OT – Nuclear Fallout Map

[zk]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=zk]
That all makes sense. You’ve also got several dyed-in-the-wool rightists who are unable to debate using facts and resort to childish and petty ad hominem when confronted.

Perhaps on this type of forum, where the average joe is involved, the anger and stupidity is equal on both ends of the spectrum. Maybe my perception is skewed because the right-wing noise machine that you see every day in the media is wild with anger, far more so than what the left comes up with. It works, though. Obama was vilified far in excess of the mistakes he made almost immediately upon taking office. You see so much hatred and anger out there towards him that wouldn’t exist without that noise machine. That machine is not only angry, it is purposely deceitful. It’s why republicans keep winning despite their awful record recently.[/quote]

Zk: No disagreement from me on anything you’ve said. Regardless of stripe, idiots should be called out.

I also don’t debate the “noise machine”, either. Whether we’re discussing relative volume or content. However, when we get to the idea of signal versus noise ratio, I would ask: What volume of criticism is Obama in for?

More pointedly: How do you think those Libyan rebels in Benghazi feel about Obama’s 2009 Cairo speech right about now? Maybe it rings a little hollow for them as the US sits back and dithers while they get bombed out of existence?

I think there are valid criticisms of the man and his administration (Gitmo, Patriot I/II, etc), and I do believe he has made some significant missteps.

I would also point out that Dubya was subjected to fairly extreme vilification himself (and, ironically for the same policies and programs), as well as being cast as an American President who should be assassinated. He and Cheney were hung in effigy, and left-wing pundits and performers had an eight-year run of mocking the president for everything from his poor grammar and elocution, to his Hitlerian foreign policy.[/quote]

I’d agree with all of that except for the part about the extreme vilification of Bush being for the same policies and programs as Obama’s. Bush was extremely vilified, but I think he deserved it. He got us into a war of choice apparently without significant reflection on the matter. Thousands of Americans are dead in vain and trillions of dollars are wasted. To me, that’s an extreme villain.

Obama dithers and has made some bad calls. But he hasn’t done nearly the damage to this country that Bush did. Whole different league.

I’m curious about your opinions on Libya. What would you have us do there? What long-term strategy would you have?

[paramount]

Another Interesting Map:

http://chanceofrain.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/20110315_fuku_Cs-137-glob_12.gif

[paramount]

Another Interesting Map:

http://chanceofrain.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/20110315_fuku_Cs-137-glob_12.gif

[paramount]

Another Interesting Map:

http://chanceofrain.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/20110315_fuku_Cs-137-glob_12.gif

[paramount]

Another Interesting Map:

http://chanceofrain.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/20110315_fuku_Cs-137-glob_12.gif

[paramount]

Another Interesting Map:

http://chanceofrain.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/20110315_fuku_Cs-137-glob_12.gif

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=zk]
I’d agree with all of that except for the part about the extreme vilification of Bush being for the same policies and programs as Obama’s. Bush was extremely vilified, but I think he deserved it. He got us into a war of choice apparently without significant reflection on the matter. Thousands of Americans are dead in vain and trillions of dollars are wasted. To me, that’s an extreme villain.

Obama dithers and has made some bad calls. But he hasn’t done nearly the damage to this country that Bush did. Whole different league.

I’m curious about your opinions on Libya. What would you have us do there? What long-term strategy would you have?[/quote]

Zk: Except that Obama is continuing the very same policies as Bush: Gitmo remains open, extraordinary rendition continues (a policy instituted under Clinton), drone strikes continue, and the war in Afghanistan actually enlarged significantly under Obama. I don’t necessarily see how one can drop the hammer on Bush without doing the same to Obama.

As far as Libya goes: Obama could have easily removed Gaddafi’s air force from the conflict, and that air force (both fixed wing and helicopter) has been the difference thus far. He wouldn’t have needed to even involve US air power, but used SLBMs and cruise missiles deployed from US subs in the Med. All of Libya’s military airfields are pre-programmed into targeting computers and it would’ve taken about three days total to completely blind (missile strikes against radar and communications facilities) and then ground (missile and SLBM strikes against runways, revetments and fuel facilities) Gaddafi’s air power. This bullshit about involving the UN in a no-fly zone was a complete and total waste of time (we don’t have sufficient air power or resources to enforce a no-fly over Libya as it is, since USAF and USN resources are stretched thin supporting two wars), and Obama knew it. Under the guise of “multi-lateralism”, he essentially consigned the rebellion to destruction and aided and abetted a total fucking lunatic in the bargain.

Like I said, how do you think those Libyan rebels feel about that touchy-feely Cairo speech now?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=zk]
I’d agree with all of that except for the part about the extreme vilification of Bush being for the same policies and programs as Obama’s. Bush was extremely vilified, but I think he deserved it. He got us into a war of choice apparently without significant reflection on the matter. Thousands of Americans are dead in vain and trillions of dollars are wasted. To me, that’s an extreme villain.

Obama dithers and has made some bad calls. But he hasn’t done nearly the damage to this country that Bush did. Whole different league.

I’m curious about your opinions on Libya. What would you have us do there? What long-term strategy would you have?[/quote]

Zk: Except that Obama is continuing the very same policies as Bush: Gitmo remains open, extraordinary rendition continues (a policy instituted under Clinton), drone strikes continue, and the war in Afghanistan actually enlarged significantly under Obama. I don’t necessarily see how one can drop the hammer on Bush without doing the same to Obama.

As far as Libya goes: Obama could have easily removed Gaddafi’s air force from the conflict, and that air force (both fixed wing and helicopter) has been the difference thus far. He wouldn’t have needed to even involve US air power, but used SLBMs and cruise missiles deployed from US subs in the Med. All of Libya’s military airfields are pre-programmed into targeting computers and it would’ve taken about three days total to completely blind (missile strikes against radar and communications facilities) and then ground (missile and SLBM strikes against runways, revetments and fuel facilities) Gaddafi’s air power. This bullshit about involving the UN in a no-fly zone was a complete and total waste of time (we don’t have sufficient air power or resources to enforce a no-fly over Libya as it is, since USAF and USN resources are stretched thin supporting two wars), and Obama knew it. Under the guise of “multi-lateralism”, he essentially consigned the rebellion to destruction and aided and abetted a total fucking lunatic in the bargain.

Like I said, how do you think those Libyan rebels feel about that touchy-feely Cairo speech now?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=zk]
I’d agree with all of that except for the part about the extreme vilification of Bush being for the same policies and programs as Obama’s. Bush was extremely vilified, but I think he deserved it. He got us into a war of choice apparently without significant reflection on the matter. Thousands of Americans are dead in vain and trillions of dollars are wasted. To me, that’s an extreme villain.

Obama dithers and has made some bad calls. But he hasn’t done nearly the damage to this country that Bush did. Whole different league.

I’m curious about your opinions on Libya. What would you have us do there? What long-term strategy would you have?[/quote]

Zk: Except that Obama is continuing the very same policies as Bush: Gitmo remains open, extraordinary rendition continues (a policy instituted under Clinton), drone strikes continue, and the war in Afghanistan actually enlarged significantly under Obama. I don’t necessarily see how one can drop the hammer on Bush without doing the same to Obama.

As far as Libya goes: Obama could have easily removed Gaddafi’s air force from the conflict, and that air force (both fixed wing and helicopter) has been the difference thus far. He wouldn’t have needed to even involve US air power, but used SLBMs and cruise missiles deployed from US subs in the Med. All of Libya’s military airfields are pre-programmed into targeting computers and it would’ve taken about three days total to completely blind (missile strikes against radar and communications facilities) and then ground (missile and SLBM strikes against runways, revetments and fuel facilities) Gaddafi’s air power. This bullshit about involving the UN in a no-fly zone was a complete and total waste of time (we don’t have sufficient air power or resources to enforce a no-fly over Libya as it is, since USAF and USN resources are stretched thin supporting two wars), and Obama knew it. Under the guise of “multi-lateralism”, he essentially consigned the rebellion to destruction and aided and abetted a total fucking lunatic in the bargain.

Like I said, how do you think those Libyan rebels feel about that touchy-feely Cairo speech now?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=zk]
I’d agree with all of that except for the part about the extreme vilification of Bush being for the same policies and programs as Obama’s. Bush was extremely vilified, but I think he deserved it. He got us into a war of choice apparently without significant reflection on the matter. Thousands of Americans are dead in vain and trillions of dollars are wasted. To me, that’s an extreme villain.

Obama dithers and has made some bad calls. But he hasn’t done nearly the damage to this country that Bush did. Whole different league.

I’m curious about your opinions on Libya. What would you have us do there? What long-term strategy would you have?[/quote]

Zk: Except that Obama is continuing the very same policies as Bush: Gitmo remains open, extraordinary rendition continues (a policy instituted under Clinton), drone strikes continue, and the war in Afghanistan actually enlarged significantly under Obama. I don’t necessarily see how one can drop the hammer on Bush without doing the same to Obama.

As far as Libya goes: Obama could have easily removed Gaddafi’s air force from the conflict, and that air force (both fixed wing and helicopter) has been the difference thus far. He wouldn’t have needed to even involve US air power, but used SLBMs and cruise missiles deployed from US subs in the Med. All of Libya’s military airfields are pre-programmed into targeting computers and it would’ve taken about three days total to completely blind (missile strikes against radar and communications facilities) and then ground (missile and SLBM strikes against runways, revetments and fuel facilities) Gaddafi’s air power. This bullshit about involving the UN in a no-fly zone was a complete and total waste of time (we don’t have sufficient air power or resources to enforce a no-fly over Libya as it is, since USAF and USN resources are stretched thin supporting two wars), and Obama knew it. Under the guise of “multi-lateralism”, he essentially consigned the rebellion to destruction and aided and abetted a total fucking lunatic in the bargain.

Like I said, how do you think those Libyan rebels feel about that touchy-feely Cairo speech now?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=zk]
I’d agree with all of that except for the part about the extreme vilification of Bush being for the same policies and programs as Obama’s. Bush was extremely vilified, but I think he deserved it. He got us into a war of choice apparently without significant reflection on the matter. Thousands of Americans are dead in vain and trillions of dollars are wasted. To me, that’s an extreme villain.

Obama dithers and has made some bad calls. But he hasn’t done nearly the damage to this country that Bush did. Whole different league.

I’m curious about your opinions on Libya. What would you have us do there? What long-term strategy would you have?[/quote]

Zk: Except that Obama is continuing the very same policies as Bush: Gitmo remains open, extraordinary rendition continues (a policy instituted under Clinton), drone strikes continue, and the war in Afghanistan actually enlarged significantly under Obama. I don’t necessarily see how one can drop the hammer on Bush without doing the same to Obama.

As far as Libya goes: Obama could have easily removed Gaddafi’s air force from the conflict, and that air force (both fixed wing and helicopter) has been the difference thus far. He wouldn’t have needed to even involve US air power, but used SLBMs and cruise missiles deployed from US subs in the Med. All of Libya’s military airfields are pre-programmed into targeting computers and it would’ve taken about three days total to completely blind (missile strikes against radar and communications facilities) and then ground (missile and SLBM strikes against runways, revetments and fuel facilities) Gaddafi’s air power. This bullshit about involving the UN in a no-fly zone was a complete and total waste of time (we don’t have sufficient air power or resources to enforce a no-fly over Libya as it is, since USAF and USN resources are stretched thin supporting two wars), and Obama knew it. Under the guise of “multi-lateralism”, he essentially consigned the rebellion to destruction and aided and abetted a total fucking lunatic in the bargain.

Like I said, how do you think those Libyan rebels feel about that touchy-feely Cairo speech now?

[KSMountain]

[quote=ILoveRegulation]And here comes the idiotbertarian brigade to crack wise. Shouldn’t you morons be congregating on the NPR thread bitching about the infinitesimal portion of the federal budget that organization receives?

You better be careful. One of your kind was inadvertently exposed to Mother Jones earlier in this thread and experienced a massive amount of cognitive dissonance after reading an article entirely based on facts. He hasn’t been seen since. You don’t want the same to happen to you.[/quote]
Maybe you could tone down the vitriol a bit.

[KSMountain]

[quote=ILoveRegulation]And here comes the idiotbertarian brigade to crack wise. Shouldn’t you morons be congregating on the NPR thread bitching about the infinitesimal portion of the federal budget that organization receives?

You better be careful. One of your kind was inadvertently exposed to Mother Jones earlier in this thread and experienced a massive amount of cognitive dissonance after reading an article entirely based on facts. He hasn’t been seen since. You don’t want the same to happen to you.[/quote]
Maybe you could tone down the vitriol a bit.

[KSMountain]

[quote=ILoveRegulation]And here comes the idiotbertarian brigade to crack wise. Shouldn’t you morons be congregating on the NPR thread bitching about the infinitesimal portion of the federal budget that organization receives?

You better be careful. One of your kind was inadvertently exposed to Mother Jones earlier in this thread and experienced a massive amount of cognitive dissonance after reading an article entirely based on facts. He hasn’t been seen since. You don’t want the same to happen to you.[/quote]
Maybe you could tone down the vitriol a bit.

[KSMountain]

[quote=ILoveRegulation]And here comes the idiotbertarian brigade to crack wise. Shouldn’t you morons be congregating on the NPR thread bitching about the infinitesimal portion of the federal budget that organization receives?

You better be careful. One of your kind was inadvertently exposed to Mother Jones earlier in this thread and experienced a massive amount of cognitive dissonance after reading an article entirely based on facts. He hasn’t been seen since. You don’t want the same to happen to you.[/quote]
Maybe you could tone down the vitriol a bit.

[Author]

Posts