mattp

Bill... you're kidding, right? Think of any weapons upgrade, whether it is the B-1 bomber or the latest generation fighters, or the pathetic trucks we sent to Iraq in which our troops had to put sandbags on the floor or weld scrap metal onto. We should trust the pentagon procurement office to make good choices? I agree with part of your premise, and I stated this point the other night in response to one of Serenity's posts: we DO have to have some measure of trust or respect or appreciation and at some level we cannot second-guess everything. At least not on an operational level. But when we are talking about procurement? (Let alone policy) The larger point remains: at the fundamental levels we can and should second guess pretty much everything.

Nice fantasy. You were lucky enough not to get involved in such a tragedy, perhaps, but you're fooling yourself if you asset that nobody you ever climbed with and none of their family members would ever have sought to recover damages from somebody they perceived as being irresponsible in a way that led to their becoming disabled or killed. Lets see somebody try to answer his question rather than stirring the pot with the rhetoric that belongs in one of your political "discussions."

Good luck getting any kind of real answer to that question. We have thousand year old rules of law like assumption of the risk which protect you but you could lose everything you have and end up in jail.

The Red Cross calls Gitmo treatment torture and you guys who talk about how liberals hate America refuse to acknowledge that there is anything even remotely embarrassing about this. Meanwhile, you still have not tried to argue exactly or even vaguely WHY this was a good idea. In this discussion, where Serenity says he set out to "troll" those who are against Gitmo, any defense of what we did there would be welcome. Seriously.

How does that go for you? You must obey, but must she?

In your lap?

Looking at the original post, though, I realize: Thursday is out for me. There are two other events that night - and both involve people who have in the past attended PubClubs. Wednesday or Friday or...have fun and don't drink so much beer you don't want to do it again...

Yoda?

May the force be with you, young Fuke.

He did. He's just shy about sharing the details of his seminar group. Half of them are transgendered and the rest are "diversity" students. (Wink: I'm laughing with you rather than against you here, Fairweather. It sounds like you're taking some good classes.)

Mr. Klenkinator: what do you have for show and tell? The muffler bracket that the jeep left behind on ??? peak? And Peak Pimp: the broken tooth ice screw from your last montaine adventure? And Dawg: a photo of you and the bandits facing off at your last dig? Let's make this a night to share! Ballard is great. It is definitely out of the way for anybody who doesn't already have a reason to be in that part of town but we've been to West Seattle and Monroe in times past, and (within reason) "out of the way" may be more something to complain about than a serious deterrent. Still, though, if we are going to have more than one event it'd be a good idea to focus on locations closer to I-5 for the next one. As for times, there have always been some earlier folks who want to show up at 7 and leave by 8:30 whereas others won't even show up 'till 9:00. Rarely have we stayed out must past about 11:00 on a week night.

Hey Wayne: I think Mt. Garfield and Mt Index are in the "Alpine Lakes" region. Surely there is something on both of those peaks that would merit mention on your list.

Meanwhile, I'll note that I've been watching this thread and so far I have not seen any real argument as to why we actually benefit from having the facility at Guantanimo and being known for torturing the bad guys. There's been some talk about how the bad guys really suck and our guys are underappreciated, but not really any discussion of exactly or even vaguely what it is that we've gained from having Gitmo. I got one private message that there might be some tangential benefit in having that facility but it was really not very specific and you tough guys aren't even trying to say that we've gotten good intelligence from Gitmo or that the gains have been worth the PR losses, let alone even acknowledging the fact that it has been an embarrassment.

Righto. I used to head down to the hills in West Virginia and N. Carolina/Tennessee for caves and climbing over spring breaks and never had any kind of Deliverance moment. Quite the opposite. Anyone else ever eat the wild green onions called "Ramps?" My in-laws from Kentucky never heard of 'em but when I was a young lad the locals down there would crawl through the woods filling gunny sacks with them in the Spring.

Hey Jake: I'd share a ride with you but I live in NE Seattle so I'd meet you 3/4 of the way there and I'm not going to be in a hurry to come home 'cause my wife is at her sister's house and all I have to look forward to at home is an ornery cat.

Baltoro is right, that this is not the "preferred" way to self belay. However, depending on what the climber was actually doing it may have been a "secure" way to do so. I've done some solo climbing where I simply clipped into each piece with a figure eight and, on a remote mountain wall covered with lichen, I took comfort in the fact that I had multiple anchors and fat rope and simple mechanics. There are devices made for this purpose that would undoubtedly do a better job if employed correctly and if the set up was undertaken with proper care. The crude system with clipping into every piece with a static or relative static cord may or may not be entirely stupid.

Who ya got in your cross hairs, there Pink? I love that film, by the way. The John Birchers were always better than Hollywood when it comes to subplot and subterfuge.

Nice!!! The John Birch Society rocks.

I'm a solid member of the curmudgeon team around here but to this statement I'd say: why not? He's excited about climbing and folks around here and I bets everyone else is saying to him that it's amazing that he is doing all of this at such a young age. "Get experienced and be sure you are ready" is excellent advice that I'm sure he get's plenty of but setting out to be the youngest climber, or the one who rode his bicycle from home or the oldest climber or the demonstration of international-brethren, or the no-oxygen climber or the clean-up-the-south-col climber or [name your particular fetish here] are largely just different ways to motivate or define our experience. Lots of people enjoy these record-setting or climbing-plus type expeditions and if the "theme" helps someone raise money for their venture because someone else wants to contribute, I have no problem with it.

Good question, Braydon. Dane's looking out for your interest here, and I agree with him nearly fully -- but in fact younger climbers CAN do some amazing things. The #1 thing you should do is to get as much as possible experience on the biggest mountains you can find. Rainier is better training than Mt. Si, but McKinley would be better training than Rainier. I don't know exactly how high Pumori is, but people die at that altitude just because they happen to be there. It is serious.

They are trying to get her phone number.

That's the real point here. Nobody, and in this case I include Serenity and Alkateke, have even tried to tell us how and why Gitmo has helped make America more secure. Instead they warn of the "Bogeyman" and say "you liberals don't understand what is at stake." I think we do. Terrorism is no joke, but our recent activities have only fed the beast and last I heard all rational analysis says we are in fact little or no better protected against terrorist attack now than we were eight years ago but, at the same time, we've lowered our standing and damaged our reputation around the world. I'm not referring to GWB specifically but to the fact that after 911 we had an opportunity to show leadership and resolve and, yes, power. We showed the opposite and the "we're fighting the terrorists and you guys who don't support that want America to fail" constituency can only urge us to continue to do so.

Serenity, I have some sympathy for that "you civilians safe in your houses shouldn't be second guessing the troops on the ground" argument, but that is why we have the rule of law and a political process which includes the election of our commander in chief. I noted above that I'm sure there were some good reasons for decisions made at many points along the road to Guantanimo, but I'm afraid you are just going to have to live with the second guessing - and should.

Billcoe, nice try on the previous page but really all you did was prove my point. You didn't set forth any argument that we are accomplishing anything at Guantanimo that we couldn't do if we held the same captives at home, nor did you even try to justify the torture practices there. Your chief point is that some of them are bad guys.

How many of our guys –including maybe our friend Serenity- should be tried, then? I'm sure we have plenty of guys active in the conflict areas who are not always wearing uniforms identifying them as our guys.