shinRaiden

Hey, no blabbing about the secret reasons for Bush's pro-logging Environmental policies and refusal to support Kyoto.

One of the other advantages that OFP has is that the story line and target models were based around the late cold war, something that nobody else really touched. Do we really want another WW2 or Nam game? It's one thing to make excellent mods after the fact for the interested community, it's a whole different issue to make a WW2 themed game because you want to ride the BF1942 wake. Do we want a bastardized mutt of all the other games out there rolled into one? No, I don't think so. Would it be nice to have WW2 and Nam stuff? Sure it would, but if BIS focuses in on that they could run a great risk of vision sellout for me-too-ism. There's plenty of material that hasn't been touched, like a Resistance-style campaign set in Budapest 1956, Afghanistan 1979-89, the Sub-Saharan African wars like what the Brushfires mod is doing, and so on. While I like the idea of a "Red Storm Rising" theme (it would be cool if they did it as a two-sided dynamic coop'able campaign), there's so much sci-fi writeups on it that it could get messy.

www.freescottspeicher.com This could mean all sorts of things, basically from war-time data whether his aircraft was lost from attack or malfunction is unclear. It suggests though that based on post-op guesswork, as well as crashsite investigation and partial flight recorder recovery that his Hornet was hit hard at the same time they were engaging a Mig 25 squadron. Cmdr. Robert E. Stumpf, USN (Ret.) Detailed 6-Part analysis of this case by The Virginian-Pilot (lengthy and detailed covering all aspects of the case)

Security? what for?

The news reports were saying that this was initiated over a training range that used to be in an isolated rural area, but has now been built up and suburbs stacked up to the fence line. But to echo Havocsquad and others there seems to have been some lack of proper proceedural diligence, we'll just have to wait for the report.

You are just as entitled to your opinions as I am to mine. The problem as it arose in the US Presidential Election thread and previously in the War on Terror and Middle Eastern threads among others is that there is a very fine line between debatable issues and scenarios, and undebatable principles. By undebatable, I am refering to the philosophical preaching from both sides. For example, questions about gay marriage legislation or litigation are debatable secular issues, the morals either way of homosexuality is undebatable philosophical preaching. Operations in Iraq are debabtable, the doctrine of intervention and preemption are undebatable dogmas. This thread will last as long as the "conservatives only" thread, because it is for preaching, and not debating. What would be an excellent question, and one I'm interesting in hearing replies on, is whether or not its possible to debate politics on principles at all. From the fundamentalist conservative viewpoint, I support an organizational seperation of Church and State, but am in favor of some moral legislation, because I view my political principles as a subset of my philosophical principles. My initial response would be that some issues, such as God in the Pledge and on the Money and Ten Commandments on the wall etc are not debatable, they're an expected baseline. On the other hand, I'm sure many of strongly feel that they very much are debatable topics, but is it because you hold an intellectully fundamentalist position and are looking for a means to legislate your position as I do mine?

Right now it's a clear and exciting as the Democratic Primary was. The biggest problem is that Arafat stonewalled any succession structure in a paranoid attempt to prevent coup's. First up you've got current PM Ahmed Qurei. He currently has the most 'power' in the PA, but that's still severely curtailed. The reason why is that Arafat rigged the structure of the PA to mirror the PLO, much how the Soviets had a token government stuffed with matching folks from the Communist party. So while on paper Qurei is independent of the PLO structure, he has to clear everything with the PLO chair first, who is Arafat. Secondly you have Mahmoud Abbas, Arafat's number two in the PLO. He's in even worse shape than Qurei. Hamas and several other groups like the PFLP have had long standing feuds (ie gang rivalry, clan warfare, etc) with the PLO. Abbas has no direct power in the PA, can't run the PLO without Arafat's say, and will likely get pounced on by external groups like Hamas and internal splinter groups like Al'Aqsa, which has some compliants about the mainstreaming of the dominating Fatah branch of the PLO. The third dark horse is Marwan Barghouti. Currently sitting sitting in Israeli prision for orchestrating terrorist attacks, he still maintains some noteriety among the Palestinians. He's not the mellow type needed to pull off a Nelson Mandela-style transition, and would be garaunteed no cooperation from the Israelis. His availabilty is dubious at best, and usefulness is near nil. Plus his association with Arafat would not benefit him in the southern areas. ============================= The immediate problem will really come to light when he does die and people try to figure out where to bury him. You'll really see all the different divisions in the Palestinian community come out on that one. In the south you have Hamas with an iron hold on Gaza. One factor that repeated gets overlooked is that Egypt is not in any hurry to have Israel pull out of Gaza. This is because a large number of the Muslim Brotherhood members and other radicals involved in insurrection and assasinations since Nasser and Sadat have been hiding out in Gaza, and secondly it gives the rest of the world an excuse to stick Israel with the blame. When Isreal withdraws from Gaza, it will leave a disciplinary void that Hamas -a radical splinter group of the MB- will quickly move to fill. Egypt is immediately concerned that instead of fighting the Israelis, these terrorists will move their operations back to Cairo using Gaza as a launching point for further attacks on Mumbarak. Egypt doesn't have the natural resources that the Arab states do, and relys heavily on tourism and other business trade. Their economy took a severe hit after the Queen Haptshepsut's tomb massacure, and will probably plunge again following the recent Taba bombing. Secondly you have the Hebron area, where the most radical of both sides are based. On the palestinian side, you have the Al'Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, which split from Fatah because they felt Fatah was slacking off. This is also echoed by Hamas in Gaza, and there is actually a fair amount of disgust at the ineptitude, pandering, and corruption by Arafat. Many in that region feel that they've been sold out or abandoned by Arafat. It should be noted that Arafat was in exile in Tunis during the first intifada, and only showed back up when things started looking good. Moving north you have the convergence zone between Bethlehem and Ramallah. You've got Hamas from the south, the PLO-Jordanians from the east, Israel to the west, and Hezbollah to the north, each fighting over pieces to the pie. There's a lot of blending with the Israeli economy, the terrain is more rugged complicating already volatile property disputes, and the outside Arab influence is the rather moderate Jordanian perspective. The more relaxed environment has made it easier for Arafat to use it as his safe house, and has the advantage of being convient to the crown jewel of Jerusalem. Arafat has managed to adeptly dodge legitimacy questions and power stuggles by claiming to be the boss of the idea of Jerusalem for the Palestinians. To some extent he's managed to get out of dealing with explosive local issues by pointing everyone back to Jerusalem as the goal. He won't talk about what kind of nation he envisions for the Palestinians, but he will definately tell you where he sees the capitol being. In the north you have a much stronger Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad influence from Syrian and Iranian backed factions. After their gains from the Barak administration, they've pretty much laid low under Sharon because they have a vivid memory of what he did to them in the 80's as Defense Minister. Furthermore Syrian and Iranian attention is more on Iraq recently. Lebanon doesn't count, it's a Damascus puppet. Where Arafat has had very little success is in uniting and mobilizing the devout islamic factions among the Palestinians. He's done well among the more moderate Islamic and Christian palestinians. His ancestory is absolutely uncertain from having cooked his passport so many times from the 60's through the 80's to suit changing times, and audiences, but the latest estimate is that he was born in Cairo to non-refugee expatriates during the early Mandate period. That's a couple strikes against him by the Arab Muslims. Secondly, he married a Christian infidel who ran off to live in Paris, another couple strikes. Third he has a track record of burning bridges where ever he goes. The Jordanians kicked him out at gunpoint, he got run out of Beirut, and he had to reinvent himself into the first Intifada that started on the ground level without his involvement. To bolster his support among his moderate Palestinian base, and dodge attacks and allegations, one of his repeated declarations has been that he is to be buried in the cemetary on the outside of the east wall of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. This is the holiest cemetary in all Islam because the bridge of judgement will start there and those buried there get first dibs on salvation with Allah. Well there has been a number of complaints from the muslim community about Arafat's islamic worthyness to be buried there. The imams say 'yes, he was a great secular leader, but spiritually he was an infidel, and has no business being buried there.' There is the possibility of attempts by his supporters to bury him there could drive a major wedge into the Palestinian community. Additionally reports yesterday suggested that he may not have prepared a will stating how his Islamic last rites are to be handled, which could also be used by the fundamentalists as grounds for keeping him out of that cemetary. The Israelis understand perfectly Arafat's intent there, it is to stake a claim on the Temple mount for the Palestinians, and to solidify Arafat's place in history. Additionally it would be seen as further strengthening Arab claim to the Temple mount and diminishing Israeli claims. Furthermore it would also be used as precedent for boundry disputes. Private reports suggest that Arafat was offered a plot in Abu Dis in Arab East Jerusalem, administratively that would be a much easier solution. He is also reported to have a family plot in Gaza. The problem that this creates though is that it puts Hamas in the very unpleasent situation of being tactically allied with Israel against Arafat. The Arab term is "the enemy of my enemy is my friend", and I can only imagine the amusement Sharon is having thinking of the hand-wringing that Hamas is going through. In order to take over the PA, they're going to have to go after the PLO. The PLO (actually Arafat) has all the money and infrastructure in the PA's name. Hamas can only buy so many votes through more diligent bombings, at some point they're going to have to move on Ramallah. Popcorn anyone? This is going to be an interesting show.

The Jerusalem Post has an excellent piece commenting on the likely economic fallout of Arafat's passing: The rumors and uncertainty is probably the easiest way to handle this with a minimum of potential flareup. By announcing that Arafat's "good as dead, but not quite" and dragging it out, by the time he actually does pass away for real the people will already have dealt with it in some regard. This could defuse a good deal of the anticipated tension. Somewhere in the midst of this, at an appropiate moment of course, is a golden opportunity for the US and Israel and the rest of the Arab world to begin a new chapter in the peace process. With Arafat's embezzleing and bombastic obstructionism quickly fading, there's now breathing room for more level heads to prevail in picking up the pieces.

Well, this thread will probably be getting locked any moment now. It's been a long four years, and it's anybody's guess what the next four years will bring. It's been really interesting to see the motivation and determination from both sides, as well as disheartening to see the severity of the disconnect between the two camps. We could continue to debate cause and effect, but I think that the arguments from both sides have been made clearly and resolutely. What is certain is that the world is facing a new and rising generation, and new challenges to old problems. Thank you especially to the mods for their frazzled nerves in trying to keep this ruckus in order. As Hellfish6 said so well, Despite wild accusations of mod bias, both sides were still able to pimp the the most partisan schtick to the other's delight. Thanks.Anyway, I hope each side was better able to understand where the other was coming from. I still may not agree with the anti-Bush crowd any more than I previously did, but I think I better understand where you guys are coming from. I hope that in turn you guys were better able to understand the values and principles and vision of America that we conservatives base our words and actions on. So for now, God bless the whole world (including America and the Swedes and the French and the Germans and the Dutch and the Belgian and all those other nations glorified and vilified in the campaigns), God bless George Bush, and good night.

So you want to know what you might had gotten if Kerry were elected? scoop on next Newsweek issue Report through MSNBC And so with the populace. Each camp sees in the other a world view each utterly rejects on non-negoiatable points.

Hmm, the Bush thought-police are already at work in Norway cracking down on dissent...

And just how, might I ask, is Bush (or Kerry were he to have been elected) to 'unite' the country and 'unify' the divided peoples - who refuse on grounds of non-negotiatable principals to be united?

No significant news yet on Arafat's condition other than material leaked to the French Media, which may be suspect as we've seen earlier. Current reports suggest that Arafat may be comatose, on a respirator, and not responding to treatment. Jerusalem PostThe UPI wire suggests that a statement maybe forthcoming in the morning from Yasser's wife Suha and the Palestinian delegation at the Hospital, but is unclear whether they are referring to a new statement or the press conference earlier today. ------------------ Meanwhile, the number of children suicide bombers continues to increase.

And while we're at it, Happy Birthday Laura Bush First Lady's page

~nm.

Enron was not an IT company. Arthur Anderson was not an IT company. Tyco was not an IT company. Martha Stewart Online was not an IT company. Worldcom was a little IT upstart that bought Telco giant MCI, then tanked them. Qwest was a little IT upstart that boughtout baby-bell US Worst then tanked them. ABCDisney is in rough waters. AOLTimeWarner dropped the AOL part, mor management difficulties. Boeing got caught with their pants down (and the story is the CEO literally...) and they're abandoning the commercial airplane market. These are all examples of the artificial bubble economy's case applications. Microsoft and Cisco are very small pieces of the pie. Furthermore, the only airline to turn a profit in 2001 was Southwest Airlines, all the others basically screwed their infrastructure so that when hard times came they couldn't weather them. So the surpluses were slashed by the new corporate accountibility because the tax revenues were based off the exaggerated earnings. Secondly, as the top companies tanked the effect was as bad or worse on their smaller vendors and clients. Third, 911 whacked the rest of the air out of the bubble. So with the surplus bubble eliminated, there were then new unforseen and unplanned for expenses, such as the War on Terror and Homeland security. These obviously would move the line into the red, and what was Bush to do economically - strangle the life out of the economy with new burdens in a repression? The fact that the economy has rebounded as well as it has from all these factors show's how well Bush's management has worked. The entire reason thogh for this discussion was that there was an eariler claim that then presumed narrow margin implied that Bush was 'obligated' to abandon his fiscal conservatism that Kerry tryed to coat-tail to and begin restricting the creation of wealth and economic liquidity. Meanwhile CBS has jumped on the "Praise the Lord"

You're part-way right, in that the stonewalling and Clinton defense cuts limited expenditures while the revenues increased due to the bubble. But there was a whole pile of factors - the market corrections to the realistic track, the below norm impact from 911, and the unanticipated expenses of Iraq and Afghanistan - that popped the predicted decade of surpluses. Secondly, that decade of surpluses was anticipated to disappear anyway when Social Security implodes in a bit, again because the Clinton Era economic machine chose to do nothing while they had the artificial opportunity. But the fact that the economy has done as well as it has, and rebounded from those three factors as quickly as it has supports Bush's economic plan, and confirms it for another term.

And to those that see this as somehow urging Bush towards a more centrist 'unity' government structure, read this And many more voters than 2000 liked what they got, so the momentum for Bush and the conservative movement grows and builds. FMCAT Statement

There are three reasons for the deficit, not the two of just 911 and Iraq. The third is the baseless projections from the artificial Clinton Bubble Economy. It was those projections that created the illusion of budgetary surpluses from the constant churning of the economy propped up by the acounting scandals. Bush was handed the bubble as it burst, and the sooner it did the better. That cut the head off of the rigged numbers, and then 911 cut off the legs, and the demands of all operations of the War on Terror imposed a major additional load as well. The fact that the economy is not in the tank, and that it is improving is proof of the economic genius of George W. Bush. As for environmental issues, The EPA figures clearly show the impact of the economic growth and environmental concern by Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush and the positive effect that they've had in increasing economic output while reducing environmental impact, and you can see that those trends stagnated under Bill Clinton.

Well Bush has been able to fairly successfully rebuild the economy after the artificial Clintonian bubble economy, cracked down on corporate accounting scandals to support long term financial stability, cut taxes on the middle and lower income brackets so that they would have the ability to move more liquidity in the economy, cut the taxes for the higher brackets to help get more money moving into the economy, changed the tax code on small vehicle depreciation to help encourage businesses to expand their motor pools and create automotive demand in the Mid-West, worked to stabilize the economy following 9/11 as well as the increased and previously underbudgeted security support, and as one analyst noted that there has been a net gain of about a million and a half new jobs, from over 600 million jobs created and lost, indicating a large amount of growth and activity in the economy. Additionally Bush has been energetically supporting new industries such as Charter Schools, Energy Research, Security Contractors, and other value-adding businesses that create new long-term jobs and grow wealth by serving the community. That's a pretty good track record, and one that with a little tweaking to fit the next four years will be of great benefit to America and the World. Of course those policies should continue, since they're right, and have been proven to work.

If you want an easier way to manage all your files try this. I chopped up the config.cpp classes so that you can find the one you want a lot quicker, and maintain the code a lot better.

Read the entire post please. Yes some of you sent a portion of your stuff to those places. Your military and ours still have much more undeployed resources. Those were what I was referring to, you're more than welcome to follow our example and lift a finger to help out the impoverished closer to your home.

Well do you want us to take care of the whole world or not? You europeons have all your equipment that you didn't volunteer for Iraq and Afghanistan that you could go do something about, instead of just documenting the butchery for historical pundits to peruse centuries from now.

Oh this is rich, opinion page from Jerusalem Post: The general assumption was that 'Arik the Bulldozer' would do something really uncalled for and put ratbait in Yassir's food or send in the Apache helicopters and beg forgiveness later, but instead old age is catching up with him.

Well the death reports got started by the PM of Luxembourg speaking out of turn. The reports now are pretty much all rehashes of the same wire bulletins, but seem to indicate that Arafat may be comatose and on life-support, indicating serious change in his condition.