|
Today's Fortune: |
   
|
Saturday, March 09, 2002
.: posted by George 3/9/2002
Friday, March 08, 2002
They've released security camera pictures of the Pentagon attack. No explanation of why they've suddenly released the photos. No plane to be seen in the photos, either--just a great big fireball. I don't really know why there should be some kind of conspiracy here, but ever since I saw that site I posted the other day, it's been on my mind. I guess if I dwell on it long enough, I'll invent a motive, too.
.: posted by andy 3/8/2002
Did anyone ever hear of the Azad Hind Legion?
.: posted by andy 3/8/2002
If I was gonna get something tattooed on my forehead, it'd be "whitey will pay."
This story, or at least the headline, reminds me of a story Pierre told me. Back in January, he went to San Fransisco and on the flight back he had a layover in Dallas. United cancelled the flight from DFW to AUS and refused to pay for hotel rooms because the cancellation was caused by weather. Pierre asked around to find people to split car rental costs, and some girl offered the use of her car if she didn't have to drive. On the trip, she told Pierre about her career, which was working at The Lodge, a high rent strip club in Dallas, incidentally run by a woman. She also explained that she was a very high priced call girl, and married men for money. She was 21, had been divorced twice, and had a child from each man. Something about getting more money in divorces if you have kids. She was on her way to Austin to meet some exec from IBM.
.: posted by Grand Inquisitor Fnord Moco 3/8/2002
Thursday, March 07, 2002
Another one from Shawn. I think he wants to be a contributor, but according to him "I'm just too damn lazy to register my own nic..."
.: posted by Jeremy 3/7/2002
I think some of my cynicism got mottled in my last post. I'm pretty sure WW2 wasn't the last time we had trade issues with japan, and I was expecting all kinds of retaliation from everybody we buy steel from outside of NAFTA. It was more a response to the Japanese trade/industry minister's angry tone about the whole thing.
Seriously though, if not for the Angles and the Saxons, we probably WOULD all be speaking german right now. Or at least spanish, norweigian, dutch or maybe even portugese. But while we're tattooing our foreheads, maybe you should consider "Blame America First."
.: posted by Jeremy 3/7/2002
Jeremy, you should get "If it weren't for us, all of you'd be speaking German right now!" tattooed on your forehead.
It'll prolly be lawsuits in WTO and retaliatory tariffs on US goods, like when the US threatened a 200% tariff on French wines a few years ago coz France was trying to prop up one of it's failing industries.
If this were something like apples or honey (which, incidentally did get import tariffs put on it last year by the US), it wouldn't be such a big deal. But a tariff on steel is ridiculous. Steel isn't used in every product, but it's used in the manufacture, transport, and sale of every product. Every kind of machine, every means of transport, every tool is made from steel. Some US steel manufacturers are competitive. The larger, older ones are not. Tariffs to protect those less efficient companies does no good for nobody. Ugh. Of course, Canada and Mexico are exempt, and they're something like 25% of the raw import tonnage of steel that enters the country, so we'll still have quite a bit of imported steel. And talk about a windfall for Mexican steel manufacturers. They make a lot of lower cost steel and have heavy competition from South America, Korea, and China on these commodities. But no more. There's also already been talk of drop shipped steel, sold from Peru or China to Mexico or Turkey or some other exempt country, then brought into the US tariff free.
About the Daily Yomiuri, they seem to take an anti-American view. I wish more press i get access to would.
"... U.S. industries that consume steel, such as automakers, had been urging the U.S. government not to take inappropriate retaliatory measures."
"The protectionist move by the United States ... "
"[The US steel industry], which has been overly dependent on Washington's protectionist policy, has yet to show any signs of recovery."
A funny aside about honey tariffs, they were country-based, targetting countries that had large agricultural incentives. Argentina got 66% tariffs on honey, but since the Argentine peso has been uncoupled from the dollar, prices of Argentine honey with the tariffs have fallen to below the pre-tariff prices.
.: posted by Grand Inquisitor Fnord Moco 3/7/2002
Japan should consider history before it acts brashly. I remember the last time we imposed trade sanctions on them.
That's right, build yourself a fleet and park it in pearl harbor, japan, I dare you.
.: posted by Jeremy 3/7/2002
i mean, right. er... it was modesty..
.: posted by aida 3/7/2002
oh yea, i'm not kicking in any of the TKD pictures cause they were taken about 3 weeks after i joined the dojo. my kicks weren't pretty enough yet, i guess.
.: posted by aida 3/7/2002
on the front page of today's "Daily Yomiuri" (japanese newspaper translated into english for all the foreignors in tokyo...lucky me, i can get it in niihama, too):
"US slaps tariffs on steel imports." yes. we knew that. then just underneath, the japanese trade/economy minister reacts (he's rather annoyed): "Japan will work closely with Europe, South Korea and related nations to consider approprate [counter] measures." Translation: trade war.
.: posted by aida 3/7/2002
Wednesday, March 06, 2002
Here's something new. According to some British guy's findings, the Chinese circumnavigated the world before Magellan, and found the Americas before Columbus. If this is true, I wonder how that will affect the teaching of Western history. I hate to get all progressive and revisionist, but when I took world history in elementary and high school, it sure was Eurocentric. There was always a chapter in the book which says, "outside Europe, things were also happening, mostly in China." My History of Design class (at UNCG) doesn't even acknowledge that there's architecture outside of Europe before white people came to North America. That's odd to me, since Asian style has become so influential in the last 200 years.
.: posted by andy 3/6/2002
Shawn wanted me to post this to the site. It's good that he has the proper perspective when it comes to seeing the possible consequences of world domination.
Steph didn't want to show off her kicks in the pictures because she's so modest. Right steph?
.: posted by Jeremy 3/6/2002
The widows of the terror attack are angry at Ted Rall's editorial cartoon. Does anyone want to give odds on a possible lawsuit? I'm kind of tired of the media glorifying the people killed in the attacks, and all the talks of memorials, and all the ceremonies and all the dirty money-grubbing that goes along with the whole thing.
.: posted by andy 3/6/2002
I tried the table top fusion experiment at home, and it seems to work. Please note, however, that if you're going to try it yourself, you should make sure to use something microwave safe. I used styrofoam, and now it's all melted and crusted onto our dining room table. Those little acetone bubbles get HOT, and I'm not kidding.
Steph, how come, in the dojo pictures, you're the only one not doing a kick or something? Is it some kind of Japanese cultural thing?
.: posted by andy 3/6/2002
oops, i'm sure i spelled pleiates wrong... i meant to look that up and verify it. doh.
.: posted by aida 3/6/2002
ok, i gave up trying to do this from work... go figure. here's the message (posted about 12hrs later then it was written).
all you guys blabbering about war strategies and military operations is getting a little heavy. (aka boring), so i've decided to add in my own two sense about something completely unrelated... japan.
devin, you asked me way back in december about japan. i didn't forget about your questions, but i did ignore flooz for the entire time i was in scotland (for christmas), and then when i came back... well, i kept ignoring it.
but today i looked back into the depths of the flooz archives (germ, i'm impressed. they're working and they seem rather complete.) and found your
questions:
"It's great to hear from you, Stephanie! We need more diverse voices here. Sorry to hear about the computer problems. Never having lived in another country, I am curious about the language situation in Japan. Did you know any Japanese before going over? Have you been able to pick any up? At your language level(whatever that may be), is it difficult to get around in the general population, or is the society accomodating to English-speakers; and is there an English district, like 'Chinatown' so to speak?"
Well, to be honest the language situation is really tough. it's a constant barrier and a source of never-ending frustrations. i only knew 3 words of japanese when i landed in tokyo: konnichiwa, sayonnara, subaru (like the car, but the word means "the seven sisters" or the "pleiates"-- the constallation). the language difficulties are far worse then they ever were when i lived in france because a) i speak french, and b) french uses the same alphabet as english. my japanese has improved exponentially since my arrival, but i'll never be able to effectively read it. and where i live, in Niihama, is about as non-international as west texas. few people really speak english and there's not just a who lot of westerners around. as a matter of fact, i've become immune to the curious stares i get from 5 year olds who are old enough to see that i'm different, but not old enough to know that staring is rude. i have managed to find a littel pocket of friends here (two of which are french) with whom i can commiserate and socialize. and recently i actually joined a tae kwon do dojo. (the link is to a japanese website, but my picture and that of the other members is on it. just in case you thought i was making it all up.) they don't speak english, i don't speak much japanese and all the commands and moves are taught in korean, but it's a blast.
living in japan is a challenge, and getting set up was the worst (phone lines, internet service, finding my way around the grocery store..) but i've grown quite accustom to things. and i've gotten quite used to everything being 10 times more difficult to do (ordering from a restaurant menu, calling for a taxi, finding shampoo.) overall, though, i'd have to say i like it.
.: posted by aida 3/6/2002
Tuesday, March 05, 2002
ok, it appears that i can't post LONG messages cause for some reason the network won't handle it.. but if i keep the messages short it'll let me send them. this is rather unfortunate since i've already written out a long message. so i'm gonna send it in two or three small chuncks... see if this works.
.: posted by aida 3/5/2002
ok, that one worked. what is going on????????
.: posted by aida 3/5/2002
hell. i can't post again.
it's like the computer arbitrarly decides what days it'll let me post. how come i didn't have any problems yesterday, and i'm getting error messages right and left today. damn japan
.: posted by aida 3/5/2002
I'll check this out when my issue of Science gets here, but that magazine is usually pretty careful when it comes to publishing results of experiments. Could be another cold fusion thing, 'tho.
.: posted by George 3/5/2002
Trade war, here we come!
So, America has an aging steel industry with inefficient production facilities and technology from the 60's. This is causing a lot of old steel companies to go bankrupt, and layoffs, and that sort of thing. What's the solution? Prop it up with tariffs that hurt the rest of the US economy, and the world economy, as well as angering trading partners and possibly violating WTO agreements.
.: posted by Grand Inquisitor Fnord Moco 3/5/2002
If you ever read anything I ever wrote in my life, then you probably have a vague sort of overall sense that I'm a conspiracy buff. Don't get me wrong--I think most things in life are exactly as they seem. When I tripped walking up some stairs today, I didn't blame the CIA or the Eisenhower Military Industrial Complex. But every now and then I think there's more going on than we see on the surface. Take Ariel Sharon's visit to that Mosque, what's it called? I forget, but I don't think it's a coincidence that a few months later he was the new Israeli Prime Minister.
Here's another really interesting conspiracy theory. Compare the amount of debris around the Pentagon with the debris field left by the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania. And while you're at it, tell me where the massive skidmark made by the plane allegedly skidding into the Pentagon went. Whey they would fake a plane crashing into the Pentagon is beyond me, but it's interesting, nonetheless.
.: posted by andy 3/5/2002
Same MSNBC article as below, saying "The initial plan for the operation was for U.S. troops to take up blocking positions to prevent Taliban and al-Qaida from escaping, with Afghan forces leading the fighting."
More recent news from CNN has the Afghans doing the blocking and the Americans on the frontlines. It's neat to be able to watch the strategies shift as those in charge begin to recognize the full scale of the conflict. Also interesting--the Afghans claim the fight is against 250 Chechens and 150 Arabs. No Afghans at all. I think it's neat that Islam has informal, transient armies that go wherever they feel they're needed. It's hard for me to imagine that the Chechens feel needed more in Afghanistan than in Chechnya (interestingly, the US has just openly admitted using a thermobaric bomb, which is a kind of fuel-air explosive).
.: posted by andy 3/5/2002
You know, I was just looking at that picture I posted a minute ago. Those guys sure don't look like regular soldiers, do they? What kind of soldiers do you think they might be?
.: posted by andy 3/5/2002
Here's one of the first articles I read about Operation Anaconda. "Early Saturday, 500 to 600 Afghan soldiers and a contingent of troops believed to be from the U.S. Army's 101st Airborne Division launched a ground offensive, officials said."
"Afghan fighters returning from the front lines Saturday said they were badly outnumbered and were being pushed back by al Qaeda forces," it also says.
This article quotes an Afghan who says there are 50 Americans with the Afghans. That's the same thing I read somewhere else several days ago. I know that things have more than doubled since then, with BBC and MSNBC both quoting the number of allied troops involved at 1500, while CNN more hawkishly claims a whopping 2000. The afore-linked MSNBC article also goes on to contradict its Afghan source, claiming that about half the total force is American.
Nevertheless, Saturday morning, when I first read about the assault, I read that a force made up of about 600 Afghans and 30 Americans was beaten back by Al Qaeda and Taliban fighters. The fact that no progress has been reported three days after the attacks began means to me that Central Command overestimated its troops and underestimated their opposition. Today I read claims that in some cases, our forces are within 100 yards of Al Qaeda positions. Woopity Doo! In other words, we're now to the point where the Al Qaeda can bring accurate rifle fire against us (note the wide open spaces behind these guys, and the 4-wheeler their equipment is on. Maybe a good time for a Bradley? The first American death happend when his pickup truck was hit by a mortar round).
.: posted by andy 3/5/2002
I'm confused. Andy's ranting about 30 Special Forces going up against the remains of the entire Taliban armed forces, and the article he links to talks about 800-900 US soldiers from the 10th and 101st, along with a few hundred European soldiers, as well as a thousand or so Afghani troops going up against several hundred Taliban and al Qaeda soldiers, mostly in groups of 5-20; and spread out over 60 square miles of mountains.
I heard an interesting term for the US on BBC tonight; 'Hyperpower'. Makes sense, a step beyond superpower, but it's new to me.
Oh, and G.W. is openly discussing attacking Iraq. In response, an Iraqi government official said somehting along the lines of, "We'll give'em another Vietnam." Is that a joke? The biggest problem with Vietnam was that the US had it's hands tied politically. We had to do something the stem the "red tide", and we couldn't attack North Vietnam because a) we were supposed to be the good guys, defending Democracy in the South, not forcing our own agenda on the world like the conspirators in the North; and b) China would have taken none too kindly to the action, like in Korea, which huge stalemate that the world is still trying to deal with today. And let's not forget the puppet government that needed our support.
Iraq, and Afghanistan for that matter, pose none of these issues. In fact, the current situation with Iraq, and the US with soldiers sitting in Saudia Arabia indefinitely, is closer to a Vietnam than if the US were to launch a full scale assault on Iraq again. If there were some rebel group in Saudia Arabia that was recruiting and attempting to overthrow the Saudi government, and the American troops in Saudia Arabia were constantly fighting against these guerrilla groups, and losing a war of attrition and public opinion, then Saudia Arabia and Iraq would be just like Vietnam. As it is, Saudia Arabia for the most part likes us there, coz it saves them $billions a year on defense spending, and they don't have to worry about Saddam getting all gung ho again and sending the largest army in the Middle East south for more oil.
If we attacked Iraq, there would be no limit to our targets, we wouldn't just be sitting monitoring the supply trains coming down the Ho Chi Minh trail, we'd be very righteously and indignantly shooting everything that moved. As for Afghanistan, the US has stated that it will not take on the role of peacekeeper. It will instead be peacemaker. Leave the policing actions and unpopular disarming work to the Italians and the French, we just want to shoot people. This works fine until the government we prop up becomes unpopular, and hopefully it won't, or if it does, we'll have the sense create a new one to replace it with. If all goes well, in 20 years Afghanistan will be another Japan or (pre-Castro) Cuba.
I don't like unilateralism and fundimental governance, but it does make the world a simpler place, for certain.
And why is it that these suicide attacks are so ineffective? I can see attacking a security checkpoint and only killing a few people, but it seems like if I were going to martyr myself for Allah with an M-16 and grenades at a crowded restaurant, I could do a lot better than 3 dead and 30 wounded. That's like the effects of a single well-placed grenade, not an entire attack.
.: posted by Grand Inquisitor Fnord Moco 3/5/2002
andy, you might want to reread your war-in-afghanistan article. the 10th Mountain Division was and is being used in operation anaconda... i don't know just a whole lot about military divisions and their purposes, but it seems to me your argument has a rather gaping hole in it.
other then that, how's life everybody? i'm trying, yet again, to post from work, though judging from past experience, i won't be the least bit surprised if it doesn't go through.. guess you could call this a bit of a test message.
.: posted by aida 3/5/2002
Monday, March 04, 2002
I call Andy's attention to the sad experience of the Soviets, who went into Afghanistan with full military force and got their asses whipped. We shouldn't be there in the first place; this could turn into another Viet Nam. Why does the US misuse its military? Its run by civilians (read politicians).
The helicopter that went down was evidently hit by a missle, maybe a Stinger, which we gave to Afghans in large numbers. Imagine some of them smuggled into this country, and used on airliners. Also the supposedly missing 10-kiloton Soviet nuke destined for NYC after Sep. 11. All this gives me the willies.
.: posted by George 3/4/2002
Looks like the war in Afghanistan is picking back up. Reading this article, it seems like this is a good occasion for regular Army to be used, instead of special forces. Please notice that the 101st Airborne Division, along with Green Berets, I'm sure, is involved. Why not the 10th Mountain? Isn't this what they train for? I understand Green Berets, because someone has to lead the Afghans, and that's what Green Berets do. But which part of this battle requires light infantry? In fact, why not tanks and armored personnel carriers? This is a full-on battle, with mortars and artillery and fortifications and stuff. I thought you weren't supposed to use Special Forces for this kind of thing. I thought they were for small, localized missions, like capturing airports, rescuing hostages, and doing reconnaisance work. But why would you use light infantry for ground attacks on heavily fortified positions?
It seems like the US has historically misused its special forces. In Panama, they used Navy SEALs to attack the hangar where Noriega's private plane was, despite the fact that Army Rangers train specifically for attacks on airports. It was a fiasco, with the SEALs assaulting across the flat tarmac under heavy and accurate enemy fire, with no cover anywhere to be found. Along the same lines, the Rangers and Delta forces that went after Aidid were hung out to dry when they encountered stiff resistance. As soon as things got dicey, those in charge should have sent out regular infantry in APCs to pick the Special Forces guys up. Of course that didn't happen because our Special Forces guys are the best in the world and they can handle anything, right? Instead we had to borrow Armored vehicles from the Pakistanis. The problem is that those in charge have too much faith in Special Forces, and not enough of a clue as to their capabilities.
We're going to attack 500-700 veteran Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters in a heavily fortified position backed by artillery and mortars? No problem, we'll send 600 Afghans and 30 Special Forces guys. That should clear them right out. What, our troops were repulsed? Drop some bombs and throw in 30 more Special Forces. Still no luck? Maybe if we bomb them some more, and then try again... It's as if we have no clue how to conduct a conventional battle any more. Why not tanks? Why not artillery? Why not regular infantry in Bradleys? What about this has "unconventional warfare" written on it?
.: posted by andy 3/4/2002
It makes sense to extend morality to animals. There's no reason why a lab rat shouldn't be treated in a humane and dignified way. I'm not saying we shouldn't inject it full of cancer; I'm just saying that after we give it a tumor the size of an eggplant, we can still keep its cage clean and feed it regularly. Just because we're ultimately going to kill and eat a cow doesn't mean it should have an unhealthy, unhappy life leading up to its slaughter. Our dependence on some animals should morally oblige us to look after their quality of life.
By the same token, animals should not be used for intrinsically inhumane testing that has little or no survival value for humans. More specifically, cosmetic manufacturers should NOT test on animals. If you think your mascara might be caustic, stick it in your own goddamn eye, you heartless sonsofbitches. I can see where an evolution-based explanation of cosmetics might be credible, but that's no justification for using animals as makeup test pilots. I hate the whole damn cosmetic industry. Moreover, I hate the fashion industry for forcing such a completely artificial and utterly unattainable definition of beauty onto women. I wonder if anorexia was such a major problem for the adolescents of the Roman Empire. But anyway, that's something for me to think about on a day when I don't have a major test the next day.
.: posted by andy 3/4/2002
Woohoo! 6 million Euros stolen from a French money depot. I wish I had just stolen 6 million Euros from a French money depot...
.: posted by andy 3/4/2002
Sunday, March 03, 2002
I've really never understood the idea that Human morality should be extended to animals, except when extending morality to that animal benifits your chances of survival, like it may in the case of dogs, which have historically played a beneficial role in human survival. Extending human morality to animals to the point where we limit our food supply or medicinal testing procedures seems to be counter to human survival, which is the reason why we evolved morality. And even beyond that, most animal rights people are very selective about what kind of life they want to extend morality to. What magical properties make an oxygen breathing semi-intelligent cow more worthy of life than a carbon dioxide breathing peice of grass? Is one more alive than the other? It just doesn't make sense to me to use morality for anything other than keeping people from hurting other people.
.: posted by Jeremy 3/3/2002
Now might not be the time for critical appraisals of the Koran.
.: posted by andy 3/3/2002
Google
DrinkBoy
Modern Drunkard
DMOZ.org
The Agonist
Metafilter.com
Fark.com
RobotWisdom.com
Memepool.com
Plastic.com
news.google.com