Walsingham

homin ahomina homina

If I ever decide to quit being an amateur and go full 'walt', I'm getting an eberlestock.

I agree with Malc that if intelligence is to play a part in policy, and I think it really rather ought to, then it needs to be pretty ****ing sure of its facts in this case. If that WERE the case I'd expect a president like Obama, who is more comfortable with the media than with the military, to make the facts known. As gambit says, this isn't about guilt any more. It's about what is being done next. In this instance I believe the West is using the opportunity to put pressure on Assad to come to the table. That's probably the best outcome we can hope for, on behalf of the Syrian refugees, anyway. My concern is that Obama's team don't inspire me with confidence that they can apply pressure in a reasonable way to secure cooperation from Assad. Not that it's easy with a half-informed, half-asleep electorate giving top cover.

I don't have much experience of the alternatives, but the 'short' bergen I was issued with by the Army was the most comfortable backpack I could have imagined, given the weight. And tough as all hell. I'd look for one of those online. I've just checked and the short pattern is around £30.

I've been using Enid Blyton's The Faraway Tree, and I'm more or less intact.

If you're new to Stratfor, you can sign up to the service free for a month (usually, not sure if this is active right now). I feel it's only responsible to remind you that Stratfor have been a target of Anonymous before, and might be again. I think it would be ludicrous to let that stop you, but I wouldn't feel right not pointing it out.

This is true. I have a first aid kit and food for two weeks as standard. And unless I'm wearing a suit, most of my clothes and shoes are hard wearing enough to live in for a while.

About to place an order now.

It is possible that Assad wasn't sure if disloyal elements had used government issued weapons in order to bring him down. Just a thought. Ultimately: 1. I don't see the attacks as consistent with a government military effort that is 99.9% conventional 2. I don't see the attacks as consistent with the timing and proximity of the UN visit 3. Stratfor - who I rate highly - assess the attack as being inconsistent with Assad's character, given the above. And unlike the documented conventional street-corner atrocities, chem weapons use would have to be ordered directly by him. A failure to cooperate fully with the weapons inspectors may be as much due to raging paranoia on the part of the regime, regarding the UN. I say paranoia, but one could easily be forgiven for thinking it dances to US inclination.

Realistically most of us would end up dead in the fall of civilization... and the only winners are the cowards. Why? Because they(we) are opportunists. And generally understand that when crap is going down the drain you can't play knight in shining armor. Admittedly in part this would depend upon how the world was ending... in a epidemic you'd probably find family units sticking together but being incredibly xenophobic (in case the sickness jumped). In a more nuclear ending you'd see people trying to act as larger groups to survive, but it's unlikely they'd be larger than a township. Although the initial chaos that wiped out most people would have individuals operating on their own, or maybe clinging to their dependent relationship (so parents and young offspring). Depressingly those who'd be trying to be Chivalrous or whatever would end up getting crushed 'neath pragmatism and base instinct. Sorry my bipolar has been acting up so I've been looking at the dark side of things. Aren't you kind of contradicting yourself? There's strength in coherent cohesive groups, but cowards and selfish people won't form those groups. What you will get are groups of people who altruistic in-group, and judgemental of outgroups. Tribes, essentially. My real chance of survival lies in finding a tribe and becoming their witchdoctor. Couple pints of snakebite and I can froth at the mouth and quote Star Wars with the best of them.

I do not believe that a limited military action will achieve the intended result. It would have to use only unmanned systems at a considerable standoff. This is simple military science, given the publicly available information. This is turning into a clusterf*** from Obama, who has managed to paint himself intro a corner. Being an intrinsically weak president I don't think he feels able to make the case that he should not exert force. Worse, I fear that he feels the second term itch to pull a trigger and damn his successor with the consequences. From Stratfor.com

I could do that, I ended up using a Peri-Peri sauce that did add flavour but I was looking at a more elegant solution to infuse flavour while the rice is cooking. Cardamom pod in with the rice. Nice delicate aromatic flavour.

I don't think I argued in favour of intervention at this stage. But I also think it's dangerous and decadent to pretend that these are "barbarians" who ought to be ignored. Many of the people in these countries are more than capable of joining this discussion, if they weren't preoccupied with possibly dying. I don't deny that they have some odd and unhelpfuil cultural mores, but those don't make them less human. FFS, I'm tempted to write off Great Britain every time they screen a new series of Big Brother. It doesn't mean that Britain is a helpless mewling mess of overly entitled windbags. ...I hope.

I could observe that your illness analogies have sinister forebears, but I doubt you'd care. Instead, consider the implications of what you are saying for other 'aberrant' behaviour. You already recognise that humans beings are much more complex than animals. I do not automatically deny that homosexuality is a 'deviant' behaviour, and that animals would regard this as destructive. But I do deny that we need to live by the same rules as animals, living or dying by nature's word. That is our glory and (arguably) our curse. In other words, I am accepting of Man's right to f*** other men, because doing so reinforces our right to f*** nature. And given that nature cares no more for us than the dodo or panda, I'd say that f***ing nature was much more important than gayness. An ostensibly scientific adherence to what nature tells us, is by contrast, no better than the argument a seaslug might make simply existing.

I'm disappointed with you gentlemen on two levels: 1. I simply can't believe that many of you ( I won't say which) are really completely indifferent to the suffering of quite literally millions of innocent people who never chose this path of slaughter, and who are now powerless to stop it. 2. I can't believe you that many of you (I won't say which) are so pig ignorant you think that what happens in one Mideast country doesn't affect the others, and via ordinary trade, never mind petrochems, that your own countries are inextricably linked. I am perfectly at ease with you wanting all the extremists, rapists, terrorists, and associated corrupt riffraff to disappear. But basing foreign policy on that presumption is worse than idiotic.

I'm off to a session with the blokes in the pub, after a weekend without. This means cheese and onion sandwiches, but to make sure I'm not too hungry I'm going to make pancake mix and do a couple first.

Like Malc says, it's not like New Year. ~ I've been cleaning the kitchen floor. This should be easy, but the previous owners thought a stone floor would be a good idea, and then failed to understand the most basic rules of using concrete. Streaks of cement go everywhere and the stone they used is uneven. I have just spent most of today on my knees, scrubbing the bastard with several bottles of floor cleaner, and a wire brush. Then following up with soap and sponges. It still looks exactly the same.

While it's kind and commendable that you are all trying to engineer my way to safety, I would remind you that even the folks who do prep are likely to get eaten by those who don't in a country with so many people, and so little arable land under cultivation.

Ironic, isn't it? If a chap chooses to act out the role of a woman in real life I regard 'her' as a brave individual, and will extend every courtesy. But do it online and I regard it as contemptible stupidity. I suppose it's because 'oby's author seems to think he's terribly clever, and is exerting a good deal of effort to no better purpose than deliberately provoking people. The analogy of someone who went into a convivial coffee house and screamed "REEDLE REEDLE REEDLE REEDLE REEDLE" until their voice gave out, just to get attention is, to my mind, exact. They don't need to be on this forum, attempting to make us thinks Russians are weirdos. They need to be in therapy coming to terms with mummy and daddy not giving them enough attention.

You could always shove it all in your wheeled luggage. Just include an inflatable raft ... never know when you'd need it. Wheeled luggage takes up too much room on pavements. And it makes you look like a tw**. I'd rather starve.

It's a fair question, but the debates a more complex one than would fit in this thread. Suffice to say that France has luxury of enjoying similar dependencies as the US and UK. She tends to rely on us doing her work for her, Mali notwithstanding.

I don't have a survival bug-out bag or anything else for the simple reason that I lack the working back to carry anything heavier than a large book. Even if I did I couldn't swing anything to defend myself. In the event of such a crisis I would be completely funted. The best thing I could do would be to give my house stocks to the nearest family, and lie in wait to try and ambush at least one mob of looters with all my household chemicals mixed up in a bucket. Not a good way to go. I'd feel worse about this, but Britain has so little food available compared with the population that if society broke down you'd witness total ravening anarchy inside 14 days.

Um... they used a nerve agent, as in chemical warfare. I'm sure you didn't mean biological. Regarding Iraq, yes it is still suffering, with a huge loss of civilian lives, it's not on the same scale as Syria. It is not a civil war. Moreover, although we shoulder some responsibility, I am quaint in my belief that the people carrying out the murders are at least partly to blame as well. The important thing about Iraq is that while it has many problems it has been carrying out free elections under close international scrutiny. Consequently I feel justified in hoping that they will move towards reconciliation and stabilisation. The basic premise being that ordinary people don't want to live in a warzone, and if they can vote they will vote towards that end. EDIT: Jason Motierre - There's no such thing as 'sitting something out' in international politics. You can't just drape a blanket over the Middle East and hope it goes to sleep. But then at present we also lack to will and means to intervene in a useful way. Our best and only hope is that moderate progressives assume some negotiated role in Syria in exchange for redress of grievances, and something like the SA Truth and Reconciliation effort. Slim hope, though. We can count on continued efforts by jifs and Iranian proxies to destabilise and murder their way towards a complete collapse.

Wanting to go in, and having the capability to go in are two very different things. Firstly, I don't think anyone is suggesting the deployment of land forces. Secondly, I don't personally think we have the capability to exact a bloodless domination of the air, like we did in Libya. However, I do think there's enough doubt over our intentions to achieve two things: 1. Focus the minds of the regime more firmly on negotiations currently under way. 2. Disrupt ongoing operations and regime capability by obliging them to reorient against a possible air attack. Shift everything from maps to munitions around, disperse command facilities. *shakes head* I just had to deliberately remember that a couple days ago several hundred people got gassed. Interesting how the lack of an obvious guilty party confuses things. It suppose it also iluminates what the public reaction would be to a dirty bomb or somesuch, if it were unattributable. Maybe even make the impact LESS terrifying.