Commissar

No. I've got a choice of backwoods bumpkins or naval medicine up here. I'm sticking to my own smarts. Natural selection, and all that.

Screw doctors, I self-medicate. Remind me to tell you guys about the time I removed a three-inch splinter from my shoulder with my trusty Gerber knife. I got a horrible infection. Edit: It's self-diagnosis that led me to come up with the stupid pressure theory, and which has had me trying to pop my ears every ten minutes for the last day and a half, causing great pain and likely some damage up there. I'm still not going to see a doctor.

Antiobiotics, huh? Got a crapload of those lying around, maybe I'll pop some.

What you suggest sounds suspiciously a lot like drowning.

So, I have a weird problem. I got a cold right before we took off to visit the folks for Christmas, and my sinuses got hit bad. I was fine for the flight out, though the descent built up a lot of painful pressure I couldn't clear - imagine like when you need to pop your ears, but with your sinuses. I thought my head was going to explode, but it was cool. Eventually dissipated. Flying back, same thing happened; now, however, I've got what feels like a pocket of rather painful pressure behind my right brow. Tried clearing my ears, no dice - the left ear will pop, but the pain intensifies greatly on the right side, to the point where I have to stop blowing. Talked to a pilot friend, he said to try clearing my ears. Talked to a doctor friend, he said such things shouldn't be physically possible, but he's a podiatrist. Anybody ever have anything like this happen? If so, please tell me how to fix it. I'll pay you.

The Pirate Coast: Thomas Jefferson, the First Marines, and the Secret Mission of 1805 by Richard Zacks. I'm also reading Umberto Eco's Baudolino. Both very good.

Maybe they won't moan and piss about terrorists because the terrorists are no problem for them since they don't actively support the "World Preserver and Majorly Spoiled Brat" USA... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> See, what you meant to say there was, "They rely on the US to keep the oil flowing, the back doors of Europe locked, and all problems solved." Throw something as simple as Kosovo at them and they panic - did anyone else see that telegram from Paris to Milosevic, trying to negotiate terms of surrender? How is the US a problem for them? You're saying that the United States of America accidentally killing civilians in the course of military operations is worthy of getting upset about, but terrorists detonating themselves all over the world in the largest crowds they can find is not? You just suggested that Europe will let terrorists do whatever the hell they want, so long as they leave Europe alone. Great philosophy, man. And you guys wonder why you aren't in the world driver's seat anymore. Edit: And answer my question.

Wait...that first thing you said isn't much more sad than being a Star Wars fan?

What aggression would that be? Surely you don't mean al-Qaeda. I know you're not suggesting they're after us because we "take innocent lives." No, I think you mean European pissing and moaning. Interesting to note that it's about the same amount, or possibly more, pissing and moaning as the Europeans direct at the terrorists for taking far more innocent lives, far more deliberately. Since France or Sweden or Denmark has yet to decide to stop pissing and moaning and start doing something about la terroristas, I have very little worry about those same countries, and the others like them, deciding to do anything other than blather towards the US. If you're powerless, why should we listen to you? You're not necessarily right. And again, I ask: who discovered and publicized the Abu Ghraib prison abuse stuff, Battlewookiee? I'll bet you twenty dollars you can't tell me.

Except that we don't do that. We go with whoever can bid the lowest, promise to meet specifications, and deliver it on time. Also, considering the immense size of our defense industry, there needs to be protectionism in order to keep that behemoth generating income for the US. Besides, we can make pretty damn good stuff. Whatever rifle we choose - and I'm still not saying for sure that we didn't pick the Plastic Wonder because it's German, that's just my personal hunch - is going to be capable of doing the job. We use plenty of foreign-licensed weaponry already, and though a rifle contract is really a drop in the bucket compared to most other military spending, it's still more considerable than a squad support weapon or a sidearm.

Out of idle curiosity, who discovered and publicized the whole Abu Ghraib abuse thing? I'm trying to remember...

Which brings about another question: has the war in Iraq really improved our national security in the long run? Remember how quickly some of US's past allies in the Middle East turned against us? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I don't particularly think so, but it's hard to tell at this point. Ten years down the road we'll be able to make that determination.

We have goals in Iraq. Anyone actually involved with the whole affair, or potentially involved, could tell you what they are. We're staying and allowing the Iraqi defense forces to gradually take on more and more responsibility in dealing with the insurgency, while phasing our own guys out. Our plan isn't to "beat" the insurgency, it's to hand the problem to the Iraqis when they're capable of handing it, and then high-tail it out of there to let them run their own security, and their own country, for that matter. It would be a much better plan if there were timetables set; the entire strategy over there depends entirely on perception. I was never taught to tell my boss, "Well, I have no idea when I'll get this done, to tell you the truth; it'll get done when it gets done." It's also seeming more and more like Iraq's going to end up something of a theocracy, which could very well push it right into Iran's open arms, so it's entirely possible we massively screwed up. Nothing really to do now save wait and see. Defenders of this strategy will tell you that it's been working, since we haven't had a successful attack on the United States by terrorist elements. They've been too busy in Iraq. Detractors will tell you that, despite al-Qaeda's definite involvement in Iraq, they've still managed to hit Spain and the UK - ignoring the fact that the UK's problem was home-grown, of course. I don't know which point of view is correct, though I suspect it's a mix of both. I also don't think we can perform an immediate pullout, like many seem to be calling for. We broke it, and therefore we bought it; we're under an obligation to leave the country capable of fending for itself.

Your statement - I don't want it, it's German - just proves the fact you don't know excatly what you're talking about. It's not strictly German weapon, it's a joint development by the US defense contractors and one German. The XM8 Future Combat Rifle was supposed to be developed by ATK Integrated Defense, as the lead company in this venture, which is the system integrator on the XM29 program. Teammates on the program were Heckler and Koch (German) - weapon development; ATK Ammunition Systems ( USA) - ammunition development; Brashear LP (USA) - integrated full solution fire control and Omega (USA) - training systems. The XM8 rifle is weighing 20 percent less than the M4 because of advanced technologies developed for the XM29 program. The prototype weighs 6.4 pounds, with an objective weight of 5.7 pounds. PEO claims it takes one third the time to train a Soldier on the XM8 than the current weapon system. The XM8 is also more reliable. Unlike the current M4 and M16, the XM8 does not introduce propellant gases and the associated carbon fouling back into the weapon

What makes you think whatever the next generation rifle ends up being shall prove inferior? True story: several of our super-secret squirrel boys are running around the sandbox with Vietnam-era M14s out of personal choice. A rifle's a rifle's a rifle; if you don't know how to shoot, slapping all the whiz-bang **** you can think of onto a receiver's not going to make a lick of difference. If you can shoot, you can hit what you want with anything, so the whiz-bang **** becomes redundant. And yes, this thread is rather weird.

I think it looks disgusting. My personal opinion on why we aren't acquiring it? It's German. I'm rather fond of the idea of keeping the primary rifle for all US military branches coming from an American manufacturer, myself.

It's the sand. The 240s do very well, on the other hand.

It's also worthless in the desert. Remember that if you get stuck with one. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> just wondering... why is it worthless in the desert? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It jams. It jams early and it jams often. And since you have to take the thing halfway apart to clear one...

It's also worthless in the desert. Remember that if you get stuck with one.

Why do you keep ignoring the fact that your argument relies wholly on blind trust in the extremely small section of the government involved to do the right thing? How do you know they're just listening to the calls to terrorists? Because they told you so?

Voila. http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/12/20/intellig...sign/index.html

The government is perfectly fine in doing so - provided they go through the correct steps to do it. There is some method of oversight at every single level of the American justice system, and this particular program has none whatsoever. It requires you to believe exactly what the Bush administration is telling you. Now, the Patriot Act, designed to enhance our ability to fight terrorism, has been used to put away strip club owners with no ties to terrorists; why in the name of all that's holy would you believe they wouldn't also be listening in on any international calls they suspect could possibly be involving any form of crime, anywhere? Here's where Taks' brilliant, "If you ain't done nothin' wrong, you ought to let the FBI live in your attic," argument, but the fact of the matter is, if you deprive an American citizen of his or her right to due process under the law, you're violating the Constitution of the United States of America. End of story.

you don't, and i never said you could absolutely know. however, if you aren't talking to terrorists, you don't need to worry. such taps can't be used against a US citizen for anything unless he is indeed talking to terrorists. By that logic, you should have no concern with the police stopping you for a random search on your way home from work, or even strolling in the front door whenever they like to. If you aren't doing anything wrong, why should you care if the government's monitoring your life? Foreign intelligence, but not off of US citizens. Not without due process. Once again, if you're not doing anything wrong, I see no reason why you should object to anything such as RFID chips, or random searches, or a closed-circuit camera in your bedroom. The right to privacy, according to the Supreme Court, exists in the Constitution. It can only be violated under certain conditions; the President deciding that he wants to do it isn't one of them. It's illegal.

We have no idea what they're listening to, because there's absolutely no oversight. Not even from the secret intelligence courts which, what, have turned down maybe four out of over three thousand requests for warrants and authorizations? I do know what probable cause is. Probable cause is one of the things that's necessary for a warrant. Since a warrant isn't needed for the eavesdropping Bush has approved, probable cause isn't needed, either. They're listening to international calls, and that's all they've revealed. There are calls from my household to Russia on a weekly basis. There are e-mails on a daily basis. How the hell do I know they're not listening in? Guilty until proven innocent is how our government deals with other parts of our government. That's precisely why we have the need for warrants, writs of habeas corpus, oversight committees, and so on. You're telling me to trust the government. Our entire Constitution is founded on the idea that the people should not, in fact, trust their government.