An A for effort.....
 

You are not going to like hearing this, but I don't think there was much we could do to stop NK from getting Nukes, and there is not much we can do about Iran. With NK, Republicans point their finger at Clinton and Albright for screwing up, and the Dems point their fingers at current US policy on NK, but in reality nothing could be done. With all those artillary pieces aimed at Seoul, they were going to get their Nukes and we just had to suck it up. I think Iran is going to get a Nuke and there is nothing we can do in this case either. There just isn't the political support for an invasion, and air attacks won't do it. I am just glad I don't live in Tel Aviv.

Note to Taxwonk
 

There are far more muslims than non-muslims. In particular, there are more Arab muslims than Britons. Consequently, Reid represents a higher proportion of the British population than the 19 Arabs who acted on 9/11 are of the Arab muslim population. Does that mean that Britons are propotionately more likely to try to blow up a plane than an Arab Muslim?

Like I said, statistics can be used to prove almost anything. They are generally used to prove anything but the truth.

Asshole.

Victimhood
 

Ssshhh. Reid must be ignored, otherwise Spanky's "statistics" aren't as compelling. Besides, you shouldn't believe everything just because it's a fact. If you ignore the inconvenient ones, you might be more dogmatic. You'll be more stupid, but that's okay if you ignore that fact, too.

Victimhood
 

2. How we going to catch the UK guys when they start up? They look clean!

http://www.mugshots.com/IMAGES/P__richard-reid.jpg

or, god forbid, more John Walker Lindh's

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/ad...er_enlarge.jpg

Note to Taxwonk
 

I don't even know where to begin with the stupidity of that statement.

Why don't you just be quiet before you make yourself look even dumber. There is not a single person on this board that agrees with your original assertion. Not one. Doesn't that tell you something? You find me one person on this board that doesn't think that, all things being equal, an Arab is more likely to hijack a plane than a Norwegian, then I will discuss this with the two of you.

Victimhood
 

Neither of these guys look like Arabs. So, other than contributing nothing to the conversation, do you have a point?

Note to Taxwonk
 

New thread title?

Note to Taxwonk
 

That isn't my point and it never has been. Let me try and help you rap your simple little brain around why your position is fallacious with a similarly invalid syllogism:

1. I like sushi.

2. Japanese frequently eat sushi.

3. Therefore, I am Japanese.

And at this point, I think I have finished discussing things with you. I'll leave you to have your little fights with everybody else.

k
 

this thing poppin tonight or what?

Note to Taxwonk
 

and in the 40s the Japanese INVENTED crashing airplanes into shit on purpose, so therefore we should be profiling aging Jews also.

Victimhood
 

I'm on your side T. Neither of these guys looks suspicious. I would let both onto a plane with no particular scrutiny.

An A for effort.....
 

A lot of people know more than you do, but if you don't bother to try to learn about it then you can remain in blissful ignorance. What do you think David Kay was doing?

If you want your money back, talk to RT.

Because it's six years later, and in the interim we've occupied Iraq.

You certainly don't. I believe the military and intelligence knows more than you do.

Yes. And Desert Fox was in 1998, so you could say it was the straw that broke the camel's back, if you wanted to use that kind of metaphor. A RB who scores from 1 yard out gets a touchdown, even if he doesn't claim credit for the drive down the field.

You have yet to post a single citation to any sort of evidence that controverts or undermines anything Ricks says. Nor can you point to any reason that he should be considered biased, other than that he -- like much of the rest of the country -- thinks that Iraq is a clusterfuck.

An A for effort.....
 

I said something like that in the post to you yesterday or the day before, but you never responded. Off my corner, ho.

An A for effort.....
 

sooo, can I cite your post as evidence mine is true?

Note to Taxwonk
 

That was exactly your point as evidenced below.



You said:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by taxwonk
I think that statistic is utterly irrelevant compared to the fact that there are far more Arabs don't blow up planes (hi Hank!) than Arabs that do. As a consequence, to suggest that Arabs are more likely, because they are Arabs, to be terrorists, is to act upon prejudice and not reason.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I said:

Of course there are more Arabs that don't blow up planes than do. Otherwise there wouldn't be any planes left. But, like I said, more Arabs blow up planes per capita, than Norwegians. So it is a fact, all other factors being equal, that an Arab is more likely to blow up a plane than a Frenchman. Just like it is a fact that you are I are more likely to be serial killers than an African American women.

You said:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by taxwonk
You're forgetting two of the most basic rules of statistics. First, in order for statistics to have any meaning, there has to be a correlative relation between the things being measured. Your basic fallacy is that there is a correlation between being Arab and blowing up planes. That is not true.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I said:

I don't know how to respond to this. You are saying black is white. Is there anyone else on this board that thinks there is no "correlative relation" between being Arab and blowing up airplanes?


Both you are statements were incredibly stupid, and because they were, no on the board has supported them. No one has contested mine. As I said, find one person that agrees with you and we can start the discussion again. If not one person backs you up, I think it is safe to assume that your statements were incredibly stupid. Or could it be that you are under the delusion thant you understand statistics (and I am talking the most basic concepts) better than everyone else on this board?

An A for effort.....
 

It only helps if you learn from people that actually know themselves.


I am sorry you are right. The fact that the administration didn't listen to you is obscene. You shouldn't be incensed that they didn't acknowledge that you were an expert and at least listen to you before going in.


If Clinton thought he had weapons when he left office, then no one knew BEFORE the invasion that there were no weapons. And that includes the group of experts you include yourself in.


Of course. So what you are implying, that you knew more or know more than the military and intelligence?


You could say, but you would be assuming facts not in evidence. The straw that broke the camels back could have been Bush resolve. Once Saddam realized W. was coming in he got rid of them. My point is we don't know.


Why do I care about Rick? I have just undermined everything you have said and that is all that matters.

An A for effort.....
 

Spanky v. Wonk
Spanky v. Ty

Looks like someone is back from hiatus with a vengence!

Note to Taxwonk
 

Huh? WWII era Japanese were predominately Jewish?

Army meets its retention goal (a month early)
 

If people in the military are so convinced that the administration has screwed up in Iraq, that Iraq is a senseless war, and we have no chance of succeeding - why are they all reenlisting.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...08-30-16-43-14

Army meets its retention goal (a month early)
 

Ignoring that the complaints are apparently coming mostly from senior officers, because the governement is paying them to reenlist? From the article:

"So far this year, the Army has doled out an average bonus of $14,000, to eligible soldiers, for a total of $610 million in extra payments.

'The bonuses have a lot to do with it, along with a feeling of accomplishment that comes with doing their mission,' said Army spokesman Henry Minitrez."

Army meets its retention goal (a month early)
 

They could have given out triple the bonuses they are giving out now during Vietnam, and there still is no way they would have gotten these type of retention rates.

In addition, if it is such a hopeless quagmire why are they getting that "feeling of accomplishment that comes with doing their mission".

Army meets its retention goal (a month early)
 

Because we're lowering the standards for admission. Duh.

link

• Col. Peter Mansoor commands the Army-Marine Counterinsurgency Center at Fort Leavenworth, Kan. The story quotes him thus:
  
  ``The challenge is to train the force not what to think, but how to think. Counterinsurgency is a thinking soldier's war. It is graduate-level stuff. There is public relations, civil affairs, information operations. It is not easy.''
  
  To read Bender's story is to be reminded -- and to be grateful -- that the Army has a corps of super-bright young officers who know how to read a scoreboard. Unfortunately, they're not in charge yet.
  
  Also this month, David Wood of the Baltimore Sun reported, ``At a time when the Defense Department is calling for the `best and the brightest' to fight today's tricky and unconventional wars, the Army is quietly signing up thousands of low-scoring recruits, who historically have performed less well, in order to meet its recruiting goals.''
  
  Let's see . . . one of the lessons of the past three years is that we're going to need smarter soldiers. So let's lower the standards.
  
  Wood reported that by the time the federal fiscal year ends Sept. 30, the Army will have signed up 3,200 ``Category IV'' recruits, kids who scored below the 31st percentile on the Armed Forces Qualifications Test given to all recruits. Just two years ago, only 500 ``Category IV'' recruits were allowed to sign up.
  
  College kids are not beating a path to recruiting offices. Nor are young people with the technical or trade skills needed in the job market. The Iraq war has made recruiters' jobs a lot more difficult. Despite enlistment bonuses and other perks, if the Army had not lowered its standards, it would have missed its goal of recruiting 80,000 new soldiers this year.
  
  If you add this year's 3,200 Category IV recruits to the 2,900 who signed up last year, it means that for the next three years the Army will field two brigades' worth of soldiers who finished in the bottom 30 percent of all those taking the test.

Army meets its retention goal (a month early)
 

How does lowering the standards help reenlistment? I understand how it would help push up new enlistees? Duh?

Army meets its retention goal (a month early)
 

Oh, my bad. We're all cool because they've met their retention goals. Never mind.

Army meets its retention goal (a month early)
 

I sense a hatred for America and freedom in your post...why?

Army meets its retention goal (a month early)
 

:violin:


I know that wasn't really appropriate. I just wanted to use it again because I think it is cool.

Army meets its retention goal (a month early)
 

An ARMY SPOKESMAN was the one who said that they are getting a "feeling of accomplishment that comes with doing their mission." WTF? That's like Paris Hilton's spokesman saying "Paris deeply regrets her friend Brandon's statements about firecrotch. Paris admires Lindsay very much and has called to express her dismay at Brandon's actions, and to assure Lindsay that she in no way shares his feelings."

Do you get, like, gulliblER (if that is possible) late at night?

Army meets its retention goal (a month early)
 

No I am always very gullible. Ask Slave.

Army meets its retention goal (a month early)
 

In fairness, "doing" a mission is similar to a "sucessful" test. And the re-enlistees are mostly enlisted personnel.

Islam, a religion Promoting Online Banking!
 

• Series of 22 Bombs Explode in Thailand
  
  BANGKOK, Thailand — At least 22 bombs exploded almost simultaneously Thursday inside commercial banks in southern Thailand, killing two people and injuring 28 in a region bloodied by a Muslim insurgency, police said.
  
  The homemade bombs, which were triggered by mobile phone signals, were placed in garbage bins, at newspaper stands and near seats where customers wait for service in the banks in Yala province, said Maj. Gen. Paithoon Choochaiya who heads the provincial force.
  
  Authorities said that two suspects had been seized.
  
  
  A review of close-circuit video showed that some of the explosives were planted by women, police said.
  
  The army chief in the south, Lt. Gen. Ongkorn Thongprasom, said some of the apparently small devices were hidden in women's handbags or secreted into thick books carried by teenagers dressed in student uniforms.
  
  "We received some intelligence reports, but we did not anticipate it would happen inside banks, especially on the last day of the month. We don't believe they are that cruel," Ongkorn said. Banks are normally crowded at month's end with customers withdrawing funds from their deposited salary checks.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,211428,00.html

I don't know about you Wonk, but it sounds like the governement is limiting its investigation to Muslims. We both know that's not wise. I've emailed the Thai embassy and suggested they look at UK/US tourists- so hopefully all bases will be covered.

Islam, a religion Promoting Online Banking!
 

Most helpful indeed. I think another example that backs Wonk up is the recent resolution to the Jon-Bennet Ramsey case. Spanky, being quick to jump to simplistic cause and effect solutions would have said the killer actually needed to be present at the crime scene to have committed (or been involved in the crime), thus, wholly overlooking the potential class of subjects such as John-Mark-David Karr. Wonk, like Mary Lacey, takes the broad totality of the possibilities in....

Islam, a religion Promoting Online Banking!
 

eta: was JMDK wearing a Pink shirt with those hi-waisters?

Turning Red Tide
 

After months of generic polling numbers by Gallup and others showing the GOP lagged far behind the Democrats by a seemingly insurmountable nine to 10 points, the titanic political battle for control of Congress is virtually dead even.

My optimisticism that the ideological irrevelancy of the Democrat party being exposed, once again, at the polls, is heartened by this news. Spending a week away from the faux-intellectual eliticism of the cut-and-run maternalistic-big-brother-nanny-staters who control the blue city-state of my residence, and during such week being out in the heartland, amongst the average Joes and Josefinas of the real America, I was reminded of what makes this country great....

....Hatred for the enemy, love of G-d, guns, cheap cigarettes, roadside adult entertainment shacks and monstrous trucks! (not necessarily in that order.

Turning Red Tide
 

I've never understood the value or relevance of national polls to local elections. What are the polls in the contested races?

Turning Red Tide
 

Doesnt a little known double secret codicil of the preemption doctrine apply here?

Turning Red Tide
 

You like the parliamentary system? How french. no offense.

another reason to vote for Lieberman...
 

Among the celebrities journeying to Connecticut to support Ned Lamont's campaign to unseat Sen. Joseph Lieberman (now running as an independent, having lost the Democratic primary to Lamont) is Michael Schiavo, known around the world as the husband who finally succeeded in conspiring with a state Judge to murder his late wife, Terri Schiavo

Do the liberals have any sense of shame?

another reason to vote for Lieberman...
 

hard to beat the sense of shame the pro-teri people had.

Turning Red Tide
 

Upon being introduced to me, more often than not, the introducee queries me, platonically, "Account, is that french?"

Note to Taxwonk
 

good idea.