• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  

PissingIntoTheWind

Members
  • Content count

    88
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About PissingIntoTheWind

  • Rank
    Anarchist

Profile Information

  • Location
    Midwest
  • Interests
    That's me in the picture above, doing what I do best.
  1. All things Libya

    When the leader is a madman and/or the regime has attacked Americans, the policy should be open season. Three down or almost down. The big question now becomes what do we do with Iran and Pakistan? Sitting back and watching Iran, and pouring money into Pakistan will likely provide diminishing results.
  2. All things Libya

    Eghemmm.... I have it on good authority that Dory Dude has a direct line to Baghdad Bob. That Bob says the darndest things in time of war, doesn't he?
  3. All things Libya

    I'm relishing the moment that's likely approaching when Obama and Mrs. Clinton must explain the goal of regime change without actually saying those words. Also relishing the list of war-related items that Obama backtracked on from the 2007-8 campaign trail leading up to the 2012 election. Some lessons from Slick Willy himself are in order.
  4. All things Libya

    The Arab League speaks for the Arab street? Seems to me most their streets are filling with people who are seeking leadership change. Great comment. Outstanding illustration of reality.
  5. All things Libya

    Anyone else notice how this is going down? The French and the British are supposedly taking the lead. However, it turns out that only the US has the systems to run the operation and carry out most of the missions. The Brits have flown 4 sorties and the French - about a dozen (this may have changed in the last few hours). I'll be interested to see how our allies lead the operation... and will follow No Drama Obama's explanation with great interest. Very curious how our Nobel Laureate Peacenik-in-Chief talks his way out of this. How do you Obama fanboys feel about the duplicity and contradictions our Prez just walked into?
  6. All things Libya

    Interventionist foreign policy is definitely a slippery slope, and unfortunately, there is always a price to pay for messing in the affairs of other countries. One of the consequences is blowback from our well-intentioned deeds. Witness my discussion above about our direct role in the creation of Al Qaeda and the Taliban, and what often happens when we support "freedom fighters". All things considered, I think it's better to take action when necessary. How "necessary" is defined is certainly a question which demands a vigorous debate. I see your point of view and will be scratching my head today over the issues.... Thanks for the healthy discussion.
  7. All things Libya

    You make some excellent points, and I respect your point of view. It is extremely interesting that our Nobel Peace Prize-winning president did indeed order our armed forces into action without a mandate from Congress, as prescribed by our constitution. From what I read, he consulted with the leaders of Congress, and that's about it. Obama did have a UN Security Council resolution though. Just by itself, this is a remarkable moment in US history. It's astounding that this president, who taught constitutional law and whose ascent to power was built on the unpopularity of GW Bush and the Iraq war, sent our forces into harm's way based on a UN resolution. Regardless, I believe it was the right thing to do. You may have gathered that I'm in favor of an interventionist foreign policy. It's in our vital interests to see the procession of the last century's despots handing power over to their sons STOP NOW. Saddam Hussein -> Uday Hussein - check Hosni Mubarak -> Gamal Mubarak - check Maomar Qaddafi -> Saif Qaddafi - in progress Kim Jong Il -> Kim Jong Un - hopefully the next succession to be spoiled Haffez Assad -> Bashir Assad - too bad the old man didn't hang around longer. Too late here but I'd say he is TOAST. Whatever your politics Tom Ray, you can't deny the tide of history. Despots handing power off to their sons is one more trend headed for the trash heap of history. Tom Ray - would you agree that the world is better off by showing tyrannical leaders the exit sooner rather than later?
  8. All things Libya

    Too bad the goddamn rebels arrested and deported the SAS and MI6 gents who dropped in for just that purpose. Talk about a boner move. I would imagine that with pro-Qaddafi tanks and snipers a few blocks from their HQ, the welcome mat is now brightly lit.
  9. All things Libya

    We should listen to JBSF on this one, as someone who has risked his life for this cause. From my side, I believe we MUST care because the people of the Middle East will create problems which we cannot ignore, unless there is a dramatic and rapid break from their recent past. I see what you mean about the new boss being the same as the old boss, but at least in Iraq, so far that is absolutely not true. You could also take a look at the history of the 20th century. There are dozens of new bosses who are decidedly better than the old bosses, and many parts of the world are much better off thanks to this fact.
  10. All things Libya

    My hunch is that the French see a golden opportunity to prevail in a foreign conflict in the leading role. I also see strong signs of forward-thinking about the absolute necessity of prosperity and freedom of expression spreading throughout the Middle East. Call it a high chance of a brilliant military success, a chance to leap to prominence on the world stage, and put another stake into the heart of the age of Middle-Eastern despots. How delicious is the irony of all the parallels to what Bush and Blair did in Iraq? Anyway, Vive la France! Man, to be a fly on the wall in Bashir Assad's compound...
  11. All things Libya

    Thanks for the thoughtful comments. What I had in mind was not AQ, but specifically "the next iteration" of enemies in the Mideast and Central Asia. My hunch is that AQ as a brand will continue to fade, and new, unexpected threats will emerge. I may be fatalistic but it seems that intervention on the side of "freedom fighters" too often blows back in our face years down the road. It's impossible to see, just as the transformation of the mujahedeen into AQ and the Taliban was hard if not impossible to predict back when we poured all that money, training and weapons into their cause against the Soviets. By the same token, a case could be made that we backed the wrong side in Vietnam beginning in the 50's. From what I've read recently, Ho Chi Minh was far from committed to Communism in the years after WWII, and was surprised and dismayed that the US didn't support his fight for liberation from French colonialism. The conflict in Indochina bears only passing resemblance to today's problems in the Middle East and Central Asia, but I would argue that it's very hard to predict how rapidly transforming allies in unstable parts of the world will evolve. The optimist in me believes that the information age and rising levels of education in the Mideast and some parts of Central Asia gives hope to the chance of emergence of peaceful neighbors, but the amateur political historian in me casts a wary eye on the new breed of Middle Eastern rebels. The same fruits of the modern age which provide hope can also serve to deliver the unexpected at speeds we have not previously witnessed. Where enemies have previously emerged gradually over time, there is a strong chance that new and powerful enemies may rise up rapidly and with vengeance towards the US. Thank god our allies are more involved in this conflict. It's your time to shine, Europe. There's two questions I have at the top of my mind as I observe what might be called springtime in the Middle East. Would this be happening at all, and if so, how would it be different, if GW Bush and Tony Blair had not taken the initiative to carve out a slice of democracy in Iraq? If peaceful neighbors emerge from the current mess, I believe the invasion of Iraq will be viewed in the future as the critical first domino to be toppled. If it all goes to hell though, perhaps we'll see another manifestation of blowback in the face of good intentions. Anyway, from an armchair observer to an American aviator JBSF, I'm grateful for what you and the rest of the coalition men and women in uniform did in Iraq. As unpopular as that war has been, I'm convinced that seizing the initiative by toppling Saddam was a brilliant move, and deserves enormous credit for what's happening now throughout the region. I'm both surprised and not surprised at all that I see ZERO mention of this in the news and commentary on current events. I know there must be like-minded people out there but so far don't hear their voices. In time, I think we will. The second question I'm pondering with no answer in sight is what about Pakistan? Among all of the festering sores spread across the Mideast and Central Asia, Pakistan appears to be the one without even a hint of a solution. My hope is that the relative prosperity and power of India will spill over into Pakistan. How long must we wait and at what cost to the world?
  12. All things Libya

    I figure it all boils down to what resources the rebels have at their disposal. If they don't have the weapons and the money to take the fight back to Tripoli, then the next steps are already clear: arm and fund the rebels. I just wonder about the blowback we seem to always face after putting guns and money into the hands of Middle-Eastern / Central Asian "freedom fighters." I still shake my head over the billions we spent on the mujahedeen, recognizing that 20+ years later these people are among our worst enemies. What if the next iteration of Al Qaeda / Taliban have control of production and reserves of oil, AND they pulled themselves up using Western money and free weapons??? It seems that each military intervention exacts a terrible cost years later... At least this time, our friends in NATO are stepping up to the plate.
  13. All things Libya

    I guess that all changed with the introduction of 110 cruise missiles. Watching with interest to see how significantly this degrades Qaddafi's air defense. Some items of particular note: 1. The Germans - the most war-mongering nation of the last 100 years, are the only cock-blockers opposed to military action in the EU. 2. The French military are taking the lead role... very interested to see how they do. I'm always offended by observers who criticize the courage of the French and their substantial military capabilities. 3. On the other hand, I understand that the start of military action was delayed BY LUNCH MEETINGS in Paris, allowing Qaddafi's forces to enter Benghazi. I appreciate the need to consult with all the participants and the imperative of having Arabs represented in the meetings, but talk about brinksmanship! 4. The Italians have the most to lose out of the foreign powers. Billions invested and more dependent on Libyan petroleum products than any other. Will be very curious to see how their military and their politicians behave as this unfolds.