Rex Kickass

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Dec 2, 2009 -> 11:56 AM) Than let the people of Afghanistan get rid of them. And that helps secure Pakistan how?

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Dec 2, 2009 -> 11:49 AM) And we get rid of them in Afghanistan they'll move to Pakistan, Yemen, etc. It's whack-a-mole and we're losing lives of our own in the process. Except its pretty clear that the Afghanistan strategy is part of a larger strategy with Pakistan. I'm sure this is being a bit simplistic, but quick question - are you saying that because this is a non-state actor who can catch a plane we should just leave them alone? It just seems foolish. Not every situation will require this kind of military action. In fact many of them will be more police like in nature. And that's ok. But in this circumstance, there's not a lot of other options out there that make sense.

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Dec 2, 2009 -> 11:47 AM) People keep talking like we can get rid of the Taliban from Afghanistan. The Taliban are Afghanistan. They are not some invading force. They are citizens of that country. Insane as they may be. Its up to the people of Afghanistan to change that. Umm, no not really. If that were true, the Taliban wouldn't have been looking to do power grabs of large swaths of Pakistan over the last year. They represent a violent, extremist view of politics in Afghanistan and they aren't the majority by any means.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Dec 2, 2009 -> 11:46 AM) Almost all of the 9/11 attackers were Saudis. Trained in Afghanistan, controlled by the Taliban - which, by the way, has basically become an arm of Al-Qaeda since 2002.

Pew did a phone survey asking people to answer twelve questions about current events. Nearly two-thirds of those surveyed got 6 or less correct out of 12. How did you do? http://pewresearch.org/politicalquiz/

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Dec 2, 2009 -> 10:52 AM) via Digby's blog It seems pretty obvious to me, further squeeze the Taliban into disorganization, further squeeze Al-Qaeda out of the region, help Pakistan get the breathing room it needs to build its stability, and to provide Afghanis with tools necessary to build their own country from the ground up.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Dec 2, 2009 -> 10:32 AM) I would say Bush's pre-surge speech had about that level of detail. IIRC anyway. I was really pissed at him at the time and wasn't really listening that closely. I was talking with my father about it, and I think that Obama set goals for success last night with a pretty refreshing clarity and was more honest and forthright about the why than we've seen since Poppa Bush did in 91 during Desert Storm's launch.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Dec 2, 2009 -> 10:28 AM) It's physically impossible to withdraw troops from Iraq immediately, and frankly right now they are coming out as fast as is reasonably possible. They're on a pace to be out entirely by the end of 2011. The whole "16 months" thing was just campaign rhetoric that got ratcheted up between him and Hillary in the primaries and was never seriously going to happen just like the whole "canceling NAFTA" thing. Actually the 16 months referred to active combat brigades and not about the entire presence in Iraq IIRC. The timetable he set out during the campaign is pretty close to what he's doing.

I think tonight's speech was one of the clearest outlays of foreign policy objectives that we have seen from a President in a lifetime. And he threw in a Comparative Studies 101 lecture on top of it.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.p...mp;sc=YahooNews

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Dec 1, 2009 -> 03:30 PM) Just because Saddam Hussein was a ruthless dictator doesn't give us the right to punish the people of Iraq. It didn't work there and it hasn't worked in Cuba. All it does is help build resentment for the United States. In those countries and other countries around the world. We've had the same backwards ass foreign policy in the middle east and south central Asia for the past 50 plus years. It's never worked and yet we still think more bombs and more troops will work. Again, had Saddam Hussein acted as a responsible leader for his people and done the necessary things to end sanctions after he was defeated in a war that HE started by the way, the UN would have removed sanctions. He chose not to. In fact, he worked hard to circumvent the sanctions but to further his own gains and not to provide proper food and water to his own people. So how is this the US' fault again? Oh wait, it's not. There are lots of horrible things we did in Iraq in the 1990s, turning our backs on the Kurds and Shia when they had a chance to make real regime change from within, for example. To sit there and equate the Bush41/Clinton containment strategy in Iraq to Vietnam or Korea or Afghanistan is really really really short sighted. In fact each of these conflicts have fully separate issues and problems, and different solutions. Iraq and Afghanistan probably share the most common ground, but its not especially similar, different pressures are made to bear and form different sets of challenges for us to face. Just because more soldiers go to Afghanistan doesn't mean its more of the same. On the contrary, the direction we started to take in Iraq in 2007 and are starting to take in Afghanistan in 2009 are solid, reasonable directions that are looking to minimize the horrors of war and provide populations with not only access to safe drinking water, food and supplies, but the means to be able to provide it for themselves in the near future. I really can't see a comparison.

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Dec 1, 2009 -> 12:55 PM) It made it harder for them to trade for food and medical supplies. Those are just two things that were a problem. There are other issues that were created by the sanctions. Such as water purification. Chlorine and other chemicals were banned and those were needed to help clean the water. United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) survey noted that almost half the children under 5 years suffered from diarrhoea, in a country where the population is marked by its youth, with 45% being under 14 years of age in 2000. If Saddam Hussein had spent half as much time working to provide his population with drinking water as he did to sell his oil on the black market between 1991 and 2003, we never would have needed to have this conversation.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Dec 1, 2009 -> 12:16 PM) The reason for that has everything to do with Israel, the article kind of glosses over/ignores that completely. The article also assumes change happens overnight. It doesn't. And it also assumes that everybody suddenly has to be "friendly." They don't. There's a rule in politics that I think applies in foreign relations. You can appeal to a group of people who don't support you and it can be of great value. They probably won't support you after your appeal, but they might have their passion damped down enough to make a difference.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Dec 1, 2009 -> 10:25 AM) This article recognizes skepticism on Afghanistan and tries to explain continued involvement http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009...worth_the_fight There are a few articles out there along these lines and its refreshing to see a more nuanced approach to whether or not this effort makes sense. There's too much polarity in our thinking. Either Afghanistan is the new Germany/Japan or its the new Vietnam in the punditocracy - and there seems to be no middle option of what it could be. I don't think the goal of the US is to nationbuild like they did in Germany or Japan. And I don't think the goal is to prop up a failed state like it was in Vietnam. I think the goal is to provide them building blocks to create a relatively stable state and on the other hand protect Pakistan from destabilizing itself.

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Dec 1, 2009 -> 12:17 PM) There are hundreds of pieces written about this. Here is one, that has a break down of the effects of the sanctions. http://www.globalissues.org/article/105/effects-of-sanctions You are addressing an effect, I am addressing a cause. The sanctions themselves didn't lead to food and medicine shortages in Iraq, the government in Iraq did.

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Dec 1, 2009 -> 09:51 AM) Plus most of the people that died in Iraq from the UN sanctions were children. Madeleine Albrights response to a May 11, 1996 60 Minutes question about the over half a million children killed by the Iraqi sanctions Death of 500,000 Children 'Worth It' "It’s a hard choice, but I think, we, think, it’s worth it." Let's be honest that had more to do with the leadership of Iraq than the sanctions. I don't believe food aid or medical supplies were restricted due to the sanctions.

Dan Rather was on Rachel Maddow last night, apparently he spent a good part of the month in Afghanistan last night, and of course he's parroting a lot of the "there's no point" line that seems to be talking head CW these days, but he did talk about noticing a surge in what he calls soft power - the military and NGO's working together to build useful structures for communities, creating bottom up leadership. I don't claim to know a lot about this conflict, but it seems to me if the strategy has changed to squeezing out the Taliban and giving population centers in risky areas of Afghanistan tools to survive and grow (which is how the Taliban gain legitimacy in areas they initially control btw) I think we've found something that works. The goal in Afghanistan seemed unclear the last few years, now the goal seems to be shaking out to a somewhat stable and mostly harmless state and then we leave, hopefully with it in better shape than when we left. If what I understand to be the case is the case, it seems a pretty reasonable strategy and one with a pretty well defined goal especially in contrast to many of our recent foreign engagements.

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Dec 1, 2009 -> 01:08 AM) Run is probably the only influential rap group anyone can make a case for. I don't mind them getting in especially considering they helped change the complexion of hip hop and rock n roll together. I love Flash, LL, etc.. but unless my memory is very hazy about LL, I don't even remember him collaborating with a rock n roll artist much less having any kind of influential mentions in the past. Hell, at this point I hope RHCP gets into the Hip Hop HOF as well. Anthony Kiedis rapping in a song is better than half these jackasses out right now. Grandmaster Flash and the Furious Five are the reason anyone today still knows who Liquid Liquid is, and for that alone they belong in a hall of fame. But seriously, they've been hella influential in the rock world. But LL? The ladies may love cool james but The Replacements deserve that nod way before LL does.

I agreed. If the vet dies in theater, his family ought to get a letter at least.

Reagan went lower faster. The Gallup poll has been crazy volatile lately, seeing five point net favorability changes day to day at times.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 27, 2009 -> 10:07 AM) Down drops 200+ within minutes of the opening bell, on fears related to an announcement from DubaiCo, who wants to delay/defer payments on loans. The gov't run company has over $60B in loans, and is just now hitting the first balloons. Investors see a possible ripple effect. Yikes. The long term game for the Middle East is uglier than just the current wars and religious/cultural conflicts. The region is realizing they won't be able to live off oil forever, so they go into tourism, with heavy debts. If the debts cause problems, the governments will have to pour more oil money in to cover. They then would likely reduce supply levels and increase prices, causing spikes in oil and gas. As consumers use this to go further and further away from oil, the loop feeds on itself, until the region plummets into economic hell. Scary stuff for them, and all the more reason for the US to get off oil before others do, so at least we don't have to get as entangled in that nightmare situation. It also has the potential to be good news for the dollar, at least temporarily. Almost all the exposure from Dubai World has to do with European banks instead of US ones. And the debt on Dubai World is 100 billion dollars, roughly 100% of Dubai's GDP.

QUOTE (Heads22 @ Nov 26, 2009 -> 01:14 AM) Love Me Dead - Ludo Error: Operator - Taking Back Sunday Everytime I Look For You - blink-182 Straight Lines - Silverchair That's the Way (My Love Is) - Smashing Pumpkins Pictures Of You - The Last Goodnight Dani California - Red Hot Chili Peppers Float - Flogging Molly Top Back - T.I. Atomic Garden - Bad Religion That I think is one of the only two good Silverchair songs ever. Massive Attack v Mad Professor - Moving Dub (Better Things) Miss Platnum - Do You Kanye West - The Glory Sufjan Stevens - Detroit, Lift Up Your Weary Head! Sufjan Stevens - John Wayne Gacy Royksopp - Happy Up Here Nouvelle Vague - Love Will Tear Us Apart Serge Gainsbourg - Les Sucettes Goldfrapp - Deep Honey La Crema - Cisco Kid Bonus 11th Tricky - Bad Dreams

QUOTE (qwerty @ Nov 25, 2009 -> 08:28 AM) So how many deaths this black friday? Any guesses? The over under is one.

http://www.slate.com/id/2236558/

The new Kid Sister album is like ear candy. The new Yoko Ono Plastic Ono Band album is really refreshing, surprising but fairly hit and miss. She needs to learn to edit more. A lot of the stuff would be stronger at 3 minutes than 6.