bmags

We aided a revolt with air power, which the rebels were not capable of. But at what point would you say that Libya was at the point it could have lost control of their nuclear arsenal? Especially if in tripoli? It was at least 4-5 months after the airstrikes began.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 5, 2012 -> 11:09 PM) Iraq openly cooperated with inspections prior to the invasion and nothing was found. Iraq was invaded for a variety of transparently-dumb-at-the-time reasons. If they really had nuclear weapons and the world knew, they probably wouldn't have been invaded. Libya was "invaded" once a massive internal revolution was well-underway with several cities taken by rebel forces. If they had nuclear weapons and threatened e.g. Italy with retaliation if NATO got involved, yeah, that would definitely have an impact on the decision to support the rebels. If they had nuclear weapons but it was becoming apparent that they were losing control of them, that introduces an entirely different dynamic. Indeed, it seems that we are willing to invade a country we don't like when the opportunity presents itself. Everything I've read has stated that the lesson iran has taken from this is that the mistakes made by both these countries is not that gave up their program or kept it, but rather that they just weren't successful in finishing it.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 5, 2012 -> 11:05 PM) What nearby states or allies did Libya have the ability to actually threaten? Do you have a map?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 5, 2012 -> 09:54 PM) Nuclear-weapons-as-invasion-deterrence isn't where I'm taking exception, btw. It's that this lesson is learned from Libya instead of, say, Iraq. Saddam Hussein refused to show his nuclear progress and was invaded. Ghadaffi cooperated, and as soon as he was weak, he was invaded. What benefit do you see in Iran cooperating? I don't understand that you don't believe these things can act concurrently. Iraq was an example of what happens when you don't cooperate, while libya when you do. Well, it turns out it doesn't matter.

Are you being purposely obtuse? the development of nuclear weapons has been the strongest deterrent for attacks from other nations of the past century. If Libya had indeed continued to develop them in the 00s they would have been met with sanctions following the uprising but they most certainly would not have seen an airstrike against. Qaddafi was mad, and the airstrike was carried out by a number of countries. Libya didn't need to hit the US navy, or sell it to terrorists to smuggle into the united states or whatever other absolutely bizarre, albeit creative, scenarios you created, they could have merely threatened to use nuclear weapons against nearby states or allies. In what cost/benefit analysis do you see NATO going thru with an airstrike if it carried the potential of a nuclear attack. Would than not obliterate the argument that it was to protect human life. The nuclear weapon cannot be seen if not without the major deterrent effects it provides, in addition to respect.

Hey balta do me a favor and tell me how many countries with nuclear weapons we've conducted a multilateral attack on in the last century? How many countries without nuclear weapons have we attacked?

bestbuy is an awful experience nowadays.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 5, 2012 -> 07:10 PM) "Using nuclear weapons on your own civilian opposition" doesn't seem like a practical strategy for holding on to a country. Deploying nuclear weapons against the Eastern part of his country might have prolongued his rule slightly, but it also would have destroyed it, since there's a whole lot of oil and economic resources in that area...and "Quadaffi nuked my parents" is probably a pretty good reason for you to lay down your arms if you're in the army. Nuclear weaponry would prevent a large, massed, Iraq-style invasion, but at some point we're all going to have to agree that would be completely nuts. I certainly didn't imply that he would deploy nukes on his own people.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 5, 2012 -> 03:37 PM) Really? He was taken down internally. I don't see how a nuclear program would prevent an internal populist uprising. It would prevent that whole NATO airstrike plus CIA training campaign thing you seem to be forgetting about.

If you want to know one of the major consequences of Libya, see: Iran. They obviously now see Gaddaffi's move to scale back his nuclear ambitions in exchange for better favor among western leaders as THE move that lead to his downfall.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 5, 2012 -> 03:26 PM) Maybe Korver has just hit the wall and lost his touch? his shots are very flat right now, usually means something with his legs.

Agreed about Korver. He is playing so terribly right now and not hitting his 3s, so at this point, i'd rather have someone who can play D and help run the offense.

I obviously meant irremovable.

Great. Another player that if sucks will be untradeable.

ray allen? that s*** cray

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Jan 4, 2012 -> 10:04 PM) Does Iran shut down the Strait of Hormuz now? they don't have the ability to.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 4, 2012 -> 06:36 PM) My guess is that since the same regime is staying there, they'll stick with VJax one more year. I don't really want Welker. I want Bowe...I just can't see the Chiefs letting him get away. Same here, I find a Bowe/Bennett pairing to be pretty good.

I shoot about 25% while providing the same great defense.

only 3 years in. Congrats.

He is so much worse than huckabee.

I don't think it's being blown out of proportion, it is absolutely incredible that that man could come even close to winning any primary/caucus is an absolute embarrassment for our democracy.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jan 4, 2012 -> 02:52 PM) Martz didn't even let Cutler really audible. The OC should be making his game-plan adapt to his franchise QB, not the other way around. Is that why he put the plays in so late?

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jan 4, 2012 -> 09:00 AM) So, Mizzou beat Oklahoma by 38. Damn. And Kadeem Green transfers. I put that as my status and one of my friends commented "Leaving 7 scholarships" Now, he was on the team with Shannon Scott (OSU) and a bunch of other D1 kids last year in HS. He wants to try out for the Mizzou team next year (I actually think if he fixes his 3, he can make it). So I said "That leaves one available..." "Hopefully for a 5-star recruit" And it went over his head. With the way we were stacking up players you knew somebody was going to have to go. We were on pace to have a full roster next year which I don't think we've had the past decade.

I did mean coaching personnel.

What's the definition of Holmgrening?