All Hank, all the time.

[sgtclub]

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...07-14-16-17-05

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by sgtclub
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...07-14-16-17-05

Hezbollah has aircraft?

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Spanky
This was predictable. Like I have said a thousand times, they always underestimate the deficit in bad economic times and overestimate it in good economic times. The best way to raise goverment revenue is through growing the economy. Now if congress could start cutting some fat (and the president grew some cajones and started vetoing appropriation bills) we might get a balanced budget.

http://www.economist.com/agenda/disp..._id=E1_STVJTRP

It's only "on the wane" if you accept that the WH's original estimate was anything but a puffed number designed to make "cutting" the deficit easier. It's still a huge number. (I know, I know -- we don't to pay it back, so we're all right.)

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Gattigap
Hezbollah has aircraft?

Tons, but they keep getting hijacked.


Ba-dum-bum.

[flare up]

Originally posted by Spanky


The best way to disable an airport is to take out the runway and that is exactly what they are doing. Of course is ain't that hard to fix so you have to do it again and again.

How about a couple of tactical nukes? One on Beirut and one of Damascus. Wouldn't that solve the problem?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
I don't think the threat itself is enough. And I don't think it's a threat that Israel can make.

OK. Per my last post, I would now defer to the IDF on that decision.

I think that Israel should do what is necessary to shut down the airport. Cratering a runway is probably not sufficient. Runways can be fixed, and a runway designed for jetliners can be used by a small plane even if damaged, I suspect. I think that's why Israel keeps hitting it.

Maybe, but as with some of what Israel did a few weeks back in Gaza, it seems to me that they are responding with disproportionate force to punish civilian populations for the actions of Hamas and Hezbollah, and I don't think that's appropriate. In fact, I think it smacks of terrorism.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
This was predictable. Like I have said a thousand times, they always underestimate the deficit in bad economic times and overestimate it in good economic times. The best way to raise goverment revenue is through growing the economy. Now if congress could start cutting some fat (and the president grew some cajones and started vetoing appropriation bills) we might get a balanced budget.

http://www.economist.com/agenda/disp..._id=E1_STVJTRP

This is like hearing a morbidly obese man who goes in for his yearly check-up, finds out he gained only 10 pounds instead of the 20 he was guessing, and says, "That's great -- now if I can only run a marathon or two I might be able to play professional basketball."

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
I have to go with Sidd on this. It is just not realistic to expect Israel to shoot down a civilian airliner. Israel would never do it (because of the bad press at home and around the world, and the propaganda coup it would be for the Palestineans) and they know it. The second Israel declared a boycott the other side would start sending in planes full of women and children. And there is no way to know which planes are carrying civilians and which ones are carrying arms for Hamas (I know everyone likes to think intelligence agencies have crystal balls, especially when it comes to WMDs, but in reality they don't).

The best way to disable an airport is to take out the runway and that is exactly what they are doing. Of course is ain't that hard to fix so you have to do it again and again.

My point was that having taken out the runway, they came back to bomb the fuel facilities, and that seemed like excess force.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
It's only "on the wane" if you accept that the WH's original estimate was anything but a puffed number designed to make "cutting" the deficit easier. It's still a huge number. (I know, I know -- we don't to pay it back, so we're all right.)

To be fair to the White House -- not that they deserve it -- $60 billion of the difference between the projection deficit and the actual number just announced is due to larger than expected government revenues, and $60 billion is because the White House inflated the projections for the nth year in a row to be able to have this sort of announcement to distract Spanky and everyone else from noticing the billions being added to the federal debt.

[sgtclub]

• JERUSALEM (AP) -- A missile fired by Hezbollah, not an unmanned drone laden with explosives, damaged an Israeli warship off Lebanon, the army said Saturday. Iranian troops helped fire the missile, a senior intelligence official said.
  
  One sailor was killed and three were missing.
  
  The intelligence official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the information, said about 100 Iranian soldiers are in Lebanon and helped fire the Iranian-made, radar-guided C-102 at the ship late Friday.

If it turns out that Iran is involved in this, I think it gives Israel the provocation they need to attempt to take out Iran's nuke program, which I sure the US would not be unhappy about.

The other irony of all of this is that if Israel is successful in taking out Hezbolla (sp?) in southern Lebannon, it would have freed an Arab country from a totalitarian regime (at least in the south), but will still be hated in that country.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sgtclub
...gives Israel the provocation they need to attempt to take out Iran's nuke program....

If it were that easy to do, I'm sure they would have already tried.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
If it were that easy to do, I'm sure they would have already tried.

I'm not sure of that. I get the feeling that, for obvious reasons, the WH has been holding them back. If you look at what Israel has been saying publicly on this topic, it looks to me like their stance is "we'll be patient, but only for so long."

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sgtclub
I'm not sure of that. I get the feeling that, for obvious reasons, the WH has been holding them back. If you look at what Israel has been saying publicly on this topic, it looks to me like their stance is "we'll be patient, but only for so long."

It's very easy to talk about "taking out" Iran's nuclear capability, but we don't really know where the facilities are. Except that some of them are deep underground, which is why the White House told the Pentagon to plan for the use of tactical nuclear weapons.

So, "holding them back" from doing what?

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
is why the White House told the Pentagon to plan for the use of tactical nuclear weapons.

Cite?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
Cite?

Among others, Seymour Hersh has reported about this in the New Yorker.