
                                who what share of the profits but for the
                                very poor, they can be pushed into what
                                jeffrey sachs calls "the poverty that kills".
                                jeffrey saches calls "the poverty that kills".
                                we think of scorpions and black widows as
                                nasty, dangerous animals, more so than
                                elephants, but i bet elephants are responsible
                                for more destruction and death.
                \_ Hillary has said that her excuse that she is the one
                   lone freshman senator who's every single legislative move
                   is micro analyzed by lasers because of her status
                   \_ status?  what status?  if it wasn't for her 'status'
                      she wouldn't had been elected.  being special cuts both
                      ways.
           \_ Like her firm and deeply researched demands that Rockstar Games
              be held liable for a third-party patch?  If this is an omen of
              the "Gvt Will Be Your Mommy" she wants to replace Bush's "Gvt
              Will Be Your Daddy", I'm not looking forward to it.
              \_ fine, her internet law congressional staffer must be
                 a fucking moron.  she probably was involved because
                 rock star games is in NY.  i doubt any Senator out there
                 has publicly said they are pro GTA.
2006/10/18-21 [Computer/SW/Languages/Web] UID:44852 Activity:low
10/17   has anyone tried to use Soda as a Calendar Server?  Does it
        requires more than just mod_webDAV?
        \_ I am playing with this right now (trying to get iCal to synch
           to something..anything.)  From what it looks like you need
           something that actually supports DAV, like PHPGroupWare (not
           so sure on that one) or Horde/IMP.  I'd be interested in what
           you come up with though.  -John
           \_ most of the stuff requires php.  Can on do this on a
              CGI/php system instead of straight-php? thinking of doing this
              on ocf
              \_ Yeah I'm sure you could, but you'd probably have to write
                 it yourself.  PHPGroupware and HORDE are the only freebies
                 I've found that seem to do it, and I'm having a bitch of a
                 time getting HORDE to play nice (you may not, I have PHP
                 issues with PEAR and other apps.)  -John
                 \_ how about webcalendar?
                    \_ No clue--if you get it working, let me know :-)  If you
                       mail me @zog.net, I will be working on the HORDE thing
                       this week and will be glad to share what I find.  -John
2006/10/18-21 [Recreation/Food] UID:44853 Activity:low
10/18   I'm in SF for a few days from tomorrow onwards--does anyone know
        a decent coffee/food type place easily reached with public transit
        with free wireless & power jacks where I can work a bit?  -John
        \_ Panera Bread has free WiFi.  Dunno if they have a store close
           to where you will be at.
        \_ Other than starbucks?
           \_ Starbucks has free wireless?
              \_ I just assumed that it did; I've never had the need
                 to use it though.
              \_ I think it's via T-Mobile or Verizon or one of those ones
                 where you have to pay.
                 \_ Starbucks uses t-mobile, which you have to pay for. Last
                    I checked it was $10 for 1 day, though theres options for
                    more time for less $$.
              \_ It's free in Santiago, which is why it's pretty much my
                 office (plus Chileans don't have decent coffee otherwise.)
                 I also thought it was $$ in the US, like in Europe.  -John
                 \_ Where in Santiago?  I spent two years there (93-94), and am
                    curious what it's like now. -emarkp
                    \_ We live in Las Condes / Plaza Peru.  It's been
                       colder than a witch's left tit, and I've had nil
                       success business-wise and haven't made many friends,
                       so I have an understandably negative view of the
                       place.  I find it has no concept, little culture, it's
                       pretty hideous architecturally, and I find Chileans
                       weird, distant and closed-off.  That said, the view
                       is beautiful, there are some great restaurants and
                       when the weather's nice there are really cool places
                       to visit in the countryside.  I'll be glad to give
                       you more info if you mail me @zog.net  -John
                    \_ Amazing that a South American country would have
                       bad coffee.
                       \_ They pride themselves on not being really S.
                          Americans unlike all the smelly corrupt places
                          around them--and they're right, it's the country
                          place here that kinda functions.  On the other hand
                          I have been told that "we are the {Germans, English}
                          of South America" in all seriousness.  Draw your
                          own confusions about food & coffee.  -John
        \_ Off the topic, the AC Transit Transbay buses ARE public transit and
           have power jacks, and there will be free wireless by the end of the
           year.  No open container beverages allowed though.
2006/10/18-21 [Consumer/PDA, Transportation/PublicTransit] UID:44854 Activity:nil
10/18   Has anyone tried that BART pilot smart card program?  Thoughts?
2006/10/18-23 [Uncategorized] UID:44855 Activity:nil
10/18   Practical TOR Hacking:
        link:tinyurl.com/uq7v2 (pdf, http://packetstormsecurity.org)
2006/10/18-21 [Uncategorized] UID:44856 Activity:nil
10/18   I survived Oahu's 1 day power outage and the almost meltdown of
        civilization in Waikiki. I made it back.                -waikimon
2006/10/18-23 [Health/Dental, Health/Women] UID:44857 Activity:nil
10/18   dear motd nutritional expert,
        are Vitamins a scam? or do they actually work?
        \_ Work for what?
        \_ If you have a healthy diet, you get all the vitamins you need.  If
           not, you need to supplement.
        \_ This may be of interest to you, Jane Clarke, UK's leading
           nutritionist (according to the Daily Mail) doesn't think
           they are useful if you eat properly:
           http://tinyurl.com/yyww2s (dailymail.co.uk, 17 Oct 2006)
2006/10/18-23 [Reference/Law/Court] UID:44858 Activity:nil
10/18   Hi sodans.  I'm thinking of getting married to my h07 42n ch1x gf.
        After we get married, I want to convert her to a PR (green card).
        A lawyer is charging $1,500 for this plus $935 to the government,
        for a total of $2,435.  Process takes 4-6 months.  Does this all
        sound about right?  Thanks.  (The URL below mentions $500 for lawyer
        fees and $50 for a do-it-yourself kit.)
        http://www.usavisanow.com/immigrationservicesprices.htm
        \_ Why the hell do you need a Lawyer for this? Especially if
           she's here and you are marrying her. There's 0 probability
           of this being denied, short of her being a terrorist. So
           just file the paperwork yourself, it's not that
           complicated. You graduated from Berkeley and can't figure
           out how to file some INS paperwork?? Save the $1500 on
           something else. I know a place that will do this a lot
           cheaper in Mountain View, probably $300-$400. I'll post it
           tomorrow if you want it.
                    \- some of the INS paperwork is crazy. it's not a matter
                       of cleverness but recordkeeping and dilligence. i mean
                       the ask thinks like "list every time you have left the
                       country with dates" and "list ever law enforcement
                       event including all (non-parking) tickets, with dates".
                       so some of that's almost impossible to get 100% correct.
                       \_ Partha, how many "law enforcement events" have you
                          had? And c'mon, you don't keep track of when you're
                          in and out of the country? Mexico doesn't count.
                          \- i guess the INS/DHS probably doesnt know about
                             the "you, i know" episode with the campus police.
                             those are not the first words you want to hear
                             from a cop. it also seriously freaks out any
                             of the other people you are with.
           \_ thanks, fyi, the $1,500 lawyer is in cerritos, and another couple
              used them.  i also figured i could just spend $ on the govt
              filing fees (which I tabulate to $190 I-130 + $395 I-485 = $585),
              but I wasn't certain. -op
              \_ I-130, so she's not here. The place I used charged me
                 about $200-300 for filing the initial paperwork.
                 Afterwards I did all the follow-up paperwork myself,
                 no big deal. Makes me wonder if I should've paid the
                 $200 in the first place, but it's only $200.
                 \_ she just graduated on F-1 and will be working on OPT in the
                    U.S. for at least ten months.  don't i still need to file
                    an I-130 to establish the spousal relationship?
                    \_ I don't know. I thought I-130 is for spouse who
                       is not here. But I am no expert. I'll post the
                       place I used tomorrow.
        \_ My wife and I just finished the process, including lifting the
           conditional PR (married in late 2002).  It did require diligence
           and chasing the INS at various points, but I didn't think that it
           required a lawyer, just good record-keeping and thoroughness.
           Don't ever believe anything they tell you, though, to some
           extent - every person we ever talked to at INS (phone or in
           person) would tell us something completely different.  Glad it's
           over.  One benefit at the time was that we could still go in in
           person (Sacramento), so my wife had work authorization from day
           one under the new status.  You can email me if you have specific
           questions - mds
        \_ thanks for all the advice, everybody.  fyi, the process seems to be
           much quicker these days.  The $1,500 lawyer got that SoCal couple I
           know the PR card for the grad student / non-citizen spouse in about
           four months from the initial time of filing I believe.
           I hope it will be just as quick w/o the lawyer. -op
2006/10/18-23 [Transportation/Car] UID:44859 Activity:nil 70%like:44922
10/18   BBC demonstrates the proper way to recycle a car:
        http://www.glumbert.com/media/carshoot
        \_ That's pretty damn awesome
        \_ 900 rounds/min is 15 rounds/sec.  That machine gun is firing more
           like 5 rounds/sec.  Also, does such a short gun really have a range
           of 1.5 miles?  Also, 800MPH is supersonic speed, and the RPG looks
           like 5 rounds/sec.  And does such a short gun really have a range
           of 1.5 miles?  Also, 800mph is supersonic speed, and the RPG looks
           like it's flying slower than sound.
           \_ What I'm wondering is, RPGs aren't guided. How the heck did he
              aim a single round in 3D space at a flying object?
              \_ I was wondering the same thing. Perhaps a lot of practice,
                 but that sounds like a lot of money.
        \_ Mythbusters showed you can't explode a car with bullets, unless
           maybe they're tracer rounds.  So the scene with the machine gun must
           have had pytrotechnics in the car to start with.
           \_ A gas tank will explode if enough of the gas atomizes in the
              presence of heat or a spark.  The gun they were using was
              much bigger than the one Mythbusters used and was making
              bigger holes.  The gas tank was also moving through the air,
              which would help atomize the gas.  So it's at least plausible
              that the explosion was natural.  -tom
              \_ Yeah cars are quite likely to explode in these circumstances,
                 of course a crate of TNT in the trunk goes a long way, too.
2006/10/18-21 [Computer/SW/Languages/Misc] UID:44860 Activity:kinda low
10/18   When NOT to respond to a job posting when the poster is clearly
        an idiot or a typical MBA who thinks a computer science
        degree is all about creating HTML pages:
        Job Description:
        Design, developement and implementation of HTML for XXX.
        The current website for XXX is, to put it mildly, decrepid.  We
        need an organized, motivated student (previous web design
        experience preferential) to revamp our HTML. The web site needs
        to allow users to sign on, put in credit card information,
        allow shopping carts, update and sync inventory automatically,
        generate work flow, print out shipment labels, optimize
        operation flow, and provide statistics for analysis.
        We need the HTML immediately. Pay: $10-15/hour depending on
        experience.
        \_ I had an interesting conversation with a Haas guy who thinks
           computer science is all about setting up Linux servers, creating
           HTML pages, and working for http://Amazon.com/eBay and creating pages
           and such.
           \_ That is what most CS grads end up doing. Some don't even
              do that well.
        \_ well.. all web app server code spews html so what is the diff?
        \_ Doesn't matter if it *is* all abut creating HTML pages. They
           want all of that work for $10/hour??!?!?!
           \_ You realize this is pretty good for a starving student, yes?
              \_ I was making $13.75/hr as a co-op 15yrs ago, and I wasn't a
                 hot-shot.
              \_ No, it's not. As the above person said, I was making $8+/hour
                 as a mail courier 15 years ago at UC. For someone to
                 basically build this guy's entire web site which does
                 all of that backend shit... good luck to him! I am not
                 sure $20 or even $30 per hour is fair. The market rate is
                 probably twice that. I hope no student decides to do it
                 out of desperation.
           \_ $15/hour is sort of ridiculously low for arguably
              professional work, that's true.  "Credit card information"
              means you better get someone who knows WTF they are doing.
              \_ The fun part is after they fail to get *any* resumes even
                 remotely useful they'll just say all tech people suck and
                 that justifies the low rate.  Hopefully they'll go out of
                 business soon.
                 \_ Well I figure they'll either give up, or else ask for bids
                    from real web design places (and hopefully realize how
                    much this sort of thing really costs).
2006/10/18-24 [Recreation/Dating, Politics/Foreign/Asia/Korea] UID:44861 Activity:nil
10/18   http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200610/200610120018.html
        Sex Dolls, etc
2006/10/18-23 [Recreation/Activities] UID:44862 Activity:nil
10/18   For tom: http://www.glumbert.com/media/bikerobatics - SFW
        \_ Tom, how many of the tricks can you do?
           \_ I've never ridden an artistic bicycle; virtually none, would
              be my guess.  I'm also not much into freestyle unicycle
              tricks, although I can do a few.  -tom
        \_ I'm much more impressed by http://youtube.com/watch?v=9xuUzuklkoU
        \_ That's known as "artistic bicycling," and it's a fairly sizeable
           sport in Germany.  It's a little too formalized for me; like the
           compulsories in ice skating.  -tom
2006/10/18-21 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44863 Activity:high
10/18   Wow, watch the democratic party implode!  Swami's political little
        brother sure called that one right.
        \_ Huh? -motd political ignorant
        \_ ob ^democratic^republican
           \_ You're right.  The minority party imploded in 94 and never
              recovered.
        \_ http://www.csua.org/u/h9b
           A whopping 16% of Americans approve of the job the Republican
           Congress is doing. I think more than that believe that they
           have been abducted by space aliens...
           \_ and I bet there's a strong correlation between the two groups
           \_ They'd have higher poll results if they polled for everything
              they did.  I'm certain Bush didn't do a poll before getting his
              new dog.  Pretty crazy of him, huh?  Fortunately this is still
              a republic and not a democracy.
              \_ I don't want the President looking for input on what to name
                 his dog. I do want the President looking for input on whether
                 or not to cherry-pick information and invade a country with
                 no real plan for getting out.
                 \_ YOU want this and YOU want that but have you ever
                    considered what the average American wants? Hint:
                    what they want is different than what YOU want, you
                    stupid prick. The average American wants the president
                    to be confident, decisive, religious, faithful, and be
                    a good family man who keeps his penis in his pants
                    instead of fucking an intern at the White House. The
                    average American wanted all of the above in 2000 and
                    2004, and they got exactly what they asked for.
                    \_ The average American is a myth. We're a nation of 300
                       million Venn Diagrams.
                       \_ I am a man, not a Venn Dia-- er, animal!
                          \_ You are number six.
                    \_ And why Average Americans are not happy with Bush now?
                 \_ If you want to discuss the real world I'm here.  If you
                    want to dailykos on me, then go to Dailykos where you'll
                    find a zillion people who will rah-rah that sort of noise
                    instead of quoting every agency in the Western hemisphere
                    and numerous leaders from your party who believed the same
                    intel all through the 90s.  That dog don't hunt, son.
                    \_ I don't read dailykos or Mother Jones (or freep or
                       Fox News). This is the real world. The Pres. wanted to
                       invade Iraq, so he cherry-picked info to make his case.
                       Then he took the word of partisan hacks like Chalabi who
                       told him that the invasion would be over quickly because
                       we would be greeted as liberators. He ignored his
                       experienced generals like Powell, and our lack of
                       sufficient troops and a workable exit strategy led us
                       directly to the mess we're in now. If he'd taken a poll
                       of actually qualified people, they would have told him
                       this ahead of time. Believe me, I'm happy to see SH
                       gone, but this wasn't the way to handle the aftermath.
                       \_ This has been gone over so many times.  "Bush lied,
                          people died!"  "Halliburton!"  "No blood for big
                          oil!".  I'll keep it brief since it really *has*
                          been covered (and ignored) so many times: every
                          western intelligence agency in the world believed
                          SH had WMDs.  Period.  No one cherry picked anything.
                          \_ No. They all believed he WANTED WMDs. The Pres.
                             took that to mean that he had them.
                             \_ Give it up.  The quotes have been posted many
                                times.  Repeating a falsehood doesn't make it
                                true.
                                \_ I would be interested to hear what you
                                   have to say about the Carnegie Report on
                                   WMD in Iraq, 2004, particularly from p.15:
                http://www.carnegieendowment.org/npp/iraqintell/home.cfm
                                   \_ Uh ok, I went to the site, I clicked the
                                      link, then I opened the pdf, read page
                                      15 and a few pages around it.  What
                                      about it?  How does that address what I
                                      was saying?  Or if that isn't your
                                      point, explain further what you're
                                      talking about and I'll be happy to
                                      address it.
                                      \_ From page 16:
                        "In brief, the consensus of the intelligence agencies
                         in early 2002 was that:
                         -The 1991 Gulf War, UN inspections, and subsequent
                          military actions had destroyed most of
                          Iraq.s chemical, biological, nuclear, and longrange
                          missile capability.
                         -There was no direct evidence that any chemical or
                          biological weapons remained in Iraq, but agencies
                          judged that some stocks could still remain and
                          that production could be renewed.
                         -As Iraq rebuilt its facilities, some of the equipment
                          purchased for civilian use could also be used to
                          manufacture chemical or biological weapons.
                         -Without an inspection regime, it was very diffi-
                          cult to determine the status of these programs."
                                         So here are the truths. Repeating
                                         falsehoods like every western intel
                                         agency believed Saddam had WMD will
                                         not make it so.
                          \_ So, the The Carnegie Endowment for International
                             Peace essentially say there was stuff, the stuff
                             is probably gone, they've been buying stuff that
                             can be used to reconstitute their programs, but
                             because they can't inspect they don't know for
                             sure.  So, the President took a better-safe-
                             than-sorry policy.  I've got no problem with
                             that.  Now go back to the 90s like I said and
                             you'll find quotes from Clinton, Gore, and others
                             saying SH has WMDs, and no I'm not going to dig
                             them up for you (again).  They'll just get
                             ignored (again).  I said in plain English the
                             quotes were from the 90s.  If you're going to
                             call someone a liar, get it right.  I'm happy to
                             see that in the next 5 years our quality
                             intelligence agencies were able to go from "they
                             have them" to "gosh, we have no clue really but
                             they've bought the right stuff to have them if
                             they wanted".
                             \_ So what you're really saying is that you don't
                                mind if the western intel did not say that
                                SH had WMDs because you believe it was enough
                                that he might have had WMDs. Good for you.
                                Someday, like a broken clock, you will be
                                right.
                                \_ No.  I already wrote several times what I'm
                                   saying.  Putting words in my mouth is a
                                   third rate rhetorical tactic.  If you
                                   actually cared what I was saying you would
                                   have read it but you only seem interested
                                   in "winning" even if it is only in your
                                   own mind.  Go read your own links and
                                   quotes if you won't read what I said.  They
                                   say the same things I just said even if you
                                   want to misinterpret them for your ego
                                   stroking.  And thanks for turning what was
                                   a somewhat interesting discussion into the
                                   now standard motd crap, but I guess that's
                                   just the thing to do once you've run out
                                   of things to say around here.  It's ok, I've
                                   come to expect it.  I guess we're done here.
                                   Have a nice day.
                                   \_ The French did not believe it, the
                                      Russians did not believe it and the
                                      Germans did not believe it. It is too
                                      bad you drank the kool-aide. You lose.
                          We had more than enough troops for the invasion, but
                          \_ We had enough troops to invade, demolish, and get
                             out, true. We did not have enough troops on the
                             ground to keep peace afterward.
                             \_ We absolutely had enough troops.  At no point
                                were troops given orders to take control of
                                the civilian areas, martial law was never
                                declared/enforced, rampant looting was allowed
                                to go on with soldiers watching.  All in an
                                effort to win the hearts and minds.  Boo-yah!
                                \_ no we don't.  Shensaki said that based upon
                                    the experience in Bosnia and Serbia, we
                                   needed 300k-500k boots on the ground to
                                   pacify the country..
                                   \_ Based upon a different theatre, a
                                      different war, a different make up of
                                      troops, a different enemy, sigh.  If
                                      your army can conquer a region, they can
                                      certainly keep the civilian population
                                      in check *if ordered to do so*.
                          yes, they screwed up the aftermath.  Not because
                          they didn't have enough troops.  They did.  Because
                          they weren't willing to do what needed to be done
                          with them.  Another 500,000 troops would have meant
                          nothing if their orders are to *not* kill people who
                          need killing.  Had we gone with the Powell Doctrine
                          of overwhelming force then how many people would be
                          whining that, "we put so many troops in their country
                          that of course they're upset.  We should have gone
                          with a much smaller force so as not to enourage the
                          insurgency."  Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
                          \_ These mythical people who would have complained
                             do not include me or the Iraqis who wouldn't have
                             died due to the utter breakdown of civilization
                             in Baghdad.
                             \_ No, you're missing the point: a larger force
                                would have moved slower and allowed even more
                                of the pro-Saddam forces to slip into civies.
                                We had more than enough troops to militarily
                                conquer the country.  That is a historic fact
                                demonstrated 100% by what actuall happened: we
                                conquered the country in record time with
                                previously unheard of low casualties.
                                \_ A larger force could have just have easily
                                   rushed forward the same smaller force to
                                   conquer and then deployed the rest to hold
                                   and pacify. You underestimate the mobility
                                   of the US Armed Forces.
                                   \_ Logistics are extremely difficult.  All
                                      those troops need food, water, ammo,
                                      fuel, parts, bunks, training, letters
                                      to/from home, cycle time out, and a bunch
                                      of other things I'm sure I've forgotten.
                                      You don't stick half a million guys in a
                                      wasteland and tell them to just go for
                                      it.  At the time I think it was only me,
                                      Rumsefelf, and Bush who believed the
                                      Iraqis were going to be swept aside.  The
                                      rest of the world was talking about a
                                      50k loss and months of hard fighting and
                                      endless body bags and baby killers and
                                      "omg itll be a quagmire just like Vietnam
                                      all over again!".  They had the troops to
                                      secure the ammo dumps.  They didn't.
                                      They had the troops to stop the looting.
                                      They didn't.  The orders never came
                                      down.  Had they cracked down hard on day
                                      1 in Baghdad the rest of the country
                                      would have continued in the same "never
                                      really had a central government anyway"
                                      kind of way they had for decades.  The
                                      so-called Sunni Triangle has Baghdad as
                                      one of the points.  That is where all
                                      the trouble began and where a tremendous
                                      number of problems still exist today.
                                      Falluja is a good example.  We did
                                      nothing while it turned into a swamp.
                                      Then we sort of half assed a kind of
                                      nothing not-quite, nevermind lets go
                                      home attack.  It got worse.  Then we
                                      sent in a real force and killed everyone
                                      who raised a gun.  It is reasonably
                                      quiet there today.  I'm stunned they had
                                      the balls to order that especially after
                                      the grave disappointed and leadership
                                      cowardice shown on the first non-attempt.
                                      You underestimate the abilities and
                                      training of the American military.
                                      Shensaki wanted a Vietnam style Powell
                                      Doctrine troop flood.  Yes, let's
                                      repeat our previous mistakes by
                                      refighting previous wars just as poorly
                                      using the same tactics that worked so
                                      poorly then.
                                      \_ Here's what I'm getting from this:
                                         I'm arguing a fantasy based on the
                                         idea that more troops, more research,
                                         and not disbanding the Iraqi bureau-
                                         cratic machine might have led to a
                                         better situation in Iraq; you're
                                         arguing a fantasy that martial law
                                         and more aggressive action would have
                                         led to a better situation in Iraq.
                                         We're both agreed that the current
                                         situation suffered once the invasion
                                         was over.
                                         \_ I'm not arguing fantasy.  I'm
                                            arguing based on history.  Wars
                                            have always been won by applying
                                            force, and by killing people until
                                            they stop fighting back.  I have
                                            no idea what you're arguing, but
                                            if you'd like to call your
                                            arguments a fantasy, I'm ok with
                                            that.
                                            \_ Why did we lose Vietnam? Why
                                               did the German's never wipe
                                               our the Russian partisans?
                                               out the Russian partisans?
                                               Why did the Poles never give
                                               up nor the Yugoslavs? How
                                               about India or Algria or
                                               about India or Algeria or
                                               Indonesia? Your view of how
                                               guerilla warfare works is
                                               ignorant.
                                               \_ Vietnam: lack of will at
                                                  home.  It was won militarily
                                                  after the Tet Offensive.
                                                  Russians, Poles, Yugoslavs:
                                                  conquered and reduced to a
                                                  history book footnote.
                                                  What about India, Algeria,
                                                  or Indonesia?  Your view of
                                                  what went down in Iraq post
                                                  invasion is what is ignorant,
                                                  and you continue to ignore
                                                  what I've been saying.  There
                                                  was no reason to have an
                                                  insurgency if we had done
                                                  the right thing on day 1 or
                                                  even up to a week later.
                                                  It's been mildly entertaining
                                                  but you're now grasping
                                                  wildly at straws tossing out
                                                  random other country names in
                                                  the apparent hope of I'm not
                                                  sure what.  It was fun but
                                                  now we're done.  Go ahead
                                                  and take another random
                                                  potshot, have the last word
                                                  to soothe your ego and we're
                                                  done.  I won't reply to this
                                                  thread any further.  Have a
                                                  nice day.
                                                  \_ FWIW, you're arguing with
                                                     at least three different
                                                     people now. As far as
                                                     fantasy goes, there's no
                                                     way of knowing whether
                                                     your solution or mine (or)
                                                     would have worked because
                                                     neither was tried, and
                                                     every situation is diff-
                                                     erent. I _get_ the pre-
                                                     cedent for the success of
                                                     martial law, and I would
                                                     have been interested to
                                                     see what would have
                                                     happened if it had been
                                                     implemented-- but it was
                                                     not, and so it's pure
                                                     conjecture at this point
                                                     to say that it would have
                                                     been an unqualified
                                                     success. The same goes for
                                                     my suggestions. That said,
                                                     this is not debate club,
                                                     and I have no illusion
                                                     that I'm going to con-
                                                     vince you of the superior-
                                                     ity of my suggestion.
                                                   \_ The point is almost any
                                                      country that fought
                                                      against colonial
                                                      occupation in the last
                                                      50 years has emerged
                                                      triumphant. As will Iraq.
                                                      \_ Tibet?
                                                      \_ Hopefully not because
                                                         I think that would
                                                         make Iraq the first
                                                         country ever to
                                                         resist democracy.
                                                         This is not an act of
                                                         colonisation.  Then
                                                         again this is the
                                                         Middle East and theyre
                                                         all a bunch of raving
                                                         lunatics so whatever.
                             \_ how about disbanding the Iraqi army? not
                                securing the the ammunition dump?  allowing
                                disbanded army to melt into civilians is the
                                worse thing can happen.
                                \_ I still say disbanding the army was the
                                   better of two poor choices.  Not securing
                                   the dumps falls under the "didn't declare
                                   martial law" category and I agree that was
                                   stupid.
                          And a brief word on Chalabi: who *isnt* partisan but
                          has an interest and contacts in his third world
                          government?  Everyone has an agenda.  There is no
                          mythical neutral person out there who just wanted
                          what was "best for the Iraqi people".
                          \_ Chalabi is/was a snake who is/was never trusted by
                             people in Iraq. A bit of digging would have
                             revealed this. Instead, he was believed because
                             what he had to say fit what the Pres. and his
                             advisors wanted to hear.
                             \_ They're all snakes.  That's the point.  At some
                                point you have to pick your guy(s) and go with
                                it.  No digging was required.  He was already
                                known to be a snake.  It wasn't a secret.
                                Anyone else would've been a snake, only the
                                name would change.
                                \_ Then we should have picked a snake who
                                   actually had an idea of the real picture in
                                   Iraq, someone the Iraqis could have backed.
                                   \_ The problem with that is there is no
                                      such thing as an "Iraqi".  They don't
                                      see themselves in national terms which
                                      is why they've had such a hard time
                                      forming an effective government and
                                      associated services.  They see themselves
                                      as Sunni, Shia, and Kurd and with good
                                      reason.  There is *no one* the mythical
                                      average Iraqi could have backed.  I
                                      think Chalabi had an excellent idea of
                                      what was going on.  He abused his
                                      position for personal gain and got
                                      busted and now he's out of the picture.
                                      The abuse is the snake part.  It is to
                                      be expected.
                          On exit strategies: there is no exit strategy when
                          your initial plan doesn't include killing enough of
                          the enemy to break his will.  When I saw reports of
                          the Iraqi army vanishing into the civilian population
                          I knew we were in for it, but there was no way to
                          stop that.  We could not have moved any faster and
                          \_ err., we DISBANDED THE ENTIRE ARMY, remember?
                             de-Baathification?
                             \_ Yes.  And I still prefer that to replacing the
                                bastard we knew with a new bastard from SH's
                                old military.  That would be the definition of
                                failure.  The idea wasn't to replace one
                                bastard with another.  The idea was to clean
                                the whole lot out.  And I sure as hell wouldn't
                                want the Baathist army running around still
                                slaughtering civilians in the name of stability
                                on my watch.
                          your Powell Doctrine sized army would have taken
                          another 3-6 months to build up, moved slower, taken
                          more casualties and allowed even more Iraqi military
                          to disolve into the general population.
                          \_ The Iraqi army disappeared into the population
                             because they didn't want to fight for SH. A better
                             and more honest analysis of the situation would
                             have revealed this and would have shown that the
                             dissolution of the IA was a bad idea; reform
                             would have been a better idea. There were people
                             in place at the time who could have helped with
                             that. Now there are not.
                             \_ The disappeared because they were getting
                                crushed.  Not even crushed.  They were getting
                                swept from the battle field as if they were
                                never on it.  Fighting a classic insurgency
                                campaign was the only alternative.  That is
                                why SH and his pals were handing out cash left
                                and right before the fall.  It was part of a
                                staged plan because they knew they couldn't
                                stop the allied forces.  As far as disolving
                                the army goes, it's one of those ugly choices
                                with no good answer.  Disolve it and rebuild
                                from scratch which takes time or keep the same
                                bastards in place who were responsible for
                                mass killing of their own civilians yet
                                maintain order?  I think they made the better
                                call.  The army was Sunni run and would have
                                just replaced SH with another Sunni military
                                dictator making the whole thing for naught.
                                At least this way there is a chance of doing
                                something better than replacing one bastard
                                with another.
                                \_ This does not match the real situation which
                                   was that SH had created a cult of
                                   personality such that no one had power out-
                                   side of him. Kill/capture SH, and the rest
                                   would have fallen apart. This is why we
                                   tried to get him with missiles several times
                                   before invading.
                                   \_ There was no cult of personality.  He
                                      had supreme power because like most
                                      dictators he (mostly) rewarded loyalty
                                      while torturing and executing disloyalty.
                                      Cult of personality?  Er, uh, what?
                          Final word at this time: we have more than enough
                          troops.  Our leadership lacked the will to allow
                          them to do what they were trained to do: find and
                          kill the enemy in sufficient numbers to break his
                          will to fight.  That is how wars have always been
                          won.  Not this hearts and minds garbage.
                          \_ The enemy was found and killed or captured. The
                             enemy was SH, not the Iraqi people (or even the
                             Iraqi army). But because we focused on finding
                             and killing/capturing the enemy, we let the
                             country slide into ruin. GHWB understood this, and
                             that's why he didn't push all the way to Baghdad
                             in GWI. You can't leave a power vacuum, or
                             anarchy will descend.
s
                             \_ The enemy was not SH nor the people.  It was
                                SH's military and intelligence establishment
                                as headed by SH.  The army was not some bunch
                                of poor innocent victims.  The lowest end
                                grunts were constripts and draftees, but
                                anyone in the officer core was scum and in
                                good need of jail or killing.  The country fell
                                to ruin because we didn't have a post invasion
                                plan and probably didn't think about or even
                                care about it.  And the only plan that would
                                have worked is not something they would have
                                done: declared martial law, rounded up the
                                thugs and executed or long term imprisoned
                                them.  I do absolutely agree with you about
                                power vaccuums.  We created one the moment the
                                SH government vanished and we failed to take
                                control.  We had the troops, we lacked the
                                will at the leadership level.
        \_ HAHAHA SUCK IT CONS! You lied, you are going to now pay for your
           lies and incompetence. Too bad all the rest of us are going to
           have to pay for and clean up your mess. Can we levy a tax on
           Bushbots to pay reparations to Iraq?
           link:www.csua.org/u/h9k
           \_ I'm guessing a tinyurl with no attribution from a troll isn't
              work safe but thanks for caring enough to post.
              \_ Work safe chart of stock market-esque tracking of the House
                 GOP.
2017/09/24 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
9/24    
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2006:October:18 Wednesday <Tuesday, Thursday>