OT, Libya, Japan

A) Libya. I assume that when cruise missiles are sent against radar sites, they use the largest payload that works, in order to do the most damage. But if they could find out where kaddafi is, could they not use a small payload, big enough to kill him and maybe 25 people closest to him? Way back in 1966, I worked as a lowest-level undergraduate, confined mostly to delivering the mail and making copies, plus a couple other less time-consumng things meant to teach me more than they were meant for me to help anyone there, at the US Naval Avionics Facility, where they were working on the Walleye missile, to be controlled by the pilot of a plane who would identify a target as small as a person or a doorway, lock on to it, and the missile, with a little ongoing help from the pilot, was meant to hit it. I think they had production problems that delayed it for years, but by now, with faster processors, GPS, and with the great success from cruise missiles, I think it would be possible to go through a window or a wall and straight to where he is standing.
B) Japan. Don't they have lead-lined suits that the firemen could wear to get their water cannon closer to the reactors? I saw that they only shoot 100 or 150 feet, but once they had the range, I think they would work a lot faster than dumping from the sky, where most goes somewhere else.
Is there any kind of robot that will fit in the drivers seat and press the pedals and steer, so they wouldn't need a special robot for every purpose?
If not, can't they drive the truck up there and leave for a few hours in another truck or by walking?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
mm wrote:

It's too bad that western countries are going to topple Kaddafi.
When will we learn that it takes a dictator to lead arab / muslim countries, and that in the abscence of said dictator what we end up with is caos, confusion, stagnation, and degredation of the state of affairs of (insert arab/muslim country here).
Seems that before all this started to happen, that the people in Libya were getting along, doing their business, living their lives, etc.
The west had their oil companies there, doing business, and the country seemed stable enough, and people weren't being slaughtered in the streets.
Nothing good will come of Kaddafi being assasinated (like Saddam Hussein was, and nothing good has really come of that either).
Libya will now degenerate into a Somolia or Ethiopia or Congo, and we (the west) will have another basket case of a country to take care of.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Oren wrote:

The entire "war" the us prosecuted in Iraq was one big Hussein assassination attempt. Hussein, and his 2 sons.
It was a political assassination disguised as a war - which wasn't even a real war because the US did not declare war on Iraq and the US did not hold a vote in the UN security council to authorize action against Iraq like Bush said he was going to do.

Hence the false war in Iraq.
The very first night - over 1000 cruise missles fired at every place they thought Hussein could be. A so-called "decapitation" of Iraq's command and control structures. A thinly veiled assassination attempt, and very expensive when you consider the missles cost $10 million each.
But let's not detract from the main thesis: Aram / muslim countries can't evolve or maintain any sort of democracy or democratic form of gov't or a society that obeys any sort of legal framework or impartial court system. They are far to tribal and clannish to achieve such structures and enjoy the lifestyles and liberty that follows.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Re: OT, Libya, Japan:

+1 on that.
--
Work is the curse of the drinking class.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 3/19/2011 7:12 PM, mm wrote:
Ran across this:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/19/extremists-among-libya-rebels_n_837894.html
on a per capita basis, no country sent more young fighters into Iraq to kill Americans than Libya -- and almost all of them came from eastern Libya, the center of the anti-Gaddafi rebellion that the United States and others now have vowed to protect, according to internal al Qaeda documents uncovered by U.S. intelligence.
Unintended consequences. Seems to me like a good site for a GE Mark 1 reactor. I know where they can get 5 or 6 used ones.
Jeff
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jeff Thies wrote:

Just another example of the schizophrenic nature of US foreign policy and strategic thinking.
Just like handing over weapons and training the taliban to fight the soviets in afghanistan (who were on their way to at least tame and civilize that stone-age excuse for a country) and we know the blowback that happened from that.
Just like handing over chemical weapons to Sadam Hussein to use against Iran (remember the photo of Rumsfeld shaking hands with Hussein?) as Iraq fights a proxy war for the US against Iran, and later the US screws Iraq over the invasion of Kuwait (he got the green light to do it from the US to invade Kuwait, and the US faked satellite pictures showing Iraq was massing tanks along border with Saudia Arabia as excuse to station a permenant US military presence there, which arguably fed into muslim anti-US hatred and helped foment 9/11 attacks purpetrated mostly by Saudi men).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Well that doesn't sound good. I know that we really don't know what the rebels will be like, but just like a poster boy for multiple sclerosis generates sympathy and the desire to give money, kaddafi is more like a poster boy than the amoorphous mass of people in the rest of the country, that is, everyone other than him. So he generates in me the opposite-of-sympathy and the desire to kill him.
And btw, for all those witch-hunters who just assume any source that has one liberal article is always "liberal", the huffington post doesn't seem to be dominated like they think.

Isn't there a way to make money as a reactor broker? We could advertise them on www.ebay.lib and marked them "used, asis".

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 3/20/2011 10:08 PM, mm wrote:

Oh, it is complex. Before it was Libya it was Tripolitania and Cyrenaica (and one other). Tripolitania being Ghadafi's base centered in Tripoli and Benghazi being in Cyrenaica. Ghadafi is from the largest tribe and as allied with other tribes of the old Tripolitania. The Cyrenaicans have been getting the short shrift.
That is how I very roughly remember it and I may not have that quite right, but they are historic enemies.
At the moment the thing to do is watch the air show in Libya and enjoy. Nothing like US air power. And in the desert, there is no hiding from it.
As far as US involvement, playing a cool hand will turn out better than the hot headed one.
Not easy. Just reading this:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/us-jets-strike-gaddafis-forces-coalition-continues-hitting-libyan-air-defenses-/2011/03/20/ABgFNa3_story.html?hpid=z1
The goal of this mission is not to get rid of Gaddafi, and that is not what the U.N. licensed. And I would not call it going to war, Sen. John F. Kerry, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said on Meet the Press. This is a very limited operation that is geared to save lives, and it was specifically targeted on a humanitarian basis.
Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates said the United States would cede command of the military operation to allied countries as soon as possible. We expect in a matter of days to be able to turn over the primary responsibility to others, said Gates, who spoke to reporters on his military aircraft shortly after he departed Washington for Russia. We will continue to support the coalition, we will be a member of the coalition, we will have a military role in the coalition, but we will not have the preeminent role.
The question of who would take over the lead responsibility from the United States, however, remained up in the air. Gates said one possibility would be to allow Britain and France to take leadership, while another would be to run the mission under the aegis of NATO, even though some NATO members, including Germany and Turkey, have expressed reservations.
Gates also cautioned that the military operation should not target Gaddafi personally or exceed the mandate approved by the U.N. Security Council. The council has not called explicitly for Gaddafis removal, and only France has given official recognition to the Libyan rebels. The key is, first of all, to establish the no-fly zone, to do what we can to prevent him from using his military forces to slaughter his own people, Gates said.
This is basically going to have to be resolved by the Libyans themselves, he added.

I forget which conservative writer it was, but he referred to the Tea Party as: The Party of the Terminally Upset. They whine about everything preemptively.

I like it.
Jeff

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Too long to answer toinght! I plan to read it tomorrow.
wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 3/19/2011 7:12 PM, mm wrote:

What I don't understand is that Libya isn't one of the top oil exporters and our (US) gas prices are increasing daily.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
harry wrote:

Only in capitalist countries. If the price of crude goes up, the gas station owner has to have enough cash to cover his next delivery of 15,000 gallons. So he raises his prices immediately to be able to buy his next load of product. Hence the "Rocket up" notion of increased prices.
If the price of crude goes down, the gas station owner lowers his prices to meet the competition. This technique is known as the "Feather down" process on gas prices.
As I said, this happens only in capitalistic economies. Where the government controls the supply of fuel, prices do not show such volatility. Think Iran or Venezuela.
Or Pennsylvania liquor stores.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
harry wrote:

Latest numbers for Venezuela are around twelve cents per gallon.
The U.S.? $3.45. (#101)
And the UK? $8.38 (#3)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.