I still stand by the Afghanistan mission, and I think we could have done a lot of good there had we provided more security and not gotten involved in an unrelated and ludicrous additional war with Iraq. ;^)
A war Obama voted against. ^_~
Afghanistan was a good idea, if nothing else, because no matter what we do to that place there ain't no way it's getting worse, and the Taliban are pretty much the grossest ideology on the planet; on principle they really shouldn't be allowed to be in charge of anything. Even with the half-assing done in that country due to Iraq, the results thus far have definitely been a net positive; better infrastructure, better rights for women, and a partial restoration of urban areas to pre-Soviet levels.
We just have to hope it doesn't just all go to shit again when the international troops are gone.
Contrary to media portrayal of them, the Afghan national forces are both quite competent and their commanders fucking hate the Taliban; most of them are old enough to remember the days when Afghanistan was actually a country rather than a country-shaped shithole ruled by theocratic and warlords. I think that if enough western observers stick around to train the troops and we keep up contact with the government, they'll be fine.
Intelligence war. We weren't going up against a centralized publicly known entity, we were going up against an underground terrorist ring -- and looking for one man specifically -- but we fought it like World War II. We should have used tactics from the War on Drugs (which I'm not saying isn't problematic, but it's problematic for completely different reasons that aren't applicable here.)
The problems with Afghanistan are not in the fighting of it. The "Land War in Asia" idiom came from Korea and is surprisingly situational. Like all pithy soundbites, it's a lot more nuanced than that.
The reason fighting a land war in Asia sucks is that there are a lot of people there and everything is next door to something else. Korea sucked because it was next door to China, which added a massive weight of supplies and troops. Vietnam sucked because it was next door to Cambodia and Laos, through which supplies flowed along the Ho Chi Ming Trail which the US couldn't block from the ground. Iraq sucked because dudes from Iran flowed across the border looking for a group which could set them up with a bomb and a ticket to paradise. And Afghanistan sucks because Pakistan is right there, offering support and shelter for enemy leadership. The drone bombing campaign there is just a mirror of the low-altitude raids on the Ho Chi Ming Trail in Vietnam.
The thing with Afghanistan, though, is that nobody wants to go under Taliban rule again, because the Taliban are awful to everyone they rule over. There is not the problem of Western forces being resisted by the locals because the locals have gladly bound together to prevent the Taliban from taking over again; they only cooperate with the Taliban under duress. The trick is that the coalition will have to basically support the Afghan army for the foreseeable future; not necessarily with boots on the ground, but they just have to make sure they can prevent the Taliban from taking stuff over. They might mean drone support, it definitely means training and strategic advisers. The Taliban can't fight a real war with anyone; the best they can do is "conquer" unguarded towns and play feudal lord until a real force arrives to kick them out. Every year, their support dwindles, their funding runs lower, and their reserves of actual dedicated soldiers shrinks.
It's essentially down to time; it's not a case of beating them, just of enduring them until their cause fades away.
Also, the invasion of Afghanistan was textbook. You unfortunately can't wage a war and do an investigation at the same time because the assets which are good at investigation and micro-war can't do their jobs with real military assets on the ground, and Afghanistan did sort of have an army and a central government that needed to be removed before intelligence and special forces could work. If you look at the actual timetable, there was a very short war period, then a spamming of special forces across the mountains to hunt down al-Qaeda elements. Most of this generation of special forces in the United States cut their teeth in Afghanistan.
It doesn't help that in my old age I've developed a pathological fear of flying. The gestapo crap at the airport only feeds my anxiety about being in a tin can 6 miles above the earth travelling at 600 miles per hour held up by air.
At 600 miles per hour, air is actually quite substantial. ~_^
It doesn't help that in my old age I've developed a pathological fear of flying. The gestapo crap at the airport only feeds my anxiety about being in a tin can 6 miles above the earth travelling at 600 miles per hour held up by air.
Well, my Iomega external 0.5TB drive just shit the bed. Apparently Time Machine gave it too much of a workout or something. Meanwhile, my 250GB Maxtor that's at least 5 times as old is still chugging along with no problems.
So, currently I have no backups. I guess I'm buying a drive next week. Newegg has 1.0TB externals for $99 with free shipping, which is great. Any better deals out there that might not come up early in google results?
No but it's probably a strong factor. I'm only basing that on intuition, I admit.
Competition is more or less out the window unless you honestly believe that price fixing isn't going on. I used to work at multiple service stations and let me tell you, the price of gas at the pump is a matter of committee amongst the stations in town. At least one town. :-)
As for the rest, how many retail chains are left? Here in my area it's Walmart, or Target, for most housewares. You can go to boutique shops as an alternative, but not for a deal.
What I guess I'm rambling at is that if companies wanted to raise prices in response to a more expensive payroll, there's little competitive pressure that's going to prevent them from doing so, would be my guess.
No but it's probably a strong factor. I'm only basing that on intuition, I admit.
It varies from country to country. For example, here, it's set by cost of living and quality of life, ensuring that even on minimum wage, you're theoretically above the poverty line.
It is a factor, but how much of a factor is not set in stone.
Also, I didn't explain myself well enough, there - it was regarding price comparisons between countries, too, which is where it gets really shaky about using minimum wage to determine pricing.
No but it's probably a strong factor. I'm only basing that on intuition, I admit.
It varies from country to country. For example, here, it's set by cost of living and quality of life, ensuring that even on minimum wage, you're theoretically above the poverty line.
It is a factor, but how much of a factor is not set in stone.
Also, I didn't explain myself well enough, there - it was regarding price comparisons between countries, too, which is where it gets really shaky about using minimum wage to determine pricing.
OK, well that does seem pretty obviously like not a good single variable for comparison, but then how do you reconcile that against comparing gun control amongst various first world countries and ignoring factors like porous borders shared with failed states, and so on...?
OK, well that does seem pretty obviously like not a good single variable for comparison, but then how do you reconcile that against comparing gun control amongst various first world countries and ignoring factors like porous borders shared with failed states, and so on...?
Rarely a need to, when I'm only talking about comparative prices on consumer electronics and software bought under first sale.
Heh, I thought you were one of the "UK is safer thanks to gun ban" folks in the other thread the other day.
Fair enough then.
Fuuuuck that. I'm all for Gun Control, but I'm on the "Reasonable regulations" side than the "Ban guns" side - I prefer ideas like mandatory firearms education(y'know, safety courses, basic universal principles and the like) and things like tighter regulations on storage of arms and ammunition, rather than just getting rid of them. I'm all for people owning guns, but I'm also all for ensuring at least some level of safety and responsibility regarding them.
I think universal firearms training, not shooting necessarily but just safe handling and an understanding of capabilities, is probably the best policy for any nation. In places that have lots of guns like the US, you'll cut down on stupid incidents and dead kids who didn't know what they were doing. In places with lots of gun regulation but still has firearms, you ensure that the population understands guns if it becomes an issue for them. For places that basically don't have firearms, you make sure everyone is at least familiar with them if it ever comes up.
I believe that basic firearm safety should be taught in elementary or secondary school here in the US, but right now it's an uphill battle because in my town, in the middle of a "Blue" state, we've apparently switched over to "abstinence only" sex education without anybody noticing.
I think universal firearms training, not shooting necessarily but just safe handling and an understanding of capabilities, is probably the best policy for any nation. In places that have lots of guns like the US, you'll cut down on stupid incidents and dead kids who didn't know what they were doing. In places with lots of gun regulation but still has firearms, you ensure that the population understands guns if it becomes an issue for them. For places that basically don't have firearms, you make sure everyone is at least familiar with them if it ever comes up.
True that - every person I know in this country that is genuinely afraid of people having firearms, or even just genuinely concerned, doesn't know the first thing about them.
I believe that basic firearm safety should be taught in elementary or secondary school here in the US, but right now it's an uphill battle because in my town, in the middle of a "Blue" state, we've apparently switched over to "abstinence only" sex education without anybody noticing.
I am not sure I would say taught in school but it should not be difficult for someone to get training at any age. I am not sure how it is everywhere in the US, or even here now, but when my father wanted me to get a hunting permit at around 14 I had to take a firearms safety course first, which was relatively cheap in my town but was offered at terrible times or rather expensive in the next town over offered at great times. I think instead of just for hunting permits requiring that it should be required for gun owners in general.
Showed up two hours before my boarding time for my return flight. Unfortunately there were no hiccups this time. It took me half an hour from the point I pulled in to return a rental car to get to my gate.
Comments
The reason fighting a land war in Asia sucks is that there are a lot of people there and everything is next door to something else. Korea sucked because it was next door to China, which added a massive weight of supplies and troops. Vietnam sucked because it was next door to Cambodia and Laos, through which supplies flowed along the Ho Chi Ming Trail which the US couldn't block from the ground. Iraq sucked because dudes from Iran flowed across the border looking for a group which could set them up with a bomb and a ticket to paradise. And Afghanistan sucks because Pakistan is right there, offering support and shelter for enemy leadership. The drone bombing campaign there is just a mirror of the low-altitude raids on the Ho Chi Ming Trail in Vietnam.
The thing with Afghanistan, though, is that nobody wants to go under Taliban rule again, because the Taliban are awful to everyone they rule over. There is not the problem of Western forces being resisted by the locals because the locals have gladly bound together to prevent the Taliban from taking over again; they only cooperate with the Taliban under duress. The trick is that the coalition will have to basically support the Afghan army for the foreseeable future; not necessarily with boots on the ground, but they just have to make sure they can prevent the Taliban from taking stuff over. They might mean drone support, it definitely means training and strategic advisers. The Taliban can't fight a real war with anyone; the best they can do is "conquer" unguarded towns and play feudal lord until a real force arrives to kick them out. Every year, their support dwindles, their funding runs lower, and their reserves of actual dedicated soldiers shrinks.
It's essentially down to time; it's not a case of beating them, just of enduring them until their cause fades away.
Also, the invasion of Afghanistan was textbook. You unfortunately can't wage a war and do an investigation at the same time because the assets which are good at investigation and micro-war can't do their jobs with real military assets on the ground, and Afghanistan did sort of have an army and a central government that needed to be removed before intelligence and special forces could work. If you look at the actual timetable, there was a very short war period, then a spamming of special forces across the mountains to hunt down al-Qaeda elements. Most of this generation of special forces in the United States cut their teeth in Afghanistan.
So, currently I have no backups. I guess I'm buying a drive next week. Newegg has 1.0TB externals for $99 with free shipping, which is great. Any better deals out there that might not come up early in google results?
Competition is more or less out the window unless you honestly believe that price fixing isn't going on. I used to work at multiple service stations and let me tell you, the price of gas at the pump is a matter of committee amongst the stations in town. At least one town. :-)
As for the rest, how many retail chains are left? Here in my area it's Walmart, or Target, for most housewares. You can go to boutique shops as an alternative, but not for a deal.
What I guess I'm rambling at is that if companies wanted to raise prices in response to a more expensive payroll, there's little competitive pressure that's going to prevent them from doing so, would be my guess.
I would be very happy to be proven wrong.
It is a factor, but how much of a factor is not set in stone.
Also, I didn't explain myself well enough, there - it was regarding price comparisons between countries, too, which is where it gets really shaky about using minimum wage to determine pricing.
Fair enough then.
I'm half asleep trying to sleep and somehow he gets startled. So he decides to run away by leaping off my face and giving me a mark on my fucking eye.
I was also commenting earlier yesterday that we needed to trim the cats' nails too.