StrangeSox

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 21, 2011 -> 05:20 PM) No, read my words. I didn't say that civilians had been killed by U.S. forces (although the idea that they haven't been killed by a couple hundred missile strikes is just ludicrous). I said people. Why do the people fighting in the Libyan army and dying now count less than the people who rose up against Qadaffi? Because they were on their way to shell a city? And probably massacre a bunch of people?

At what point, if ever, do you think it'd be appropriate for the US to step in with military action to prevent a humanitarian disaster?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 21, 2011 -> 05:16 PM) I need to provide a source that says when a bomb hits something and explodes, people die? You need to provide a source that civilians have been killed by UN forces. Because it seems pretty clear that they've prevented at least some deaths at the hands of Gaddafi. Otherwise you're just flailing around a bunch.

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Mar 21, 2011 -> 05:13 PM) let other countries handle it When your military expenditures dwarf a good chunk of the rest of the world combined, you'll probably have to step up your game for international operations.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 21, 2011 -> 05:11 PM) Except for the people hit by the bombs. But they don't count since we're not selling arms to them. Source?

Hmm, it is possible that, even if you're not taking it out of context, Obama's views have conveniently changed. Anyway just about every conflict since 1945 says his views on the War Powers was incorrect.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 21, 2011 -> 05:06 PM) I'd say it's pretty convenient to consider a handful of tank kills to be significant participation. It was his main tank brigade on it's way to Benghazi, wasn't it? It's pretty convenient to pretend this hasn't already had a measurable impact on lowering civilian deaths.

The US has said from the start that we have "unique" military capabilities for the first operations, ie we can jam every signal you can think of, fly in without being picked up on radar and take out their anti-aircraft defenses. The plan is then to step down to a logistics/support role, and it appears that is happening.

No, Balta. The correct answer is that the Libyan army is nothing like the Taliban.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 18, 2011 -> 05:15 PM) I'll offer up another version of the effectiveness of airpower...our current air/drone attack campaign in Pakistan. If you want to argue that strategically it is working and effectively damaging the Taliban, you might be right, I don't know. But there has been a hell of a lot of civilian "collateral damage" associated with that campaign. Does the Taliban operate in the same way that a standing national army does? Really, Balta, stop with the bad comparisons to Afghanistan and Iraq. They are completely different situations.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12787739

QUOTE (Felix @ Mar 18, 2011 -> 08:30 AM) Congrats! He did something that Kevin Love has done (at the very least) 34 times this season. Won basketball games? oh, wait...

All sites in the country are performing INPO-guided comprehensive reviews of their emergency plans, and they're doing it on a very short timeline.

Dude, check the link.

Libya has declared a cease-fire.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Mar 17, 2011 -> 06:28 PM) Tucker Max is funny as hell. :shrug: Is he a misogynistic pig, douchebag, and just a bad person in general? Of course he is, that's why it's so funny. Eh, he was funny for a handful of stories, then it was "obvious douche looking for validation" coupled with irl stories of his insecurities and general making-s***-upism.

I don't think Obama should have gone in unilaterally (or dragged along gullible Brits again!), I just think they dragged their ass far too long on pushing the UN/NATO/Arab League/ANYONE to do something.

UN authorized military strikes on Libya. http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=212699 Hopefully both myself (too little, too late) and Balta (intractable campaign needing 50-100k troops) are wrong.

QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Mar 8, 2011 -> 10:08 AM) I think having a minor league team closer would be a good thing. How many bus loads of people show up at Wrigley Field every year from Iowa because they are fans of the Iowa Cubs? Iowa isn't exactly close enough to draw fans away from going to the Cubs like a suburban AAA affiliate would be.

QUOTE (GoodAsGould @ Mar 7, 2011 -> 10:12 PM) Thats the same family of four that isnt going to a Wsox game anyways, if they used that reasoning that family would already go to Flyers/Kane County games instead. I don't think that holds true at all. There's a big difference between watching your teams' minor-league affiliates, especially if it's AAA level, and watching the Flyers.

Your end result is still mass slaughter by Gaddafi and him retaining power.

I think the Kosovo comparison works but the Iraq one is s*** and you know it, Balta.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 17, 2011 -> 03:35 PM) My mistake, I didn't realize UNSCEAR was speaking for the WHO. Alphabet soup. Cough. Yeah it was a rather large body of organizations getting together for that report.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 17, 2011 -> 03:24 PM) The fact that they'd use the WHO estimates for one type but deliberately not use an available WHO estimate for another type of electricity makes me more than a little uncomfortable, even if I think they're right regarding the fossil (cough) fuels. Huh? The WHO estimates for Chernobyl are the Chernobyl Group 4k estimates.

I'm far too lazy myself, but a graph like that should include error bars on the estimates for all deaths and compare to reasonable worst-case estimates from Chernobyl, not the lowest estimate available. I'd imagine it's very sensitive.