Agiel

What I see in Iran is... 1. A regime that sees value in what those in the nuclear non-proliferation business call "threshold capability," meaning that the program could, if they so choose and they said to hell with the consequences, be re-purposed to produce a weapon in a very short period of time... 2. A cynical, fascistic regime that claims by an interpretation of Wilayat al Faqih that its word should override that of its toy democracy, has a history of sponsoring assassinations of those that displease them, on the sovereign territory of foreign nations no less, on an almost yearly basis threatens to unilaterally close the Strait of Hormuz (and has nearly done so once in the past) with world-wide repercussions (Korea, Japan, and even China, hungry for energy as they are, would shed no tears should Operation Praying Mantis be repeated in response to this), and supports Islamic militant groups that does its part to seriously undermine the cause of a free and pluralist Palestinian state, has through mismanagement, greed, and certain parts by design stunted Iran's own economic development (it's telling that Iran's short-erm economic woes would likely be exacerbated _because_ of the lifting of sanctions). A regime who, in my opinion, whose days are numbered because Iran has... 3. An educated, fairly cosmopolitan citizenry due to what Christopher Hitchens called a "baby boomerang" as a result of the horrific war in the 80's. One that is expressing significant push-back against the authoritarian regime that rules their country. One that increasingly favours good relations to the west. You may have noticed that hardly anyone has batted an eye at proposals to sell Iran air defence systems and advanced fighter jets. It has been acknowledged that nations are well within their rights to pursue means of defending themselves within the bounds of the NPT, and history is replete with examples of conventionally armed actors triumphing over nuclear-armed states, primarily through exacting asymmetric costs on the aggressor state (and this effect has only been accentuated with the rise of the "media war"). In contrast to a conventionally armed Iran that forces its neighbours onto a reactive footing, a nuclear armed Iran that neglects its conventional forces in favour of a costly strategic weapons program makes them think in terms of being proactive ("How can we take out Iran's nukes?") To better fit that analogy to deterrence, the person being mugged would acquire an explosive vest rigged with enough Tritonal to level three city blocks, haphazardly wired to a leaky car battery (_THIS_ is the danger represented by a nuclear program built outside of international oversight, Israel and Pakistan's included). Frankly, I'd rather live in a world where people tried got along with each other while reducing risk (which is, you know, why there was the P5+1 talks to begin with and the US is actively seeking rapprochement with Iran, even if it meant burning some bridges with historical US allies in the region).

F/A-18 integration tests for Lockheed Martin's LRASM to begin: http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3021 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvHlW1h_0XQ

Michael Mann and Christian Bale team up for Enzo Ferrari movie. http://www.slashfilm.com/christian-bale-ferrari/ After a couple of relatively "meh" movies from Mann, and given my speed freak nature, I seriously hope this will turn out good.

If you commit stuff to writing, prepare to defend it. And unlike your nuclear deterrence theory (which remains that*, a theory), I speak entirely of historical experience, of the practical military realities of human fallibility when it comes to complex systems, the illogical nature of brinkmanship, and its potentially monumental cost to human civilisation. You really have some nerve to so blatantly second guess me and while betraying the fact that you have only glossed over everything I've said as yet: Everything I have said so far was critiquing your notion that "A nuclear armed Iran would be the greatest achievement for peace in the middle east", that "An armed society is a polite society." Not anything close to resembling any pro-Israel agenda (and those who know me on this board will say I've been among the strongest critics of the political leadership of Israel and the United States' patronage of it). History has shown us that proliferation of nuclear arms does nothing but put both strategic and conventional forces on heightened alert and the citizenry in the crosshairs, ordinary people not much different than you or me ready to be blotted out at a key-turn, even by accident, a _very_ real possibility, and there is absolutely no reason to believe that a freshly-minted nuclear military arm entering the stage will make that play out any differently. And this goes for just about any country out there. For instance, do you agree that we live in a far safer world where an economically broken country like Ukraine who cannot guarantee to safely maintain the world's third largest nuclear arsenal gave up its own nuclear weapons (I think we do), even though if they had kept it it _might_ (and I can't emphasise this enough, operative word being "might") have made Russia's actions in Crimea and Donbass far more measured? --------------- *The idea that nuclear deterrence is the reason the Cold War ended without a nuclear exchange, and that it will continue to work flawlessly reminds me of this story: A man on a train is tearing up pieces of paper, and tossing them out the window. Puzzled, the other passengers ask him why he is doing that. "I'm keeping the elephants away." He responds One passenger says what they're all thinking: "That's crazy. There are no elephants anywhere near here." The man smiles and says: "Of course not. I'm keeping them away."

I caved as well. Performance was okay but not great on my Geforce 550 (I know it's an Alpha, but I should think the only 3D elements being the character shouldn't be _that_ taxing). I actually dig the fluid animations, which were quite refreshing on the tail end of PoE. Is that opening narrator the same from Mask of the Betrayer?

Watch almost zero TV these days, but thought I'd share:

Phantom Pain won't have pre-loading. Though I lost my interest in Metal Gear Solid at Snake Eater (I actually really dig the truly prescient post-modern navel gazing of MGS2*, and I far prefer the idea of the Patriots being the will of the United States made manifest rather than them being AIs), I got it if only for the sake that I should have something to put that AMD R9 FuryX I ordered through its paces.

Hilarious, when you keep bringing the theoretical into the discussion. and... The point of my posts that you spectacularly ignore is that contrary to your, as Herman Kahn would call it, "sloppy and emotional thinking", "a nuclear armed Iran" (and you can insert nearly any other country in that space) or even a world where a credible nuclear weapons program can be acquired by nation states as easily as I a new Gmail account carries a very high probability of escalation through a costly arms race and more. As opposed to the current paradigm where sabre-rattling and border conflicts would at most result in a few dozen military casualties between conventionally armed forces for a given incident, a misstep with nuclear weapons as a result of carelessness, lapses in security, sabotage, rogue launches et al. means civilian casualties that are at minimum in the thousands, and unlike conventional forces that you can stand down and withdraw, you absolutely _cannot_ recall a warhead descending at Mach 12, and contrary to what the movies might tell you, neither can you remotely steer it into the ocean (though small comfort if the guy who pressed the button suddenly wanted to take it back, "no one would ever know, would they?").

Nice self-defeating logic there. By the dictates of Deterrence Theory, if Iran had one nuclear weapon, not only would US weapons previously pointed at the ocean by treaty be re-targeted on Iran and Operation Chrome Dome (so as to avoid them being pre-emptively destroyed at their bases in Guam, you see) re-instated, but Tehran formerly just in the crosshairs of no less than two (and even three in short order. Wouldn't take much for Riyadah to get Islamabad to loan them some "buckets of instant sunshine") hair-trigger nuclear powers will be a key-turn away from being blotted out. Which brings us back to the prime issue I've raised on my posts: "What about accidents? What about early warning false alarms?" Things not accounted for by MAD. The Unthinkable quickly descends into the realm of the Thinkable when you put human fallibility in the mix, and those who invest everything into the system can't be counted upon to admit they have a problem. After Stanislav Petrov correctly deduced that the Soviet Union was not under attack in 1983, he was refused commendation and promptly demoted because the the generals of the Strategic Rocket Forces and the Soviet "Metal Eater's Alliance" couldn't have word get out that the entire doctrine and technology they staked their careers and reputations rested on pretty shaky foundations. And if a freshly-minted nuclear power came about with all the inexperience and blaise attitude as shown by the likes of Pakistan and North Korea (and I freely admit it was by sheer luck the US and Soviet Union managed this threat before becoming "mature" nuclear powers), would anyone want to be in the same county, nay, _continent_ of what is surely an incredibly crude and unsafe weapons systems? An accidental groundburst detonation (as is likely would be the case for the hypothetical Iranian device) would throw up far more radioactive fallout than an airburst weapons like Little Boy and Fat Man (and pretty much every countervalue weapon which made them look like cherry bombs that followed), and thus to think of the "Right of Boom" catastrophe is to describe a humanitarian situation _VERY_ different from Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

You make no bones of having your fingers in your ears, that much is certain. Particularly when you had this to say: Failing to read this: And thinking that I'm on any moral high horse makes some pretty dangerous assumptions (made evident by your reflexive Iraq circle-jerk) that I'm anything but _extremely_ critical of not just American nuclear doctrine and policy but deterrence regimes in general (which was made painfully evident in my previous post if you bothered to read it, which is a position I've been nothing but consistent with). I'm even supportive of unilateral disarmement to a state of minimum deterrence as outlined by the great Pavel Podvig (something even practical military men agree with). You have also failed to address the issue of "nuclear safety" outlined in my post. Keep in mind that one of the chief reasons the US and the Soviet Union were able to stave off the Unthinkable through all the false alarms and mishaps was because the flight time of a weapon coming over the Pole would have been about 30 minutes, which gave Early Warning teams and political and military leaders ample time to re-examine their systems (which was a case with one of my favourite episodes of the Cold War). For neighbours such as India and Pakistan who have no love lost between them and thus "don’t understand how [the other side] think to a very high degree of precision" armed with nuclear tipped SRBMs and MRBMs, that time is reduced to five to ten minutes. Deterrence Theory is reliant upon a completely mathematical approach to nuclear policy, coined by game theorists with unlimited license to speculate, ignoring the simple fact that, as K said "people are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals". And take for instance a speculative Iranian Strategic Military arm (which if you had also been paying attention, I don't put a lot of stock in either). However progressive Rouhani is now, the civilian government remains a "toy democracy" at the mercy of the clergy of Iran. Just who do you think the Mullahs want at the keys? The regular military that draws from a progressive, cosmopolitan citizenry or the Basij "True Believers" who answer directly to them? Even if the Ayatollahs are rational players (I think they are), what of the men below them who can potentially be a whole Missile Wing of General Ripper characters?

The enormous armies, the fleets of battleships, and the factories turning out artillery pieces by the thousands didn't stop the proverbial stuff hitting the fan in 1914, and when both sides had the means of producing mustard gas, that little fact didn't stop them from employing them. Even if one thinks this is irrelevant to the discussion of deterrence theory, consider how even at their most rational, _BECAUSE_ they were rational, the leaders of the world were willing to stake eternity over ideological differences. But most of all, even if the deterrence regime was absolutely waterproof in logic, it falls apart due to one key detail: the human beings who design them and are at the keys are fallible. By any objective measure the United States Navy and Air Force have at their disposal the safest nuclear arsenal and the most well-trained personnel at the helm, having been pioneers of the field and having high-tech industries backing it that leave the next best competitors in the dust; this has not stopped a multitude of nuclear weapon related accidents and mishaps. What the hell does that say about powder keg regimes in Tehran, Tel Aviv, Islamabad, New Delhi, and soon Riyadh if Iran tests a weapon? The technology, materials, and expertise to develop nuclear arms are astoundingly simple to procure, but the culture of safety and competence from the US strategic forces and the Russian Strategic Rocket Troops is not so easy to absorb. So, if you don't know a Skiff from a Sturgeon...

I just don't thrive in big cities. I thought I could adapt and adjust to it and gave it a full year. But in the end, I just hate it. Moving to an area that is way more "open" and less claustrophobic for a country bumpkin like me when Gromnir finally retires, which we have threatened to do for a couple years, we will likely move to some remote part o' idaho. as much as am wanting access to city restaurants and entertainment options, am still most comfortable living miles from anything. likely gotta get rid o' the bmw and buy a ford pickup old enough that we could actual maintain and fix... something with a carburetor. a two-hour drive distant from a smallish city would be nice... far enough that at night we cannot see city lights in the distance. spend a week or two in chicago or new york each year to get our city fix. HA! Good Fun! Your post kind of reminds me of this scene from the Hunt for Red October:

@Luridis Seems very sensible. Any combat at all? Seems like if they were doing an AST for a PS: T spiritual successor, the big thing to ensure was great this time around was the combat.

Even though one would have to try pretty damn hard to convince me that Iran is trying to develop anything more than a threshold capability, If you believe that _more_ nuclear weapons will result in a more peaceful world, be they Iranian, Israeli, American, or Russian nukes, than I'm afraid your head has, in the words of General William Y. Smith, "left the world of reality." And that's before we get to such "trivial" matters like the safety issues of sitting on top of your own "buckets of instant sunshine" on permanent 5 minute alert.

For those who think the real fun starts at 20mm. A good friend of mine in the Command community on the supposed waste of taxpayer money that was the F-4 Phantom: https://coilerscreativecorner.wordpress.com/2015/08/10/in-defense-of-the-f-4/ James Acton's Reddit AMA on nuclear non-proliferation, specifically the recent Iran deal. https://www.reddit.com/r/geopolitics/comments/3gggfv/i_am_james_acton_a_nuclear_policy_wonk_im/

Taking the shirtless Putin pictures to its logical and terrifying conclusion.

Excerpt from David E. Hoffman's (of The Dead Hand fame) The Billion Dollar Spy, in the Atlantic: http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/08/adolf-tolkachev-cia-kgb/400769/

Are you speaking of the mine plow?

...and recruits spies in our intelligence apparatus (who not only sold intel to the Lekem, but to anyone else who would buy i.e. Pakistan and Apartheid South Africa. Oh, and by the way is almost out of the clink),nearly sinks one of our own ELINT vessels in international waters, and pressured the US to divert precious air assets to the Scud hunt in Desert Storm that General Horner believed was better spent to decisively decimating Iraq's military to the point that the Baathist regime of Hussein would be another footnote in history.

Cirque du Soleil really let their "Mystere" set go to s***. Mongorian and a robit. He's like an minority best friend double-whammy! Gotta fix the eyes of my robit girlfriend. Cree...py... There we go.

@Bendu Can you tell me what your get-up is in your pics? As compared to Dark Souls 1, it's hard for me to find a look that suits me.

Picked it up as well. Spent about an hour in the first task of making breakfast for an eagle since it's as if the task given to you assumed that you the player have lived in a Mongolian Yurt your entire life. Went crazy trying to figure out where the mortar and pestle that was needed to grind up the ginger was as although I had a general idea of what they looked like, I didn't know where some Mongolians living on the steppes kept them (on top of the crockery). Although the game has the kind of adventure game designer logic that aggravates me, otherwise having a good time. Am probably about half-way through the game if the level select screen is anything to go by, and the fiction of that world is certainly drawing me in. I still don't really know what to think of it, but it's definitely an interesting game. I'm probably nowhere near as far as you because I'm splitting time between Cradle and The Talos Principle: Road to Gehenna. Finished it in probably about 6 hours or so, and it probably would have taken me a bit longer if I searched every nook and cranny for the extra fluff. I honestly see a lot of shades of Dark Souls in the narrative, insomuch that a lot of the gaps left by what is explicitly told to you has to be filled in with stuff you have to actively seek out in the game world and analyse (like how a lot of Dark Souls lore comes from item descriptions, or by the fact that this guy's body was found near the sick spider lady). That, and at risk of sounding like a cultural and linguistic chauvinist, a lot of the confusion can also be attributed to localisation issues (hint: When they say "red pot" they mean "red wok" and when they say "solar battery" they mean "solar panel"). The Steam store page also has one of the most disastrous translation jobs I've seen this side of Ice Pick Lodge's Pathologic.

Picked it up as well. Spent about an hour in the first task of making breakfast for an eagle since it's as if the task given to you assumed that you the player have lived in a Mongolian Yurt your entire life. Went crazy trying to figure out where the mortar and pestle that was needed to grind up the ginger was as although I had a general idea of what they looked like, I didn't know where some Mongolians living on the steppes kept them (on top of the crockery). Although the game has the kind of adventure game designer logic that aggravates me, otherwise having a good time. Am probably about half-way through the game if the level select screen is anything to go by, and the fiction of that world is certainly drawing me in.