New Mars Forums
You are not logged in.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Announcement
#1576 Re: Not So Free Chat » Is George Bush a Coward - More Than 1,000 Americans Killed » 2005-01-07 12:42:11
If I among were the evil leaders of China (and "evil" is now a rather pedestrian term) I would announce that 100 million of my countrymen just decided to walk to the Red Sea.
Everyone gets bags of rice and every one in ten gets an AK-47 and the whole migration gets a nuclear umbrella. I suspect India and Pakistan would follow suit.
Consequence? No oil for Uncle Sam anyways.
Which is precisely why "kicking the petrol habit" isn't an answer either. We stop buying Saudi gas and they have a hard time for about a week before the ChiComs jump in, then our big long-term emerging rival has access to cheap oil and we lose any means of pressuring those countries. Disengaging isn't the answer any more than a sheet of hot glass from the 'stans to the West Bank is.
We need to accomplish some "honest to God" nation building. But we need secuirty first. Which we do not have.
Can't just kill 'em and we can't walk away.
How long do we have to restore basic infrastructure and security before 95% of the Iraqis simply want us to leave? Have we passed that point already?
#1577 Re: Not So Free Chat » Is George Bush a Coward - More Than 1,000 Americans Killed » 2005-01-07 07:29:41
Scott Beach is well known here, from before. Enough said.
However "nuke their ass, steal their gas" is an idea growing in popularity amongst America's wing-nuts. The growth of such sentiments makes following a sensible and prudent foreign policy increasingly difficult.
#1578 Re: Not So Free Chat » Is George Bush a Coward - More Than 1,000 Americans Killed » 2005-01-06 23:32:35
And the head of Iraqi intelligence (he's on our side) says the insurgency now numbers over 200,000. Yup dead-enders. All 200,000 of 'em.
So all we have to do is piss off the rest of them enough to join the insurgency and we can use Scott's "Nuke 'em" option.
I know "nuke their ass, steal their gas" is a freeper wet dream - - but there is a problem with that.
Suppose we did kill 99% of the population in the Persian Gulf and suppose the oil fields somehow survived to be "stolen"
If I among were the evil leaders of China (and "evil" is now a rather pedestrian term) I would announce that 100 million of my countrymen just decided to walk to the Red Sea.
Everyone gets bags of rice and every one in ten gets an AK-47 and the whole migration gets a nuclear umbrella. I suspect India and Pakistan would follow suit.
Consequence? No oil for Uncle Sam anyways.
#1579 Re: Not So Free Chat » Is George Bush a Coward - More Than 1,000 Americans Killed » 2005-01-06 23:05:31
And of course, I wouldn't put it past Al-Reuters to make s*** up.
#1580 Re: Not So Free Chat » Is George Bush a Coward - More Than 1,000 Americans Killed » 2005-01-06 23:00:16
We have an excellent military, and we need a top notch military but Bush is intent on blunting its edge. In 2008 or 2010 or 2012 when we really need it, the military will be broken and demoralized.
If your assessment is correct, then we have essentially two options: Either we pick one big target and hope it's the right one to solve the largest chunk of our problems, or we decide collectively that our people are worth more than everyone else and fight each little war from a purely military perspective. Kill them, destroy their ability to threaten us in the future, then leave the survivors to fend for themselves.
The "real" conflict is the geo-political order for the 21st century. The undeclared war Bush launched was a diplomatic war to re-shape the existing United Nations structure.
Let me concede the merits of that (for tonight - heh!) and presume the UN system is / was fatally broken.
We still deployed far, far, far too few resources to win that conflict. Bush acted like he could fly to NYC, wave his jockstrap at the UN and say "Don't mess was Texas" and the French, et. al would crumble and pay homage to America.
I agree 100% with Taylor Dinerman. Europe's Galileo project is all about military and strategic interest. Without a parallel to our GPS and space assets, the EU and the Russians and the Chinese are powerless.
But we are fighting the whole damn world (except Britain and Australia, sort of) and we are cutting taxes and acting like Iraq will still be a cakewalk.
= = =
Bush has picked fights with lots of people and he will be back in Crawford when it come time to pay up.
Edited By BWhite on 1105074067
#1581 Re: Not So Free Chat » Is George Bush a Coward - More Than 1,000 Americans Killed » 2005-01-06 22:53:21
I'm mildly surpised you think we should have a bigger army, Bill. Wouldn't that just make us better positioned to engage in the very sort of "topple and occupy" missions you've opposed all along?
Actually, in the abstract, removing Saddam was a very GOOD and NOBLE thing to do. Exactly what we should be more willing to do IF we refrain from micro-managing the aftermath.
But as I said right here at NewMars, before we removed Saddam, we were woefully underestimating the challenge of Part #2, the reconstruction. To be candid, on the day Bush flew to that aircraft carrier and announced "Mission Accomplished" I genuinely felt I might have been wrong, but no more.
Paul Bremer went in with a "theory trumps facts" plan to Ameri-form Iraq into some sort of Ayn Rand loving libertarian paradise and we end up FUBAR-ed.
#1582 Re: Not So Free Chat » Is George Bush a Coward - More Than 1,000 Americans Killed » 2005-01-06 22:19:46
*shrug* Ya know, if you read the article, you might pick up on somthing:
"200,000 fighters" and active supporters
"40,000 hardcore fighters"
So which is it?
Annnd given that we've been taking them out in roughly a 15-20:1 ratio... This is assuming that the really big 40,000 number is accurate, which it probobly isn't... if it were, the attacks would be many fold what they are now. A five-fold difference here...
15 - 1? Got proof?
Fallajuh was supposedly the turning point.
= = =
How many of our 150,000 are war fighters and how many are truck drivers and file clerks? Our speartip is about 40,000 - 50,000 as well.
= = =
Edit #2 - - what was the kill ratio in Vietnam?
IIRC (in general) 10 to 1 in our favor and the insurgency is winning, big time.
Do we could Coalition Iraqi deaths?
Edited By BWhite on 1105071792
#1583 Re: Not So Free Chat » Is George Bush a Coward - More Than 1,000 Americans Killed » 2005-01-06 22:15:04
Actually, I believe the current Bush adminstration is rather like the corporate raiders who buy a company and loot the pension fund. They don't give a damn about the future.
We have an excellent military, and we need a top notch military but Bush is intent on blunting its edge. In 2008 or 2010 or 2012 when we might really need it, the military will be broken and demoralized.
= = =
Had we not done Iraq, we wouldn't need more soldiers. But we are there.
You do have a point, if things keep getting worse, and we do not increase the military, we could well suffer a humiliating defeat. And then the freepers will blame the gay rights activists for that.
Edited By BWhite on 1105071542
#1584 Re: Not So Free Chat » Is George Bush a Coward - More Than 1,000 Americans Killed » 2005-01-06 21:28:58
And of course, I wouldn't put it past Al-Reuters to make s*** up.
Fair enough.
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/1239fda6-6052- … .html]This general gives his name.
US Army Reserves are "broken"
= = =
And the head of Iraqi intelligence (he's on our side) says the insurgency now numbers over 200,000. Yup dead-enders. All 200,000 of 'em.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, … 22,00.html
Edited By BWhite on 1105069269
#1585 Re: Science, Technology, and Astronomy » US Space Transportation Policy - Link here » 2005-01-06 21:27:23
http://www.ostp.gov/html/SpaceTransFact … 005.pdf]US Space Transportation Policy document.
Discuss. 
#1586 Re: Not So Free Chat » Is George Bush a Coward - More Than 1,000 Americans Killed » 2005-01-06 21:17:50
Well, at least someone besides John Kerry now says we need a bigger army:
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtm … ...7260440
The senior Army general, briefing reporters on condition of anonymity. . .
But of course, it needs to be anonymous. 
Edited By BWhite on 1105067948
#1587 Re: Not So Free Chat » The American Taliban - would this qualify? » 2005-01-06 21:14:24
Obviously, I am unhappy that Alberto Gonzalez seeks the power to investigate anyone without meaningful judicial oversight, but I ask, does Cobra Commander really want some future Janet Reno to have these powers:
[GONZALES:] With respect to access to library records, to take a specific point, obviously you're referring to Section 215 of the Patriot Act. Two-fifteen relates to obtaining business records. It never mentions library records. Two-fifteen allows the government to obtain certain types of business records, hotel records, credit card records, rental records, transportation records, in connection with -- it's got to be related to a foreign terrorist -- a foreign intelligence operation. And the government cannot do that without first going to a judge. The government goes to the FISA court and obtains a warrant to do that.
SEN. SPECTER: But there is no requirement for a showing of probable cause before that judicial order is entered, Judge Gonzales. And the question is, why can't we have that traditional probable cause requirement on the obtaining of those records?
MR. GONZALES: Certainly, Senator, you could do that. But right now, today, a prosecutor could obtain a grand jury subpoena, if it was relevant to a criminal investigation, without meeting that standard, and obtain access to those very same library records and --
SEN. SPECTER: But when the prosecutor obtains those records on a grand jury subpoena -- and I have some familiarity with that -- it's subject to judicial supervision. There can be a motion to quash.
Edited By BWhite on 1105067687
#1588 Re: Not So Free Chat » The American Taliban - would this qualify? » 2005-01-06 20:54:41
A Republican (of course!) has introduced this http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504 … egislation in the State of Virginia.
Report of fetal death by mother; penalty. Provides that when a fetal death occurs without medical attendance, it shall be the woman's responsibility to report the death to the proper law-enforcement agency within 12 hours of the delivery. Violation of this section shall be punishable as a Class 1 misdemeanor.
Since miscarriages can occur in the first few weeks of pregnancy - - before the women even knows she is pregnant - - one suggestion has been to send this dear Representative the ahem evidence. Once per month.
Of course, fighting wing-nuttery like this undermines the essential "War on Terror" therefore only traitors will object.
= = =
Oklahoma Representative Tom Cole on President Bush's plan for Social Security:
"He cannot afford to fail. It would have repercussions for the rest of his program, including foreign policy. We can't hand the president a defeat on his major domestic initiative at a time of war." (Wall Street Journal, 1/6/04)
Hey, does anyone believe I am giving aid and comfort to bin Laden if I oppose the Bush Social Security plan?
#1589 Re: Not So Free Chat » Give Sistani the keys to Iraq; - and just come home! » 2005-01-05 21:16:56
The original point of the quoted article is that the Najaf Shia (Iraq) and the Qom Shia (Iran) do not see eye to eye. The Najaf Shia do not favor direct clerical rule as currently practiced in Iran. But they are very Islamic - - no alcohol and no porn for example.
If we empower the Najaf Shia (meaning Sistani over Sadr) that can be used to undermine the Iranian Shia. If we stiff- arm Sistani and impose our puppet as a strongman that will weaken the Najaf Shia and I predict we will soon regret that attempt.
From the original article:
It should be recalled that the spiritual leaders of the Iraqi Shiites are significantly different than the leaders of the Islamic Republic in Iran in their philosophy of government and their conduct of politics.
Shiite religious authority resides in the reputation of a grand ayatollah, whose wisdom, moderate behavior and leadership qualities attract a large number of followers. These followers direct their obligatory religious tithe to their chosen ayatollah, who uses the funds to support charitable works such as orphanages, hospitals and mosques. As a jurisprudent, these ayatollahs also serve as opinion leaders for their followers, issuing their views on all aspects of life, including political affairs.
Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the leading light of the Iranian Revolution of 1978-1979, made a significant departure from the normal pattern of Shiite leadership. He forcefully stated, in a doctrine known as Wilayet al-Faquih, that religious leaders should hold temporal power in the absence of the 12th Shiite Imam, Mohammad al-Mahdi, who disappeared more than a thousand years ago, but who, Twelver Shiites believe, will one day return.
Every other grand ayatollah in the Shiite world disagreed with Khomeini at the time of the revolution. Some of these religious leaders living in Iran paid for their opposition with house arrest or execution. Although Sistani would be foolish to voice direct opposition to the fundamental philosophy of the government of Iran at this sensitive time, it is clear that he is not interested in holding state power himself, and the hawza, the influential colloquy of religious scholars in Najaf, is of a similar disposition.
Shouldn't this approach be encouraged?
If this assessment of the Najaf Shia is correct, then they are a valuable couterweight both to bin Laden and the Iranian mullahs.
Step #1? We US-ians needs to realize that all Muslims don't look alike.
Edited By BWhite on 1104982008
#1590 Re: Not So Free Chat » Give Sistani the keys to Iraq; - and just come home! » 2005-01-05 21:11:13
So they're all insurgents-in-waiting, just biding their time until the perfect moment to strike? That makes it easy, just nuke 'em all then. Provoke 'em first, for an aura of legitimacy.
Dude, first we need a hydrogen economy. Just like John Kerry said last June.
Want to stop worrying about Islam? Kick the petroleum habit. Until then, we cannot "just nuke 'em" - - setting morality aside.
Either they're just people trying to get on with their lives, in which case the vast bulk aren't going to fight us or they're all terrorists and we're perfectly justified killing every last one. Can't have it both ways.
Well, if insurgent means not wanting to be subject to puppets selected by Uncle Sam, then yes I believe they are all insurgents. They want us to leave them alone also.
But remember, Sistani is one crafty dude. He didn't survive Saddam's rule as clerical leader of the Shia by turning to violence, or by caving in to Saddam. The Shia are the majority and they know it. So they have largely avoided violence, except for that one outburst by Sadr.
(As an aside, Sadr's uprising was more to challenge Sistani as leader of the Shia than to challenge the United States. Sadr, with Iranian backing, was opposed to Sistani's non-violence based diplomatic approach to the US presence. Wheels within wheels. - - Sistani won that episode hands down.)
If Allawi's slate genuinely wins, Sistani will know it well before the Coalition does (Sistani will trust his own "exit polls" more than Halliburton's) and I believe he will accept those results because his authority did not arise from wielding military power. Under Saddam he had ZERO military power and he still became a powerful leader.
If Allawi's slate wins a majoroity of the votes "fair and square - - in Sistani's judgment" then I believe he will continue to attempt to suppress violence by the Shia militia. He will tell them to accept the vote, IMHO. After all, the majority of Iraqis will have spoken even with the Sunnis sitting it out.
If Sistani's slate wins (but the US fudges the numbers so Allawi is declared winner) Sistani will know that also. The US press can wail and spin all they want but Sistani will likely lose his ability (and incentive) to keep the Shia militias in check. Folks like Sadr will gain popularity.
My main point? We must play fair with Sistani and be willing to accept his slate if it wins, otherwise the insurgency will explode come February. We must grit our teeth and do this even though Sunni clerics have issued fatwas saying it is a sin to vote and Shia clerics are saying its a sin not to vote, all of which kinda points to which way the polls are heading.
#1591 Re: Not So Free Chat » Give Sistani the keys to Iraq; - and just come home! » 2005-01-05 15:23:39
The Sistani option may have been the best available to us a year ago, but we're past that point now. Any such move will now be seen as a sign of weakness and will encourage our enemies. Watch al Qaeda's morale rise after that, watch their recruitment rise when they can tout the weakness of the "Great Satan", any policy that is at its core "cut and run" is profound folly at this point.
bin Laden hates Sistani as much as he hates the US, perhaps more, since Shia are Muslims who have fallen from the true path. The rest of us who were never Muslim to begin with are merely infidels. Playing the Shia against al Qaeda seems like a sensible strategy.
Why has there been little insurgency in the Shia regions?
IMHO, because they have been ordered to lie low and keep their powder dry. Sadr's little uprising is only a small taste of what the Shia might do. The summer after we invaded, I recall reports that Hamas and Hezbollah were busy as beavers building cells and infrastructure throughout southeastern Iraq and were under strict orders NOT to engage, confront or antagonize the Americans.
Cut & run? No.
Negotiate a timetable to withdraw with a genuinely elected government of Iraq. All the better if its Sistani's slate that wins the election since those same Hamas and Hezbollah fighters who have been lying low these past few years can then be called upon (by Sistani & Sadr) to defend the new government from the Sunni insurgents. I suspect the best Shia fighters are not joining the national guard and those who have joined are proving to not be the most reliable of fighters.
Allawi, lacking a core constituency, has no local resources for a credible military except the US and if we prop him up for too long and provoke the Shia to join the insurgency against the government, we may soon face a military debacle of nightmare-ish proportions.
= = =
Cobra, I agree that elections are very premature if we seek a secular westernized Iraq, however can we cancel elections now? I see no good outcome from that.
The original decision to call for elections in January 2005, without a plan to cede control to a Sistani favored faction, reveals a spectacular failure of foresight. IMHO, as always.
= = =
Invade Iran? Yeah, right.
You and what army? The US military has its hands full, today.
#1592 Re: Not So Free Chat » Give Sistani the keys to Iraq; - and just come home! » 2005-01-05 12:45:57
The http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp … 1485]Iraqi Shia centered on their holy city of Najaf are not puppets of Iranian masters according to this article.
Still the United States cannot give up its obsession over Iran. Rather than attacking Iraqi Shiites, they have been trying to attack Iran on the false assumption that Iraqi Shiites are being supported by the Iranian state and derive all of their power from Tehran. The accepted theory seems to be that if Iran is destroyed, the power of the Iraqi Shiites will atrophy.
The American theory is something Iraqi Shiites view with wry amusement. They know with absolute certainty that the center of religious authority in the Shiite world is gradually migrating to Iraq - most particularly the long-established center of Shiite scholarship, Najaf. If the Iraqi Shiites come to power it is they who will eventually be influencing the Iranians, not the other way around.
The sad thing is we could have given control of Iraq to Sistani's followers 18 months ago, and started to withdraw. Okay, he is an Islamic cleric but the Najaf Shia are one of the more moderate strains of all Islam. But no, Paul Bremer wanted an Iraq that would be proud of a blue & white flag and recognize Israel. And now we have a FUBAR on our hands.
A peaceful, prosperous and secular Iraq? A terrific goal, but in the immortal words of Meatloaf - - two out of three (peaceful & prosperous) ain't bad. Now, if we postpone the elections or if Allawi's slate wins what is seen as a rigged eelction, I predict a Shia firestorm that will make today's insurgency seem like a birthday candle.
More from the article:
However, it is the Bush administration and its neoconservative members who are the most frightened of all. They have convinced themselves that a Shiite victory in the election will result in the unambiguous failure of their Iraqi adventure. This will supposedly come about because the victorious Shiites will ally themselves with Iran and start taking orders from Tehran. They will supposedly then establish a religious dictatorship, persecute the Sunnis, overrun the Kurds, and kick the American military out of their land.
All of these catastrophe scenarios are unwarranted - unless the attacks against the Shiites become so acute that they touch off a cycle of revenge, and an eventual civil war.
Have the elections, cede power to Sistani, and prepare to withdraw.
Edited By BWhite on 1104950832
#1593 Re: Human missions » Long Duration Lunar Mission "Dry Run" - for Mars Direct » 2005-01-03 16:03:01
No thought to crop automation or using non-biological recycling for the most part at all... No GMO plants either I bet.
Quite right, because Biosphere 2 was to a large degree motivated by ideology rather than science, canned food or mechanical means of recycling the air would have been heresy! Not a good way to go about matters.
Drop the requirement for a completely closed, self-sustaining system and things get much more realistic. Hell, a closed system complex enough to sustain multiple humans yet small enough for spaceflight may not even be possible. It certainly isn't wise to have your only means of scrubbing the air even more likely to die than the crew at the first signs of imbalance.
Why do we want a closed loop? I want to assimiliate Mars inorganic resources and convert them to Terran long chain organic molecules. Rather like the Borg, actually. :;):
Dang selfish DNA. Down! Down boy! (Slaps self on wrist. . .)
#1594 Re: Human missions » ESA - Aurora Program » 2004-12-31 11:08:05
Americans "live to work" but who is really collecting the honey these worker bees are producing?
I'm not going to argue with this. The Marxists in me tends to agree with you somewhat even. I was just pointing out that the retorical question you are asking is realy not so retorical, it is more of a cultural issue.
My sense, as an American, is that the political Right would like us to believe that asking such questions is not permitted. As Freud said, happiness is found in "Love and Work" - - but for who's benefit should we work?
#1595 Re: Interplanetary transportation » Just Cancel The Shuttle Program - Not in five years, do it right now. » 2004-12-30 21:02:02
If Bush and Putin have too big a falling out, perhaps bye-bye US involvement in ISS, and therefore the end of shuttle.
#1596 Re: Human missions » Ordinary people...? » 2004-12-30 20:33:27
How do we identify platinum laden asteroids? How accurate are our observing platforms?
Have platinum rich locations been surveyed on the Moon, or is lunar platinum still something that theory predicts?
= = =
http://www.mines.edu/research/srr/Prese … um.PDF]One paper - background reading
He proposes moving a 20 meter asteroid into LEO and processing it there. At that size, it would not survive re-entry and therefore would not pose a danger to the surface.
Edited By BWhite on 1104461603
#1597 Re: Not So Free Chat » Boiling Water? » 2004-12-30 17:20:53
The idea would be to use the coolant, whatever it is, and pass it through a dedicated heat exchanger to operate the thermochemical cycle Bill. You definatly don't want to be putting reactor coolant in your gas tank.
That is what I meant by "secondary" coolant loop - - sorry for the incorrect term. I agree, this water cannot go anywhere near the reactor itself.
Solar thermal?
Can focused solar collector arrays reach 550C - - even on Mars? If so, rovers could deposit tanks of water at automated refueling depots as they travel and collect H2 when they return.
Edited By BWhite on 1104448907
#1598 Re: Human missions » Ordinary people...? » 2004-12-30 17:14:42
The motivation being, that fuel cells do apear to be the only solution to the majority of fossil fuel problems, and the Earthly supply of catalyst metals are not sufficent to support this goal. As a commodity, the price will rise cataclysmically as the supply from the meager African mines runs out. Unless someone can come up with a catalyst that doesn't need rare elements, then we will just have to get more. $200 billion doesn't seem like such a big number if you look at it, only double the cost of the ISS.
If this is true, and the price per ounce skyrockets (sic), then the calculations change accordingly.
If an "honest to God" RLV is a pre-requisite, we may be many, many decades away from doing this, however, since no "honest to God" RLV development programs are currently funded at any meaningful levels, by anyone, anywhere, correct?
GCNRevenger, can you recompute these numbers using Proton, for example? $20 billion (your RLV budget) will buy you 266 Proton launches.
Edited By BWhite on 1104448965
#1599 Re: Not So Free Chat » Boiling Water? » 2004-12-30 16:46:27
No byproducts, the system is theoretically a closed loop, the details are in the plumbing.
The intermediates are quite toxic and fairly corrosive, but they stay in the machine.
Edit: http://www.cmt.anl.gov/science-technolo … ical.shtml
Even more efficent
If your nuclear reactors have a secondary coolant loop pressurized with water - - and the pressurized hot water fed into a chamber with catalysts and replaced with new water - - wouldn't this increase the overall efficiency of your reactors?
The two most highly developed thermochemical cycles are the sulfur-iodine and the calcium-bromine cycles. Both contain at least one reaction that requires temperatures greater than 750ºC. Process heat in that range (750-850ºC) could be provided by next-generation nuclear power plants.
Copper-chlorine appears to be at 550 degrees C - - can we a design a Mars reactor to spin off coolant water at that temperature? Or if we are close, heat the water with a "relatively' small input of additional energy?
Edited By BWhite on 1104447022
#1600 Re: Not So Free Chat » Tsunami in Asia » 2004-12-30 13:49:20
Here is the real]http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=3944374]"real global war" - - everything is else is merely sideshow.