Serenity

Fair enough. China is too reliant on the United States almighty currency to rattle sabers with us. One little glitch in their system and they have millions of affected dissidents beating on their tanks in a square right under the cameras watchful eyes. That, and the US is still forward projected into the Pacific Rim tenfold over the small effort we have expended in the ME. ****************************** News from China stole the stage (everywhere outside the United States, anyway) from U.S. President-elect Barack Obama on Monday, with Beijing announcing a $570 billion stimulus package to counteract the local impact of the global economic downturn. Stock markets in Asia and Europe, along with most commodity markets, bubbled in reaction. As the theory of the uptick goes, China is the world's third- or fourth-largest economy, depending on whose numbers you use, and its nearly $2 trillion in currency reserves makes it one of the few states to have much room to maneuver in the current economic crisis. The specific problem that China faces is not a liquidity crunch (as in the United States) or banking crisis (as in Europe), but rather the enervation of its exports -- most of which are sold to a now recessionary West. Fewer exports means fewer factory runs, which could quickly translate into multitudes of unemployed Chinese willing to take long walks in big groups. The question on the Chinese Politburo's collective mind is how to ensure that social stability does not fray when the fundamentals of the quintessential Asian export economy go straight to hell. The proposed solution goes something like this: Develop the inland provinces and thus create internal demand for the country's "exports." Most of China's wealth is generated by and held in its port cities, all of which grew to prominence during the export-led development binge of the past 30 years. But much of the population is not clustered around these coastal provinces; it is located further inland, where people live on the wrong side of sizable income, education, employment and quality of life gaps. On the surface, it seems the new program has a middling chance of succeeding simply because it will be backed up by $570 billion -- nearly 20 percent of China's gross domestic product (GDP). Yet at second glance it is not clear how much money is really on offer. The $570 billion includes funds precommitted for other programs, and a large chunk that local governments will be expected to somehow stump for themselves. And there is also the issue of how quickly the money will be made available. Details are sketchy here too, but it appears that the money will be spent over a period of two to as many as five years. Taken together, the package suddenly looks a lot less impressive, having shrunk from the originally reported 15-20 percent of GDP in one year (the biggest stimulus package in human history) to a sum with "new money" perhaps amounting to less than 1 percent of GDP per year for the next five -- a "stimulus" that most countries would just consider part of their normal budgets. Which leaves us with two questions. First, why is the national government not simply using its currency reserves to pay for the program itself? Most likely, this is because Beijing realizes that much of the vastly poor and corrupt inland would require far too much aid to ever become developed by any reasonable standards. Turning the poorest parts of an overpopulated country into something rich enough to potentially replace Paris and New York on your customer list is not something that can happen quickly or cheaply, and Beijing cannot be itching to send good money into China's undeveloped areas. Second, if the national government is not bellying up to the bar for this plan, then who will? Based on China's record, it seems the interior provinces are most likely to be forced to pay up to three-quarters of the bill, mainly by taking out loans under the much looser monetary policy that Beijing is offering. In terms of relative size, this could well be like Washington directing the 50 states to double the outlays of their budgets for four years without compensation. The provinces will approve of taking on so much debt only if they are freed to lavish their borrowed wealth on pet projects of their own. And that would not be a coherent economic policy at all. Strafor

No-I've never been to Chicago, but clearly...you've never spent time around the political scene in Najaf, Fallujah, Ramadi, Kabul, Qatar, UAE, Peshawar, Baghdad, Kunar, Asadabad, Tora Bora, Speen Boldak, Helmand, etc...I could go on. DEFINE "No permanent military installation". Sounds pretty ambiguous to me. I wonder if Bad Tolz was considered a 'permanent US base" or a leased Bundeswher backwater? Fighting dying down in Iraq, picking up in Astan? Wonder why? Because all the bad guys changed theater. I've been wondering how long it would take them to figure that one out. Do you think the guys in the middle east are going to be impressed by the 'tough guys' in Chicago? Probably a little less than the 'tough guys' from Texas. I mean, look at our boy Medvedev. Sure didn't take him long to show the world what he thinks of the upcoming political leadership, did he? ******************************************* On Wednesday, as the entire world took in the idea of having Barack Obama as the next U.S. president, one of the greatest challengers to American power, Russia, decided to make itself immediately clear on its views of the current U.S. administration, Obama's election and the global U.S. agenda. Russian President Dmitri Medvedev gave his long-awaited first State of the State address (the equivalent of the U.S. president's State of the Union address) on Nov. 5. The speech was much more than a nationalist appeal liberally sprinkled with Soviet-era rhetoric; it was a declaration of Russia's return to the ranks of the world's great powers. In effect, Medvedev not only tossed the gauntlet for Russia's rivals in the West, but he also is not waiting around to see how they respond. It must be understood that Medvedev -- while he is certainly coming into his own under the sponsorship of his mentor, former president and current Prime Minister Vladimir Putin –- did not write this speech himself. The author is the Kremlin's gray cardinal, Vladislav Surkov, who has played the role of backroom dealer, enforcer, planner and puppet master for Putin for most of the past eight years. Surkov does not control Putin -- far from it -– but in many ways is the brains behind much of what happens in the Kremlin these days. It was Surkov who recommended that Medvedev's speech, originally scheduled for Oct. 23, be postponed. Ostensibly, the delay was meant to allow Russia more time to deal with its deepening financial crisis, but in reality, Surkov wanted to know which presidential candidate the Americans were going to elect. The speech was already written. In fact, according to Stratfor sources, two speeches had been written -- one for each possible outcome of the U.S. election. In waiting for a clear picture on whom Moscow would be dealing with in Washington, Russia underscored the central role the United States plays in the international system, and that Moscow views Washington as its main counterweight. Unlike many previous State of the State addresses, Medvedev's Nov. 5 speech contained few veiled threats or simple proclamations. Instead, it announced hard actions, including the following statements: Russia will deploy Iskander short-range ballistic missiles to Kaliningrad, a Russian enclave sandwiched between NATO and EU states Lithuania and Poland, in order to directly target the fledgling U.S. ballistic missile defense installations slated for Poland and the Czech Republic. (The Iskanders' limited range will allow them to put only the Polish site at risk.) Russia will return to a more Soviet-style system of term limits in order to more firmly entrench the power of the Putin team. Moscow will not even consider negotiations with the lame-duck administration of President George W. Bush, preferring instead to wait for President-elect Barack Obama's team, which Moscow thinks will be easier to manipulate (whether or not this proves true). The United States is to blame not only for Russia's war with Georgia, but also for the global financial crisis. Russia will not make any concessions on its international position; the United States can take it or leave it. All in all, these statements bear a degree of boldness that has long been present in Russian propaganda, though not necessarily backed up by any particular actions. Russia's goal is simple: Use the three-month U.S. presidential transition period to impose a reality on the regions Moscow considers of core interest, presenting soon-to-be President Obama with a fait accompli. Most of Russia's efforts will focus on Ukraine, but attention also will be spread throughout the Caucasus and Central Asia, as well as the Baltics, Belarus, Poland and the Czech Republic. These states are already nervous about Obama's ability to stand up to Russia's new swagger, especially since he has never outlined a firm stance against Moscow and will be embroiled in other critical affairs, like Iraq and Iran. Now, Medvedev has told these states outright that Russia is about to act while the Americans can't. He is playing on the states' fears to push them into making a choice: Continue to depend on the United States (whether its support comes through or not), work with Moscow, or get crushed in the process. ~ George Friedman

Thanks. I worked all day long. A lot of other veterans on this board.

Fixed that for you.

Most of the time I am trying to post under some unusual circumstances, and I am often not able to find time to make clear concise points. It is a bit frustrating. I hadn't really intended to even get into this conversation at all, as it is taking up too much of my time I don't really have to offer. W is not Churchill, no doubt. Best to you Joe.

I'm certainly not casting it in cultural terms. I never have, and I think you have misinterpreted what I was trying to point out. I have always stood by the proposition that the current war was from the start, and has been, a strategic move to buffer Saudi Arabia from Iran. Moreover, the two front concept has always been by design an effort to pincer Iran between 2 forward air bases. I will certainly not argue that the planning phase of the operation was poorly concepted, and there was civilian bullying of military organizations that were more afraid (at the time) of rocking the boat, then standing up for what was right. Only the retired generals (Zinny -et al) were able to make their point without being censured. Just take a look at what General Westmoreland did to active duty Colonel David Hackworth when he called the bullshit flag on Vietnam. The man almost went to jail for telling the American public some basic truths. And Hackworth was a TRUE warrior. My arguments here dating as far back as 2003 were never neo-con cheerleading, they were simply "Oh fuck, we're knee deep in this shit now, let's get the job done". As always this was the perspective of someone who puts their money where their mouth is. What I know about this place is because I'm here. It might not the viewpoint of someone sitting back with copious amounts of time to laser in on one aspect, but I could certainly tell you about shit you'll never hear about. Oh, but I never will. Get it? I know you know what I am saying. You know I respect you, and I like what you have to say. Flip side to every coin though. It took Winston Churchill about 3 years to figure out the best commander to deal with the issue of Erwin Rommel and the Afrika Korps. I wonder if he would have had a bunch of naysayers and swamp donkeys riding his ass from the second 8th Army hit the ground if anything would have been accomplished there? it cost a hella of a lot more Britsh and Crown lives to deal with that see-saw situation then it has cost us in Iraq. Yeah-yeah I know, why were we even there to begin with, and we have argued this ad-naseum. We're there now, and I think President Elect Obama is going to have some serious intel briefings that are going to alter some of his campaign promises. We'll wait and see on that one. My prediction is forward air bases, heavily guarded, with at least several battalions of forward deployed combat troops there as a QRF(Quick Reaction Force) able to move anywhere within Iraq in minutes to protect any serious threat against US bases. A low signature FID (Foreign Internal Defense) package, and the largest US embassy in the world. Somewhere in the neighborhood of 25-50K US troops for quite a while. We're still in Korea, we're still in Germany.

A few points. Bug - Regarding the issues surrounding WW2 veterans, and the concept of shell shock. You're not telling me anything I don't already know. My point is that "the greatest generation' survived handily without being over diagnosed as 'shell shocked'. Their combat experiences far overshadowed the modern soldiers in most cases. Most returned to lead productive. and efficient lives. They coped with their experiences. Likewise with WW1, Civil War vets, et-cetera. In order for PTSD to be diagnosed, there has to be a feeling of great fear bordering on helplessness or witnessing a horror of some kind. PTSD requires several elements in order to be diagnosed properly. A. Traumatic Incident: Actual death or perceived death of yourself or someone in close conjunction. Some warriors are constantly moving towards the sound or the actual event of fighting. Given the right circumstances this is inevitable. B. Must respond with intense fear, hopelessness, or horror. This is known professionally as 'Condition Black". Also known as the "sheep effect". If you are trained properly, have confidence in your men, your team, yourself, and react properly there is no PTSD because there is no "Condition Black". This is sometimes referred to as "The Wolf" effect. Herein, you have to understand the concept of stress inoculation. Read up on Charles Kelly (machine gun Kelly). C. Effort to avoid any association with the event. Disassociation. D. Irritiability, difficulty sleeping, etc ************************* Joseph- I care little or nothing about politics in Chicago or any major American city for that matter. I'll give President Elect Obama FULL benefit of the doubt, and I certainly hope he does a great job. I don't do partisan politics. I want a good government that satisfies the needs of the larger interest. So far all I see is a constant sway back and forth, back and forth, back and forth. It's getting old. I do not however, condone or accept far left liberalism any more than some of you accept nonconservative doctrine. Let's just hope he does a great job, and we all walk away happy. Credible strategic threats have to be dumbed down so the layman can understand them in a 60 seconds (or less) T.V. blurb. Whether you are a Christian right wing nutjob or a Jihadist car bomber, you're probably cut from the same mold. The Afghan government has never declared religious war on the United States. Why? Because the US was invited to Afghanistan. I did not introduce the term caliphate into the conversation.

It's a different generation. Over 7000 US Marines lost their lives in a week on Iwo Jima, and I don't remember reading about too many guys bitching about PTSD.

I told the chaplain the truth. I like it here...

Everything you'll ever need to know about how to ski can be ascertained by repeatedly watching 'Hot Dog', 'Alpine Extreme', and 'There's Something About McConkey'.

Hey Justin, I think like all situations involving people thrown into turbulent and violent situations there will be those who have trouble readjusting to 'regular life'. In general, and for the majority, of not just contractors, but also regular military the adjustment will be gradual but accomplished without incident. The true 'tier 1' guys will remain employed for a long time to come, as it was prior to the big blow up in 2004. Salaries will be commensurate with what the market will bear, and also will reflect the skills the IC brings to the table. For the rest they'll have to find their niche in life. For everyone that will be different. Some will return to the military or police system that provided the skill set they parlayed into an IC lifestyle, while others will return to college, and still others will fall into careers that suit their skill sets. There have been a few guys I would characterize as crackpots, but overall most of the people I have met, known, or worked for or with were good people. You could say the same about almost any work group you are around. ********************* PC313....WOW! 2/10 points.

Figured this would go 90 degrees sideways pretty quickly. I can see that the REALLY-REALLY smart people have slithered out of their holes. Hey pc313, that's a real super neato series of photos you've posted to your profile. GOOD WORK GUY!!! CC.com is a better place because of your good work. Please refer to my posting entitled "Hey Spray Forum" for further information on my views.

Substitute: Monty = Tvashtarcocksuckwhatyernameis Shenanigans = Spray Forum @ CC.com Guy in back of room in t-shirt = joblo Any random member of spray forum = other people in video [video:youtube]FF7ouCjSPB4

As for more serious questions being raised, which deserve an honest response. Ecomomically everyone has to tread their own waters. The same applies to a professional football player, or a musician. Live like a rock star, prepare to burn out and fade away. Live like a budget conscience individual, and when your house falls down you can rebuild. Or move onto greener pastures. There are some HUGE misconceptions about this industry, in particular the wage scheme, and the reasons behind it. No one seems to throw that big of a fit when a pro soccer player in his rookie year, gets a multi million dollar salary for kicking around a ball. However take a guy who served his country in the system for 20 years, retires, and is called forth in time of need (by the same governmental system) to utilize his ample and specialized skills, pay him a 6 figure salary, and all the sudden he's a mercenary. How does that make sense to some of you? In most cases the military has retired that guy, or he was medically unfit due to injury incurred on active duty. I have worked with several guys who were involved in serious parachuting accidents, who were stronger and more fit than a lot of the NG guys I've seen. They went to the system that allowed them to work and participate. Joseph, what comparison can you make to the current situation to the 40's war against global fascism? Are people back home being rationed? Are people standing in line to sign up? No, there are dwindling numbers of people in our 'great' nation who are willing to stand up and get into the thin line, so concessions had to be made. I ran into a guy who was in his 50's standing at one of the most dangerous ECP (Oh sorry assclown Pat, did I say a big word you didn't understand?). He was retired, had no money issues, just chose to serve. In the 1940's that position would have been manned by a guy in his mid twenties who initially stood in line to get in period.

Shut your cock-holster asshole. You're about the biggest fucking blowhard pussy this website has ever seen.[img:center]http://www.ascensionist.com/PhotoPost/data/511/Photo_41.jpg[/img]

Doing DA work as an ODA has gone out of vogue. They are returning to more traditional FID. As far as doing EP protective work, this was NEVER a military occupational speciality. It was William Clinton who emasculated the intelligence services, and left a huge vaccum. We've had this conversation previously. I do not care to revisit it. If you think you can make a difference Joseph get off the sideline and get back to work. See you in the trenchline.

Yes, PMC's will stay in Afghanistan for the foreseeable future. IC's have played pivotal roles in all aspects of the situation in Afghanistan. Currently IC's are seeing an upsurge of anti-piracy work related to Somalia and other oceanic regions.

snobbishly out of touch Who are you referring to? [img:center]http://photos1.blogger.com/img/24/2081/640/Stars_Stripes.jpg[/img]

With the Iraqi SOFA going into place soon, as well as limited jurisdiction over PMC's agreed upon in Iraq, BW in particular has indicated it's eventual withdrawal from doing any type of work that might put it's people in harms way. In short BW is going to be gradually leaving Iraq. Their business plan has changed to reflect the changing situations. Furthermore, the whole paradigm of DoD/DSS contractors is evolving, and has been for a few years now. Currently DoD contractors are subject to UCMJ, and DSS contractors in some cases are subject to local laws and jurisdiction. All DSS contractors have always been under the RSO's overall control at various embassies. Accountability has increased, as well as oversight. Pay has been declining for quite some time, and there is no guarantee of work for anyone, anywhere. However, the fact remains that despite a presidential change, that enemies of the United States are still flexing, and moving to position. PMC's will continue to play their part in the overall scheme while providing support and SME expertise to the various agencies that employ them.

Look at the proportion of taxes in this country paid by the highest 2% richest people in this country. And to further increase that proportion? I don't make that much but I believe that the drive to make yourself better and to better your situation is what runs this country (or did in the past) to take that away can only derail our progress as a nation and the foundation that made us the Superpower that we are/were. We won't be a SUPERPOWER anymore? OH NO! I think we became a SUPERPOWER! by surviving WWII: the luck of geography, a very progressive tax policy, and a strong middle/working class made that possible, not a bunch of speculative Wall Street assholes. Asshole. Ok, I don't log in here that often, and choose to engage in these senseless debates even less. However, whenever I do I find you spewing out an endless list of insults. Take this post for example. "Asshole" etc. You seem to have carte blanche around her to rain down "F bombs, idiots, assholes, morons, etc". It goes both ways. Or does it moderator?

a. 7-8 depending on the season. Hitting a ten would require a more intense lifestyle change, that is unlikely with a 3 year old, and my work schedule. b. Yes, it's probably the most sensible approach to a long term training regimen. For me switching to macro/micro cycles has been a great way to prevent injury, and just as importantly, burnout. It also provides a framework for focus. When all I did was climb I never really trained, or had any direction other than 'do this route, or try this boulder problem'. Skiing really didn't help me focus any better, because I would often hit a series of powder days that were impossible to pass up, and would just go until my legs wouldn't work anymore. A lot of fun, but hard on the body. For my main athletic interests I maintain a sport specific training paradigm throughout the year, but vary the intensity, time, and EXACT type of training. As competitions come closer I train specific to the event, and in the off season take a more general approach. I also throw in a good dose of various styles of yoga to *connect* the various seasons. c. I modify to suit my personal goals in racing, or work related physical necessities. In racing your micro cycles equate to previewing courses at or near maximum efficiency.

Captain Caveman and I did it in 1999 car to car from the closed road. Moonlight ski out was sick! Wallowing in bottomless powder was not...

Nothing to see here, move on along...

Come to think of it, so is spray. Later.

Politics is boring period.