Ok, I just ran across this and my mind has been resonating ever since. I know I'm being immature, but, God, I haven't seen anything that sexy in a really long time. I don't generally seek p0rn, but I would be willing to look her up any time.
Who the heck is that girl?!
As you can see, I don't have a way to parse everything...maybe I should listen to the French, Russian, and Chinese...Let's see, the French aren't so pure or so noble and we haven't even gotten deep into equipment and oil agreements. Ok, so how about Russia? Hmmmm, isn't it funny how a country can negotiate new deals in the midst of a UN arms inspection? So it has finally fallen to China to prove that there is something honest about the anti-war group at the UN...oops. And what about the fringe reports?
That being said, the US is just as enmeshed economically, but not for oil, at least not for current needs. This is getting harder and harder, not easier and easier.
Maybe I should fall back on my history...what about the major reason the UN was created...meaning the elimination of genocide? Well...what about Rwanda? It's also funny how the Rwanda Report from the UN doesn't actually exist online anymore. How about Yugoslavia? What about Kosovo? Shit...why the hell does this site exist if the UN is doing it's job?!? How many genocidal attacks in Iraq by Iraq before someone says "ENOUGH!"?
So, I've established that no one is clean in this damn conflict. Everyone stinks and the only "honest" person is Saddam since he clearly pursues his own agenda, reality, world opinion, and human lives be damned.
I'll tell you right now that I'm firmly on the side of logical consistency. The US cannot continue to support the Saudis while demanding that the Iraqis and Iranians change to democracies. Hell, the US isn't even a democracy except at the local level.
In the end, this is the shittiest conflict about which I've ever studied and it makes me sick.
Just been thinking about the whole 802.11g flare-ups recently...it's funny how marketing can backfire pretty damn quickly...the major premise of 802.11g over 802.11a was that g could happily live in harmony with 802.11b installations...it can, it just simply throttles back to b bandwidth. So, the only advantage is if you can manufacture g radios less expensively than a/b radios (if you want legacy coexistence/compatibility). Well, it seems pretty obvious that an a/b device would have two radios and therefore cost twice as much...right? Except that to work with b, g also needs a second radio or you throttle back...
In other words, the 802.11g advocates are getting eaten by their own false marketing, whereby they claim that they can have coexistence inexpensively, but they actually cannot deliver coexistence at all (which the a/b crowd can...different freqs and all) and the cost differential between one and two radios is trivial...
Funny how marketing works...
You are false data.