SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

   PoliticsPolitics for Pros- moderated


Previous 10 Next 10 
To: LindyBill who wrote (219848)9/16/2007 3:09:48 AM
From: John Carragher
   of 785422
 
lol

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: LindyBill who wrote (219848)9/16/2007 3:09:57 AM
From: mistermj
   of 785422
 
I'm awaiting the paperback release..."If I had robbed someone this is how I would have done it". ;-)

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: ManyMoose who wrote (219855)9/16/2007 3:13:11 AM
From: Snowshoe
   of 785422
 
>> "When Blackfoot and Sioux Meet."... For all I know if you click on it, the battle will resume.<<

Damn, I'd like to see that movie!

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: Geoff Altman who wrote (219858)9/16/2007 3:36:14 AM
From: Nadine Carroll
   of 785422
 
On the ground, Syria’s formidable air defences went dead.

The Israelis figured out how to jam it?

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (3)


To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (219878)9/16/2007 3:43:44 AM
From: RinConRon
   of 785422
 
The Israelis figured out how to jam it?

I'd love to know. And I hope we are working together on it. If the Israeli strike is true, it's a good news/bad news scenario. The good news is that the IAF blew it up. The bad news is that there was something so consequential that it needed to be blown up.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (219878)9/16/2007 5:47:02 AM
From: LindyBill
   of 785422
 
That story about the Raid was in the Times UK. Bill Katz notes the absence of major interest in the raid by the American media and wonders why. "Could it be that they choke over any notion that the Bush administration's concern over WMD might be justified?"

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


From: LindyBill9/16/2007 5:55:10 AM
   of 785422
 
Hillary the Micromanager
By Robert Novak

Democratic insiders blame Sen. Hillary Clinton's micromanaging for her presidential campaign's acceptance of nearly $900,000 in contributions donated or raised by Norman Hsu, convicted for fraud and a former fugitive.

The Clinton campaign has insinuated that her financial aides dropped the ball in failing to vet Hsu before taking his money. But the senator is obsessive in running her own campaign, taking responsibility for details.

Hsu for many years has been well known in New York Democratic circles, appearing at events with $5,000 to $20,000 in contributions. Recipients were ignorant of his criminal background. Nevertheless, considering Clinton administration scandals about dirty money from Asian businessmen, Democrats are amazed that Sen. Clinton did not thoroughly investigate Hsu before accepting funds.

MAKING HILLARY WAIT

Sen. Hillary Clinton waited for five hours, behind three other Democratic presidential candidates, to hear testimony Tuesday from Gen. David Petraeus and Amb. Ryan Crocker because of a calculated political decision by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

Sen. Joseph Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, refused the joint hearings with the Armed Services Committee held by their House counterparts. Reid ordered that Foreign Relations would go first because its Republican members were not nearly as strong for President Bush on Iraq as GOP members of Armed Services, headed by Sen. John McCain. Of the top two Republicans on Foreign Relations, Sen. Richard Lugar has distanced himself from Bush policy and Sen. Chuck Hagel opposes it.

Clinton, as an Armed Services member, had to wait until late afternoon. Her principal rival for the Democratic nomination, Sen. Barack Obama, is a Foreign Relations member, as are presidential hopefuls Biden and Sen. Christopher Dodd.

KERREY IN?

Before Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska announced his Senate retirement, former Sen. Bob Kerrey -- president of The New School in New York City -- confided his intentions to a political friend.

If maverick Republican Hagel sought a third Senate term, maverick Democrat Kerrey would support him -- whether Hagel switched to the Democrats or stayed in the GOP. If Hagel did not run, Kerrey would return to Nebraska to run for the Senate.

Kerrey, undefeated in campaigns for governor and the Senate, is one of the most popular Democrats in Nebraska's history. Although he has been in New York seven years, he would be heavily favored in 2008. Secretary of Agriculture Mike Johanns, who resigned as governor to join President Bush's Cabinet, might be the only Republican capable of defeating Kerrey.

KERRY OUT? [I would love the see the Swiftboaters finally get him.]

Homeland security consultant Jeff Beatty, new to Republican politics, arrived in Washington this week with a Zogby poll showing him in a virtual tie with Democratic Sen. John Kerry in Massachusetts.

Republicans had not listed the 2004 Democratic presidential candidate as even faintly vulnerable for re-election in 2008. The Zogby poll gives Kerry 48 percent to Beatty's 45 percent -- a tie with a 4.1 percent margin of error.

That signifies Beatty's strength rather than Kerry's weakness, with Zogby showing Kerry far ahead of other possible Republican candidates. Kerry leads Andrew Card, President Bush's former chief of staff, 61 percent to 29 percent. Beatty -- a veteran of the FBI, the CIA and the Army's Delta Force -- frequently appears on television commenting on security questions.

SHRUM IN BLIGHTY

Campaign consultant Bob Shrum, who retired from U.S. politics after publication this summer of his candid memoir ("No Excuses: Concessions of a Serial Campaigner"), is now in Britain working for the Labor Party in the campaign of Prime Minister Gordon Brown.

Shrum was the strategist in the last two Democratic presidential campaigns for losing candidates Al Gore and John Kerry. But he has worked on the last three winning Labor efforts in Britain. Shrum has been a close friend of Brown for many years.

Shrum last month left his position on the New York University faculty. He is now an NYU fellow in London.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


From: LindyBill9/16/2007 6:00:08 AM
   of 785422
 
How to Kill a Diesel Electric Boat
STRATEGY PAGE
September 14, 2007: The recent success of a newly commissioned South African Type 209 sub against NATO ships was yet another example of how deadly diesel electric subs are, even against modern warships with trained crews and good ASW (anti-submarine warfare) equipment. However, one element that is often left out of these exercises, is the search for the subs before the surface ships are located by the subs. Diesel electric subs spend most of their time on the surface, or near it (with just an exhaust device above the water, to let air in and diesel exhausts out). When on or near the surface, these boats can be easily detected from the air. Diesel Electric boats are also quite vulnerable when still in port, and any foe would strive to use bombs or missiles to sink these subs before they can put to sea. This is when the subs are most vulnerable, and training exercises demonstrate this so frequently that ASW training instead concentrates on the hard part, finding a submerged sub that is stalking surface ships.



The really dangerous submarines are those using a non-nuclear AIP (air independent propulsion) system. This enables the sub to stay under longer, thus making the sub harder to find. AIP allows the sub to travel under water for at least 4-5 days at low speed (5-10 kilometers an hour). While nuclear subs also have AIP, their nuclear power plant is noisier, and the subs are larger. Both of these elements make nuclear boats easier (but not very easy) to detect. Some of the newer AIP designs allow boats to stay under for several weeks. If such boats are equipped with good (and very expensive) passive (silent) sensors, they can be the most difficult subs to detect. This has caused all the major naval powers to increase research in ASW, and increase ASW training.

strategypage.com

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


From: LindyBill9/16/2007 6:13:58 AM
   of 785422
 
This will probably cause a Fatwa to be issued.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: Geoff Altman who wrote (219858)9/16/2007 6:39:02 AM
From: skinowski
   of 785422
 
Interesting that the tone of the article does not seem to be critical in any way. Quite a difference compared with the Israeli destruction of the Iraqi nuke plant in Osirak in 1981.

en.wikipedia.org

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)
Previous 10 Next 10