Alpinfox

Another 5-star post from Jason. Thanks for instructing us gumbies.

The biggest issue for me is the pictures. I think it's a real shame that all the pictures in all of the old trip reports are screwed up. People put a lot of time and energy into making those TRs, and they are the best feature of this site, so I'd make that a priority. I don't really have a right to complain since I haven't donated any money (though I will when I get a job), but that's my biggest complaint. Thanks and Cheers!

If you are talking about "F", I think that is Sloan or White Chuck, but I'm really bad at these things. edit: I guess I'm a little late. Was this picture taken from Johannesburg? Eldorado?

or Mammut Matrix or Kong Gi-GI I believe all of the autoblock devices work better with skinnier ropes; I know the Reverso does. Fat ropes, 10+mm, create a lot of drag which means a good workout for the belayer.

Lubed ? cramPond's Cold Cream?

Oh yeah! You da man.

I thought someone might be interested in this: LaFuma Extreme 800 Sleeping Bag Synthetic Insulation 46-degrees $45 1lb 7oz

Now available at Pro Mountain Shorts over Polypro!

CBS - Kills Threads, DEAD!

For climbing recommendations, buy these books: and Keep in mind that based on the lack of snow we've had thus far this year (25% of normal), May this year may be more like July conditions in normal years. For partners, make a post in the CLIMBING PARTNERS forum when it gets closer to May. Where are you coming from?

Petzl Spearmint 'biners?

HB Deep Woods Off-sets?* *contains 10% DEET

And where is Assmonkey? I miss assmonkey. And Bug? And ExtremoMtnDude? And lI1|1! ? And Ropegun2002? And Anodder_otter? And Harry_Pi? And NOLSe?

I've got a pair of leather belay gloves that fit me really well, and I've climbed in them a few times with pretty good results. Large edges and hand jams are no problem; small crimps don't feel very secure, so you ain't climbin' hard, but at least you are outside! Pour hot water and a package of jello into a nalgene. Put nalgene in insulated bottle jacket or whatever OR calls those things. Stays hot/warm for hours. I've only done this for ice climbing, but it would be nice for cold rock days too I guess. Warms the hands and the insides. A thermos full of Hot Toddies would be good too. I've gotta try that. I saw RuMR at Smith once with a little portable propane heater.

to or

Shampoop tube?

Based on the title of the thread, I was expecting something else.

GriGrease?

That's because you understand so little about them. People always fear what they do not understand. PP, Could you please define "them". I don't know what you are talking about.

I'm sure that part of GWB's motivation for invading the middle east is to "make the world safer", but I believe economics, religion, the unifying/empowering nationalistic effects of war, and personal vendettas play a bigger role. PP, regarding your table, here is another: 1 Saudi Arabia 2 Iraq 3 Kuwait 4 United Arab Emirates 5 Iran 6 Venezuela 7 Russia 8 Mexico 9 Libya 10 US top 10 countries in terms of oil reserves.

According to a certain chemist/climber on this website, helmet sunscreen might not be a bad idea.

I believe GWB would very much like to invade Iran. The guy is crazy and is on a crusade to "democratize" (read: christianize and open to capitalist markets) the middle east. He would probably do so if he could get the draft up and running. As for Korea, they already have the bomb, so we gotta play nice.

You also weren't vociferously criticizing Clinton to the degree you do so w/r/t to Bush's policies, now were you? Seems the intensity of your indignation is directly proportional to partisan politics. As for your smart-ass comment about my use of the word "keen". I did criticize Clinton, but I assume by "you" you mean "Democrats" or "Liberals" or something. I think had Clinton invaded Sudan you would have heard just as much yelling and griping as you have seen re:Iraq. Since it was a surgical strike type operation, by the time the public knew about it, it was over. That's quite a bit different than dragging the country and hundreds of thousands of American troops into a multi-year long war, killing tens-of-thousands of civilians, toppling a government, costing the US trillions of dollars, tarnishing our world image, etc. Ah, but how often do we hear that there is "no threat from Iraq", implying "no national security" issue. One would conclude that this would be a litmus test for those making the argument w/r/t the necessary conditions for the use of military force. But you say there was "no ulterior motive" w/r/t Kosovo, just a "humanitarian mission". Meaning "no national security issue". That's the first point of hypocrisy. Then, when those who argue that the current mission in Iraq is a "humanitarian issue", that is shot down as a legitimate reason for our presence - "the Iraqis need to take care of their own problems". But, in Kosovo, a "humanitarian mission" was justification for the use of force. That's the second point of hypocrisy. The time to intervene for humanitarian reasons in Iraq was during the genocide of Kurds (mid 1980s I think?), not in 2002. There was NO threat to US national security from Iraq in 2002. We had Saddam in a tight little box where he could do no harm.

YOU miss the point. I, for one, would not have supported invading Iraq no matter who was president. I wasn't too keen on the use of military force in Kosovo either, but at least there we had a humanitarian mission and the support of the UN with little/no ulterior motive (that I am aware of anyway). I didn't support Clinton's air strikes of pharmaceutical factories in Sudan either. So your insinuation that political affiliation colors support of military action is incorrect, at least in my case.