(FWIW, currently it's Reps by 14 in the House and Dems by 1 in the Senate)
[ November 04, 2002, 21:28: Message edited by: The_Tom ]
Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
Reps, House by 4 Reps, Senate by 1.
Posted by Solommagnus de Pym (Member # 239) on :
08/NOV/02 03:00 AM
10081 Johnny Bredahl -1500 Draw +1800 10082 Leo Gamez +750
Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
Looks like I guessed on the low end.
I'll gloat later.
Posted by Snay (Member # 411) on :
Well, now at least, when the country goes into the shitter, Rob & Omega can't blame it on the Democrats. Honestly, it was a stretch as it was with the Republicans controlling the Executive branch and half of the Legislative branch.
I'll also keep (mostly) quiet on the scandal in Baltimore regarding police posting fliers in poor neighborhoods "reminding" people to make sure all they were up on their bills and rent before coming to vote. The FOP endorsed Ehrlich this race. Gee, if that's not Republican intimidation, I don't know what is. But it's okay, because Democrats are evil, and Republicans only want to save the world with their armies of goodness.
Forgive the sarcasm.
Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
quote:. . . when the country goes into the shitter, Rob & Omega can't blame it on the Democrats.
You think? In the UK, after eighteen years of Conservative rule, they continued to address any criticism with the reply "Well, under the last Labout government. . ." So, think again. Expect the New Deal to get a hammering. 8)
Posted by Ritten (Member # 417) on :
It really doesn't matter what party is in power, they are equally fucked up!!!!
Neither is interested in what happens to the common Joe, absolute power corrupts absolutly, so they can only be semi corrupt, with checks and balances and so forth....
Till everything is controlled by one party with hardliners.... Which I doubt happened....
Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
Try some sweetened tea, Snay. Might wash that bitter taste out of your mouth.
If they're smart, the Reps will use this opportunity to finally secure the gaping wounds that are our borders, with troops. Polls show 65-78% of Americans support that.
I say we use troops pulled from American bases in Europe, particularly Germany. With the Cold War over, they're not needed anymore. Keep a few bases like Rammstein (sp?) as transfer / fueling / quick-deploy points, close the rest down. Europe can see to its own, I'm sure it would make them feel better not having troops of the 'evil imperialist oppressor' on their soil anymore.
Yes, the regions US soldiers frequent may take an economic hit, but I'm sure they can make up for the loss somehow.
Other important issues for attention include making the tax cut permanent, increasing ethanol in gas mixtures, and making sure Grassley (R-Iowa, Finance chair) keeps his promises about more enforcement on corporate accountability and alternative energy tax incentives.
We'll probably see a reduction in the backlog of 46 held-up judges' conformation proccesses. Orrin Hatch: “The American people want judges who know their limited roles and will uphold the law, regardless of their personal views. As long as a judge is willing to do that, any other litmus test on their personal views is wrong.”
Here's somthing interesting... the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee (Lugar, R-Ind) is against the US taking unilateral action against Iraq.
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
Well, its obviously in America's interest to have Canadian citizens who happened to be born in Iraq decades before Saddam came to power stopped at the border, surrounded by shaved apes in cammo, and fingerprinted like the criminals they are. So yeah, a good idea.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
It is not a good idea for free nations to deploy military units as domestic police for any prolonged period of time.
Posted by Free ThoughtCrime America (Member # 480) on :
Unless you're playing Civilization II. Or Alpha Centauri. If you are, clearly you have the advantage.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
Not in Civilization III. Feel the power of a cultural revolt!
Posted by Free ThoughtCrime America (Member # 480) on :
In Alpha Centauri you can nerve staple your citizens. Take that, cultural revolt! And by the time you need to do it, everybody is against you anyway, so why care about honor rankings?
Posted by E. Cartman (Member # 256) on :
Cultural victories. Fun!
Posted by Free ThoughtCrime America (Member # 480) on :
I am a harsh leader. I demand nothing less than total submission from my electronic followers.
It makes me feel Republican!
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
Actually, I tend to stay on most factions' good sides as best I can, wiping them out one at a time. Safer that way.
Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sol System: It is not a good idea for free nations to deploy military units as domestic police for any prolonged period of time.
I do not believe that the Border Patrol is considered "domestic police."
Posted by Free ThoughtCrime America (Member # 480) on :
Do they police the domestic?
Posted by Snay (Member # 411) on :
They're not a foreign police force, and they operate within the borders of the US. I don't see how they could get any *MORE* "domestic".
Posted by Free ThoughtCrime America (Member # 480) on :
Snayality!
And so forth.
Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
quote:I say we use troops pulled from American bases in Europe, particularly Germany. With the Cold War over, they're not needed anymore. Keep a few bases like Rammstein (sp?) as transfer / fueling / quick-deploy points, close the rest down. Europe can see to its own, I'm sure it would make them feel better not having troops of the 'evil imperialist oppressor' on their soil anymore.
However, should anyone suggest that NATO be disbanded, Farquad will scream like a girl. 8)
Posted by Ritten (Member # 417) on :
We gotta get the dang thing to stop growing first, it is almost as bad as the EU....
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Uh...ok.
I have been inspired to reinstall Alpha Centauri. Yes. We should play.
Posted by Free ThoughtCrime America (Member # 480) on :
Is the multiplayer Alpha Centauri any good? I tried online play with Civ II, but was bored the entire time.
Posted by Kosh (Member # 167) on :
quote: However, should anyone suggest that NATO be disbanded, Farquad will scream like a girl. 8)
I think he does anyway.
Posted by Ritten (Member # 417) on :
OUCH!!!
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Well, I like it, and prefer it to the single player game since, with enough humans playing, you get to actually use the political apparatus. But, I do not think it is different enough from Civ II to change your mind, sadly.
Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
Actually, Vogster, I was just about to suggest that myself.
With the USSR out of the picture, and more Eastern European nations joining, NATO's purpose becomes more and more fuzzy. Wouldn't a regional defense force, made up of the members of the EU, be more reasonable than committing US and Canadian troops to the defense of a continent that isn't theirs?
I mean, if the dream is for a united Europe, having the US pulling the strings of European defense (while providing a great deal of it) can't be good for it.
Of course, the question of effectiveness of a EUDF (European Union Defense Force?) would need to be addressed. Getting Europeans to fight, even in their own defense, may be more than most folks could handle. (Although perhaps they could say that the enemy cheats at soccer.)
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
Only minor problem is that most European armed forces are crap. Anyway, surely a larger number of countries from different continents in a mutual defense pact is better than a smaller one?
Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
quote:Originally posted by Wraith: Only minor problem is that most European armed forces are crap.
True enough... but with the US gone, they'd finally have some incentive to improve.
quote: Anyway, surely a larger number of countries from different continents in a mutual defense pact is better than a smaller one?
That's the thing. There's not a great deal really "mutual" about it, from our POV. I can count on no fingers the number of times since NATO was formed that its troops were called to duty in the Western hemisphere. We shouldn't have to defend ourselves AND carry European defense at the same time. Sure, we'll be on call if things get dicey, but they should be able to stand on their own by now.
Posted by Free ThoughtCrime America (Member # 480) on :
Actually, that might be fun, after all. The people I played Civ II with all wanted to get straight to the combat, which isn't as interesting in that game as political manipulation could be.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
European (and here I'm speaking Western European, as the solution to the Eastern question is: NO MONEY! but I'll get to that in a moment) militaries are not "crap" or bad or stupid or awful.
Or at least they weren't when organized.
For your edification, the proposed Ultimate Battle Strategy of NATO, circa Cold War:
Problem: Soviet tanks and infantry are rolling west from places like Germany and Czechoslovakia. They are ruthless, great in number, and backed up by a sizable nuclear arsenal.
Solution: Here is everything a Western European military needs to do: Slow down the Russians until the Americans arrive in force. The European members of NATO had absolutely no need for force projection, or global rapid response, or navies. They needed to travel a few hundred miles and stand in front of the largest tank push ever.
Had the Soviets ever invaded, I suspect these armies that now look so antiquated would have done exactly what they were supposed to do.
The problem now is, no Soviets. No real threat of military invasion. And so you've got nations with armies that are wonderful at fighting Iron Joe and his eleventy billion tanks as they roll through their backyard. But nobody needs that capacity anymore.
The European Union is well aware of this.
Posted by Ritten (Member # 417) on :
Yes, the Chinese should be quite noticable advancing all that way...
A place the Soviet Bloc was to pour through was the Fulda Gap, then protected by the 3rd Armored Div, and an ACR, 11th I think, plus the German units...
Sol has the plan down, even to the point where NATO forces were to be pushed all the way back to Portugal before a full counter offensive could get underway....
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
Well, I suppose crap was a bit harsh; ours (UK) are quite good (easily best trained in the world but appalingly equipped- see recent problems w/ SA80, Challenger 2 and Apache- problem is mainly lack of funds); the French really are pretty awful; the Germans are OK but generally people are a bit uncertain about using them (for obvious reasons); the Dutch and Norwegians are alright. Most of the rest are so-so and most are underfunded. The US armed forces aren't exactly fantastic either BTW, but they make up for that with numbers and technology. It was estimated that Western armed forces (Including American) could have held off a Soviet invasion for 72 hours (on a weekday- all except for UK and US went home for the weekends).
Posted by Ritten (Member # 417) on :
Ha, fooled you Kirch-goens was my home....
As was the Irish Pub in Saxenhausen(sp?), on the second floor balcony... Till they put up that dang 8 foot wall, blocking the view of the women below... Then I hung out by the dart board by the door...
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
Sol is smart and brilliant and all that.
My reading is that First is defining the American military as "good" and European militaries as "crap" based on the very fact that America's strategery of force-projection is so much cooler and kickassier than actually defending one's own dirt.
Look, nobody is in the business of force projection in the same way as the Americans. What is it, 11 carrier battle groups? If you're going to wait until France drops a cool couple of hundred billion so they can have even half that kind of projection capacity before upgrading them from "crap" to "satisfactory," I think it's time to get a new dictionary.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
Not to mention, some nations might not actually want to spend so much money, just to build up such a military.
Posted by Ritten (Member # 417) on :
Or they could do like the US has, downsize since the threat of the Soviet Bloc is gone...
The higher in technology the US military gets the easier it will be for low tech to waste us in a war of attrition. Vietnam and Afghanistan are the two prime examples of this.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Afghanistan? That campaign made the Gulf look like a messy affair.
Or, you know, not. But the Taliban folded like a middle manager on an overnight in Reno.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
And of course the ultimate goal, according to Rumsfeld's wonky space war report, is to just drop hammers on offending nations/NGOs from high earth orbit. Fat chance defending against that with punji sticks and Stingers.
Posted by Free ThoughtCrime America (Member # 480) on :
The EU is going to have it's own military. ONe that won't answer to NATO. And it's not going to be small, either. 60,000 men on rotation from various powers, with the totality of all MEP nations armies as accessible reserve, and with a 2,500 mile radius from EU borders being considered open territory to use that force in, as per the Treaty of Rome.
So, yeah, they're not worried about the Soviets anymore. But they're not throwing away their armies either.
Posted by Free ThoughtCrime America (Member # 480) on :
Vietnam was lost as much because the US military was caught in a maelstrom of red tape from Washington as thick as any jungle.
And the boys in Afghanistan did have stuff like stinger missiles. Hardly just a bunch of spear chuckers.
The Soviets failed to take the area simply because the Americans were propping the rebels up with Rambo. The Americans failed in Vietnam because the Soviets were propping the Viet Cong up with Ivanisms. Such is the nature of Proxy Warfare, where nobody wins, and everybody loses.
Posted by Ritten (Member # 417) on :
Still, both sides had technology that vastly out did the opponets, MANPADS aside.
The US did suffer a few more things, home opinion and Washington's micro-management, that the Soviets didn't.
mmmm, 60,000 is small, 1 US Corps has that plus....
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
One thing about the US armed forces; why do they all salute navy style rather than properly?
Posted by Daryus Aden (Member # 12) on :
Some proof that European militaries are 'crap' would be nice. Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
Well, expect something along the lines of "they're European, therefore they're not American, so they're crap." Or some similar leap of jingoistic logic. 8)
Posted by Free ThoughtCrime America (Member # 480) on :
quote: One thing about the US armed forces; why do they all salute navy style rather than properly?
That's debate territory, but the salute is based upon knights raising their helms to look at each other...different salutes are based on different helms. In fact, beyond the knight, it was the first navies that started to use what would become known as the modern salute. In that sense, the American salute is more true to its roots than any in the world, since it's based on the salutes of the American Cutters in the early eighteen hundreds.
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
Oh, right; thanks for that! I'm used to RAF/ Army salute rather than the US style/ Navy salute and it always looks a bit odd to me.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
So, what do the Brits do? Some kind of heil-Hitler-style salute? The TOS Romulan salute? The Vulcan salute? A black-power fist-in-the-air?
Posted by Ritten (Member # 417) on :
Wraith, they seemed to have missed your post as to why you decided 'crap' was a bit harsh on European militaries.....
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Probably something more like Rimmer's.
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
Sol's, uh, got it, I suppose. Well, not exactly. I mean, none of the wiggly stuff. So he doesn't.
But in a nutshell, palm open facing forward (and slightly downward?), middle fingertip to side of eyebrow.
We had an amusing dealing with this very issue on the, erm, musical I'm working on at the moment. The cast members playing British soldiers got a crash course in saluting from our Stage Manager who turns out to have been in Cadets when he was younger (trust me, plenty of smirking has been had over this). Anyway, there was widespread consternation because our loyal Canadian thespians knew how to salute the American way, not the British/Commonwealth way, and thus eyes were cast to heaven and the American media was condemned. And they were then brutally re-educated into saluting like soldiers from any respectable country would. End of story.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
There are several variations of the Rimmer salute, remember. The half-Rimmer (for emergencies), and the double-Rimmer (for special occassions), for instance.
quote:Originally posted by The_Tom:
We had an amusing dealing with this very issue on the, erm, musical I'm working on at the moment.
This will be mentioned often from now on.
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
Hey, everyone! Tom's helping with a musical! Take note!
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Like that.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Oh, yeah...I hadn't actually been thinking of the different hand orientation. Just that Rimmer+salute=hilarity.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
So, basically, it's exactly like the US salute, except that the palm faces out, rather than down. And, somehow, this is a major deal?
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
SHOCKING!
Posted by Solommagnus de Pym (Member # 239) on :
No wonder the Germans almost won the war.
Posted by Daryus Aden (Member # 12) on :
Quite. If the Valar hadn't come out of the West when they did who knows what would have happened. Perhaps one day we of the lower peoples can also see the light of the blessed lands.
Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
We shall now pause while Farquad and Omega sing the touching duet "The Flameboard shall Fan the Fires of our Love." Music and lyrics by Tim Rice and Andrew Lloyd-Webber. Direction and Choreography by Tom Aylward-Nally. 8)
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
It's not a big deal. It just looks odd (to me).
...and I did say that crap was a bit harsh. It's not training; mostly it's just funding and manpower retention, particularly with the UK's armed forces. Which still manage to be the best in the world
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)