Libya

[Orogun01]

There was a huge Savings and Loans crisis in the 80's, so it's not like the financial system was so great back then either. It seems like instead of learning our lessons from that, we instead expanded the same principles to the entire financial sector. I don't know why we don't just look at what Canada does with their banks and do the same, I mean I do know but it's a shame that we don't.

I would put that blame on the political field, aside from these lobbyist and senators having investment on these corporations there is also the presidential campaign. I may be blowing things out of proportion here but a Deus Ex-like future may not be that far off, were corporations are explicitly the ultimate power.

Specially after the series of mergers.

[Enoch]

The difference being that the S&Ls were a lot of small entities, and they weren't tied together with big investment banks, hedge funds, insurance companies, or trading outfits. They had a separate regulatory scheme that was a bit less rigorous than the commercial banks, and it let them get into trouble.

[Rosbjerg]

Enoch, I'm curious, do you subscribe to the Austrian school of economics or are these just your personal thoughts on the matter?

[Walsingham]

In defence of Enoch I don't think he'd ever be sad enough to actually subscribe to a school of economics.

[Rosbjerg]

Bad choice of words - replace with "lean towards".

[Enoch]

In defence of Enoch I don't think he'd ever be sad enough to actually subscribe to a school of economics.

Pretty much, although I wouldn't put the "sad" label in there. I'm more than willing to admit that there are partisans in all of the established schools of thought who understand the field miles better than I do, so I don't want to call them names out of ignorance. I have little more than a dilettante's understanding of macroeconomic theory, but the historical results tell me that most of the established schools have models that work ... some of the time. There's a lot of noise in all of them; noise that, depending on the circumstances, can be louder than the signal.

 

Much of what I posted above comes from a more (second-hand) micro-level understanding of the firms involved. The incentives are all out-of-whack with doing what bankers are meant to do in a free-market economy. It's a position of huge power and responsibility, and the concentration, combination, and mimicry in the industry has effectively insulated it from competitive forces. The big players either all profit (enormously) or they all fail, and the society as a whole won't let the latter happen.

[Orogun01]

So if I understand correctly if they win they become disgustingly rich and if they lose we cushion their fall. I will begin to entertain suggestions about what to do with them, starting with disembowelment.

[Wrath of Dagon]

A very good article on Afghanistan: http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2011/0...t_it_could.html

Is it worth it? This is a hard question. We made the judgment that this war was worth fighting when we put our warriors into the arena in the first place. We've already jumped and now we are deciding whether to land on our heads, our rears or our feet. We cannot unjump. Our people are fighting as you read this. When we ordered our military to go, we cloaked ourselves in great responsibility to support them and to achieve success.

 

Petraeus should run for president, that's the second time he saved our bacon.

Edited June 21, 2011 by Wrath of Dagon

[Enoch]

A very good article on Afghanistan: http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2011/0...t_it_could.html

Is it worth it? This is a hard question. We made the judgment that this war was worth fighting when we put our warriors into the arena in the first place. We've already jumped and now we are deciding whether to land on our heads, our rears or our feet. We cannot unjump. Our people are fighting as you read this. When we ordered our military to go, we cloaked ourselves in great responsibility to support them and to achieve success.

 

Petraeus should run for president, that's the second time he saved our bacon.

Eh. It's too focused on the canard of sunk costs and on the bravado of insisting that any outcome other than "success" is wholly unacceptable. By that logic, the U.S. would still be occupying Vietnam.

 

You're not going to get a good answer to the "What should we do in Afghanistan in 2011?" question if you base your analysis solely on what we did in 2001. You have to look at the situation on the ground today, ask what improvements are possible, at what cost and with what risks, and decide whether those costs/risks are worthwhile to achieve those improvements.

[Wrath of Dagon]

I didn't mean that quote was the entirety of the article. I think his point is that we shouldn't quit while we're making progress.

[Walsingham]

I agree with the general thrust that progress is being made, and that the situation could completely unravel if we pull out. That will NOT be 'OK'. Strategically the opposition will claim that they won in Afghan, in spite of being consistently kerbstomped. Operationally you are going to see a concomitant rise in recruitment, and a return of trained indivdiauls from Afghan to other countries. Pakistan, Yemen, Iraq. All places we can't afford to get any worse because we have no rescue plan for these countries.

 

Having said this I cannot believe that the UK is going to maintain its commitment so I find it hard to condemn the yanks for cutting and running. I simply think it's inexpressibly foolish and wasteful.

 

This is not to say that the commitment to Afghan should be open ended. If it is that will only become a kind of colonialism. BUt the latrenative is that we need to deliver three things: economic growth, military security, and a political 'heart' or fire to enliven the minds of the Afghans. Yet I also think that all three are doubtful. We can't currently deliver economic strength in our own countries. The Afghan security apparatus is not as horribly compromised as Pakistan, but has a long way to go in terms of trade skills. And Hamid Karzai is a drugged up loon; not the kind of man to inspire a nation Ataturk style.

[Orogun01]

This is not to say that the commitment to Afghan should be open ended. If it is that will only become a kind of colonialism. BUt the latrenative is that we need to deliver three things: economic growth, military security, and a political 'heart' or fire to enliven the minds of the Afghans. Yet I also think that all three are doubtful. We can't currently deliver economic strength in our own countries. The Afghan security apparatus is not as horribly compromised as Pakistan, but has a long way to go in terms of trade skills. And Hamid Karzai is a drugged up loon; not the kind of man to inspire a nation Ataturk style.

I think that I've said something to that aspect before, so I concur. Personally I think that the area has abundant resources (oil) that will make delivering easier, hoping that the private sector won't **** it up. Plus the more open we are about it the more strength we gain in the international arena, since we would be privy to the rights of the oil in the area (now if only we could sabotage Russia's pipeline).

 

In any case if we are going to stay in the area it should be under 2 conditions: we gain something from the endeavor (**** democracy ) and we focus our efforts solely on a single country, setting up an stronghold for our interests in the area.

[Walsingham]

With affectionate disrespect, Orogun, you sound like you're advocating a return to old fashioned pre-1900 colonialism.

[Orogun01]

With affectionate disrespect, Orogun, you sound like you're advocating a return to old fashioned pre-1900 colonialism.

Nah it's more like I am advocating for a post-1900 neo-colonialism (which I am) I consider it to be a mutual beneficial relationship. We get to control a resource, and they get a ticket into the 21st century, like most colonies have done (Africa excluded) it's the true and tried method.

[Humodour]

I actually agree with you, Orogun.

 

I have a fundamental belief in the correctness and superiority of modern Western culture - specifically democracy, human and civil rights, market economics and the worth of the individual. I think we must continue to export these values and ideas to the rest of the world, albeit more intelligently then American neocons or British imperialists ever did.

 

I like the direction European soft power is taking and I support the interventions in Libya and Afghanistan as just wars. Between the Taliban and the Gaddafi regime you've got some of the worst humans to have ever lived in recent memory.

 

I don't think either war has ever been about oil, though. A lot of countries have oil - America, Australia, Norway, Scotland, Canada, Brazil, Russia all have large oil reserves for instance. It's not exactly a rare thing.

[Rosbjerg]

I don't think either war has ever been about oil, though. A lot of countries have oil - America, Australia, Norway, Scotland, Canada, Brazil, Russia all have large oil reserves for instance. It's not exactly a rare thing.

 

And yet a conservative assessment says we will run out of "cheap" oil in 40 years.

[WDeranged]

Apparently what's happening in Libya is definitely not 'hostilities'

 

“If I just sort of sucker-punched someone, and they doubled over on the floor, I think we would say that I was involved in a hostile action, whether or not they were able to land a punch or a blow in response,” said Saikrishna Prakash, a law professor at the University of Virginia."

 

Welcome to the age of kinetic military action.

Edited June 22, 2011 by WDeranged

[Malcador]

NATO should start bombing both sides. Good way to ensure peace.

[Wrath of Dagon]

I thought they already are

[Walsingham]

Apparently what's happening in Libya is definitely not 'hostilities'

 

 

[Humodour]

US military drones have now logged over 1 million hours flight time.

[Walsingham]

US military drones have now logged over 1 million hours flight time.

 

Want to set up a union? We could get fat paychecks for making them go on strike.

[obyknven]

Liberation of Misratah!

 

!

 

 

 

 

2 days ago rats attacked Zawia, Gherian, and Surman cities with NATO's help of course (NATO's strick was so hard this time)....anyway the brave citizins of these cities fought the rats and cought them, the army also came and did a great job ,,,the cities now as far as I know are safe except few rats nearby Gherian city but the army is there to clean them up...however rats are attacking crazy now and they just want to enter Tripoly!!! the good news is last night Musrata became clean of rats, there are only a few of them and they are hiding in a building which is sournded by the army, so its just a matter of time until the army cought them, also there is news said that the army cought Khalifa Haftar the rat in Musrata...thats the news in general,,,please continue praying for us because it is a dirty tough war. Inshallah victory is near

Edited August 19, 2011 by obyknven

[Drowsy Emperor]

I have a fundamental belief in the correctness and superiority of modern Western culture

 

I recognize the sentiment. Its echoed in Mein Kampf.

[Enoch]

US military drones have now logged over 1 million hours flight time.

 

Want to set up a union? We could get fat paychecks for making them go on strike.

Given that many (most?) of those drones are being operated by the CIA, I don't foresee a strike ending too well for the people who organize it...