« Last Edit: Oct 25th, 2014, 3:50pm by Sysconfig »
Re: Stuff & Nonsense
« Reply #11643 on: Oct 25th, 2014, 3:51pm »
While the analogy of Vladimir Putin playing geopolitical chess (while the rest of the world plays checkers) has been a popular one, the French ambassador Gerard Araud has a different - somewhat stunningly honest - persepctive: Putin "is more a poker player really, putting all the money on the table; saying, 'Do the same' and of course we blink. We don't do the same." As Bloomberg reports, Araud goes on to express entirely un-Juncker-like, how Putin has outmaneuvered his opponents and humiliated Ukraine. Simply put, he adds, the Russian president "has won because we were not ready to die for Ukraine, while apparently he was," leaving the ominous question, "when is Putin going to stop? Whatever we decide is a disaster for us."
Vladimir Putin has outmaneuvered his opponents and humiliated Ukraine by continuing to back pro-Russian separatists and flouting a cease-fire, making it crucial that sanctions on Russia remain firm, France’s ambassador to the U.S. said.
The Russian president “has won because we were not ready to die for Ukraine, while apparently he was,” Ambassador Gerard Araud said yesterday at a Bloomberg Government breakfast in Washington... Echoing the view of other European envoys in Washington, Araud expressed concern that the Ukraine conflict has hit an impasse, leaving Putin the winner by default.
Poroshenko is “kneeling in front of Putin with the cord around his neck and saying, ‘You know, you have won,’” and Putin is still not backing down, Araud said.
While many observers have called Putin a geopolitical chess player, he said, the Russian leader is more a “poker player really, putting all the money on the table, saying, ‘Do the same,’ and of course we blink. We don’t do the same.”
The economic sanctions against Russia must stay in place to prevent Putin from going further, said Araud, who moved to Washington in September after serving as the French ambassador to the United Nations.
“Whatever we decide is a disaster for us,” Araud said, again expressing his personal view. On one side, he said, lies France’s credibility as an arms supplier who delivers on contracts, and on the other, the difficulty of delivering a weapons system to Putin, who might use it against Ukraine or a European ally. Araud concludes - rather ominously - and far too honestly for a paid-up member of the European elite:
“The question is there on the table: When is Putin going to stop?” Araud said. “That’s the reason that we need to keep the sanctions” because, “let’s be frank, it’s more or less the only weapon that we have. We are not going to send our soldiers in Ukraine. It does not make sense to send weapons to the Ukrainians, because the Ukrainians would be defeated real easily, so it will only prolong the war” and lead to a “still bigger Russian victory.” * * *
Don't tell General Dynamics that..They and several others gotta good thing goin right now..
« Last Edit: Oct 25th, 2014, 4:02pm by Sysconfig »
Re: Stuff & Nonsense
« Reply #11644 on: Oct 25th, 2014, 4:11pm »
But to do that you have to disregard everyone else.
You can only assume that position (total self centerism) if you adopt it from a very early age and stick to it throughout you life.
That is very interesting..because for newborn..the universe does center about them..they learn to distinguish and ignore between noise and the sounds that best serve them..they in turn emit cries which best serve them..they even learn to manipulate them and get responses very pavlov like.. some outgrow this and others never let go..and refine it...sociopaths master it..become criminals and respected leaders and politicians.. its always about them or moi.
We learn to obey the golden rule whilst they bend or break it as it is convenient to them
« Last Edit: Oct 25th, 2014, 4:13pm by Sysconfig »
Re: Stuff & Nonsense
« Reply #11645 on: Oct 25th, 2014, 7:36pm »
IDEAS: Where does the term “double government” come from?
GLENNON:It comes from Walter Bagehot’s famous theory, unveiled in the 1860s. Bagehot was the scholar who presided over the birth of the Economist magazine—they still have a column named after him. Bagehot tried to explain in his book “The English Constitution” how the British government worked. He suggested that there are two sets of institutions. There are the “dignified institutions,” the monarchy and the House of Lords, which people erroneously believed ran the government. But he suggested that there was in reality a second set of institutions, which he referred to as the “efficient institutions,” that actually set governmental policy. And those were the House of Commons, the prime minister, and the British cabinet.
IDEAS: What evidence exists for saying America has a double government?
GLENNON:I was curious why a president such as Barack Obama would embrace the very same national security and counterterrorism policies that he campaigned eloquently against. Why would that president continue those same policies in case after case after case? I initially wrote it based on my own experience and personal knowledge and conversations with dozens of individuals in the military, law enforcement, and intelligence agencies of our government, as well as, of course, officeholders on Capitol Hill and in the courts. And the documented evidence in the book is substantial—there are 800 footnotes in the book.
IDEAS: Why would policy makers hand over the national-security keys to unelected officials?
GLENNON: It hasn’t been a conscious decision....Members of Congress are generalists and need to defer to experts within the national security realm, as elsewhere. They are particularly concerned about being caught out on a limb having made a wrong judgment about national security and tend, therefore, to defer to experts, who tend to exaggerate threats. The courts similarly tend to defer to the expertise of the network that defines national security policy.
The presidency itself is not a top-down institution, as many people in the public believe, headed by a president who gives orders and causes the bureaucracy to click its heels and salute. National security policy actually bubbles up from within the bureaucracy. Many of the more controversial policies, from the mining of Nicaragua’s harbors to the NSA surveillance program, originated within the bureaucracy. John Kerry was not exaggerating when he said that some of those programs are “on autopilot.”
IDEAS: Isn’t this just another way of saying that big bureaucracies are difficult to change?
GLENNON: It’s much more serious than that. These particular bureaucracies don’t set truck widths or determine railroad freight rates. They make nerve-center security decisions that in a democracy can be irreversible, that can close down the marketplace of ideas, and can result in some very dire consequences.
IDEAS: Couldn’t Obama’s national-security decisions just result from the difference in vantage point between being a campaigner and being the commander-in-chief, responsible for 320 million lives?
GLENNON: There is an element of what you described. There is not only one explanation or one cause for the amazing continuity of American national security policy. But obviously there is something else going on when policy after policy after policy all continue virtually the same way that they were in the George W. Bush administration.
IDEAS: This isn’t how we’re taught to think of the American political system.
GLENNON: I think the American people are deluded, as Bagehot explained about the British population, that the institutions that provide the public face actually set American national security policy. They believe that when they vote for a president or member of Congress or succeed in bringing a case before the courts, that policy is going to change. Now, there are many counter-examples in which these branches do affect policy, as Bagehot predicted there would be. But the larger picture is still true—policy by and large in the national security realm is made by the concealed institutions.
IDEAS: Do we have any hope of fixing the problem?
GLENNON: The ultimate problem is the pervasive political ignorance on the part of the American people. And indifference to the threat that is emerging from these concealed institutions. That is where the energy for reform has to come from: the American people. Not from government. Government is very much the problem here. The people have to take the bull by the horns. And that’s a very difficult thing to do, because the ignorance is in many ways rational. There is very little profit to be had in learning about, and being active about, problems that you can’t affect, policies that you can’t change.
Re: Stuff & Nonsense
« Reply #11646 on: Oct 25th, 2014, 11:49pm »
Hillary says Business doesn't create Jobs The Gubbermin Does!
People forget, but Hillary was really President – not Bill. Just 4 days after taking office, Hillary was given the authority to start a task force for healthcare reform. The problem was, her vision was unbelievable. The costs upon business were oppressive so much so that not even the Democrats could support her. When asked how was a small business mom and pop going to pay for healthcare she said if they could not afford it they should not be in business. From that moment on, my respect for her collapsed. She revealed herself as a real Marxist.
Now, that she can taste the power of Washington, and I dare say she will not be a yes person as Obama and Bush seem to be, therein lies the real danger. Giving her the power of dictator, which is the power of executive orders, I think I have to leave the USA just to be safe.
Hillary has stated when she ran the White House before regarding her idea of healthcare, “We can’t afford to have that money go to the private sector. The money has to go to the federal government because the federal government will spend that money better than the private sector will spend it.” When has that ever happened?
Hillary believes in government at the expense of the people. I do not say this lightly, because here she goes again. She just appeared at a Boston rally for Democrat gubernatorial candidate Martha Coakley on Friday. She was off the hook and amazingly told the crowd gathered at the Park Plaza Hotel not to listen to anybody who says that “businesses create jobs.”
“Don’t let anybody tell you it’s corporations and businesses create jobs,” Clinton said.
“You know that old theory, ‘trickle-down economics,’” she continued. “That has been tried, that has failed. It has failed rather spectacularly.”
“You know, one of the things my husband says when people say ‘Well, what did you bring to Washington,’ he said, ‘Well, I brought arithmetic,’” Hillary said.
I wrote an OpEd for the Wall Street Journal on Clinton’s Balanced Budget. It was smoke and mirrors. Long-term interest rates were sharply higher than short-term. Clinton shifted the national debt to save interest expenditures. He also inherited a up-cycle in the economy that always produces more taxes.
Yet she sees no problem with the math of perpetually borrowing. Perhaps she would get to the point of being unable to sell debt and just confiscate all wealth since government knows better. Their job on keeping Ebola out is just fantastic so far? Just a few people popping up here and there. Maybe everyone from New York should get a free weekend to visit Washington.
Good morning Swamprat and all of our UFOCasebookers
Not just for the Navy: Railgun pitched for upgrade to Army’s Bradley Fighting Vehicle
By Douglas Ernst The Washington Times Friday, October 24, 2014
BAE Systems wants the U.S. Army to know that there is no reason the Electromagnetic (EM) Railgun, which projects rounds at Mach 7, needs to be solely used by the U.S. Navy in the years ahead.
The defense and security company said its weapon, which has been tested at the Naval Surface Warfare Center in Dahlgren, Virginia, would be a perfect fit for the Army’s next-generation Bradley Fighting Vehicle.
Military.com reported Friday that idea for placing the Electromagnetic (EM) Railgun aboard the Army’s “Future Fighting Vehicle” came during the Association of the United States Army’s annual conference held in Washington on Oct. 13-15.
BAE’s weapon currently blasts a 23-pound hyper-velocity round that can be fired from a rail gun, Navy 5-inch guns or 155mm artillery weapons, Military.com reported. However, the company said that scaling it down for use on any future versions of the Army’s M2/M3 Bradley can be done.
“We’re committed to developing this innovative and game changing technology that will revolutionize naval warfare,” Chris Hughes, vice president and general manager of Weapon Systems at BAE Systems, said on the company’s website. “The Railgun’s ability to defend against enemy threats from distances greater than ever before improves the capabilities of our armed forces.”
The Navy will integrate the electromagnetic pulse weapon onto one of its ships in 2016, Military.com reported.
The satellite was successfully put into orbit 20 minutes after the launch at 1:32 am from the first launch pad of Satish Dhawan Space Centre here, about 100 km north of Chennai.
The successful launch, the third in the series of seven satellites planned by the Indian Space Research Organisation (Isro) to put in place India's own navigation system on par with US global positioning system, was earlier scheduled for October 10. “Third navigation satellite is up in the orbit. Our PSLV has done it again...this is the 28th flight of our PSLV and the seventh flight of the XL (extended) version,” Isro chairman Radhakrishnan said after the launch. “The injection (of the satellite) has been very precise,” Radhakrishnan said and congratulated the entire Isro team involved in the process.
Isro’s most trusted rocket and workhorse launch vehicle PSLV-C26 carried the IRNSS satellite, an independent regional navigation satellite system, designed to provide accurate position information service to users in India as well as the region extending up to 1,500 km from its boundary.
Gratz India! and Gratz Camera guy for catching and reporting accurately... Now everyone should know why certain people don't want us looking up at the sky...24/7
« Last Edit: Oct 26th, 2014, 3:02pm by Sysconfig »
Re: Stuff & Nonsense
« Reply #11652 on: Oct 26th, 2014, 4:47pm »