Comments Posted By SShiell
Displaying 21 To 30 Of 223 Comments
"That is a good reason for us to be looking into tort law very carefully to reduce costs."
That will not happen so long as Obama and the Democrats are in charge and they are in the pockets of the trial lawyers!
Comment Posted By SShiell On 7.01.2010 @ 12:21
"So far you have rhetorical questions and a lame attempt at burden-shifting. In other words: nada."
So Fucking Sue Me!
Comment Posted By SShiell On 6.01.2010 @ 13:17
"Like you just really don’t even give a damn about the truth but substitute partisan rage for reality."
Rick made the following points:
1. Obama's failure to reassure the American public.
If he is wrong, why is it still an issue to this day. Why did the President have to come out more than once to make his statement. We didn't hear him the first time? Or his first statement did nothing to alleviate the question. Any facts there in dispute?
"The facts of Obama’s terror policy speak for themselves. He has downgraded it as a priority in government, yes?" Can you refute this? Then do so.
2. Rush Limbaugh's strange comments on Health Care.
Even a member of the Cheney Cabal like myself found his statements confusing. Any facts there in dispute?
3. Primal thrust of Global Jihad.
Are you saying there isn't a potential threat there? Rick postulated about the potential head-to-head confrontations on various stages of Jihad versus the West. What facts did he leave out?
4. Conservatism's Test.
A short discussion of where Conservatism is going and the forces that may bring the ideology down. He did not offer any facts but more so posed questions that may or may not be answered in the coming year.
LOL!!! The only partisan rage being demonstrated in these comments come from people like MR, DrKrbyLuv, and Dick Butt and company. They take a piece by Rick and attack the premise. They offer no facts themselves and when their points are refuted with fact, their only recourse is to charge Rick's use of the facts.
Comment Posted By SShiell On 6.01.2010 @ 08:28
"Mearsheimer and Walt must feel at least a little vindicated."
Why? Israel is faced with making this decision on her own for one reason only - Israel sees little or no backbone behind the rhetoric from the US that Iranian Nuclear weapons are not to be tolerated. And if the US does not have her back, then Israel will go it alone. She did so over 20 years ago when she took out Iraq's nuclear facility. She'll do it again if she feels her survival is at stake.
Comment Posted By SShiell On 5.01.2010 @ 14:12
"I note you avoid addressing the possible damage to US interests. But then what does the Cheney clique care about US interests?"
On the points you made, Very simply:
1. You said they couldn't get there. I just proved to you they can.
2. You said they had to have US approval. I just showed you they do not neeed it.
3. The Israelis have hundreds of trained fighter pilots. Some of them are probably among the best in the world. 24/7 operaions like what would be entailed here is just the kind of surge operations the Israelis have practiced for their entire history.
4. I did not adress the effect such an attack would have on the US - regardless of your piss poor assumption that I did. I happen to agree with Rick and (believe it or not) you that it would be disasterous to the US for them to attack and have stated so on numerous occasions in the past.
But I also believe that Israel is going to have to make the decision - without at least conferring with the US. Our "soured" relationship with the Israelis have put us out of the decison loop for this issue. Israel believes that Obama is so intent on attaining some level of detente with Iran that he will do so at the expense of Israel. And as a result, Israel will not turn to us for guidance or even permission - they will do what they see is in their best interest - period!
(Note: And as far as you dismissing me as a member of the Cheney Clique - Do the one thing you people on the left are good at - Go Fuck Yourself!!!)
Comment Posted By SShiell On 4.01.2010 @ 20:00
Now that I have posted a snarky response I will try and educate you about the Numbers of which you are so ignorant of. For reference regarding numbers and capabilities of aircraft I give you the following link (as if): http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/israel/iaf-equipment.htm
Can they reach the target? To the numbers: The Israelis have currently 25 F-15I and 102 F-16I aircraft. These are specially modified US F-15E and F-16D aircraft. Equivilent to the best we have in own current inventory and capable of expending the full range of "smart" lazer-guided munitions.
They have both been specially modified with conformal fuel tanks, giving both aircraft a "Combat Radius" of over 1,000 nautical miles, more like 1,200. Combat radius means you can fly that distance, fight for 20 minutes and fly the same distance home. A cursory look at a map shows an Israel to Tehran distance of approximatley 800 nautical miles.
Additionlly, as Rick alluded to but you conveniently overlooked, the Israelis have 4 KC-707 and 5 KC-130 air refueling aircraft. The 707s alone could easily extend the 15/16 combat radius by 50%.
As far as whether the US will allow such a mission - I leave that to our illustrious Peerless Leader. That is his call! As far as the Saudis are concerned, their reputation as fighters is spit! Nary a speed bump the Israeli's will glide over. And think about it - If the Israelis commit to such an atack, do you really think any Saudi opposition will deter them? Really??? (No need to answer - rhetorical question)
Comment Posted By SShiell On 4.01.2010 @ 15:46
"You don’t know what you’re talking about."
I bow to your superior knowledge of Aviation Weapons and Tactics!
/sarc
And as far as Dick Butt's comments - consider the source!
Comment Posted By SShiell On 4.01.2010 @ 15:14
"You’re also missing a geographical fact: Israel can’t reach Iran without going through US-controlled airspace or Saudi-controlled airspace. In other words it is physically impossible for Israel to hit Iran without our approval."
First, you are correct that Israeli aircraft have to violate either Saudi or US controlled airspaqce to get at Iran. But our approval is not necessary for Israel to hit Iran. Why? Simple - if the Israeli's violate Saudi airspace, what do the Sauds have to stop them? They have no Patriot missile systems so they would have to depend upon air-to-air fighter assets. They have F-15s but they are still flown by Saudis. If the Sauds oppose them, the Israelis will cut through them like a hot knife through warm butter - Bet on it!
Then there is flying through US controlled airpsace. Go over to CentCom and show me where there are Patriots assets deployed to Iraq - I'll save you the trouble, there aren't any. So again, you have to rely on air-to-air assets - US fighters versus Israelis fighters. And unless Obama orders US aircraft to attack and fire on Israeli aircraft, it ain't gonna happen.
But even if it does happen, I am not suggesting mutiny or anything like that, but there is considerable sympathy for the Israeli cause among members of the US military. I wouldn't be too surprised if Obama does order US aircraft to engage the Israelis that there will be considerable consternation regarding weapon system malfunctions at the pointy end of this particular spear (If you get my meaning).
(Note: I am a retired Air Force LTC with over 3,500 hours in high perfomance firghter aircraft. I am currently employed in support of Air Force operations in the Pentagon. In other words, I have some street cred in what I am saying.)
Rick is correct. The after effects are the real constraints that have to be worked through. But the Israelis are faced with a fire v frying pan quandry. Do you trust a nuclear armed Iran? It may be easy to answer that question from our perspective - not so easy if you live in Israel.
The real point: Does the US have Israel's back? In previous administrations it was a question that need not even be asked. With this administration, it cannot be assumed!
Comment Posted By SShiell On 4.01.2010 @ 14:29
IS OBAMA BEING PRUDENT OR IS HE INCOMPETENT?
"We need to do what works, not what gives right-wingers a boner."
Tell that to Obama! I could care less what Bush did right or wrong - it don't matter for squat! When your Fearless Leader gets a clue then I will stand up and applaud him.
Not until then! And I dare not hold my breath waiting for it to happen!
Comment Posted By SShiell On 31.12.2009 @ 14:37
On January 20, 2009 I was prepared for 4 years of disappointment. I hoped for better (there goes that hope thingee again). I hoped Obama would be the Centrist he wanted the world to believe during the campaign. But way down deep in my heart I knew better.
1,119 days to go.
Comment Posted By SShiell On 28.12.2009 @ 13:07
