| 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. |
| 5/20 |