Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Bigjake on September 11, 2012, 08:24:42 PM
-
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/09/11/gunmen-reportedly-attack-us-consulate-in-libya/
First they overrun the walls in Cairo, trash our flag and hoist their own (with impunity), and now this? One " American staff member" (which sounds suspiciously like a MSG) killed, several wounded.
I thought that repelling the enemy assault by fire and close combat was how we handled this?
Pissed to be reading this sort of thing on 9/11. Not really much to discuss, I'm just surprised we're rolling over and taking it on this one, especially in friggin' Libya.
-
We should invade both places.
-
We should invade both places.
Or withdraw from both places. To hell with them.
-
Evacuate staff. Fill embassy with explosives. Detonate. Repeat as necessary. Apply budgeted foreign aid to defense and/or fortified border wall. Let 3rd world sheepshaggers vent their rage on one another. :mad:
-
The only ROE we need for those situations is to have the nearest missle cruiser/sub launch a half-dozen cruise missles targeting the embassy to "reclaim" the grounds....
-
Evacuate staff. Fill embassy with explosives. Detonate. Repeat as necessary. Apply budgeted foreign aid to defense and/or fortified border wall. Let 3rd world sheepshaggers vent their rage on one another. :mad:
Sick puppy! I like the way you think! DETCORD x infinity.....
-
I bet the Marines there were not allowed to shoot a single member of that mob. =(
-
You gentlemen are forgetting, Obama Term 1 is actually Jimmy Carter's 2nd term.
And we all know how Jimmy handled embassy invasions. :mad:
-
You gentlemen are forgetting, Obama Term 1 is actually Jimmy Carter's 2nd term.
And we all know how Jimmy handled embassy invasions. :mad:
Les Aspin's spirit pervades...
-
I bet the Marines there were not allowed to shoot a single member of that mob. =(
I can guarantee it. In Beirut they weren't even allowed to be Condition 1, I bet the same is true here. Pathetic.
-
You gentlemen are forgetting, Obama Term 1 is actually Jimmy Carter's 2nd term.
And we all know how Jimmy handled embassy invasions. :mad:
Jimmy failed in the desert, and Obama did get OBL. He deserves credit for that.
-
Jimmy failed in the desert, and Obama did get OBL. He deserves credit for that.
No, Obama was just the guy sitting in the Oval Office when OBL was taken out. The folks Inteligence who tracked OBL's movements for years and the boots on the ground that invaded OBL's compound deserve the credit for taking OBL out.
Obama and his buddies sat in a comfy office and watched the events on a big screen TV.
I concur with leaving the screaming beards of the Middle East (and other places) to wallow in their superstitions and willful ignorance.
"We'll leave you alone if you leave us alone. Continue to make pests of yourselves against the rest of world and there will be no other option but to expunge the infestation that is you from the planet."
-
Jimmy failed in the desert, and Obama did get OBL. He deserves credit for that.
I might be willing to give Obama some credit for that if he and his fellow Democrats weren't doing their best to play up his role in it for the election. The history channel was advertising some show about it playing quotes from administration officials acting like they were key parts of the mission rather than just watching.
And also, I am concerned they will retaliate against the retired Seal who is putting out that book.
-
And also, I am concerned they will retaliate against the retired Seal who is putting out that book.
Whistleblowers do tend to get the shaft as a matter of Federal policy.
-
OBL is a couple of pages in the history of the Caliphate.
The Plan is on schedule.
-
Evacuate the embassy and consulate and carpet home a 5 block radius around each back to the stone age.
Oh wait, it's already still in the stone age, nevermind.
-
Whistleblowers do tend to get the shaft as a matter of Federal policy.
I wouldn't really define him as a whistle blower, but just about the same response. Hopefully, that will change up February next year.
-
Jimmy failed in the desert, and Obama did get OBL. He deserves credit for that.
Obama deserves credit for getting OBL to exactly the same degree that Richard Nixon deserves credit for Neil Armstrong's footsteps on the Moon.
-
Radio reports this morning are that our ambassador to LYbia and 2 staffers have been killed and their naked bodies dragged through the streets of Bengahzi.
Can Obama apologize to Islam fast enough?
ETA-FOX reporting ambassador and 3 staffers.
-
Obama deserves credit for getting OBL to exactly the same degree that Richard Nixon deserves credit for Neil Armstrong's footsteps on the Moon.
Best. Analogy. Ever.
Radio reports this morning are that our ambassador to LYbia and 2 staffers have been killed and their naked bodies dragged through the streets of Bengahzi.
Can Obama apologize to Islam fast enough?
ETA-FOX reporting ambassador and 3 staffers.
Amending my prior ROE....make at least one missle a nuke....
-
Radio reports this morning are that our ambassador to LYbia and 2 staffers have been killed and their naked bodies dragged through the streets of Bengahzi.
Can Obama apologize to Islam fast enough?
ETA-FOX reporting ambassador and 3 staffers.
Gee, glad we "led from behind" on that one. Didn't the roman empire kill 10 for every one citizen harmed?
-
Gee, glad we "led from behind" on that one. Didn't the roman empire kill 10 for every one citizen harmed?
No, that was 1 out of every 10 of their own soldiers who ran off.
If you rebelled against Rome, if they were in the mind to give a salutary lesson they would kill everything - men, women, children, cats, dogs, plants, "the mood", farm animals etc. If they were in a more forgiving frame of mind they would just kill all the men who looked like they were of fighting age and enslave the rest.
-
Radio reports this morning are that our ambassador to LYbia and 2 staffers have been killed and their naked bodies dragged through the streets of Bengahzi.
Can Obama apologize to Islam fast enough?
ETA-FOX reporting ambassador and 3 staffers.
Just invading the embassy is an act of war.
There needs to be a special level of response for killing an American ambassador.
For example, the immediate and permanent removal of your city from the world and a demand for the immediate and unconditional surrender of your country.
-
Another black mark for our esteemed President. BO deserves the credit for only giving the order to take out OBL. Even Carter would have done that if for no other reason than how he would be remembered in history. Evenything comes out eventually.
-
No, that was 1 out of every 10 soldiers who ran off.
Hence the term decimate from Latin more or less to remove 1/10th.
I predict Hillary will "most strongly condemn" the violent acts of a few rogue protesters and Obama will condemn the production of any media that might remotely be construed as possibly critical of Islam or "The Prophet".
-
Just invading the embassy is an act of war.
There needs to be a special level of response for killing an American ambassador.
For example, the immediate and permanent removal of your city from the world and a demand for the immediate and unconditional surrender of your country.
The problem with Libya is that these clowns are almost certainly not from the government, or the people, or even from the city. The US should sit the Libyan government down, explain that they have just won a free house cleaning which will take place immediately, then get to work using the traditional means of aerial death robots and scary men on the ground with big guns.
They - the Libyan Government, and lets face it the Libyan people, will probably be grateful.
-
They - the Libyan Government, and lets face it the Libyan people, will probably be grateful.
More likely it would be portrayed as American imperialism and a wanton, unprovoked attack on innocent muslims.
-
Jimmy failed in the desert, and Obama did get OBL. He deserves credit for that.
Besides, BHO couldn't not greenlight the mission on OBL. It was a purely political calculation. Look hard, claim responsibility.
Bush said it wasn't a top priority to run down OBL. Why? Because dismantling Al Queda's ability to make war was a top responsibility. Something I agreed with him on. Knock the organization out of the fight. Taking out OBL is retribution, but it doesn't gaurantee that AQ won't be back knocking on our door.
-
We've condemned the guilty parties in the strongest terms for their misuse of freedom of speech to insult Islam and Allah's Prophet Mohammad.
-
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57511043/assault-on-u.s-consulate-in-benghazi-leaves-4-dead-including-u.s-ambassador-j-christopher-stevens/
He said Stevens, 52, and other officials were moved to a second building, deemed safer, after the initial wave of protests at the consulate. According to al-Sharef, members of the Libyan security team seem to have indicated to the protesters the building to which the American officials had been relocated, and that building then came under attack.
BURN THE CITY TO THE GROUND. Salt the earth.
-
Why doesn't the President get on TV and flat out state: "that any further attacks on our embassies will be met with overwhelming violence and deadly force. If any country objects we will gladly remove our embassy and terminate all foreign aid effective immediately"?
-
Why doesn't the President get on TV and flat out state: "that any further attacks on our embassies will be met with overwhelming violence and deadly force. If any country objects we will gladly remove our embassy and terminate all foreign aid effective immediately"?
Because this is the administration of appeasement
-
I'm not posting the picture because I have no desire to show that barbarity, but the murdered Ambassador was paraded through the streets.
So much rage right now.
-
A question: is the US Consulate in Libya in a separate building or compound that can be defended, or is it in an office building with other tenants? There are a number of consulates in Seattle, but they are all in office towers.
Because as I read the story about Libya, I was wondering where were the Marines? Are Marines only stationed in an embassy, as opposed to a consulate, or was the Libyan consulate not amenable to being defended? I know that some posters here have strong feelings on ROE of the Marines, but I have to think that if a mob with machine guns and RPGs is opening fire on American personnel, the Marines can fire back.
PS: I just read the CBS article linked above: Al-Sharef said two U.S. Marines sent to Benghazi when the clash erupted were shot and killed by the well-armed protesters. It was not immediately clear whether the Marines were part of Stevens' security detail. It is too bad that a company was not sent.
-
We've condemned the guilty parties in the strongest terms for their misuse of freedom of speech to insult Islam and Allah's Prophet Mohammad.
This.
-
"I do condemn the cowardly act of attacking the US consulate and the killing of Mr. Stevens and the other diplomats," Libya's deputy prime minister, Mustafa Bushagar, said via Twitter.
"Amb. Stevens was a friend of Libya and we are shocked at the attacks on the US consulate in Benghazi," Bushagar said. "I condemn these barbaric acts in the strongest possible terms. This is an attack on America, Libya and free people everywhere."
Its pretty sad when a Libyan can come up with a much more tersely worded condemnation of the act than obama can.
-
I'm not posting the picture because I have no desire to show that barbarity, but the murdered Ambassador was paraded through the streets.
So much rage right now.
Same thing happened in Mogadishu with 3 of our servicemen and we did not blow them off the map.
We should have had the common sense to get the Ambassador out earlier.
I am angry at our government for not removing our folks a lot earlier.
-
A question: is the US Consulate in Libya in a separate building or compound that can be defended, or is it in an office building with other tenants? There are a number of consulates in Seattle, but they are all in office towers.
Because as I read the story about Libya, I was wondering where were the Marines? Are Marines only stationed in an embassy, as opposed to a consulate, or was the Libyan consulate not amenable to being defended? I know that some posters here have strong feelings on ROE of the Marines, but I have to think that if a mob with machine guns and RPGs is opening fire on American personnel, the Marines can fire back.
While an embassy is considered sovereign territory of its county (not the host country) a consulate (while in many cases, housed in the same building) is simply where consular officers operate (which may include -the- ambassador for that host country) and may or may not be considered sovereign territory. In the case of Libya, the embassy is in tripoli, and this was a consulate. In either case, Libya was a signatory of the various treaties (IIRC) defining the protections of diplomatic officers, and thus these actions shoud be considered really serious. In general, an attack on diplomatic officers, their missions, consulates, and even more significantly, an embassy, is considered an act of aggression against that county. We have responded with military force in the past (cruise missile strikes after the embassy bombings, severe sanctions and eventual failed response followed by very clear military threats after the embassy in Tehran was captured, etc) by both highly liberal (carter), moderately liberal (Clinton) and conservative (Reagan's clear statements as president elect to Iran) presidents.
This is clearly an attack on US interests, citizens, and what should be considered "untouchable" diplomatic personnel and facilities. We should respond with AT LEAST political and economic sanctions, determine who is responsible, and preferably, a proportional military response. At the least, libyian diplomats shoud be expelled or declared persona non grata until those responsible are punished, and reparations must be paid by the host country. I guarantee other countries would expect nothing less than reparative actions if militants here attacked their ambassador to the US.
Anything other than this, INCLUDING our administrations current "stern talking too" is insufficient and creates an international environment that is very dangerous--host countries knew in the past that they bore the burden of protecting diplomats in their countries, as to do otherwise puts their own people at risk AMD limits the ability of countries to interact diplomatically, and showing weakness in this case merely puts our personnel in further danger.
Sure, the administration has ordered more security for our personnel...but under what ROE? Say the new ambassador (or subsidary diplomatic credential carrying personnel who may not be protected as well as e ambassador him/herself) comes under attack and the security fights back and kills civilians...what then? I bet this administration would pay some reparations then to the host county.
Attacks on diplomats are worse than attacks in random individuals, as it is an attack on the basic institution of civilized international diplomacy.
We should respond SEVERELY. Hell, even Clinton had the gonads to tomahawk the crap out of those responsible for the embassy bombings.
Worse still, aren't these the same folks our administration "supported" by "leading from behind"?
-
"We'll leave you alone if you leave us alone. Continue to make pests of yourselves against the rest of world and there will be no other option but to expunge the infestation that is you from the planet."
This.
I would not care what they rail about in their cess pool of a country, but they insist on threatening us and our allies. On top of that, they fund groups that attack us and our allies.
Let that stuff stand unanswered and you'll get more of it.
-
Why doesn't the President get on TV and flat out state: "that any further attacks on our embassies will be met with overwhelming violence and deadly force. If any country objects we will gladly remove our embassy and terminate all foreign aid effective immediately"?
Obama is too busy scrounging up some of his "stash" of our tax dollars to send to the Muslim Brotherhood to replace the ammo they expended killing our people. But, only after getting back from the golf course.
-
Pull out our folks and turn sand into glass.
We've got all these nukes for a reason.
(Oh, and it will send "a strong message" to Iran, North Korea, and anyone else that even thinks about screwing with us.)
-
Carthago delenda est.
-
Because this is the administration of appeasement
Because this, the modern West, is a culture of appeasement.
There are only two real political parties: the brave and the cowardly. The rest is words, words, words.
The "smart girls"--Clinton, Power, Rice, Jarrett--have brought us to this. But we should thank them for making clear what it all comes down to in the end.
Meanwhile, I don't think either of these two men should be in the White House.
-
A gift to the Obama campaign, should they choose to exploit it. Gives them cover for an October surprise. Wish the Iran thing weren't bubbling so merrily at this time.
-
The Left always speaks in sweeping generalities about "the collective." They certainly do about anyone rightward of themselves.
But with Islam... It's "just the few," the "bad few" who are the problem. Sure, Hill, keep telling yourself that, and keep those operators close.
I hope this event shows America--reaches them in the gut--about what the hell has gone wrong.
-
The modern problem is intimidation. We are afraid of Islam, too many of us. The measure is not in how many die in half-force war efforts or are killed by drones. The measure is in what we are unwilling to see, know, and do to save ourselves and our culture. There's a psychotic bully loose; there are those who know what to do and those who don't or won't.
-
"Our" side is claiming Libyan security forces fought against the attackers and carried Stevens' to medical aid.
International reports are saying Libyan security forces pointed out the targets and tht Stevens' body was carried through the streets in triumph.
Guess who I don't trust.
If nothing else we need to enact ROE that include shoot to obliterate/liquify anyone or any group that threatens our people in instances like that. Hell if they still do it like they did 20 years ago the marines probably weren't even issued actual live bullets to put in their evil bang makers.
-
I can't bring myself to be shocked.. pissed maybe, but not outraged.
What else can you expect to happen after you assisted ex Al-Qaeda types in taking over the country? That's who we put in power, knowingly, because it was convenient at the time, and now it bites us in the ass. Now Libya is a giant Islamic extremist, tribal, Al-Q militia mish-mash screw-up courtesy of NATOs "humanitarian" :laugh: mission. Ain't blowback a B**ch?
-
"Smart diplomacy" is code. Code for Creating the Universal Caliphate. One state at a time.
Now if Romney had the gene for truth...
Meanwhile, there's ample opportunity for candlelit prayer vigils, grief counseling, and reaching out while our High One tells us "justice will be done" and Libyans are really our friends.
-
Besides, BHO couldn't not greenlight the mission on OBL. It was a purely political calculation. Look hard, claim responsibility.
Bush said it wasn't a top priority to run down OBL. Why? Because dismantling Al Queda's ability to make war was a top responsibility. Something I agreed with him on. Knock the organization out of the fight. Taking out OBL is retribution, but it doesn't gaurantee that AQ won't be back knocking on our door.
It is purely retribution, and BHO does deserve the credit.
You can rationalize that OBL was no more important than a mugger, but I do not share that view.
-
Carthago delenda est.
Civis Americae sum.
-
This war goes back 1400 years. Deal with it.
-
This war goes back 1400 years. Deal with it.
Yes, they can deal with it.
We can eat popcorn and watch.
-
"Our" side is claiming Libyan security forces fought against the attackers and carried Stevens' to medical aid.
International reports are saying Libyan security forces pointed out the targets and tht Stevens' body was carried through the streets in triumph.
Guess who I don't trust.
If nothing else we need to enact ROE that include shoot to obliterate/liquify anyone or any group that threatens our people in instances like that. Hell if they still do it like they did 20 years ago the marines probably weren't even issued actual live bullets to put in their evil bang makers.
I find Al Jazeera English more accurate and less overtly biased than CNN or MSNBC.
-
How badly our culture needs "friends." Sad.
Facebook on the statist plan.
-
It is purely retribution, and BHO does deserve the credit.
You can rationalize that OBL was no more important than a mugger, but I do not share that view.
That. OBL was a military commander of an enemy force. Getting him was quite as important as nabbing, say, a German admiral in 1943.
-
MB, it was a Japanese admiral, Isoroku Yamamoto we sicced the P38's on, not a German. Just sayin'.
-
MB, it was a Japanese admiral, Isoroku Yamamoto we sicced the P38's on, not a German. Just sayin'.
I did not know such a thing really occured. I was pulling an analogy out of my hat.
-
More seriously speaking, it was a riot.
Countries don't really go to war when their embassies get sacked by rioters.
-
The core of that culture is a riot contained by a thick concrete shell of Law. Now and then there's a melt-down.
-
More seriously speaking, it was a riot.
Countries don't really go to war when their embassies get sacked by rioters.
Cairo was a riot. Benghazi was a coordinated attack, according to current reports.
ETA: There is also the suggestion that the Benghazi attack was retaliation for an anti-AQ drone strike, unrelated to (or masked by) the video riots.
-
Not sure what could have been done for the American Ambassador, since it seems he put most of his faith in the new Libyan state, was not on actual Embassy grounds, merely a consulate which is essentially just an office. And the situation in Libya is still in flux, and it's looking possible that Libyans who'd been loyal to Qaddafi may have infiltrated the "security forces".
As far as the U.S. Embassy in Cairo, a common sense ROE for the Marines of "Shoot whoever comes over the wall" would have sufficed.
I'm thinking that the Muslim Brotherhood, while far from pro-West/U.S., is not to blame, but that in all the uprisings, the seat of the pantsedness (to coin an adjective) that's been going on of late, they've been infiltrated by AQ, or similar groups.
-
I did not know such a thing really occured. I was pulling an analogy out of my hat.
The assassination of Yamamoto was one of the critical successes in the operations against Japan. We used crypto intercepts to get his itinerary. Yamamoto was not a moron, unlike the Japanese Army.
Good analogy, actually.
-
Cairo was a riot. Benghazi was a coordinated attack, according to current reports.
ETA: There is also the suggestion that the Benghazi attack was retaliation for an anti-AQ drone strike, unrelated to (or masked by) the video riots.
Do you think the Libyan 'government', such as it is, is behind this attack?
-
Do you think the Libyan 'government', such as it is, is behind this attack?
Probably not. Which is why I've only called for wiping the city from the face of the earth, not the whole country.
There should be SERIOUS repercussions for the murder of a US Citizen. Moreso for an Ambassador. For parading either through your streets? No more streets.
-
Do you think the Libyan 'government', such as it is, is behind this attack?
Not sure. Elements of the security forces on scene may have aided it. No indication (yet) of executive-level participation.
-
Probably not. Which is why I've only called for wiping the city from the face of the earth, not the whole country.
There should be SERIOUS repercussions for the murder of a US Citizen. Moreso for an Ambassador. For parading either through your streets? No more streets.
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fa5.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net%2Fhphotos-ak-ash4%2F250762_483583844992763_1190735063_n.jpg&hash=b1961d4b2a4fddae351e65f09bf4c8ca9968fb2b)
-
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fa5.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net%2Fhphotos-ak-ash4%2F250762_483583844992763_1190735063_n.jpg&hash=b1961d4b2a4fddae351e65f09bf4c8ca9968fb2b)
I wonder how many(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fa5.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net%2Fhphotos-ak-ash4%2F250762_483583844992763_1190735063_n.jpg&hash=b1961d4b2a4fddae351e65f09bf4c8ca9968fb2b)
I wonder how many of those people can read those signs in English.
-
You know, that's something that always bothered me. English signs in a region where English is at best a second language of a small fraction. That's called "handed out to show the press" or, "don't bomb us"
-
I wonder how many of those people can read those signs in English.
I must admit that I could not read them in Libyan - or whatever what they speak is called.
-
I haven't heard anything about Marines being on the scene. I know they guard our embassies, but do they normally guard our consulates?
-
there are stories on the news sites about the Fleet Antiterrorism Something-or-other team getting sent in
-
MB: Is the above pic similar to the Ron Edry "Israel loves Iran" youtube campaign?
Are you familiar with that?
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/03/israel-loves-iran-campaign-gains-force/
(Those of you unfamiliar with it, it is an anarcho-stateless attempt to bypass the State and cause two groups of people to communicate directly and bypass the puppet masters that seem intent on perpetual war.)
I bring this up because I hear that the "R3voLution" is gaining steam in the middle east.
-
Marines in Tripoli at the Embassy, and an additional detachment coming from Spain. State Dept. security contractors at the Consulate in Benghazi with Ambassador Stevens.
-
I wonder how many of those people can read those signs in English.
Hell, give 'em 20 bucks in local currency, a sign and tell them to have a demonstration. They don't need to know what the sign says, it is just a photo-op for the world's media, IMO.
bob
-
maybe i'm overly optimistic, but mainstream muslims denouncing violence isn't far fetched for me. I saw a lot of it in Iraq.
I mean, sure, maybe they couldn't read their signs, but I believe it's possible that they all were there to show support.
-
I think I've seen this movie before - US intervenes in another country, arming rebels, and ends up fighting them a short while later.
-
You know, that's something that always bothered me. English signs in a region where English is at best a second language of a small fraction. That's called "handed out to show the press" or, "don't bomb us"
You'll be surprised how many people in the third world speak rudimentary English.
-
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fa5.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net%2Fhphotos-ak-ash4%2F250762_483583844992763_1190735063_n.jpg&hash=b1961d4b2a4fddae351e65f09bf4c8ca9968fb2b)
That's great. Words are empty, though.
You want to prove you mean it? I want to see those men who dragged our Ambassador through your streets hanging from lampposts tomorrow. Crucifixion merits bonus points.
Not that committed? Then as others have suggested, it's just PR.
-
How would a common city-dweller know where to find such a terrorist?
-
I am not responsible for the crimes of murderers, rapists, and any other scum that exist in my city just because I do not personally go out and hunt them -and neither are you, and neither is anyone else.
-
I am not responsible for the crimes of murderers, rapists, and any other scum that exist in my city just because I do not personally go out and hunt them -and neither are you, and neither is anyone else.
Nope, but if fellow countrymen commit AN ACT OF WAR in my city that I'm not supporting, I better do everything in my power to bring them to justice. And if the police WON'T do it, I'd say that significant evidence the government of the city supports the act.
-
Nope, but if fellow countrymen commit AN ACT OF WAR in my city that I'm not supporting, I better do everything in my power to bring them to justice. And if the police WON'T do it, I'd say that significant evidence the government of the city supports the act.
Uh, and evidence that the government supports it makes you fair game to be killed why?
This is bin laden's logic. The US commits an act of war in Saudi, therefore, all residents of US cities are fair targets.
I had not predicted that you would subscribe to Bin Laden's rules of war.
-
Uh, and evidence that the government supports it makes you fair game to be killed why?
This is bin laden's logic. The US commits an act of war in Saudi, therefore, all residents of US cities are fair targets.
I had not predicted that you would subscribe to Bin Laden's rules of war.
I'd actually argue that this IS valid provocation for the wholesale execution of cities.
Democratic societies who elect representatives that campaign on a platform of "we're going to kill all of the XYZ people" and then send soldiers to do that job, need to be accountable for their vote.
Case in point: Palestine. When the Palestinians elect a government that sponsors missile strikes and bombings in Israel, it's the people of Palestine that need to pay the price.
I don't think that Libyans need to pay this particular price here though. I'm far more interested in seeing us withdraw from countries that hate us, no embassy and no foreign aid. No acknowledgment of sovereignty. They're a blight on the map that we treat as a hotbed of piracy and corruption, and encourage all American ventures to stay far away from.
Then have them prove otherwise.
If the whole world did this to the armpits of the ME, things would be much better off.
-
AZ, so you don't actually think what Bin Laden did was in principle wrong, you just think he didn't accurately characterize US activity in Saudi Arabia as an act of war?
That would be ironic considering that youve posted on the military/political nature of US involvement there just recently.
If terrorist attacks on our people are wrong, it should be wrong for us to commit terror attacks against others.
-
AZ, so you don't actually think what Bin Laden did was in principle wrong, you just think he didn't accurately characterize US activity in Saudi Arabia as an act of war?
That would be ironic considering that youve posted on the military/political nature of US involvement there just recently.
If terrorist attacks on our people are wrong, it should be wrong for us to commit terror attacks against others.
Bin Laden is not a State. He is not the government of Saudi Arabia, nor the representative of the democratic voice of Saudi Arabia.
What he did is wrong no matter what. The US didn't come and hurt him, prompting a defensive reaction where he tore down buildings and crashed planes.
That being said, our policy in the ME pertaining to Iran, Saudi Arabia, oil and the dollar is seriously *expletive deleted*ed up and needs major revision.
-
Happily, there are ways to bring the people who did this to justice without totally destroying all of Benghazi.
-
Bin Laden is not a State. He is not the government of Saudi Arabia, nor the representative of the democratic voice of Saudi Arabia.
What he did is wrong no matter what. The US didn't come and hurt him, prompting a defensive reaction where he tore down buildings and crashed planes.
That being said, our policy in the ME pertaining to Iran, Saudi Arabia, oil and the dollar is seriously *expletive deleted*ed up and needs major revision.
So would Iran be morally justified in wiping out a US city, as long as it was a decision of government?
-
Uh, and evidence that the government supports it makes you fair game to be killed why?
This is bin laden's logic. The US commits an act of war in Saudi, therefore, all residents of US cities are fair targets.
I had not predicted that you would subscribe to Bin Laden's rules of war.
Don't blame me, I voted for McGovern :P
=D
-
So would Iran be morally justified in wiping out a US city, as long as it was a decision of government?
Only if they were attacked by a democratically elected US government whose representatives reflect the will of its people. Which is arguably true in this case, if we attack them first. Yes, they have a moral justification to attempt to destroy us.
Frankly, I think the whole thing is solved by having elected representatives hung for initiating international hostilities of any sort without a resolution from Congress or similar national governing body in other countries, also drawn democratically from the people.
That being said, democracy is not the governmental system best used to protect rights... you need a Republic for that.
It all just sucks.
-
I leave this here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13xx1J5FdNE
-
Nope, but if fellow countrymen commit AN ACT OF WAR in my city that I'm not supporting, I better do everything in my power to bring them to justice. And if the police WON'T do it, I'd say that significant evidence the government of the city supports the act.
OK...
let's run with this thought experiment.
Where do you live?
-
Only if they were attacked by a democratically elected US government whose representatives reflect the will of its people. Which is arguably true in this case, if we attack them first. Yes, they have a moral justification to attempt to destroy us.
Frankly, I think the whole thing is solved by having elected representatives hung for initiating international hostilities of any sort without a resolution from Congress or similar national governing body in other countries, also drawn democratically from the people.
That being said, democracy is not the governmental system best used to protect rights... you need a Republic for that.
It all just sucks.
So all those people who spend money on things that reduce collateral damage. THey must be morons?
-
So all those people who spend money on things that reduce collateral damage. THey must be morons?
If we want to apply morality to war, we're setting ourselves up for failure from the start.
But if you want to engage in the exercise, let's try.
US strikes against targets in Iran are going to be targeted at key military infrastructure, nuclear reactors, government communication systems and targets of high economic sensitivity.
Iran is well justified in retaliating in kind.
If, however, Iran nukes Los Angeles instead... that is immoral. Because the US didn't target civilian populations in Iran, Iran is not justified in targeting civilian populations in the US.
Yes, high tech smart weapons and precision strikes keep war "civil." Yay.
It all falls apart when you ask what non-warlike provocation justified the first warlike response. Someone has to escalate something for war to come about.
-
You'll be surprised how many people in the third world speak rudimentary English.
This. English supplanted Latin as the language of education and commerce a few centuries ago.
I'm curious about their native language signage though, do we have an in-house translator that can decipher those for us? (Despite the Navy's best attempts to the contrary, I still can't read squiggle.)
ETA:
I leave this here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13xx1J5FdNE
That right there is how it's bloody well done!
-
If we want to apply morality to war, we're setting ourselves up for failure from the start.
Morality applies to pretty much all human activity, almost by definition.
Why would you purposefully kill more innocent people when the possibility is around to kill less?
If it is possible - for example - to find out where the terrorists live, fire a Tomahawk missile at said location, kill the terrorists - and, say, fifty innocents - why should we instead pick an option that would also destroy the city they live in?
Happily we have reached a time where guided weapons reduce collateral damage - and simultaneously make friendly troops safer (because rather than deploy, for instance, multiple squadrons of bombers to plow everything around the target into the ground with unguided bombs, exposing the bombers to AA fire in the process, you fire just one or two ALCMs from beyond the horizon) and improve engagement effectiveness.
This is not, mind you, some starry-eyed leftist view that 'if one Pakistani child is killed it is a war crime'. Merely pointing out he calls 'to level the entire city' are at the best merely emoting.
-
And we can now add our friends in Yemen to the list
-
Interesting perspective.
Seems that my Father had met the Ambassador some years back.
He was a VP at a large university at the time which had been doing business overseas.
Dad said that he was quite fluent in Arabic, and had been involved in the region for many years.
He was far from a honorific Ambassador, and was very committed to trying to do his best in the region.
Dad said that he was not the type of guy to get out at the first inkling of trouble, and was someone who would get readily involved despite the risks, as he was that committed to the area.
Dad had a lot of respect for his abilities and his commitment to doing the right thing when required.
I have never heard him speak in such terms about anyone else, ever.
Hearing all of this, his death is a great loss.
-
And we can now add our friends in Yemen to the list
Yea, we need to GTFO now.
-
You'll be surprised how many people in the third world speak rudimentary English.
True, but rudimentary is usually easy to spot in verb conjugation, especially weird English ones (is/was). "Chris Stevens WAS a friend of Libya" is not only properly conjugated, but reflects proper English use of the past tense when referring to the deceased. In any case, this picture may not be the best example, but my point was in many pro/against ME protests, you see a greater fraction of English signs than Arabic...and that is pandering to media, something the MSM is highly complicit in. Let's say the percentage of (first or second language) Spanish speakers in the US is comparable to the percentage of English speakers in Iran or Libya...and then compare tht to the percentage of signs at protests written in each nation's primary language.
True, English is the most spoken language on earth, but protests are typically (in most other countries) are to get a point across to ones own countrymen or government (you see Japanese signs in Japan, Korean in Korea, French in France, etc)...if its not an English majority speaking country, English signs do not serve the normal purpose, and my hypothesis is they are media-fare to support lawfare.
-
And we can now add our friends in Yemen to the list
*sigh* Seriously, RKL had it spot on. Need to simply start shooting anyone who hops the fence and enters the grounds. This crap isn't going to stop under it is universally understood that there will be severe and immediate consequences for such actions.
-
*sigh* Seriously, RKL had it spot on. Need to simply start shooting anyone who hops the fence and enters the grounds. This crap isn't going to stop under it is universally understood that there will be severe and immediate consequences for such actions.
Unfortunately, not going to happen. These countries understand our media concerns, and also the value of a disproportionate response. We burn a book, they kill people. We accidentally kill people, they kill more. It inverts the power structure. Besides, this administration isn't going to risk the bad press of shooting unarmed people before an election, especially when they have to somehow convince people that their warm and fuzzy foreign policy approach not only has worked, but is better than the alternative.
-
OK...
let's run with this thought experiment.
Where do you live?
Yeah... I'm not posting that information on a public forum. You'll have to go with a hypothetical, but I will tell you I live in the United States.
So all those people who spend money on things that reduce collateral damage. THey must be morons?
Depends on the situation. Our singular focus on limiting collateral damage has encouraged countries to turn a blind eye to terrorists (or even give clandestine encouragement to them.) If a country were aware that when the terrorists provoke an act of war with the United States, the US will respond with overwhelming force and the host country to that terror will suffer in response, that same host country will take special effort to prevent such acts and dispense with the subtle encouragements.
For example, when was the last time a Russian Ambassador was assassinated as ours just was? (Since MB is a student of Russian history, I'm assuming he'll be able to answer that.)
-
Oh, I forgot to highlight another part of my reasoning:
He said Stevens, 52, and other officials were moved to a second building, deemed safer, after the initial wave of protests at the consulate. According to al-Sharef, members of the Libyan security team seem to have indicated to the protesters the building to which the American officials had been relocated, and that building then came under attack.
Collaboration.
-
Morality applies to pretty much all human activity, almost by definition.
Why would you purposefully kill more innocent people when the possibility is around to kill less?
If it is possible - for example - to find out where the terrorists live, fire a Tomahawk missile at said location, kill the terrorists - and, say, fifty innocents - why should we instead pick an option that would also destroy the city they live in?
Happily we have reached a time where guided weapons reduce collateral damage - and simultaneously make friendly troops safer (because rather than deploy, for instance, multiple squadrons of bombers to plow everything around the target into the ground with unguided bombs, exposing the bombers to AA fire in the process, you fire just one or two ALCMs from beyond the horizon) and improve engagement effectiveness.
This is not, mind you, some starry-eyed leftist view that 'if one Pakistani child is killed it is a war crime'. Merely pointing out he calls 'to level the entire city' are at the best merely emoting.
I'm not accusing you of being a starry-eyed leftist, MB. However I'm not talking about terrorist-targeted strikes. I'm talking about wars between Nations.
I don't consider these attacks against our consulates/embassies to be terrorist strikes. I'm weighing whether this is a democratically chosen movement in these countries, or not. And I'm trying to balance the anti-US sentiment against the peace sentiment and see where these folks stand. I know that the Occupy movement doesn't represent 99% of the US, and I'm not associating these rioters/murderers with Al-Qaeda immediately, though I imagine there are strong ties to the Muslim Brotherhood movement.
Fancy guided missiles and bombs do limit collateral damage... but what about wars between disparately equipped combatants? The US has smart bombs and guided cruise missiles and a fleet to carry hundreds of thousands of soldiers across the world and so on, but Iran doesn't.
So when we attack Iran (or Libya or Egypt or some un-named Ickystan), we use all that to our advantage to limit collateral damage. But if an Ickystan wants to attack us back, they don't have aircraft carriers and battle groups and stealth bombers and precision munitions. The best they can put up is some sort of espionage attack based around a manual bombing campaign, or long range missile strikes (if they even have them, which most don't).
A country in such a situation has to throw morality out the window in order to fight. There's just not any means to fight a war, otherwise.
And when a country decides to choose war with a technologically superior enemy (i.e. Libya goes to war with the US), we are likely to use precision strikes against military targets to begin with, but the only way Libya can possibly win such a war is to strike at US citizens directly and make them end the war due to political pressure or "homeland" fear. And when Libya escalates to that level, our military is clear to strike at civilian populations as well since Libya started non-combatant strikes first.
MB: Is the above pic similar to the Ron Edry "Israel loves Iran" youtube campaign?
Are you familiar with that?
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/03/israel-loves-iran-campaign-gains-force/
(Those of you unfamiliar with it, it is an anarcho-stateless attempt to bypass the State and cause two groups of people to communicate directly and bypass the puppet masters that seem intent on perpetual war.)
I bring this up because I hear that the "R3voLution" is gaining steam in the middle east.
Do you know anything about this above, MB?
So I ponder all of this in the context of: Is the Libyan State being the antagonist here, or the Libyan people themselves? Which direction does democracy and popular sentiment sway? What picture is more accurate for the Saharan African muslim nations: parading our murdered ambassador through the streets, or the photo with english language signs?
I know Libya has a very weak government right now, and I suspect the Muslim Brotherhood movement has a strong foothold in it. I don't know how much control they have over the democratic sentiment of the people themselves, or if the Libyans disapprove of the Muslim Brotherhood or controlling government.
I just consider that the ultimate response of "glassing the city" is directly tied to the democratic feelings of the population of that area towards the US. If the bulk of the population loathes us and supports burning our embassies and murdering our ambassadors with no provocation, then leveling the city might be an appropriate response. It worked in Hiroshima and Nagasaki and changed public sentiment in Japan during WWII (die-hard religious conviction indoctrinated into the population at large), and it worked in Dresden by completely dismantling the industrial capacity of a city that fed Germany's war machine.
Since radical Islam is not tied to a single Nation, however, nuking or mass-bombing a city to attempt to change popular sentiment in that enemy country will certainly provoke radicals elsewhere to attempt a significant bombing in the US.
-
Oh, I forgot to highlight another part of my reasoning:
He said Stevens, 52, and other officials were moved to a second building, deemed safer, after the initial wave of protests at the consulate. According to al-Sharef, members of the Libyan security team SEEMto have indicated to the protesters the building to which the American officials had been relocated, and that building then came under attack.
Collaboration.
Maybe, maybe not. "Seem" covers a lot of possibilities.
Chris
-
Issue the jarhead gaurds crew-served weapons and let them they can do their job. Maybe some claymores, frag grenades, and flame throwers, too. Toss in a couple heli-type UAVs to keep an eye on things from above.
A SAW in every Marine guard's hands behind good cover ought to keep the grounds clean.
-
I leave this here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13xx1J5FdNE
Self defense is not only our right, it is our duty.
Somehow I don't think we'll hear that from Obama.
-
A SAW in every Marine guard's hands behind good cover ought to keep the grounds clean.
Well, assuming the brass is policed properly...though, brass-paved grounds would certainly send a message.
-
Issue the jarhead gaurds crew-served weapons and let them they can do their job. Maybe some claymores, frag grenades, and flame throwers, too. Toss in a couple heli-type UAVs to keep an eye on things from above.
A SAW in every Marine guard's hands behind good cover ought to keep the grounds clean.
Almost all those things are in the embassay gaurd's arsenal. The problem is that I'd bet a $20 right now that they were under specific ROE not to shoot unarmed people, not to have loaded weapons, and probably a whole pile of other idiocy.
Retribution for these acts? Meh. The real problem is they were allowed to occur in the first place.
-
Issue the jarhead gaurds crew-served weapons and let them they can do their job. Maybe some claymores, frag grenades, and flame throwers, too. Toss in a couple heli-type UAVs to keep an eye on things from above.
A SAW in every Marine guard's hands behind good cover ought to keep the grounds clean.
+1
Our security forces, if we are to have consulates & embassies, must be up to the job in terms of protection. Clearly a few Marines with (unloaded?) M-16s fails that test.
-
We need to think long and hard about what was described above as our "media concerns." A people able to be manipulated emotionally by a corrupt mass media establishment is hardly a free people. Therein lies a huge challenge for this culture, and perhaps the rock on which it breaks.
-
We need to think long and hard about what was described above as our "media concerns." A people able to be manipulated emotionally by a corrupt mass media establishment is hardly a free people. Therein lies a huge challenge for this culture, and perhaps the rock on which it breaks.
I don't know if you are describing us or them.
-
Yea, the Ambassador was a man committed to Libya, and they killed him for it. Screw them, and the rest of the savages. We can get out oil from closer sources (and probably cheaper and more safely,) I think we should be completely done with them all.
-
Based on what I am seeing in the media, the US Government sure seems to be leaning toward the Libyan consultate attack as being done by trained militia troops instead of a mob. We apparently already have drones up tracking a couple of camps associated with this militia, which may have Al-Qaeda ties. Hmm.
-
I don't know if you are describing us or them.
Both.
Mind-control is mind-control.
-
Based on what I am seeing in the media, the US Government sure seems to be leaning toward the Libyan consultate attack as being done by trained militia troops instead of a mob. We apparently already have drones up tracking a couple of camps associated with this militia, which may have Al-Qaeda ties. Hmm.
All the drones in the world won't change what is being hatched inside our own White House and State Dept. It would be funny if not so pitiable.
-
I don't know if you are describing us or them.
yes
-
For example, when was the last time a Russian Ambassador was assassinated as ours just was? (Since MB is a student of Russian history, I'm assuming he'll be able to answer that.)
I can only think of Griboedov's assassination. But there had also been a kidnapping, quite recently, of Russian diplomats in Lebanon.
This was still in the Soviet era. The Russians responded by sending Team Alpha to methodically assassinate the leaders of various militia groups in Beirut (which were many and plentiful) until the people who had the hostages got the drift and gave in.
-
I know there's already a thread going on about the embassy attacks, but here's a report (linked by Drudge) that the U.S. Ambassador to Egypt "did not authorize" the US Marines on station to carry live ammo.
http://freebeacon.com/reports-marines-not-permitted-live-ammo/ (http://freebeacon.com/reports-marines-not-permitted-live-ammo/)
Not familiar with the source . . . is the "Washington Free Beacon" credible?
(More and more I'm reminded of Carter's inept vacillation, handwringing, and virtual bedwetting when our embassy in Iran was attacked . . . )
-
http://www.mccain.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=7e95d18f-a9eb-80ef-e599-95754897384e&Region_id=&Issue_id=1bd7f3a7-a52b-4ad0-a338-646c6a780d65
“I have met with these brave fighters, and they are not Al-Qaeda. To the contrary: They are Libyan patriots who want to liberate their nation. We should help them do it.”
We back 'em...
Then they kill our Ambassadors.
Let's just stop doing ANYTHING over there. At all. Leave 'em the hell alone. Quit picking sides trying to manipulate outcomes.
-
:facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:
What's the point of having Marines if they are unarmed?
-
the folks that mccain refers to were involved with the killing? can you support that? besides "they were all libyan!"
-
:facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:
What's the point of having Marines if they are unarmed?
Snappy uniforms ? =|
-
the folks that mccain refers to were involved with the killing? can you support that? besides "they were all libyan!"
http://www.vice.com/read/al-qaeda-plants-its-flag-in-libya
But according to multiple eyewitnesses—myself included—one can now see both the Libyan rebel flag and the flag of al Qaeda fluttering atop Benghazi’s courthouse.
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.viceland.com%2Fblogs%2Fen%2Ffiles%2F2011%2F10%2Fphoto2.jpg&hash=1edd1cf58acba462bdbbe2c8fe6cfe17d1e55291)
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.viceland.com%2Fblogs%2Fen%2Ffiles%2F2011%2F10%2F334073_10150903903270451_868165450_21715212_728016733_o.jpg&hash=e9f92738f018d414f4f1839b902045c447556b26)
The rebels have either made new friends, or revealed old friends, or AQ has infiltrated the rebel movement.
-
:facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:
What's the point of having Marines if they are unarmed?
You know how some homes have "Protected by ADT"-type signs, but don't actually have a security system? Apparently the ambassador thought that was a great idea for an embassy in a potentially hostile area, too.
-
And it really doesn't matter in regards to your statement anyways, CSD:
Gaddafi had yielded to Bush II. He said, "Libya will be turr'ist no more." And fed us intel and worked with us.
He became our ally.
Yeah, he was still a dictator. But that's between him and his people to resolve. We resolved it with the Brits ourselves, 237 years ago. The french helped towards the end, but mostly out of self interest themselves. It's not our place to foment revolution everywhere in the world. Let people choose their own government. That's a function of Liberty: if people want to live under a dictator, so be it.
We (the USA) were safe after Gaddafi's conversion to peace, even if it was by direct intimidation.
No reason to go and poke the bear by destabilizing the region deliberately, and building another Hussein Bin Laden Abu Sufyan.
-
You know how some homes have "Protected by ADT"-type signs, but don't actually have a security system? Apparently the ambassador thought that was a great idea for an embassy in a potentially hostile area, too.
While Marines are typically relied on to defend U.S. territory abroad, such as embassies, these reports indicate that the Obama administration was relying on Egypt’s new Muslim Brotherhood-backed government to ensure American security
OMG I'm about to have a stroke :O
-
What was that whole thing in Beirut again? Anybody remember that?
-
Intentionally staying out of this.
But that's not an al Qaeda flag. It's a generic Islamic flag. I believe it says "There is no God but Allah".
Still needs to be torn down. Honestly, I wonder why we keep embassies in unstable parts of the ME. Oddly enough, bad things keep happening to them and we continue to be dumb enough to send folks there. Well, honestly, I don't mind sending State Department employees. But it sucks that we send humans there as well.
-
What was that whole thing in Beirut again? Anybody remember that?
Yes. The most expensive lessons are those we refuse to learn from.
-
http://www.vice.com/read/al-qaeda-plants-its-flag-in-libya
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.viceland.com%2Fblogs%2Fen%2Ffiles%2F2011%2F10%2Fphoto2.jpg&hash=1edd1cf58acba462bdbbe2c8fe6cfe17d1e55291)
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.viceland.com%2Fblogs%2Fen%2Ffiles%2F2011%2F10%2F334073_10150903903270451_868165450_21715212_728016733_o.jpg&hash=e9f92738f018d414f4f1839b902045c447556b26)
The rebels have either made new friends, or revealed old friends, or AQ has infiltrated the rebel movement.
so no then?
-
:facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:
What's the point of having Marines if they are unarmed?
Most of the military guarding things right after 9/11 was officially unarmed. FIGHTERS over the US on 9/11 were unarmed. Colonel Marc Sasseville and Major Heather Penney were expected to ram Flight 93. Military is usually not allowed to be armed except at the range domestically. Unarmed gate guards were common, probably still are.
Happens all the time.
Folks have this odd tendency to believe the military is in the business of protecting America or Americans. That's pretty rare.
-
Most of the military guarding things right after 9/11 was officially unarmed. FIGHTERS over the US on 9/11 were unarmed. Colonel Marc Sasseville and Major Heather Penney were expected to ram Flight 93. Military is usually not allowed to be armed except at the range domestically. Unarmed gate guards were common, probably still are.
Happens all the time.
Folks have this odd tendency to believe the military is in the business of protecting America or Americans. That's pretty rare.
This.
My unit still had vets from the GHWB invasion of Panama, when I was in. According to them, everyone in the unit, down to E-2s (TIS brought E-1s to E-2 by the time they got to my unit) had all the ordnance they could carry: beau coup rounds, grenades, 2x LAWs, demo, etc.
They took one airfield and then another unit came by to reinforce them. Just at that time, a rumor went around about a Panamanian infantry battalion on the way to retake the airfield. The members of the other unit were worried, as the policy in that unit, in a mother-&#%@ing war zone, was that only the Squad leader could throw a grenade, and he was allowed to carry only one. Their other munitions were similarly allotted.
-
http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2012/sep/13/picket-report-murdered-us-ambassador-libya-reporte/
claims by 2 agencies that stevens was abused before being killed
-
Most of the military guarding things right after 9/11 was officially unarmed. FIGHTERS over the US on 9/11 were unarmed. Colonel Marc Sasseville and Major Heather Penney were expected to ram Flight 93. Military is usually not allowed to be armed except at the range domestically. Unarmed gate guards were common, probably still are.
Happens all the time.
Folks have this odd tendency to believe the military is in the business of protecting America or Americans. That's pretty rare.
It is rare. It's also *expletive deleted*ing assinine.
-
People tend to underestimate how many different factions exist in nearly every Middle-Eastern country.
-
People tend to underestimate how many different factions exist in nearly every Middle-Eastern country.
The US completely misunderstands the mob rule that exists in the Middle East.
I don't think that much of anybody really does understand.
Just a bunch of factions and warlords.
It is like an Abbot & Costello Whose On First routine.
-
The US completely misunderstands the mob rule that exists in the Middle East.
I don't think that much of anybody really does understand.
Just a bunch of factions and warlords.
It is like an Abbot & Costello Whose On First routine.
Personally I'm sick of Americans dying over in the middle east kittylitter box.
The only way I can express my displeasure to the power brokers is to not vote for any of the clowns that want to continue to support our enemies with foreign aid.
-
People tend to underestimate how many different factions exist in nearly every Middle-Eastern country.
Well exactly. According to some reports over here, a decent sized portion of the mob that stormed the consulate took the ambassador out, put him and a wounded companion in a couple of cars and ran him straight down to what passes for a local A+E.
-
A report I heard earlier on Fox News has authorities denying that the Marines had no ammunition.
Don't know where this story is going.
It would be crazy if they were carrying unloaded guns because there is a name for soldiers whos guns are unloaded:
TARGETS
-
There are already two threads discussing this... let's try to avoid starting a bazillion threads
-
If true, this exceeds the boundaries of any moral codes agreed upon since the Dark Ages.
Perfectly legitimate for the US, even acting in a reserved Obama-ish way, to deploy waves of assassins from the CIA, SEALs, whatever, to kill whomever was involved. And make examples. Painful examples.
Frankly, the Libyan government should be doing this already, for an insult of this magnitude. And offering complete oversight to the State Department in advance, along with lead on any missions they would like.
-
Most of the military guarding things right after 9/11 was officially unarmed. FIGHTERS over the US on 9/11 were unarmed. Colonel Marc Sasseville and Major Heather Penney were expected to ram Flight 93. Military is usually not allowed to be armed except at the range domestically. Unarmed gate guards were common, probably still are.
Happens all the time.
Folks have this odd tendency to believe the military is in the business of protecting America or Americans. That's pretty rare.
Of course, sometimes an armed F16 strafes a school...in new jersey IIRC.
-
I don't know how it is NOW but when I was in, base security carried one of everything* we used in the vehicles and there was 4x in the guard shacks. I was at Seal Beach Nav Weap Sta. Jan 88 to Jul 90. (NEC 9545).
I can't imagine being unarmed in a hostile environment and I was just in CA. Those that disarm our service members should be tried for accomplice to murder. (those that are alive)
*Remington 870 12 ga
M-16A1 .223
S&W .38 Revolver (this changed when we were allowed the Barettas)
Panama - Howard AFB - I got to carry whatever I wanted and knew how to use out of the armory. I was not supposed to leave the building, I was just there for a Capt, picking up some stuff... This was back when it was ask for forgiveness rather than permission.
-
as f'd up as this story is i am equally disturbed by the secretary of apologies and the apologist in chiefs response. or lack of one. if they knew and peddled the "they carried him to the hospital" lie for political expediency they are both dead to me. not as a threat of violence but to indicate that they no longer exist as human to me
-
Gashing teeth....bastids.....maybe just trying to piss us off.
Still. though.....it's working.
-
Several related Libya threads merged together.
-
Unarmed gate guards were common, probably still are.
Yeeaaah, not so much.
I stood various armed watches when I was in: Pier sentry, flight deck rover, gate guard, quarter deck cover, interior rover, pier rover. All of them included live ammo. (Variously, armed with M500, M9, M14 or M60.)
-
Panama - Howard AFB
I was at Howard in 90-91! (after Just Cause)
-
Yeeaaah, not so much.
I stood various armed watches when I was in: Pier sentry, flight deck rover, gate guard, quarter deck cover, interior rover, pier rover. All of them included live ammo. (Variously, armed with M500, M9, M14 or M60.)
As did I. We had a standard load out of 2 magazines for the 1911, 5 rounds each. I think the M14 load out was 2 magazines with 10 rounds and we were handed 5 or 6 rounds for the shotguns. None of the weapons were to be loaded. This was the same SOP when we were overseas in foreign ports.
-
You want to prove you mean it? I want to see those men who dragged our Ambassador through your streets hanging from lampposts tomorrow. Crucifixion merits bonus points.
Suspects in custody. (http://www.albawaba.com/news/libya-suspects-connection-us-consulate-detained-442065)
-
Suspects in custody. (http://www.albawaba.com/news/libya-suspects-connection-us-consulate-detained-442065)
Scapegoats or not, blood is blood.
It is a good start.
-
IMO Islam is not a religion. Period. It needs to be handle like that. Incidents like this will get worse. FBI already issuing bulletins that violence could happen here in CONUS, yet they have NO info to support that.
-
According to senior diplomatic sources, the US State Department had credible information 48 hours before mobs charged the consulate in Benghazi, and the embassy in Cairo, that American missions may be targeted, but no warnings were given for diplomats to go on high alert and "lockdown", under which movement is severely restricted.
-
IMO Islam is not a religion. Period. It needs to be handle like that. Incidents like this will get worse. FBI already issuing bulletins that violence could happen here in CONUS, yet they have NO info to support that.
Yea, no *expletive deleted*it - terrorism and racism mildly poorly guised as a religion.
-
Well exactly. According to some reports over here, a decent sized portion of the mob that stormed the consulate took the ambassador out, put him and a wounded companion in a couple of cars and ran him straight down to what passes for a local A+E.
A+E?
-
A+E?
*Expletive deleted* with a broomstick. :mad:
-
Does anyone else get the feeling that the response of the administration is being filtered through some kind of bizarro world parallel universe where what they see isn't the same thing we see?
-
A+E?
Accident and Emergency. What the British call an ER.
-
Does anyone else get the feeling that the response of the administration is being filtered through some kind of bizarro world parallel universe where what they see isn't the same thing we see?
Pretty much. And it is deliberate, I think, not the product of wishful thinking.
-
As did I. We had a standard load out of 2 magazines for the 1911, 5 rounds each. I think the M14 load out was 2 magazines with 10 rounds and we were handed 5 or 6 rounds for the shotguns. None of the weapons were to be loaded. This was the same SOP when we were overseas in foreign ports.
They stepped it up a bit when I was standing those watches some 8 years ago. Minimum load outs were 15 rds for the shotguns, 45 for the pistols, 30 for rifles, and two cans (200rd belts) were with the M60 with a looooot more in the nearby ready locker. >:D [ar15] Pistols were always condition 1 (round in the pipe) and longarms were condition 3 (loaded mag, just rack the action). Also there may or may not have been some M79's in a ready locker nearby. :angel: We really didn't dick around with our security at the time, and while there wasn't anyone constantly posted at them, all the .50 and 25mm mounts were generally ready to roll with the removal of a padlock.
No doubt things have changed in the last 8 years though, and probably towards even more stringent/well armed. Hell, IMO and based on these recent events, our MSG's at the embassies should have some XM-214's in concealed mounts. Nothing says "Get the f--- off my damned lawn!" like 12,000 RPM of AP M995 5.56mm.
-
IMO Islam is not a religion. Period. It needs to be handle like that. Incidents like this will get worse. FBI already issuing bulletins that violence could happen here in CONUS, yet they have NO info to support that.
So we declare things not to be what they are, so that normal respect and protections don't hamper the government? Smart....I can't imagine any way that would go wrong!
-
I'll take it even further.
Islam is no different than Scientology. The "prophet" just beat Hubbard to the punch by a millennium or so. And Islam is slightly less goofy.
If you really want to make some money start your own religion.
-
I'll take it even further.
Islam is no different than Scientology. The "prophet" just beat Hubbard to the punch by a millennium or so. And Islam is slightly less goofy.
If you really want to make some money start your own religion.
And how are both different from catholicism?
-
And how are both different from catholicism?
Muslims and Scientologists don't have to eat those tasteless wafers.
-
And how are both different from catholicism?
Catholicism is older therefore it must have more legitimacy.
:lol:
-
Far, far fewer Catholics seem to sign up for bomb vests. Haven't seen too many Scientology imams call for extralegal executions for insults. Can we at least TRY to remember that the Inquisitions are half a millennium in the past? Are either perfect? Of course not. But neither offer an existential threat to the Republic, as radical Islam does.
-
Suspects in custody. (http://www.albawaba.com/news/libya-suspects-connection-us-consulate-detained-442065)
I say there are two options. Voluntary or involuntary extradition to the US for trial....or unfortunate accident.
-
"There are still quite vague details, but clearly it was the signing of Al-Qaeda," said Mike Rogers, Republican chairman of the Intelligence Committee in the U.S. Congress.
...
My head hurts.
-
The problem isn't any faction, Al Qaeda Taliban..... The problem is Islam. Plain and simple
-
Far, far fewer Catholics seem to sign up for bomb vests. Haven't seen too many Scientology imams call for extralegal executions for insults. Can we at least TRY to remember that the Inquisitions are half a millennium in the past? Are either perfect? Of course not. But neither offer an existential threat to the Republic, as radical Islam does.
Every religion has some criminal adherents, but today's Catholics are generally not known for fatwas to murder, IEDs, kidnapping and beheadings, honor killings, polygamy, forced marriages to little girls under 10, forbidding of voting, driving, education, and other rights to women, murder of ambassadors, rioting because of books/pictures/movies on the other side of the world, and on and on and on.
Seriously, unless one is trying to deflect criticism of the screaming beards, it's hard to draw a moral equivalence between the two religions.
And as for the Inquisition . . . aside from ending centuries ago, at least partially it came about from the Reconquista which reclaimed the Iberian peninsula from - you guessed it - the domination of Moslem invaders.
-
Every religion has some criminal adherents, but today's Catholics are generally not known for fatwas to murder, IEDs, kidnapping and beheadings, honor killings, polygamy, forced marriages to little girls under 10, forbidding of voting, driving, education, and other rights to women, murder of ambassadors, rioting because of books/pictures/movies on the other side of the world, and on and on and on.
It basically did at one time. Or the equivalent. Catholics advanced past it. Not quickly, not easily, not without plenty of bodies, but yep. They advanced and are just normal folks these days.
Most folks that follow Islam are just normal people. Everyone has their likes and dislikes, but mostly they work a job, have a family and mind their own business. The overwhelming majority are thoroughly civilized. But there is a vocal, active minority that DOES like starting trouble, and the majority hasn't gotten to the point where it's so overwhelming that only fringe cases exist.
-
My rambling thoughts, I spent all that time streaming consciousness so I feel obligated to post! :laugh:
There has been a very healthy (and in some cases unhealthy) symbiosis between western civilization and Christianity over the centuries.
Christs message to follow him and his example doesn't really lend itself to using the government to construct heaven on earth IMHO.
The early church "fathers" Augustine and Aquinas were very much steeped in Greek philosophy. This unholy alliance between church and state is where things went off the rails. In that type of alliance the state always eats the church, the message of Christ being utterly lost. The first healthy step was the Protestant reformation that rejected the authority of Rome. The second healthy step was the US constitution that both separated church and state (institutionally) and provided acknowledgement of the churches important role in society by defining its free exorcise as worthy of enumeration.
While I appreciate those early works of Christian theology and philosophy, as well as enjoy the classics in philosophy, I do believe the church needs to be independent of the state. American Roman Catholics for the most part get it, not up on world wide Catholicism to speak to Romes position on the issue.
Like in the Doctors Hippocratic oath I believe the states first duty is to do no harm. I also believe the government that governs least governs best. Finally like those in our history pointed out, our Republic was designed for and will only work with a moral people. We ceased to be a great nation when we ceased to be a good people.
There is no history of Islam where the prevailing philosophy of "give unto Caesar that which is Caesars, give unto God that which is Gods" has been practiced. The only exceptions are where Muslims are a minority.
From what I can gather, Islam by its very dogma is political and seeks to become "Caesar" so that the force of the state can be used to bring everything into submission to Allah.
-
My only real problem with Islam as a whole is that they haven't really made a concerted effort to stamp out the violent minority.
-
My only real problem with Islam as a whole is that they haven't really made a concerted effort to stamp out the violent minority.
Partially because they're as brutalized by the extremists as we are.
Our interpreter when I was in Diwaniyah said that's the biggest reason Iraqis tolerated the extremists... they were terrified of them.
-
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/09/the-movie-so-offensive-that-egyptians-just-stormed-the-us-embassy-over-it/262225/
Obviously, there's a lot to this story that's still unclear. What we do know is that some members of Egypt's sometimes-raucous, often rumor-heavy media have been playing highly offensive clips from the highly offensive film, stressing its U.S. and Coptic connections. In the clip below, controversial TV host Sheikh Khaled Abdallah (known for such statements as "Iran is more dangerous to us than the Jews" and that Tehran had engineered a deadly soccer riot in Port Said) hypes the film as an American-Coptic plot and introduces what he says is its opening scene.
So apparently when some Egyptian muckraker plays portions of the offensive, insulting video to the Arab public that were selected as being the most offensive parts it is OK? He's just reporting on what The Evil Satan is doing, not publishing/broadcasting stuff that insults Mohamed, right?
Sort of like broadcasting snuff films in order to let folks know what snuff films are, I guess?
The reason I am banging my head on a brick wall is because it feels so good when I stop.
stay safe.
-
My only real problem with Islam as a whole is that they haven't really made a concerted effort to stamp out the violent minority.
Maybe some are scared of them, but I also believe that there is silent cheering going on there.
Many others in the world are very jealous what the US has accomplished in so few years.
In spite of our problems, we have pulled off a pretty good lifestyle that other countries could not mirror over thousands of years.
They are just pissed off, and want to get back at the US for doing what they could not.
-
Maybe some are scared of them, but I also believe that there is silent cheering going on there.
Many others in the world are very jealous what the US has accomplished in so few years.
In spite of our problems, we have pulled off a pretty good lifestyle that other countries could not mirror over thousands of years.
They are just pissed off, and want to get back at the US for doing what they could not.
But then shouldn't our current POTUS attempting to make our economic growth rate 1-2% lower than it historically was, which will "catch them up" in less than 2-3 generations, be seen as a positive?
Now THAT needs a sarcastic disclaimer :)
-
Partially because they're as brutalized by the extremists as we are.
Our interpreter when I was in Diwaniyah said that's the biggest reason Iraqis tolerated the extremists... they were terrified of them.
Face it: brutalization and intimidation lie at the heart of Islam. There are those who act out and those too cowed to act out, who submit. This is "normal."
And it is not Islam that has been "hijacked," it is OUR culture and economy that are being subverted, exploited, eroded. How long are we going to let bullies make us dance like silly little schoolgirls?
-
Partially because they're as brutalized by the extremists as we are.
Our interpreter when I was in Diwaniyah said that's the biggest reason Iraqis tolerated the extremists... they were terrified of them.
bingo!
and there are parallels in other places like belfast or any us inner city where a gang rules
-
You don't develop a culture of bullies, of intimidation, by accident. That is something that informs your entire culture, that informs the way children are reared, the values they are given. And it lies at the heart of not only the culture but the religion itself. Top-down Authority.
-
My only real problem with Islam as a whole is that they haven't really made a concerted effort to stamp out the violent minority.
Partially because they're as brutalized by the extremists as we are.
Our interpreter when I was in Diwaniyah said that's the biggest reason Iraqis tolerated the extremists... they were terrified of them.
bingo!
and there are parallels in other places like belfast or any us inner city where a gang rules
That is why when there are free elections in the ME the moderates always run the table winning everything. Locking out the more extremist groups from having any authority.
-
bingo!
and there are parallels in other places like belfast or any us inner city where a gang rules
Gang members have parents, have mothers. They are TAUGHT to be gang members, to embrace the ethos of the gang. Because their parents are either gangsters themselves or aid and abet gangsterism by commission or omission.
-
My only real problem with Islam as a whole is that they haven't really made a concerted effort to stamp out the violent minority.
The violent minority has the better of the moderates theologically-speaking.
No doubt things have changed in the last 8 years though, and probably towards even more stringent/well armed. Hell, IMO and based on these recent events, our MSG's at the embassies should have some XM-214's in concealed mounts. Nothing says "Get the f--- off my damned lawn!" like 12,000 RPM of AP M995 5.56mm.
That's beautiful.
-
Nothing says "Get the f--- off my damned lawn!" like 12,000 RPM of AP M995 5.56mm.
Why is this not on a T-shirt?
-
. Hell, IMO and based on these recent events, our MSG's at the embassies should have some XM-214's in concealed mounts. Nothing says "Get the f--- off my damned lawn!" like 12,000 RPM of AP M995 5.56mm.
10,000rpm. (the 12k was proposed, for specific instances, and then abandoned) And only like 60-100 were ever made.
Why not use more m134's instead? :)
-
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-cuts-2-million-protection-foreign-missions-129-million-form-embassy-security_652355.html
Deliberately neuter Marines by prohibiting use of about $1000 worth of ammo to stop this *expletive deleted*it right-quick. Check.
Create international incident from the aftermath. Check.
Fear-monger over the cuts due to DOD by January, put it out in the press. Check.
Result?
Create a frenzy among the masses to stop the cuts to the DOD budget.
I was wondering what they were going to come up with, in order to stop the January DOD cuts that are automated to happen. I guess they kill a handful of Marines to do it.
It ain't a lack of money that made our embassies and consulates unsafe.
-
10,000rpm. (the 12k was proposed, for specific instances, and then abandoned) And only like 60-100 were ever made.
Why not use more m134's instead? :)
Because *expletive deleted*ck them, that's why. ;) And the current model was improved my GD to 12k rpm last I checked. The M134 and other goodies would work of course, but I just like the screw-you factor of something with a cyclic rate in the 5 figure range.
-
So I am reading that both the German and British embassies in Khartoum were set up by rioters and the German embassy was burned. It occurred to me that I have no idea as to if other countries routinely have military troops of that country in the embassy to provide security. Do the Germans station Bundeswehr troops and the British the Royal Marines at embassies? Is the US the only country that does this?
-
Because *expletive deleted* them, that's why. ;) And the current model was improved my GD to 12k rpm last I checked. The M134 and other goodies would work of course, but I just like the screw-you factor of something with a cyclic rate in the 5 figure range.
The GD mod was there, but I don't think they sold any :)
Of course, you know what is better than a 10,000rpm microgun? LOTS OF THEM :)
-
I'll take it even further.
Islam is no different than Scientology. The "prophet" just beat Hubbard to the punch by a millennium or so. And Islam is slightly less goofy.
If you really want to make some money start your own religion.
I would suggest, unless you're just going for the inflammatory effect, that any actual research will disabuse one of this idea.
Having worked with Muslims and having both lived and worked with Scientologists (and for extended periods in both cases), I can state without equivocation that they share pretty much nothing in common.
The good news, however, is that ignorance is something that can be cured.
Oh, and just a passing note: the ever trustworthy Press -- in whom we all place complete faith -- has had a hard-on for Scientology since the sixties, when the FBI raided the DC Founding Church in response to Hubbard's offer to assist NASA at no cost in their effort to overtake the Russians. Just remember: they're a cult and they're all weirdos and they eat babies and they use drugs and they hypnotize whole communities and they totally extorted the IRS into formally acknowledging them as a bona fide religion after persecuting them for forty years. 'Cuz the IRS is so easy to push around and they just loves them some cults.
We now return you to your regularly scheduled bash fest, already in progress.
-
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/africa/large-cloud-of-black-smoke-seen-coming-from-around-us-embassy-in-tunis/2012/09/14/3f6009d0-fe7c-11e1-98c6-ec0a0a93f8eb_story.html
http://magicvalley.com/news/world/middle-east/german-fm-sudan-embassy-in-flames/article_802671d6-84a7-525e-b91d-11f6d967ae03.html
Tunisia and Sudan too.
-
On the ground footage:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVdzAg1SnVE
-
My only real problem with Islam as a whole is that they haven't really made a concerted effort to stamp out the violent minority.
The problem being that its the violent minority in modern Islam that is the one with all the weapons, all of the money (at least since the Saudis started funding everything), a huge advantage in publicity and which actively likes stamping on others.
Indeed one of the incidents that preceded the Benghazi attack this week was their demolition - by driving a bulldozer through it - of a Sufi shrine in the city, and of course the record of incredibly murderous attacks on Sufi and Shia communities throughout the world (where they regularly take out mosques) should be well known to everyone by now.
-
Someone is making a lot of money selling flags.
-
The problem being that its the violent minority in modern Islam that is the one with all the weapons, all of the money (at least since the Saudis started funding everything), a huge advantage in publicity and which actively likes stamping on others.
Indeed one of the incidents that preceded the Benghazi attack this week was their demolition - by driving a bulldozer through it - of a Sufi shrine in the city, and of course the record of incredibly murderous attacks on Sufi and Shia communities throughout the world (where they regularly take out mosques) should be well known to everyone by now.
Yeah, I have heard they are certainly not above violence against fellow Muslims if people of other religions are not available.
I would also ask how much of that is tribal type violence versus religious. How much of it just uses religion as a pretext.
-
On cnn.com's home page, re the Mideast protests: "Should President Obama apologize?"
:facepalm:
-
On cnn.com's home page, re the Mideast protests: "Should President Obama apologize?"
:facepalm:
President Obama and his State Department should apologize... to the American people for the "lead from behind, let's support the same extremists and Al-Qaeda we spent almost a decade fighting in Iraq to take over Libya- regime change fiasco".
They are so coy about this because the KNOW the blowback is THEIR fault. They fraternized with the enemy. They assisted them in taking over the country.
Hillary's celebratory "We came, we saw, he died!" in reference to the footage showing the mob that killed Gadaffi seems to have come back to bite her in the behind, seeing from the pictures of her dead ambassador being dragged around in the exact same fashion Gaddafi was, by the same people the US Gov. and Allies supported just last year.
And they are currently trying to do a repeat of the Libya adventure in Syria, as we speak.
What a joke.
-
On cnn.com's home page, re the Mideast protests: "Should President Obama apologize?"
:facepalm:
Yes.
But not to them.
The apology should be addressed to us.
-
bingo!
and there are parallels in other places like belfast or any us inner city where a gang rules
That is why when there are free elections in the ME the moderates always run the table winning everything. Locking out the more extremist groups from having any authority.
Please tell me that's sarcasm... The last time the Palestinians voted, they ousted a murderous band of cutthroats, (Fatah) and replaced them with an even more murderous band of cutthroats (Hamas). As a young man, I used to believe that, given relief from an oppressive government, everyone would choose to be an Adam Smith sort of laissez faire capitalist/republican. What a fool I was.
-
Nope. People vote for whoever can promise them the most for nothing.
-
All governments end up being murderous bands of cutthroats, the question is: are you on the side that benefits from it or not? And more importantly, what do you do when they turn the throat cutting on you?
-
I wonder if we could starve (literally) the entire middle east -- excepting Israel, of course. Do we need their oil that bad?
-
Please tell me that's sarcasm... The last time the Palestinians voted, they ousted a murderous band of cutthroats, (Fatah) and replaced them with an even more murderous band of cutthroats (Hamas). As a young man, I used to believe that, given relief from an oppressive government, everyone would choose to be an Adam Smith sort of laissez faire capitalist/republican. What a fool I was.
No, they didn't.
Hamas got 35% of the popular vote and got ousted from half of Palestine.
-
Muslims and Scientologists don't have to eat those tasteless wafers.
Those tasteless wafers are Matzah.
;) :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
-
How's Matzah with hot sauce?
-
How's Matzah with hot sauce?
Funnily enough, that's part of the Passover meal.
-
FYI for all the Catholics out there.
Your Mass (aka a recreation of the Last Supper) is where Jesus had his friends over for Passover. So you are celebrating Passover every Sunday.
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
-
FYI for all the Catholics out there.
Your Mass (aka a recreation of the Last Supper) is where Jesus had his friends over for Passover. So you are celebrating Passover every Sunday.
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Yea, well, we'll get it right one of these days.......
-
FYI for all the Catholics out there.
Your Mass (aka a recreation of the Last Supper) is where Jesus had his friends over for Passover. So you are celebrating Passover every Sunday.
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Well...yeah.
For the past four or five years we've been hosting an annual Christ in the Passover presentation done by a group of Messianic Jews, and do a full on passover meal (minus a Jewish mother in law or aunt unfortunately, so not quite the full experience) every couple of years.
-
Related(?) unrest takes 2 Marines.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VI2XQ8-8Ks
LOL @ the prince harry comment.
-
And how are both different from catholicism?
Catholicism has already gone through their convert the whole world and kill/torture those who don't agree period.
-
Well...yeah.
For the past four or five years we've been hosting an annual Christ in the Passover presentation done by a group of Messianic Jews, and do a full on passover meal (minus a Jewish mother in law or aunt unfortunately, so not quite the full experience) every couple of years.
Messianic Jew is a tough row to hoe. So has Elijah ever wandered in to your Passover? (I vaguely remember a SNL skit where Jon Lovett was Elijah. Amusing but not very funny, OTOH I'm not Jewish. I wonder how many people got it at all?) The Empty Chair really represents more than just Elijah doesn't it? Like missing family members?
-
Messianic Jew is a tough row to hoe. So has Elijah ever wandered in to your Passover? (I vaguely remember a SNL skit where Jon Lovett was Elijah. Amusing but not very funny, OTOH I'm not Jewish. I wonder how many people got it at all?) The Empty Chair really represents more than just Elijah doesn't it? Like missing family members?
Far as I know it's just for Elijah, but a lot of things in the passover meal are based on tradition (hiding the Matzo, dad doing a ceremonial sweeping of a whopping 1 square inch of tile after mom cleans for a month...etc.) so maybe in certain circles it might mean more.
And yes, I suppose it can be a tough row to hoe. But then we're just a bunch of Lutherans.
-
I wonder if we could starve (literally) the entire middle east -- excepting Israel, of course. Do we need their oil that bad?
Yes and no. To survive, assuming $10-20/gal gas is survivable, no. To not crush our economy, yes.
-
Our "economy" may need to be brought back to its fighting weight--if we want to survive as a nation and a culture. I realize that will displease the constituency that confuses growth with OCD.
-
Yes and no. To survive, assuming $10-20/gal gas is survivable, no. To not crush our economy, yes.
Drill in ANWR, off both coasts, Keystone Pipeline, Canadian and Colorado Oilsands and we won't have $10-20 a gallon gas. Maybe $2-3 if we also build a couple refineries as well.
-
Drill in ANWR, off both coasts, Keystone Pipeline, Canadian and Colorado Oilsands and we won't have $10-20 a gallon gas. Maybe $2-3 if we also build a couple refineries as well.
Do all that and some saner people in the sandbox will line up all the extremists against a wall and then beg someone(China) to buy their oil. It's the only chip in front of them, probably why idiot wants the bomb, he's just another 3rd world crackpot if the world stops buying Iranian oil.
-
Catholicism has already gone through their convert the whole world and kill/torture those who don't agree period.
So has most of Islam.
-
So has most of Islam.
I'm not so sure of that; I think most are just not devout and I have no beef with them. Like people who say they are Christians because they live in America.
-
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsphotos-h.ak.fbcdn.net%2Fhphotos-ak-snc6%2F229277_435741853130450_1449081376_n.jpg&hash=5ad8f9ab8fcc275f5a6ef93e2810c33ba8976f66)
1,211,148,707 Muslims killed no ambassadors today.
-
1,211,148,707 Muslims killed no ambassadors today.
Yet...
-
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsphotos-h.ak.fbcdn.net%2Fhphotos-ak-snc6%2F229277_435741853130450_1449081376_n.jpg&hash=5ad8f9ab8fcc275f5a6ef93e2810c33ba8976f66)
1,211,148,707 Muslims killed no ambassadors today.
And what percentage of this 1.2 billion people is effectively muzzled, cowed, intimidated? What percentage would dare protest from the opposite point of view?
-
And what percentage of this 1.2 billion people is effectively muzzled, cowed, intimidated? What percentage would dare protest from the opposite point of view?
Good question. Another might be, how many particularly care about Islamic extremism?
-
And what percentage of this 1.2 billion people is effectively muzzled, cowed, intimidated? What percentage would dare protest from the opposite point of view?
And how many of those Muslims live in free, non-oppressive nations compared to ones that want to wage covert actions against the US?...
-
And how many of those Muslims live in free, non-oppressive nations compared to ones that want to wage covert actions against the US?...
I don't know about free and non-oppressive, but I think it's quite arguable that more Muslims live in nations that are at least nominal US allies than not.
-
I don't know about free and non-oppressive, but I think it's quite arguable that more Muslims live in nations that are at least nominal US allies than not.
That is true. I believe there are somewhere in the neighborhood of 1,211,148,707 Muslims in the world and we are not at war with most of them.
Edited by Captain Obvious
-
That is true. I believe there are somewhere in the neighborhood of 1 Billion Muslims in the world and we are not at war with most of them.
Agreed, but I wonder how quickly they would fall under the spell of their radical, American hating cleric leaders.
I fear that they are more prone to being sheep than weak Americans.
-
1,211,148,707 Muslims killed no ambassadors today.
Don't set your sites too high...
-
And how many of those Muslims live in free, non-oppressive nations compared to ones that want to wage covert actions against the US?...
How many of those oppressive crap holes do not receive US financial and military help to keep their dictatorships alive?
This amnesia is pretty tough to explain - the us funded and armed the dictator who for 30 years tortured Egyptians. Now we're outraged and dumbfounded that they don't like us being there?
Same for Libya. Helping ghaddafi arrest his enemies and making oil deals to keep him rich cant have left a great aftertaste.
These mobs arent angry for no reason.
-
How many of those oppressive crap holes do not receive US financial and military help to keep their dictatorships alive?
This amnesia is pretty tough to explain - the us funded and armed the dictator who for 30 years tortured Egyptians. Now we're outraged and dumbfounded that they don't like us being there?
Same for Libya. Helping ghaddafi arrest his enemies and making oil deals to keep him rich cant have left a great aftertaste.
These mobs arent angry for no reason.
Have a care De Selby, you're coming awfull close to sounding like a fictional teenaged girl much loved on this forum.
-
How many of those oppressive crap holes do not receive US financial and military help to keep their dictatorships alive?
This amnesia is pretty tough to explain - the us funded and armed the dictator who for 30 years tortured Egyptians. Now we're outraged and dumbfounded that they don't like us being there?
Same for Libya. Helping ghaddafi arrest his enemies and making oil deals to keep him rich cant have left a great aftertaste.
These mobs arent angry for no reason.
Ah. Got it. Ramsey Clarke reasoning. Blame our foreign policy, but only as far back as W.
-
Ramsey Clarke reasoning.
now THAT was a shot
-
Ah. Got it. Ramsey Clarke reasoning. Blame our foreign policy, but only as far back as W.
Have you read the post you responded to?
-
You mean the one I snipped and quoted? Yes. I thought I'd help him out a bit. Intervention in Kosovo by Billy Jeff - good. Intervention in Libya by BO - good. Intervention in Iraq, Afghanistan by Dubya - bad. Internment camps at Gitmo, opened by Dubya - unacceptable. Failure to close camps as promised by BO - acceptable.
The double standard gets to be very bothersome. I refuse to let it go unremarked any more.
-
Methinks some felt his comment fell flat.
-
You mean the one I snipped and quoted? Yes. I thought I'd help him out a bit. Intervention in Kosovo by Billy Jeff - good. Intervention in Libya by BO - good. Intervention in Iraq, Afghanistan by Dubya - bad. Internment camps at Gitmo, opened by Dubya - unacceptable. Failure to close camps as promised by BO - acceptable.
The double standard gets to be very bothersome. I refuse to let it go unremarked any more.
The one where he specifically referred to the Presidencies before GWB - the one where De Selby explicitly talked about how subsidies for Mubarak had been going on for 30 years?
-
I wonder, since Jimmy Carter ghost wrote several of Yassir Arafat's speeches, will BHO ghost write speeches for Lil' Squinty over in Iran after "serving" America?
-
You mean the one I snipped and quoted? Yes. I thought I'd help him out a bit. Intervention in Kosovo by Billy Jeff - good. Intervention in Libya by BO - good. Intervention in Iraq, Afghanistan by Dubya - bad. Internment camps at Gitmo, opened by Dubya - unacceptable. Failure to close camps as promised by BO - acceptable.
The double standard gets to be very bothersome. I refuse to let it go unremarked any more.
Uh, as micro pointed out, you realise I commented on the policies of every president since Carter there right?
Where have I given any indication on this board, ever, that the things you marked "acceptable" are actually acceptable in my view?
I think you have built yourself an obvious straw man there - my comment was about how Egyptians and Libyans might still be pissed off that several US presidents, over time, helped their dictators stay in power and even handed over dissidents to be tortured and killed.
You responded by listing totally unrelated foreign policies. How do those matter to Egyptian and Libyan reactions to US support for dictatorships?
-
There are reports that one of the others killed saw it coming . Messaged friends that one of the police supposedly protecting them had been seen taking pictures of the house. He seemed to havw coreectly seen it as scouting for attack.
-
There are reports that one of the others killed saw it coming . Messaged friends that one of the police supposedly protecting them had been seen taking pictures of the house. He seemed to havw coreectly seen it as scouting for attack.
Yep. He was an Eve Online player and msged it on the game forums before the attack
-
Um. I may have responded to an assertion that was not made.
I freely accept that we gave money and support to Mubarak as a price for keeping a lid on the Islamic fundies there. Propped up Libya? How? By bombing them in support of an insurgency?
Tunisia? Syria? Yemen? (well, maybe Yemen, if only a bit) How are we engaged in those cauldrons? My sentiment remains. We accept as inevitable or at least understandable, behavior from Islamics in the ME that we would decry by other religious zealots elsewhere. I reject the notion that we are somehow culpable for the brutal murder of 4 of our diplomatic corp.
-
Uh, as micro pointed out, you realise I commented on the policies of every president since Carter there right?
Where have I given any indication on this board, ever, that the things you marked "acceptable" are actually acceptable in my view?
I think you have built yourself an obvious straw man there - my comment was about how Egyptians and Libyans might still be pissed off that several US presidents, over time, helped their dictators stay in power and even handed over dissidents to be tortured and killed.
You responded by listing totally unrelated foreign policies. How do those matter to Egyptian and Libyan reactions to US support for dictatorships?
While I as an American despise despots and tyrants and fully understanding that US government policy has supported despots and tyrants, the record pretty much shows that when the despot or tyrant is thrown out, usually with the help of the US government, the "rebels", especially in Muslim countries, make life much worse for the ordinary person who lives in those countries to say nothing of the butchery that gets exported by them. One evil dictator for an even more evil dictator.
The irony also seems to be that the rather low number of "radical muslims" used earlier in this thread (Or perhaps in another by Micro??) compared to the total population comes back to bite you apologists for radical Islamists as this low number you use, if accurate, creates a disproportionate amount of violence off in every direction, especially against women and children and having a propensity of biting the hand that feeds them. Their 4th century, tribalist, misoginystic religion adheres to the art of lying to everyone who does not follow their sect as a tenent of their faith.
-
from grm one of the folks there has a bud who has been there
The Embassy is located in the nation's capitol city. It contains the Ambassador.
A Consulate is a section responsible for issusing tourist and immigration visas for entry to the United States, and assisting American citizens living and traveling in that country. It is headed by a Consul General.
Generally there will be a Consulate in each major city within the country, each with it's own Consul General. In the capitol city, the Consulate will be a section within the Embassy. All Consulates within the country are subordinate to the Embassy, and the Ambassador. There is only one Ambassador, but there is a Consul General for every Consulate.
MSGs are responsible for safeguarding Classified and Sensitive Information. Since Consulates normally do not contain any of this, being focused on issuing visas and other simple administrative work, they often do not have any Marines assigned to them. Some do, most do not.
Personal protection for the Ambassador is not a direct responsibility for MSGs. Ambassadors have their own bodyguards for whom that is the sole job. MSGs will protect the Ambassador, and any US Government personnel, if necessary and they are able, but their focus is preventing compromise of national security.
Hope that helped to clarify.
Update: Got some word from a Foreign Service friend of mine. Everything is still very confused and foggy, but he was able to give me a little better context.
1) The consulate in Libya was pretty ghetto. It was a converted one-floor motel building. The only reason the consulate was located there was because that was one of the only areas the rebels had under their control back when we first established relations with them. The diplomats got on the ground, looked around, and the motel was the first suitable building they could find to set up shop.
Bottom line though is that it was NOT very defensible. Apart from a few modifications, it was still largely a civilian structure. So use your imagination to infer what that implies.
Once the old regime was toppled, and the new embassy was established in the capitol of Tripoli, it was expected that either the motel-consulate would be closed altogether, or a new building would be acquired or built, but no action had been taken yet.
2) The attack on the Beghazi consulate was not a protest-gone-wrong. It likely had nothing to do with this supposed offensive movie either. It was a direct, planned, coordinated assault. It was a firefight that lasted for hours and hours. The attackers had heavy weapons, including heavy machineguns, RPGs, bombs, and possibly mortars. People don't bring that stuff incidentally to a normal protest.
While the details are still unclear, what likely happened was that there WAS a peaceful protest by some salifists going on outside in connection with the video, but a number of attackers used the protest as cover to launch their assault. Which implies some element of manipulation by the attackers, stirring up the protest in the first place (translating the movie into arabic?).
3) The normal Libyans are horrified. Chris Stevens was well liked, well respected, and the American presence relatively popular. Literally just a couple months ago, Ambassador Stevens announced that we would begin issuing US visas to Libyans again. The Libyans are genuinely grateful for the non-intrusive support for their revolution. When the attack commenced, the local Libyan security guards who were protecting the Consulate fought hard to defend it. Many (at least 20, possibly all of them) died at their posts, defending it (remember too how ghetto the defenses were). When Ambassador Steven's vehicle was hit by an RPG, attempting to evacuate from the scene, it was normal Libyans who pulled him out, and who took him and the other casualties to other American workers located nearby, and accompanied him to the hospital. It is possible that the angry civilian presence at the scene drove the attackers off, preventing them from following up on their attack.
4) Chris Stevens is a *moderated for GRM* hero. He was present as part of a planned visit to cut the ribbon for the grand opening of a new American Center building, so the fact that he would be there at that time was publically known. When the attack commenced, the personnel inside the Consulate went to their assigned places, but then the building was set on fire by the attackers. Ambassador Stevens apparently went into the burning building to rescue his people, and ensure the all got out to safety. It is likely that his death was contributed to by smoke inhalation as a result.
Take all of the above with a grain of salt. It's fourth-hand info.
But it does paint a very interesting picture.
p.s. Confirmed there are no MSGs in EITHER Benghazi, or Tripoli. Though now the diplomats in Tripoli are BEGGING for them to be sent some. Can't speak regarding FAST team elements.
-
^^^This is all quite interesting. I will be fascinated to see if the passage of time proves it accurate.
-
I concur with leaving the screaming beards of the Middle East (and other places) to wallow in their superstitions and willful ignorance.
"We'll leave you alone if you leave us alone. Continue to make pests of yourselves against the rest of world and there will be no other option but to expunge the infestation that is you from the planet."
But ... but ... but ... But that would be waging war on Islam, which is what the screaming beards are already accusing us of doing.
So, looking at this logically, if we are already being castigated and attacked for doing something, one might conjecture that we have nothing to lose by actually doing the aforementioned something. Further, one might remark on the irony of a group that is actively engaged in attacking western (and eastern) Christians at every opportunity complaining that Christians are attacking them.
We need to recruit a WHOLE bunch more combat engineers. There needs to be a lot of wall built -- first along the entire length of the southern border of the U.S., and then another one completely around a bunch of countries in the mid-east and northern Africa. Send all the illegal Latinos back to Mexico, and send all the Muslims back where they came from, Sharia law and "honor killings" with them. Weld the gates shut and let the Sunnis and Shiites duke it out without our interference.
We also need strict immigration quotas. Australia has had quotas for decades. If they don't need your profession, you can't emigrate there. The U.S. does NOT need any more Pakistani hotel managers, Quik-Mart clerks, or liquor store owners. We also don't need any more Mexican McDonalds counter and kitchen workers. If we don't need them, they are just taking work away from Americans who need work.
-
The world needed to know Muslims "would not be silent in the face of this insult", Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah said
So says hezbollah. What exactly should we do in the face of the insult of our sovreign territory being overrun and our people killed? That's a wee bit worse than youtube.
-
So says hezbollah. What exactly should we do in the face of the insult of our sovreign territory being overrun and our people killed? That's a wee bit worse than youtube.
"Sensitivity to the religious feelings of others" apparently now transcends murder and pedantic issues of sovereignty. I.e., rules of civility/human decency only apply to us corrupt, decadent westerners. Get with the program...
-
So let me get this straight - no one disputes that the US helped Mubarak and Ghaddaffi to torture their opponents, but we still presume that the cartoons and videos are the only drivers of this anger???
Wow.
It's tremendous irony that folks here have called for nuking their cities and wiping out millions of people over killings of US personnel, but cannot seem to imagine that Arabs might feel the same way over US assistance in torture and killing over there.
-
So let me get this straight - no one disputes that the US helped Mubarak and Ghaddaffi to torture their opponents, but we still presume that the cartoons and videos are the only drivers of this anger???
Well, we presume that if they really disliked Mubarak & Kadaffy Duck, they would have rioted against, uh, Mubarak & Kadaffy instead of some cartoons.
We are not responsible for their misplaced priorities.
Middle eastern despots are not getting help from us in the torture department. They got that one down pretty well.
-
EDIT. Oooooops
-
Well, we presume that if they really disliked Mubarak & Kadaffy Duck, they would have rioted against, uh, Mubarak & Kadaffy instead of some cartoons.
You might remember these two were overthrown. Sadly only one suffered the proper punishment he deserved.
-
So let me get this straight - no one disputes that the US helped Mubarak and Ghaddaffi to torture their opponents, but we still presume that the cartoons and videos are the only drivers of this anger???
Wow.
It's tremendous irony that folks here have called for nuking their cities and wiping out millions of people over killings of US personnel, but cannot seem to imagine that Arabs might feel the same way over US assistance in torture and killing over there.
On the other hand, I'm somewhat underwhelmed by the results of the elections and response to new "found" freedoms the folks in the ME are beginning to enjoy.
At this point I would like to see what the case is for the amount of aid Egypt receives, same for the Palestinians and the rest of the region.
I say lets disengage our military commitments and faze out all foreign aid to the region. We can maintain our close relations with Israel but I'm not sure they "need" foreign aid.
At the same time I say we start to develop and exploit our untapped oil resources here in this hemisphere.
-
Islam got along fine without oil for 1400 years.
There is no need for oil in Islam.
***
Bush could have initiated a Manhattan Project for energy independence when he took over in '00. We could have had, by now, a hundred nuclear reactors up and operating. That is just one of several massive fails on his watch, two others being the lack of spending controls and an open border.
-
you do know how long it takes to get a nuke up and running? :facepalm:
-
Bush could have initiated a Manhattan Project for energy independence when he took over in '00. We could have had, by now, a hundred nuclear reactors up and operating. That is just one of several massive fails on his watch, two others being the lack of spending controls and an open border.
The environmentalists won't allow it. If they did, we'd have reactors by now, and we'd have drilling in ANWAR, as well as off the CA and FL coasts.
-
you do know how long it takes to get a nuke up and running? :facepalm:
Yes. Coincidentally, the process takes even longer if you never start.
-
you do know how long it takes to get a nuke up and running? :facepalm:
More than six months. And therefore, since we will see no benefit from this during MY presidency, we shouldn't bother. Same with drilling. OMG, we won't seen any usable product to market for TEN YEARS! Therefore, we shouldn't ever start.
BTW, does anyone here remember what the original charter of the Department of Energy was?
-
The environmentalists won't allow it. If they did, we'd have reactors by now, and we'd have drilling in ANWAR, as well as off the CA and FL coasts.
\bingo!!
-
The environmentalists won't allow it. If they did, we'd have reactors by now, and we'd have drilling in ANWAR, as well as off the CA and FL coasts.
OTOH, maybe we're buying oil from the ME just to use all theirs up before we tap our own reserves. >:D
-
you do know how long it takes to get a nuke up and running? :facepalm:
For the new Gen-3+ plants?
~36 months from groundbreaking.
-
So let me get this straight - no one disputes that the US helped Mubarak and Ghaddaffi to torture their opponents, but we still presume that the cartoons and videos are the only drivers of this anger???
I do, at least as far as Libya is concerned. Bombed 'em a few times, shot down a few of their planes, dealt harshly with their "navy" on occasion. How does that constitute propping the Colonel up? If buying oil from some despot counts, then we are "propping up" Chavez and others as well.
-
you do know how long it takes to get a nuke up and running? :facepalm:
I do, yes, and 12 years is enough.
It is of course true that the environmentalists would not permit it. I guess they rule America then? If they do, then what the hell are we talking about any of this for?
-
For the new Gen-3+ plants?
~36 months from groundbreaking.
yea? how many of those have gone up?
-
http://www.neis.org/literature/Brochures/npfacts.htm
-
A number of new permits were issued for new Nuke plants and expansion of existing plants during the Bush years. I don't know if any of them has broke ground yet or what has happened to the permits. South Texas Nuke was going to expand. Last I heard, they hadn't broke ground. I'll have to ask my neighbor next time I get a chance.
I'll bet they are either still tied up in design approvals or facing legal challenges. Hopefully, the permits weren't revoked.
-
they wanna expand near me. it'll be 20 years from start to online assuming they ever make it. and thats to add a unit at existing site
-
Just so I understand. They are mad at us because we sent their nationals that we picked up in Afghanistan and/or Iraq, back to their home country rather than sticking them in Gitmo, where they would be mad at us for holding their nationals. Got it. ;/
(And BTW Daffy Quaduck didn't start to play nice until after we showed that we could invade your country, kick your ass, capture you and your henchmen, and turn you over to your own folks who hang your ass.) Then he "found religion", turned over his nuclear program to the UN, and kicked out a bunch of terrorists and closed their camps.
-
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jGdNmRPzIMG9iOlYDDbCKIFegSiA?docId=bb6af2e52353453297b874b27fdd96db
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/17/world/middleeast/video-appears-to-show-libyans-retrieving-envoys-body.html
So any reports that the Libyans paraded the lifeless body of Ambassador Stevens through the streets of Benghazi are apparently incorrect. Instead, Libyan citizens took him to the local hospital where staff worked for 90 minutes to resuscitate him.
-
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jGdNmRPzIMG9iOlYDDbCKIFegSiA?docId=bb6af2e52353453297b874b27fdd96db
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/17/world/middleeast/video-appears-to-show-libyans-retrieving-envoys-body.html
So any reports that the Libyans paraded the lifeless body of Ambassador Stevens through the streets of Benghazi are apparently incorrect. Instead, Libyan citizens took him to the local hospital where staff worked for 90 minutes to resuscitate him.
I don't know or care which of two potential AgitProp campaigns is accurate:
1. The IslamoNaziFascists broom-raped the Ambassador and paraded his sodomized corpse through the streets (OhTehNoez, rabblerabblerabble let's go to war with brown people!), or
2. The kind, loving Libyan people who lurvs the United States (yay, hegemony! it works and makes brown people love us!) tried to rescue the Ambassador from a small group of radicals.
Doesn't matter to me.
Whichever one is truth and whichever one is a lie, the fact remains that it's in the Neocon/Sharia/Authoritarian/Wanna-Fight people's best interests to keep America in Libya.
And it's in REAL America's best interests to pull out of the entire Middle East and tell 'em to go sodomize camels and sheep rather than us (either figuratively through taking foreign aid and then sponsoring terrorism, or literally by sodomizing our Ambassadors).
-
Wouldn't have pegged anyone here as a rabid anti-nuke - hope I'm misreading your string of posts on the subject, CD.
yea? how many of those have gone up?
None, IIRC, in large part because the government won't get behind and push as a part of a broad, diverse energy-production policy. If you claim to want cheap, safe, clean power, you NEED nuclear as a major (probably THE major) component of that platform, period-paragraph-end-of-statement. And yes, it feels odd saying that, with my political leanings - but since .gov won't get out of the freakin' way, it ought to do something useful, like help to make sure that national baseload energy requirements can be met by the safest, cheapest form of energy production currently available (take a look at the ACTUAL stats, CD - nuclear, over it's 60+year history, has killed fewer people than *HYDRO* has in that time period, and fewer than coal kills in in a SINGLE YEAR). Govt is not the only problem, certainly - but it's a big part, and it shouldn't be. I'd really like it if we could avoid putting not only noxious carbon products into the air to feed our energy needs, but more radioactive substances into the air than nuclear does as well (and yeah, look that one up too, while you're at it. You might be surprised by what you find). Yeah, I'd rather have fusion plants than fission - but until we GET fusion, we NEED fission.
Yeah, we should be investigating all methods of efficient and effective energy production. Wind might work in some areas, where wind speed is relatively constant - if the Kennedys and others who love their pristine ocean views would permit it, of course. Otherwise, you lose too much energy production to a comparatively-small drop in wind speed. Solar is getting better, but I don't think it's there quite yet as a large-scale power producer (and nobody's talking about putting collecters in space where the atmosphere won't absorb huge amounts of the energy being sent our way by Sol - that whole "death ray from space" part seems to put them off, for some reason... People don't seem to want to carpet entire states in solar panels, either). Hydro's just about maxed out, as I understand it. What's left?
It would help also if the Gen 3+ designs could actually be approved and certified for US use. At this time, it looks as though the AP1000 has certification, as of last December, and Vogtle is looking to put one or more in (they're talking a little less than 5 years to grid connection, as of June, apparently). No other advanced reactor design has apparently been certified by the NRC, though I see that a couple should finish certification sometime next year or in 2014. It takes so very long to get approval to even START construction; add to that the enormous resources which must be in place long before construction starts for end-of-life, and the fact that fedgov has been in contractual default for well over a DECADE on spent-fuel storage, forcing power companies to pick up the slack for them and store it on-site (which is something ELSE the anti-nuke types ignorantly whine about!) at their own cost above and beyond what was already contracted with fedgov for offsite storage, and perhaps you begin to see some of the barriers which have been placed in the way of the nuclear industry.
http://www.neis.org/literature/Brochures/npfacts.htm
Seriously? THOSE are what you're putting forward as "facts"? Ummm, no.
Let's take a look at one in particular which jumped out at me: "Using calculations from 3 Western European governments, the Worldwatch Institute has calculated that the world may experience three more Chernobyl-sized nuclear power accidents before the year 2000."
Where did those happen, again?
The organization attempts to use nuclear power's "low" percentage of US electrical load as a reason why they should be done away with completely - when they and groups like them are large parts of the REASON for that! Talk about disingenuous! I note that France, in particular, seems to be doing okay with ~80% of their energy portfolio coming from nuclear. Most of the so-called "facts" in the linked brochure are nothing of the sort - at best, they are mistaken; most of them seem to be nothing more than their own prejudices causing them to spew outright lies about an industry they hate. Not claiming that nuclear power is purer than the driven snow, by any means - like any other business, there are those who are corrupt and seek to cut corners to save (or skim) money. But if you're going to oppose something, you ought to do so on the FACTS.
they wanna expand near me. it'll be 20 years from start to online assuming they ever make it. and thats to add a unit at existing site
Yeah, they started work on putting a third plant at North Anna well before I left there, in '06. Originally, they were looking at a CANDU design; I've heard they changed their minds about that, but they still are not able to put a Gen-3+ plant there.
Fun fact for you, CD - Lake Anna, built by the Army Corps of Engineers specifically FOR Virginia Power (now Dominion), was originally spec'd for *FOUR* plants the size of the two currently on site. Uprating of the existing plants over the past 30 years has resulted in the equivalent of maybe half an extra plant, so that lake is supplying cooling for ~2.5 of the original 4 plants it was made for. A third of roughly the same rating, or even a fair bit more, will STILL put the lake at less than originally-designed heat load.
And that 20 year clock you mentioned (probably closer to 15) started upwards of 10 years ago, CD, when Dominion started seriously working on site permitting to get that third plant built.
Recommend if you want to continue to post about the imagined evils of nuclear power, you maybe should start another thread for it?
-
oh i am pro nuke big time. i am also pro reality and you got a better chance getting a group buy of obama memorabilia going here than getting a nuke steaming in 3 years.
the link was to give examples of how the obstructionists stop em cold. wanna take bets on when dominion gets #3 online at lake anna?
-
Interesting analysis:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSXnsL5JhLE
-
And it's in REAL America's best interests to pull out of the entire Middle East and tell 'em to go sodomize camels and sheep rather than us (either figuratively through taking foreign aid and then sponsoring terrorism, or literally by sodomizing our Ambassadors).
There's a 'real' America and a 'fake' America?
-
There's a 'real' America and a 'fake' America?
Based upon founding principles, yes more or less.
The majority of folks voting don't really even have a passing understanding of the concepts of liberty, natural rights or republican form of government.
The fake America is almost the majority.
If "real" means having nationalistic pride easily manipulated by sophists or strong feelings easily manipulated by sophists, yes we are all one big dysfunctional nation.
Heck, I voted for GWB twice! What was I thinking?
-
There's a 'real' America and a 'fake' America?
OK, I yield. Trying to defend it in my head right now and I can't come up with anything good.
Something along the lines of:
Real America - People that aren't terribly affected by much of anything in the Middle East.
Fake America - People that play games with numbers or policies in one of two big cities off the Atlantic coast, and pretend they have control over the rest of the world.
It still doesn't change my point though.
AgitProp agenda #1 comes out, and the crowd doesn't rabblerabblerabble enough for a new war. So, AgitProp agenda #2 comes out, to repeal the negative effects that AgitProp agenda #1 created if we didn't respond with dramatic force. After all, a Nation cannot stand around and just let an Ambassador be broom-raped and not retaliate at all. So, #2 expunges that idea from the public arena.
And the authors of both agendas live in two cities off the Atlantic coast.
-
There's a 'real' America and a 'fake' America?
I certainly don't recognize the America that Barack's campaign commercials talk about...
-
I don't know about free and non-oppressive, but I think it's quite arguable that more Muslims live in nations that are at least nominal US allies than not.
While that may technically be correct, I harbor no illusions that "nominal allies" are in any way to be confused with "allies."