|
Warthog posted:Is there some sort of independent unbiased US news source? I feel like a dirty progressive left-wing commie because I mostly get my infos from here and Comedy Central (and MSNBC / Fox News if I feel the need to cringe) :/ NPR is probably as close as you can get.
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 19:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 11:29 |
|
|
THE HORSES rear end posted:Also, the fighters we have now are a hell of a lot more advanced than the ones we had during Kosovo or the enforcement of Iraq's no-fly zone. I really don't see an F-22 being shot down anywhere, whether over Benghazi or Tripoli. Also, most of the Libyan air force consists of planes 40-year old (at least) Soviet museum pieces and hanger-queens at that. Most of them aren't even airworthy. Apparently, the wikipedia page for the Libyan air force has been updated since last I checked. Those 12 Mirages, which is Qaddafi's most comparable and advanced Western aircraft? Dassault only got the contract to refit 12, and completed 4 before all this poo poo blew up. Two of those flew to Malta, one got shot down a few days ago, leaving just one. Also, the rebels have taken a few of them, but with no pilots and no fuel, who knows if they can get them up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 19:37
|
|
|
Warthog posted:Is there some sort of independent unbiased US news source? I feel like a dirty progressive left-wing commie because I mostly get my infos from here and Comedy Central (and MSNBC / Fox News if I feel the need to cringe) :/ NPR is pretty good, though soon they might not be as good as they are now due to funding cuts. e: Didn't notice the post above me already had NPR - how about Bloomberg or Reuters? e2: Just to be clear, are you asking for news source IN the US or ABOUT the US? If it's the latter, there are lots of other, non-US news sources that have a "World" or an "Amercas" section that you might be interested in (the National Post, AJE, CBC and the BBC are my favourites). They might not cover every single US issue you're looking for, but they do have articles on the major ones, like the Union/Wisconsin vote. There's a lot more out there (France24 is another one you might be interested in, but I don't really use it so I can't say for sure how good it is). I'm sure if you looked around you'd find a ton of sources you'd enjoy. Narmi fucked around with this message at 19:57 on Mar 10, 2011 |
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 19:39
|
|
|
Al-Saqr posted:(Great Thank you so much for this post. I don't feel it got the appreciation you deserve. You say it's very likely no one shows up, but haven't 32,000 people already basically RSVP'd? Almost seems like for this to succeed you would need a 'flash revolution'. That sure is a hosed up situation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 19:47
|
|
about the situation in Saudi Arabia)
|
Warthog posted:Is there some sort of independent unbiased US news source? Yes, and they run stories about Linsey Lohan. Don't even bother with US news it's been corporately trashed to the point of being unrecognizable as news most of the time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 19:50
|
|
|
Defense editor for The Times, Deborah Haynes, reporting today that Zawiyah is under government control, green flags everywhere.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 19:58
|
|
|
MothraAttack posted:Defense editor for The Times, Deborah Haynes, reporting today that Zawiyah is under government control, green flags everywhere. What's a shame is we'll never know how many are actual Gadaffi supporters. If his soldiers just rolled into my town, I'd be 'praising' his arrival too. What a clusterfuck.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 20:00
|
|
|
WELP THAT WAS FAST. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/10/AR2011031003269.html WE'RE OFFICIALLY hosed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 20:00
|
|
|
Al-Saqr posted:WELP THAT WAS FAST. Did they beat Gaddafi's record? I don't think so.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 20:03
|
|
|
Al-Saqr posted:WELP THAT WAS FAST. Wow. Well I hope they leave it at that and don't come after everyone who rsvp'd on Facebook for the rally tomorrow.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 20:03
|
|
|
THE HORSES rear end posted:Also, the fighters we have now are a hell of a lot more advanced than the ones we had during Kosovo or the enforcement of Iraq's no-fly zone. I really don't see an F-22 being shot down anywhere, whether over Benghazi or Tripoli. It's unlikely, sure, but bear in mind the Serbs did in fact shoot down an F-117. Stealth isn't the same as invulnerable.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 20:06
|
|
|
Al-Saqr posted:WELP THAT WAS FAST. drat, this is only going to escalate from here. How could they be so blind as to what's happening in their neighbouring countries that they'd try the exact same thing that made things worse? The articles is short on details though - I don't suppose you can fill us in on what happened? Like, did they actually fire at the ground, or above their heads to try and disperse the? If they fired at them, what kind of ammo were they using? Were there any injuries? Hopefully no one got hurt, but that claim that they were going to cut people's hands off makes me doubt that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 20:09
|
|
|
Namarrgon posted:Did they beat Gaddafi's record? I don't think so. Gaddafi's record in terms of what?
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 20:11
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:It's unlikely, sure, but bear in mind the Serbs did in fact shoot down an F-117. Stealth isn't the same as invulnerable. When you saturate the sky with exploding shells, you're bound to hit something. FE: actually, looking at what happened, the Serbs fired a bunch of SA-3 SAMs and managed to get a lucky lock-on when the plane had it's bomb bay doors open, which increased it's radar signature. Also, the F-117 was retired in 2008, replaced by the F-22.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 20:13
|
|
|
So, what's the over/under for the change in gas prices after that?
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 20:13
|
|
|
Mixed feelings about this (from AJE):quote:8:27pm That whole thing damns the Gaddafis even more since they're openly talking about using the military, without the distinction between civilians and rebels. This, however, is a smart move and has the win the NTC points within Europe: quote:8:12pm
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 20:14
|
|
|
THE HORSES rear end posted:Gaddafi's record in terms of what? How soon it took to open fire on their own people, I'm guessing
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 20:16
|
|
|
THE HORSES rear end posted:Gaddafi's record in terms of what? Shortest time between a big protest and opening fire.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 20:16
|
|
|
THE HORSES rear end posted:Gaddafi's record in terms of what? They definately beat both Ghadaffi's and Mubarak's Start-To-Massacre record,but I think Ghadaffi is still probably MVP with Total Civilian Casualties. This has been a disappointing season for Mubarak fans. Slantedfloors fucked around with this message at 20:19 on Mar 10, 2011 |
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 20:17
|
|
|
Slantedfloors posted:They definately beat both Ghadaffi's and Mubarak's Start-To-Massacre record,but I think Ghadaffi is still probably MVP with Civilian Casualties. This has been a terrible season for Mubarak fans. Hmm, I was under the impression that SA has had somewhat smaller protests for the past month or so, whereas Gaddafi essentially ordered opening fire on day 2 or something.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 20:18
|
|
|
Namarrgon posted:Hmm, I was under the impression that SA has had somewhat smaller protests for the past month or so, whereas Gaddafi essentially ordered opening fire on day 2 or something.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 20:21
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:It's unlikely, sure, but bear in mind the Serbs did in fact shoot down an F-117. Stealth isn't the same as invulnerable. This was due to some cunning tactics against what is actually a pretty old and relatively slow fighter (30 years now) that looked and handled like a prototype. If this is the incident I'm thinking of, the flights became quite predictable. After determining when and where the aircraft would appear, they moved launchers into an ideal intercept position and then turned their equipment on at just the right time, getting a perfect view and being able to fire without spooking the pilot well ahead of time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 20:31
|
|
|
The price of oil (by the barrel) jumped $3 in the last hour.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 20:44
|
|
|
Did that French wallah on AJ just say " It will be most difficult to make blow jobs to African Dictators"?
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 20:50
|
|
|
Chronojam posted:This was due to some cunning tactics against what is actually a pretty old and relatively slow fighter (30 years now) that looked and handled like a prototype. If this is the incident I'm thinking of, the flights became quite predictable. After determining when and where the aircraft would appear, they moved launchers into an ideal intercept position and then turned their equipment on at just the right time, getting a perfect view and being able to fire without spooking the pilot well ahead of time. And? I accept that the F-22 is inevitably going to be stealthier than the F-117 being newer technology (how much so depends on exactly how much stealth  has progressed, I suppose), but it's still not some magical Superman-plane that is completely invulnerable to AA. Cunning tactics on the part of the Libyans, bad planning on the part of the US, and most of all blind chance could still cause one to get shot down.As I said I don't think it likely, but it would be foolish to assume that there is absolutely no risk in imposing a no-fly zone because of stealth.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 20:54
|
|
|
Chortles posted:He ignores two things: #1, there ARE unguided weapons that could be deployed (i.e. MANPADS) without requiring an air defense radar, however unlikely they are to be present in Libyan regime use, and #2, that it's US military doctrine -- as voiced by both the secretary of defense and the Commander, US Central Command* -- that would require that US forces attack Libyan air defense emplacements to initiate a no-fly zone. How likely is it that this would be US led (and therefore reliant on US doctrine)? I know Britain doesn't have the capacity to enforce a no-fly zone on their own (especially after the tories kindly scrapped our fleet air arm), but reading the way the wind's blowing it's Britain and France that have really been taking steps on this issue while the US has been being more cautious and backing away from direct intervention for the most part. Britain and France signed a defence treaty last year, part of which allowed for the sharing of aircraft carriers and general closer military co-operation. I'm obviously not saying that either Britain or France will go in there single handed and enforce a No-Fly zone, but would it necessarily have to be under US command? To my eyes it seems likely that any military intervention could just as easily be EU led (or maybe even led by an Anglo-French alliance) as American led. Also, even if any action was American led, how do you square the current doctrine with General McPeak's comments about the specific situation in Libya, quoted earlier? I'm not any kind of military or strategic expert, I'm genuinely curious.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 21:06
|
|
|
I'm so sorry, Al Saqr 
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 21:12
|
|
|
Apology posted:I'm so sorry, Al Saqr Yes, please keep up updated as much as you can. I'm surprised there is such a lack of coverage over this. I suppose there is a lot of money exchanging hands to try and keep it under the radar.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 21:15
|
|
|
For the next 90 minutes I am in a meeting with PJ Crowley, asst secstate, about social media and the revolutions. If you have a question about something related to this post it and I will try to ask.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 21:24
|
|
|
Petey posted:For the next 90 minutes I am in a meeting with PJ Crowley, asst secstate, about social media and the revolutions. If you have a question about something related to this post it and I will try to ask. I'd be interested as to if the officials are following social media news sources as closely as everyone else, or if they have 'official' sources that they get their information from. Although, this may be a bit of a silly question to ask. It's admittedly a bit shallow.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 21:27
|
|
|
BBC News posted:Libya: Gaddafi forces push rebels from Ras Lanuf While some rebels are claiming that pro-Gaddafi troops haven't fully claimed the town, I'd be amazed if there was any meaningful resistance left in the town after the recent offensive push by Gaddafi's forces. I really hope that the new military management and reorganizing of rebel forces has a profoundly good effect on their effectiveness.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 21:33
|
|
|
Apparently there's a fight in DC over who actually is in charge at the Libyan embassy. http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/03/10/a_tale_of_two_libyan_embassies_in_washington_dc
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 21:35
|
|
|
Petey posted:For the next 90 minutes I am in a meeting with PJ Crowley, asst secstate, about social media and the revolutions. If you have a question about something related to this post it and I will try to ask. With the speed at which social media can inform the world of ongoing international events, how does the current administration feel about the need for considered and effective action versus the increased public demand for a faster response? Are there any fears internally that an administration that advertised itself on having modern and efficient decision making is now seemingly playing catch-up?
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 21:36
|
|
|
Sivias posted:I'd be interested as to if the officials are following social media news sources as closely as everyone else, or if they have 'official' sources that they get their information from. Asked him how the availability of on the ground info as opposed to stuff from Langley shaped the response. Not sure if he understood what I meant though - his response was mostly about understanding how to engage with foreign centers ofinterest. He did say to someone else that the availability of stuff had definitely changed the rapidity of response and international pressure. Just said the US is down to 5% popularity in Pakistan, Jesus.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 21:38
|
|
|
Petey posted:Just said the US is down to 5% popularity in Pakistan, Jesus. It's impossible to overstate how big of a deal the Raymond Davis is over there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 21:41
|
|
|
Petey posted:Just said the US is down to 5% popularity in Pakistan, Jesus. Holy poo poo. Pakistan liking us is key to easy supply routes to eastern Afghanistan. I'm so sorry Pakistan. Do we have any Pakistani goons that might give us some inside info onto their situation?
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 21:43
|
|
|
YorexTheMad posted:NPR is probably as close as you can get. Democracy Now! They have people like Noam Chomsky all the time for 30+ minutes (and it airs every weekday).
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 21:46
|
|
|
Sivias posted:Holy poo poo. Pakistan liking us is key to easy supply routes to eastern Afghanistan. The Pakistani public's opinion on the United States is about as important as the Tea Party's opinion on Obama. Both groups are completely divorced from reality and nothing short of God himself descending from the heavens and schooling them will change their minds. Pakistan's civilian government is sane, and it's only their opinion that really matters when it comes to the War in Afghanistan.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 21:47
|
|
|
Someone just confronted him about Bradley manning's torture. Too complex response to post now. Very interesting.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 21:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 11:29 |
|
|
^^^^ Holy poo poo, wanna hear about how that one went. Speaking of people divorced from reality, I'm in the library killing time until my next class. Student glances at my screen as they walk by, see me reading Al Jazeera: "Why are you reading a terrorist website on campus? Don't you know that you can get arrested for that?" 
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2011 21:50
|
|