Balta1701

QUOTE(SoxAce @ Aug 7, 2006 -> 12:58 PM) So... who is everyone going for tonight, Twins? Tigers? Doesn't matter? If we in, Twins. If we lose, Tigers.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Aug 7, 2006 -> 01:00 PM) Funny, but you miss the point (well, you probably didn't but the conversation moved away from it, imagine that). The military can win any war it wants to, but 50% of Americans wouldn't stand for it. You know, I don't know right now if it actually could. 2/3 of the Army is literally not ready for wartime duty right now due to degredation of equipment and manpower from the war in Iraq, so basically, the only units we have capable of fighting such a war are the ones either deployed, about to be deployed, or returning from deployment already. Link. Beyond that, we have 150,000 of our soldiers currently exposed within a population that we don't control, and which literally does have the ability to push us out if they were to want to do so, and who are fully engaged in preventing that government from falling to pieces. If we were to have to engage Iran, we'd almost certainly face a full scale Shia revolt in Iraq (our army is only there because Sistani has prevented such an occurence thus far), combined with having to fight the Iranian armed forces, and potentially a much larger mobilized civilian force behind it in the Iranian population. These would be recipes for disaster...having to face down several million rioting Shia in Iraq, combined with having to face down the Iranian armed forces...we could kill a lot of people before it was all over, but I don't know if that's a fight we want to try. The only thing that we have right now which is a clear advantage over anything Iran can bring to the table is airpower. In other words, we can do to Iran exactly what is happening in Lebanon...we can bomb that country into the ground, but have its military capacity not seriously degraded. But the only difference is, we wouldn't have a secure place to start off any attack, since our position in Iraq is so exposed. Israel's armed forces don't have anyone shooting at them from behidn while they're trying to push forwards. The situation we'd probably want to wind up in is a retreat to Kuwait, followed by months of defensive struggle and attrition from the air before we attempt another breakout after massively reinforcing our army. And if we're talking about eliminating the entire population of Iran in order to make sure we win a war, well, then I'd hope it wouldn't just be the left which would oppose that.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Aug 7, 2006 -> 12:36 PM) We *COULD* do something about it, but the right in this country typed q instead of n in all of their columns. Fixed that for you.

Any ideas on what's been hurting Haeger so much lately? Getting tired out, or just struggling with control, or something else?

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Aug 4, 2006 -> 03:29 PM) Somewhat OT, but anyway Sweeney might be ready to take a shot in LF for the big club next year, whether it be in April or maybe July if we made a trade that opened up a spot for him? Just curious, i'm not the expert that the people here are so I figured it was a good spot to ask. Well, the question would become what spot to open up for him. RF is where i believe he's spent most of his time, and while the person the big league club has in RF is a Free Agent after 2007...I'm not sure we want to deal Dye. Although, if we were looking to make a big move next year and someone was offering up pitching for a big bat...I wouldn't rule it out. Anderson...He's not moving. In LF, we have Podsednik, and while it'd make sense to upgrade there, Sweeney doesn't seem like he'd fit very well in the leadoff spot for us. Rookie, higher strikeouts than we'd probalby want, very few stolen bases thus far. It worked for Sizemore yeah, but Sizemore had 4 full years in the minors before coming up, and had a higher OBP in the minors as well. Unless someone offers a ton for Dye, I'd say Sweeney pencils in for RF in 08.

Well, I guess the good news is...he didn't wind up with the Mets, Yankees, or Red Sox. Linky.

QUOTE(Cknolls @ Aug 7, 2006 -> 12:17 PM) I agree. I'm just taking the under of 10 years. Even if you take the under...that still gives us quite a few years to, if nothing else, rebuild our armed forces before we have to make a decision that all diplomacy has failed.

QUOTE(juddling @ Aug 7, 2006 -> 11:45 AM) Do you have a problem with that statement? That is probably the most level-headed thing a politician has said this decade. That one shouldn't criticise a president in any way during a time of war, no matter what the President does, because the nation can't afford it? That sure doesn't sound level-headed to me. Oh, and Joe Lieberman of 2003-2004 sure would have had a problem with it. At least when he was running for the Democratic nomination, and felt perfectly ok in criticising the President and undermining his credibility.

QUOTE(TitoMB345 @ Aug 7, 2006 -> 11:28 AM) I was just debating this with myself earlier. Ortiz has basically just taken any chance for an AL MVP for Thome by going off, and now theres a chance Thome won't get to 50, despite starting on pace for like 80 after 30 games. I REALLY hope his homer barrage starts tonight, because we could REALLY use them. Back in ST, he did say that he usually started taking a lot of pitches/walks right before he started really nailing the ball.

QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Aug 7, 2006 -> 11:37 AM) where does Quizno's get off charging $6.50 for a regular size sandwhich? It seems you paid that price.

If anyone wants a preview of the opening of the Daily Show tonight, here ya go. Cross that with the Generals testimony last week, and you've got a good start.

Republican Congressman from Ohio Bob Ney, aka "Representative #1" in the Jack Abramoff indictments, is dropping out of his reelection bid. The nice thing for him is that it lets him take the $417k in his campaign war chest and move it towards his legal defense. The nice thing for the Democrats is that it sets the Republicans in that district, where we're mounting a strong challenge, back by $417k.

The 21 game winning streak starts today...

QUOTE(samclemens @ Aug 7, 2006 -> 09:03 AM) you are pretty much right, I think. but the israelis could do it, thats what i am hoping for. they certainly have the justification in my opinion. They're about the only one for whom the strike would even be remotely possible, since having the U.S. do it via airstrikes would probably cause the downfall of the U.S. in Iraq, and lord knows how many casualties. It's entirely possible that Israel attacking Iran would cause it as well, but at least in that case it's not 99% like it is with the U.S. The problem of course is that an Osirak type attack doesn't work with Iran, because what we do know about their facilities is that they are spread out and hardened to either prevent or at least prolongue such an attack to a length that would really threaten the operation. And I'm not totally sure, but I think Iran's air defense system is at least capable of doing some damage, unless it's hit with something as strong as a full scale U.S. assault. And beyond that, if you guys are worried about Korea shipping things to Iran...having Israel attack Iran does nothing to prevent that, and in fact might even encourage it.

Keep it up Mark! We need you badly here. Also, interesting note, for anyone who is interested...Chone Figgins has the lowest OBP of any leadoff hitter in baseball.

You know what I think it is that bothers me most about Podsednik? He seems to have skills but doesn't seem to use them effectively. He has the skill that should allow him to be up with Ichiro in terms of infield hits/bunt hits every year, but he goes long periods without bunting. He has the skill to hit well over .300, just by slapping the ball to the left side, but he's stuck in the .270 range. He has the speed that should allow him to be a very good fielder, but he's careless with some of his plays in LF leading to errors, and he gets such bad jumps that it reduces the effectiveness of his speed (and he doesn't seem to be learning from his mistakes.) A few years ago he was in the 80 stolen base territory, now it seems he hardly tries, and when he does try, his technique goes to hell and he gets thrown out. He could be so much better than this.

QUOTE(greasywheels121 @ Aug 7, 2006 -> 08:09 AM) It's a fair point, but I hate how it's taken this long for him to say something of such. His story has changed almost daily, and that's made it harder to not accept the tests' results. I'm afraid I don't see how this one is him "changing his story." Seems like he's just trying a new defense tactic, his line thus far has been he did not take anything, and this would fit with that. He hasn't gone from saying he didn't take anything to saying his buddy Miguel Tejada gave him a B-12 shot yet, that's what I call changing your story.

QUOTE(Cknolls @ Aug 7, 2006 -> 08:37 AM) I'll take the under if they are left unchecked. Also, lets keep in mind other sources of nuclear materiel, i.e.: N. Korea. But here's the problem...if North Korea were to actually ship Iran a bomb or two, what exactly is there that we can do about it? We can't bomb the Hell out of Korea, because South Korea and Tokyo will cease to exist. We can't bomb Iran to tell them not to buy things from Korea, because all that us striking them will do is strengthen their government and give them even more reason to deal rapidly with the Koreans. And 2/3 of the U.S. army is currently not in any way, shape, or form ready for deployment, with a decent chunk of the rest tied up in Iraq.

QUOTE(samclemens @ Aug 7, 2006 -> 08:54 AM) i totally agree. also, for me, this is why israel has every justification to wipe hezbollah out, and they should continue what they are doing now. But the other side of that token is that it's not necessarily possible for Israel to do so. Their attacks have barely made a dent in that organization, they're still firing as many missiles into Israel as they were on day one of this campaign, the Israelis have been unable to push very far at all into Lebanon, and the added support gained by Hezbollah through this campaign, the damage its done to Lebanon's infrastructure, and the added prestige it has brought Hezbollah throughout the Muslim world is going to far offset the loss of a few hundred fighters.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 7, 2006 -> 06:25 AM) I agree. There was a golden opportunity for the US and other powers here, and they chose not to take it. Probably, at least in the case of the US, because they realize that it would take years of commitment - beyond the current term of politicians. I am not sure why samclemens thought that "the left" in the US would be against a peacekeeping operation either - I think they would in fact support it. I doubt there's very many people who would actually oppose a genuine peacekeeping force in that area, I just don't think it's going to be feasible at all. Who out there actually has a few tens of thousand troops available to be sent into this area to actually fight against Hezbollah? And make no mistake, the only way a peacekeeping force is going to work is if it goes in to actually fight and forceably disarm that organization. I just don't see any way that anyone is going to do it, especially now that Hezbollah has been emboldened by the Israeli attack and has gained the full support of the Lebanese government.

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Aug 7, 2006 -> 06:02 AM) So it comes back to the argument of Ethanol and Hybrid Engines again doesn't it. Ethanol of course still causes increases in the prices of petrol, so that ain't your solution. However, the next generation of Hybrids, from Honda and Toyota, due in roughly 08-09, should, if the rumors are correct, start to sate your appetite. Somewhere in the 80-110 mile per gallon range is the rumor.

QUOTE(samclemens @ Aug 7, 2006 -> 06:54 AM) you all can say with a straight face iran wont attack israel tomorrow for sure? that they wouldnt give terrorists nuclear weapons if they developed them (and no one knows how close they are)? Actually, while no one knows Exactly how close they are, plenty of people have very very good guesses, and all of those guesses say around 10 years.

QUOTE(samclemens @ Aug 7, 2006 -> 07:06 AM) Lieberman Confronts Anti-War Criticism This is an interesting article. According to this article, Lieberman is no longer getting completely killed at the polls, they say he is only down 54% to 41%. I know, thats a substantial margin, but its better than the last #s i saw, which had lieberman in the 30's. Unless you're seeing the internal polls, that 54-41 13 point Lamont lead was the worst poll for Joe that I've seen. The most recent Q-Poll, from this morning, is 51-45 in favor of Lamont. And that article you posted...well, the phrase "Fish in a barrel" comes to mind. Vs. 2005 and

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Aug 6, 2006 -> 09:44 PM) If the Sox really wanted to risk it, they could go with a Haeger or Phillips for a couple of starts, send B-Mac back down to AAA to let him start, or even keep him in the bullpen to let him keep doing what he's doing basically. The idea still has merit when you look at how Freddy has pitched lately. If you're considering bringing up a kid to spot-start...the one thing you really need to make sure you have in your bullpen is a long-man. So Mac doesn't move, IMO. And I can't think of anyone who really has any options left that we could spare, unless we're sending someone to the DL. You sending Jenks back down to make room for that starter? Maybe in September when the rosters expand...but at that point, either the season's over or the season's ungodly tight, and if the season is ungodly tight, do you want to throw in a guy making his 2nd ML start? Jerry Manuel and Neal Cotts have a few stories on how that worked out.

QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Aug 6, 2006 -> 09:40 PM) He may very well win, I am just pointing out that he is already a seasoned politician, skilled at the many levels of creative lying and selective memory. I guess you're right, if this campaign is any indication, Lieberman must not be a seasoned politician, because his whole campaign has been a disaster. Maybe I should be supporting him?