Offering constructive criticism to the social cripples in our midst since early 2005.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by nononono
Penske Penske,


So, just Bordeaux for you? \

I like a wide range of wine. Ask Ty.

Originally posted by nononono
Watch the Tour today?

Nah. I don't watch that stuff so much anymore, since I retired from the game. Maybe when I come back.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Spanky
I am talking about North Korea and China hitting the United States.

And my question is, is it thought that NK could hit the continental US now or anytime in the next several years? I didn't think so, but I am not widely read, like Ty.

[nononono]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
I like a wide range of wine. Ask Ty.



Nah. I don't watch that stuff so much anymore, since I retired from the game. Maybe when I come back.

Funny. Both things. No, really.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by nononono
Funny. Both things. No, really.

I was shooting for clever. Actually, I was shooting for genuine, did I miss the mark?

[nononono]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
I was shooting for clever. Actually, I was shooting for genuine, did I miss the mark?

I cna't really say if you missed the genuine mark. But you must overestimate my history here, because though I have seen you & Ty exchange a word or two on wine, I have no idea the running discussion there, and I have no idea what your second comment was about (JC?). Pity me. I am not slow, but I am having to keep a lot of new information in order.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
And my question is, is it thought that NK could hit the continental US now or anytime in the next several years? I didn't think so, but I am not widely read, like Ty.

It is my understanding that it is possible that one of their missiles could hit the western seaboard. I think China's can hit anywhere in the United States.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by nononono
I cna't really say if you missed the genuine mark. But you must overestimate my history here, because though I have seen you & Ty exchange a word or two on wine, I have no idea the running discussion there, and I have no idea what your second comment was about (JC?). Pity me. I am not slow, but I am having to keep a lot of new information in order.

I like wine, many varietals. I am particularly fond of PacNW wine, but also indulge in California and French. And Australian. And So American. And Mexican when I am there. And Canadian when I am there. Ty and I post about it, occassionally.

My second comment referred to my retirement from the endurance athletic realm. My come back is imminent.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Spanky
It is my understanding that it is possible that one of their missiles could hit the western seaboard. I think China's can hit anywhere in the United States.

I think you are wrong on the former. Unless you count Alaska and hawaii as the Western seaboard, and if you do, on hawaii I think you are wrong.

[Penske_Account]

CHECK YOUR PMs!

eta: Hank and Shifter, "Confidential to Spanky" did not mean for either of you to look. Respect the "re" line!

[nononono]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
I like wine, many varietals. I am particularly fond of PacNW wine, but also indulge in California and French. And Australian. And So American. And Mexican when I am there. And Canadian when I am there. Ty and I post about it, occassionally.

My second comment referred to my retirement from the endurance athletic realm. My come back is imminent.

Merci. And bueno (since we are travelling the world). I will pay attention to y'all's occasional posts.

Ah-ha. It's never too late...um, sure. Well, it was a good finish, but not huge huge fireworks. An excellent opportunity to see Paris, though, over and over.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Spanky
Your statement just convinced me that not only is it incorrect to use the term Islamofascist but it is dangerous because it can lead people to reach the ridiculous and stupid conclusion you just stated up above.

Someone who just wants power is not nearly as dangerous as someone who is fighting for a cause they believe in. Hitler was not just about power. Neither are these religious fanatics and that is what makes them so dangerous. If Hitler were just about power he would not have put so many resources into the final solution. It seriously hampered the war effort. And when it was clear the war was lost more resources were put into the final solution even though it brought the demise of the third Reich that much closer. Hitler believed in everything he was doing. It was his conviction, and his follower’s conviction, that they were doing the right thing that made WWII so destructive and awful.

Osama Bin Laden and many of his associates have completely sacrifices a good life for this cause. Osama is running from cave to cave and he is a multi millionaire. He gave up a life of luxury to live in Sudan and then Afghanistan. He risked his life in Afghanistan. How many multimillionaires do you know that volunteer to be in the front lines of a guerilla war? Especially one against a superpower.

This is why the term Islamofacist and "Homicide" bomber are so dangerous. These terms lead people to believe that the perpetrators are just greedy and selfish and they don't really believe in what they are doing.

What makes them so dangerous is they really believe in what they are doing, and believe in it so much they are willing to sacrifice everything for the cause.

There is nothing more dangerous than an opponent who believes God is on their side. Only religious conviction brings this about. Religion is the only thing that explains how these guys think and operate. Their religious belief is at the core of what they are doing and to dismiss their religious belief it beyond ignorant.

Don't get me wrong, like Hitler, they actually believe in their cause, at least the "soldiers" on the ground do. But underlying that cause is a raw power grab, pure and simple.

On a related note, how do you explain the bombings in Egypt and Saudi Arabia, both Muslim countires?

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Spanky
I am not for 100% of the budget going to SDI. But a hell of lot more resources than are dedicated to it now. In any defense appropriation there are troubles with wasted money and badly directed funds based on who has the best lobbyist. But this has nothing to do with the logic behind SDI research.

A rational leadership of a country may not nuke us. But an irrational leader might. Delivering WMDs to the United states, contrary to popular belive, is not that easy. That is why it has not been done yet. But lobbing a missile with a nuke or some other WMD is a very real threat.

If war breaks out on the Korean peninsula, I believe there is a strong chance NK will launch a missile at us.

As I stated before, I agree with SDI conceptually. But there are limits on how much of the military budget we can spend towards it. We do not have unlimited resources. So what do we do? We assess risks and allocate funds accordingly. This means that it may be rational to not allocate funds for SDI 100% of the time, and this is the part of your post that I was mainly refuting.

I don't think NK has the capacity to reach the US mainland yet, and even if they did, I highly doubt they would attempt it. It makes no sense for them. Far more likely, they would go after Japan.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Gattigap
I've found that many SDI proponents seem to place a touching yet fervent faith in the idea that a nuclear warhead will arrive via the skies, just like it said in Revelations, but those orgasmic dreams of apocalypse averted never seem to contemplate, in this age of car bombs and airplane bombs, the possibility that said warhead may arrive on a fucking boat.

2. My point exactly. It is a far more likely scenario.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
The liberals were against SDI since day one. ... The number one responsiblity of the Federal Government is national secuirty, and there is no more immediate and real threat to national security that nuclear missiles.

Have you ever heard of game theory? Why do you think liberals oppose SDI, apart from the likelihood that it won't work?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Have you ever heard of game theory? Why do you think liberals oppose SDI, apart from the likelihood that it won't work?

Afghan pipeline involved?