Obama's Problem

[sunnyside]

Just going off of the above. It seems they DID want the runway blocked. Just not if it caused "a confrontation". I.e. they wanted the runway blocked but not if it involved something getting blown up. Clark likely figured that he could get his vehicles on the runway without having to engage the Russians (who sound like the didn't have enough manpower to cause a blockade), and that the Russians would just sit and fret instead of lighting his vehicles up.

[Captain Seafort]

Sounds to me like Clark had some 'splaining to do as to why he went ahead and reissued his order AFTER hearing different from the JCOS...

He did - his tour as SACEUR was later cut short, and Shelton publicly stated that this "had to do with integrety and character issues". Ouch.

[Captain Seafort]

Just going off of the above. It seems they DID want the runway blocked. Just not if it caused "a confrontation". I.e. they wanted the runway blocked but not if it involved something getting blown up. Clark likely figured that he could get his vehicles on the runway without having to engage the Russians (who sound like the didn't have enough manpower to cause a blockade), and that the Russians would just sit and fret instead of lighting his vehicles up.

Exactly. How anyone thought the runway could be blocked without p*ssing off the Russians I'm not quite sure. The original plan was even more harebrained than the one that was vetoed, since helecopters are a lot more vulnerable to fire than armoured vehicles.

If Clark's plan had gone ahead the best case scenario would have been a serious diplomatic incident. The worst case scenario would have been a lot of dead squaddies and possibly a NATO-Russia war.

[Sonic Glitch]

Just going off of the above. It seems they DID want the runway blocked. Just not if it caused "a confrontation". I.e. they wanted the runway blocked but not if it involved something getting blown up. Clark likely figured that he could get his vehicles on the runway without having to engage the Russians (who sound like the didn't have enough manpower to cause a blockade), and that the Russians would just sit and fret instead of lighting his vehicles up.

Exactly. How anyone thought the runway could be blocked without p*ssing off the Russians I'm not quite sure. The original plan was even more harebrained than the one that was vetoed, since helecopters are a lot more vulnerable to fire than armoured vehicles.

If Clark's plan had gone ahead the best case scenario would have been a serious diplomatic incident. The worst case scenario would have been a lot of dead squaddies and possibly a NATO-Russia war.

Red Storm Rising anyone?

[Mikey]

Just going off of the above. It seems they DID want the runway blocked. Just not if it caused "a confrontation". I.e. they wanted the runway blocked but not if it involved something getting blown up. Clark likely figured that he could get his vehicles on the runway without having to engage the Russians (who sound like the didn't have enough manpower to cause a blockade), and that the Russians would just sit and fret instead of lighting his vehicles up.

I would take a memo from the JCOS to avoid "confrontation" as a warning to avoid any sort of confrontation, not "merely" to avoid an actual firefight.

[Aaron]

Red Storm Rising anyone?

More like Red Storm curbstomp. At the time Russia couldn't possibly oppose NATO (they still can't) thanks their military rotting away post-cold war. Hell there are stories floating around of Russian garrisons selling their weapons and vehicles to eat.

[Sonic Glitch]

Red Storm Rising anyone?

More like Red Storm curbstomp. At the time Russia couldn't possibly oppose NATO (they still can't) thanks their military rotting away post-cold war. Hell there are stories floating around of Russian garrisons selling their weapons and vehicles to eat.

So it would have been over in less than the ammount of time needed to order Chinese Take-out for seven people? (borrowed from Dave Barry for that one)

[Monroe]

Maybe why Clark didn't fear the Russians, he knew that they wouldn't start anything. Now though post Putin they probably would.

[sunnyside]

I'm actually inclined to agree that the Russians wouldn't have opened fire. Their counter would be to try and block people from getting to the runway. Sort of like the somewhat dangerous games we play now where they fly their bombers over our carriers while under close escort or when the US flies spy planes in the international waters near China under tight escort.

Obviously it would be viewed as a jerk thing to do politically. But it could have gotten a bit sticky if they'd starting flooding the area. And as mentioned we put up with some crap from them like the bomber flyovers so hopefully it would have been a non issue.

[Mikey]

I don't think any part of the question has anything to do with who would have won - the point is that good ol' Wes was trying to lord it over and antagonize fellow KFOR forces.

[Mikey]

OK, on the subject of Obama and saving the SSA:

http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-po ... .Security/

[sunnyside]

Clever move. He was getting beat on for raising middle class taxes, but his donut hole plan should evade that. I'm curious what the expected outcome of this would be. As in how close this comes to resolving the issue or how long it postpones it.

Actually have I ever spoken about social security here?

So for a long time people have been putting into SS, but origionally people didn't live long enough to take too much out. The baby boomers hitting retirement will change all that. And they can calculate when the saving accounts will run out.

There's a problem in that though and it's in how the government invested the money. Specifically in government bonds. Essentially IOUs to itself. This, actually, is how the Clinton administration claimed a surplus while every year the national debt increased, because the amount it owed people other than itself went down, while the amount it owed itself went up higher.

Now that isn't all bad in principle. If you're going to run a deficit it makes more sense to pay the money to yourself instead of China. But it means that when the time comes to take money out of the accounts there isn't any money actually there. To pay it the government will have to raise taxes or borrow from someone else or something.

Now really this is a problem of national debt in a general sense. But the difference is that unless we want some kind of bizzar financial disaster we have to pay what we owe China.

All the debt associated with social security, however, could in theory simply be written off if times are hard. Like if you borrowed money from your own swear jar or something.

[Monroe]

Can you imagine if rich people paid the same percentage of their income to taxes that everyone else did? Talk about a surplus I think my mom works as a teacher until like April or May before she sees any of her actual income if they took the taxes for the year out all at one time.

[Duskofdead]

Can you imagine if rich people paid the same percentage of their income to taxes that everyone else did? Talk about a surplus I think my mom works as a teacher until like April or May before she sees any of her actual income if they took the taxes for the year out all at one time.

I have become extremely cynical after working in accounting. If anyone rich tells you they pay their fair share laugh them out of the room for me. If you have the money to afford lawyers and accountants to help you set up things like trusts, LLC's, corps, and basically spread the money around enough, keep your businesses at the "we barely made any profit/broke even" level, or the biggest laugh, opening up non-profits and "foundations" if you're really rich. When it's all said and done it's like saying I paid my fair share of taxes... on the money I didn't hide in the sock drawer, the jar buried in the backyard, the money in the mattress, the pillowcase, behind the pantry, under the floorboard, and the stuff I asked my parents, siblings and spouse to hang onto in cash in a safe place. Other than THAT money, I paid all my fair share of taxes.

[sunnyside]

Also if someone tells you the rich will pay more under the "fairtax" people talk about decide wether you thing they're trying to con you or if they're just not so bright.

The premis of the fair tax is that all federal taxes are paid via sales tax. So they say everyone pays the same. Ah, but what do you pay sales taxes on?

Bought a new mansion? No sales tax.
had a chef cook you dinner? No sales tax (if you go out to eat you'll pay the 30% sales tax though).
Maid? No sales tax (You'll pay it on a vaccuum cleaner though)
Expensive imported car? No sales tax (You'll pay if you by local though).
expensive club membership? Generally no sales tax.
expensive vacation? No sales tax.

In short a whole lot of what they spend their money on will not be taxed compared to the percentage of expenditures that would be taxed by someone in the lower or middle classes.

Also it gets rid of the estate tax. Which, every generation, whacks like 40+% out of the amount inherited. Which adds a lot of how much the wealthy pay, especially if they're just heirs.