European Tribune - Community, Politics & Progress.

Thursday Open Thread

by In Wales
Thu May 8th, 2008 at 11:54:33 AM EDT

It's Thursday.

Yes, yes it is.

. Home
. About
. Contact
. Advertise
. New User Guide
. FAQ
. Search
. Search (Google)
. Archives (Wiki)
Art, Economics, Energy, Environment, EU Politics, Mech & Tech, By Country

Username:
Password:

. Make a new account
. Reset password

Thursday Open Thread | 102 comments (102 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Re: Thursday Open Thread (4.00 / 4)

No it's not. It's Wednesday. It has to be. I'm way behind.

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 11:55:22 AM EDT

Re: Thursday Open Thread (4.00 / 5)

I think it's my turn for the photo blog tomorrow. How about Ask the Expert, Photos as Usual/ and Trains, subways, metros? The latter includes stations.

I told Bush; don't play chess with the freakin' Russians.

by LEP (rafifoon@yahoo.com) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 12:11:47 PM EDT

Train Station Home (4.00 / 6)

There was an interesting piece in the NY Times yesterday about a family in England that has taken a disused train station and converted it into a 2 bed, 1 bath home -- In England, at Home in a Railroad Station.

by Magnifico on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 12:15:26 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Train Station Home (none / 1)

There's a railway station around the corner from me that needs similar attention. Now just to find a big bundle of cash under my bed...

Ad astra per aspera

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Fri May 9th, 2008 at 03:18:21 AM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (none / 1)

Zut!!! for once that I am ready for the photoblog - it's not there. :-)

Well, will post the pictures when I am back.

by Fran (fran at eurotrib dot com) on Fri May 9th, 2008 at 03:27:19 AM EDT
[ Parent ]

Hit the road Jack (4.00 / 5)

Russia expels two US attaches
By Daniel Nasaw, The Guardian

The Russian government has expelled two US military attaches, the US state department said today.
A spokeswoman for the state department said the US objects to the action but will comply. The spokeswoman referred further questions to the Russian government. The Russian embassy in Washington did not immediately return a phone call.
The action comes after the expulsion from Washington of two Russian diplomats within the last year. One Russian military officer was ordered to leave Washington in November. The second was ordered to leave on April 22.

We're back to the Cold War tit-for-tat.

by Magnifico on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 12:13:19 PM EDT

New Cold War (4.00 / 6)

Come 'n get your NEW COLD WAR news right here!

U.S. promises cannot be trusted - Gorbachev

MOSCOW, May 7 (RIA Novosti) - Promises made by U.S. leaders cannot be trusted, former Soviet president Mikhail Gorbachev said in an interview with The Daily Telegraph published on Wednesday.
"The Americans promised that NATO wouldn't move beyond the boundaries of Germany after the Cold War, but now half of central and eastern Europe are members, so what happened to their promises? It shows they cannot be trusted," he said in Paris.
He also said that Washington's claims that a missile defense system it is planning to build in central Europe was aimed exclusively at countering the threat from so-called rogue states could not be believed either.
The Pentagon's missile shield deployment plans continue to be a major bone of contention in relations between the U.S. and Russia. Moscow considers the project a threat to its national security.
Gorbachev said the missile shield plan jeopardized world peace and could lead to a new Cold War.
He continued that that "erecting elements of missile defense is taking the arms race to the next level. It is a very dangerous step".
"I sometimes have a feeling that the United States is going to wage war against the entire world," the former Soviet leader said.
"The United States cannot tolerate anyone acting independently. Every U.S. president has to have a war," he concluded, also saying that the world had squandered the chance in the decade after the Cold War to "build a new world order."

Gorbachev: US could start new Cold War

Mikhail Gorbachev has accused the United States of mounting an imperialist conspiracy against Russia that could push the world into a new Cold War.
With Dmitry Medvedev due to be inaugurated today as Russian president, the Soviet Union's last leader said that the White House's claims of peaceful intentions towards its former superpower rival could no longer be trusted.
Delivering one of his most scathing attacks on the US, Mr Gorbachev told The Daily Telegraph that a US military build-up was under way to contain a resurgent Russia.
From Nato's expansion plans in the former Soviet Union to Washington's proposals for a bigger defence budget and a missile shield in central Europe, the US was deliberately quashing hopes for permanent peace with Russia, Mr Gorbachev said.
"We had 10 years after the Cold War to build a new world order and yet we squandered them," he said.
"The United States cannot tolerate anyone acting independently.
"Every US president has to have a war."
(...)
"The problem is not with Russia," he said, speaking at a friend's château outside Paris.
"Russia does not have enemies and Putin is not going to start a war against the United States or any other country for that matter.
"Yet we see the United States approving a military budget and the defence secretary pledging to strengthen conventional forces because of the possibility of a war with China or Russia.
(...)
For a man hailed as one of the heroes of the 20th century, Mr Gorbachev, now 77, often sounded like the ageing hardliners he struggled against in the Kremlin during the 1980s.
He railed against a "military-industrial complex" that he insisted was the "real government" of the US and, quoting a Russian documentary on state television, suggested that Margaret Thatcher had supplied weapons to Chechen terrorists.
Still, while Mr Gorbachev may be delighted by the rebirth of what many see as Russian imperialism, many wonder whether he approves of the way in which Mr Putin has eroded freedom of expression to such an extent that some claim glasnost is dead.
"I do not think that glasnost is dead in Russia," he said.
"There is a phenomenon in the West to criticise Putin's domestic record. But in Russia he has mass support. His popularity ratings are 70 to 80 percent.
"Is this not democracy?"

Rock on, Gorby.

Hey, how many years does the New Cold War have to go on before it is no longer new? Existential question of the day.

Talking nonsense is the sole privilege mankind possesses over the other organisms.

by poemless on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 12:44:59 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: New Cold War (4.00 / 3)

For a man hailed as one of the heroes of the 20th century, Mr Gorbachev, now 77, often sounded like the ageing hardliners he struggled against in the Kremlin during the 1980s.

Oh, puh-lease!

When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 12:57:01 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: New Cold War (none / 0)

That was my favorite line as well! :) Never gets old...

Talking nonsense is the sole privilege mankind possesses over the other organisms.

by poemless on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 12:57:59 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

favorite line (4.00 / 3)

yet followed closely by

"speaking at a friend's château outside Paris."

If anyone takes issue with my "Yes you CAN dress like the elite and still be a real Commie!" shoe diary, I present to you the Louis Vuitton-toting, French chateau-hopping communist, Mikhail Gorbachev!

Talking nonsense is the sole privilege mankind possesses over the other organisms.

by poemless on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 01:56:59 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: favorite line (4.00 / 2)

Gorby endorsing and modelling Louis Vuitton was definitely a high point of brand-led post-modernism.

It's a shame he's not also endorsing Manolo Blahniks. That would push it well over the edge into top flight performance art.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 05:14:59 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: favorite line (4.00 / 2)

like benny in ferragamos?

"It is time for a new Humanism, or we perish" -Albert Hoffman

by melo on Fri May 9th, 2008 at 02:25:53 AM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: New Cold War (4.00 / 6)

I should have just turned this into some NWC vol.37 bazillion Diary...

But Cohen, author of Th New American Cold War, kinda the landmark piece on the topic, has a new article on the topic:

A chilly peace: U.S. presidential candidates must address our strained relations with Russia, By Stephen F. Cohen

Excerpt:

How did it come to this? Less than 20 years ago, the Soviet and American leaders, Mikhail S. Gorbachev and George H.W. Bush -- completing a process begun by Gorbachev and President Reagan -- ended the Cold War, "with no winners and no losers" (as even Condoleezza Rice once agreed), and began a new era of "genuine cooperation." Now, the U.S. policy elite and media contend that Russian President Vladimir V. Putin's anti-democratic domestic policies and "neo-imperialism" destroyed that historic opportunity.
You don't have to be a Putin apologist to understand that it is not an adequate explanation. During the last eight years, Putin's foreign policies have been largely a reaction to Washington's winner-take-all approach to Moscow since the early 1990s, which resulted from a revised U.S. view of how the Cold War ended. In that new, triumphalist narrative, the U.S. won the 40-year conflict and post-Soviet Russia was a defeated nation analogous to post-World War II Germany and Japan -- a nation without full sovereignty at home or autonomous national interests abroad.
The policy implications of that bipartisan triumphalism, which persists today, have been clear, certainly to Moscow. It meant the U.S. had the right to oversee Russia's post-communist political and economic development, as it tried to do directly in the 1990s, while demanding that Moscow yield to U.S. international interests. It meant Washington could break strategic promises to Russia, as when the Clinton administration began NATO's eastward expansion, and disregard extraordinary Kremlin overtures, as when the George W. Bush administration unilaterally withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and moved NATO's border even closer to Russia despite Putin's crucial assistance to the U.S. war effort in Afghanistan after 9/11. It even meant the U.S. was entitled to Russia's traditional sphere of security and its energy supplies.
Such U.S. behavior was bound to produce a Russian backlash. It came under Putin, but it would have been the reaction of any strong Kremlin leader. Those U.S. policies -- now widely viewed in Moscow as an "encirclement" designed to keep Russia weak and to control its resources -- have helped revive an assertive Russian nationalism, destroy the once-strong pro-American lobby and inspire widespread charges that concessions to Washington are "appeasement," even "capitulationism." The Kremlin may have overreacted, but the cause and effect threatening a new cold war are clear.
Because the first steps in this direction were taken in Washington, so must be initiatives to reverse it. Three are urgent: a U.S. diplomacy that treats Russia as a sovereign great power with commensurate national interests; an end to NATO expansion before it reaches Ukraine, risking something worse than cold war; and a full resumption of negotiations to sharply reduce and fully secure all nuclear stockpiles and to prevent an impending arms race, which requires ending or agreeing on missile defense in Europe. Discussions with members of Moscow's policy elite suggest that there may still be time for such initiatives to elicit Kremlin responses that would enhance rather than further endanger our national security.

As always, I have some disagreements with Cohen. But as always, I'm more convinced than ever that the world would be a better place if someone, anyone, listenned to him.

Also Winthrop 360 has a post for all your Gorbachev needs, including the Telegraph article, responses to it, and a very sweet list of Gorby quotes on related topics. Check it out.

Talking nonsense is the sole privilege mankind possesses over the other organisms.

by poemless on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 02:48:25 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: New Cold War (4.00 / 3)

A very good sumary of how we got here. But I doubt that anybody of the faith-based lunacy in DC has any interest in changing policy.

My fear is that Obama might inadvertantly continue it by neglect, having too many other urgent problems he may not have the necessary attention to change the policy.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 03:46:49 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: New Cold War (4.00 / 4)

Well, with Zbigniew Brzezinski as his FP advisor, I'm not sure I'd choose the word "inadvertantly."

Talking nonsense is the sole privilege mankind possesses over the other organisms.

by poemless on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 04:05:32 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: New Cold War (4.00 / 5)

A new Cold War? Goody! I get to drag out:

again.

z=z²+c. It's the Law. Obey it.

by ATinNM on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 05:36:22 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

When is the New Cold War Not New? (none / 1)

I think the New Cold War would need to survive at least one leadership change on both side of the U.S.-Russia equation... Russia has already "changed". So, if relationships do not improve with a new U.S. president in 2009, then it's no longer the New Cold War... it's just Cold War II: The Climate Change.

by Magnifico on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 01:43:41 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: When is the New Cold War Not New? (4.00 / 2)

Well, many of those promoting the New Cold War rhetoric are of the opinion there has been no leadership change in Russia... Like that's a bad thing or something. ;)

Talking nonsense is the sole privilege mankind possesses over the other organisms.

by poemless on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 01:49:03 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: When is the New Cold War Not New? (none / 1)

Has either country changed significantly at the institutional level since 1990?

you are the media you consume.

by MillMan (millguy at gmail) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 04:48:43 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: When is the New Cold War Not New? (none / 0)

Russia, definitely. Has the US?

When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 04:54:42 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: When is the New Cold War Not New? (none / 1)

The US...I don't think so. And I wasn't joking by asking the question about Russia. Has it changed that much at the top?

you are the media you consume.

by MillMan (millguy at gmail) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 05:01:38 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: When is the New Cold War Not New? (none / 0)

Has what changed?

Talking nonsense is the sole privilege mankind possesses over the other organisms.

by poemless on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 05:12:21 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: When is the New Cold War Not New? (none / 1)

How Russian leaders view and react to the world.

you are the media you consume.

by MillMan (millguy at gmail) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 05:15:34 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: When is the New Cold War Not New? (4.00 / 6)

Well yes! I'd say greatly, in fact.

Here's my ill-informed and biased cliff's note of the situation:

In 1990 you had a nomenklatura raised and educated entirely within the Soviet system. It was a Cold War mentality. Cold War lite, to be sure. But for all the openess to democratic reform, there was also a good deal of bloody panic as everything fell apart. In 1991 it did.
There was the idea that since Russia was enacting democratic reform, the West would give them a helping hand. You're moving from Cold Ward enemies -> willingness to work together as equals -> Russian economic dependence on the West.
So during the 90's it's basically chaos as the formerly Communist elite try to embrace free-market reform. The West loves Russia outwardly for embracing democracy, inwardly for embracing capitalism, a system they enter totally in debt to the West, putting them in a position of little power. Meanwhile, within Russia people were thinking more about power grabs (a la Yeltsin) and land/money grabs (a la the Oligarchs) than foreign policy. It's madness and eventually the whole economy collapses in 98.
In 2000 Putin's put in power with the idea he'll continue the the "democratic reforms" of Yeltsin. Outwardly, this means freedom of speech, etc. Inwardly it means unchecked capitalism, privatization. He slowly reverses some of both. Pissing off the West and some Oligarchs alike. In doing so he manages to stabilize the economy and return Russia to a position where it is not forced to do the bidding of the West and can have political leverage to protect its national interests on the global stage.
The West does not congratulate Russia on finally getting its act together but becomes bitter and bullying because this is not what they'd planned.
Russia is like, what up, hommies? This is the game you sold to us. And we are winning. So shut up and do what we say!
And the West is like, Gah! It's the Cold War all over again!

It's been a difficult relationship.

Talking nonsense is the sole privilege mankind possesses over the other organisms.

by poemless on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 05:38:32 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: When is the New Cold War Not New? (none / 1)

So not much has changed, really.

A small group of elites controlling the country's wealth - Soviet communism doesn't look that different than crony capitalism in terms of who wins, who loses, and in what numbers. Instead of the party apparatus, it's the oligarchs running the show.
Overblown Soviet / Russian threat - yes, the Soviets had nukes, but their power and aims were always overstated in the western media, and still are.
Zero political freedom during the Soviet era, minimal political freedom today.
A near total reliance on natural resource exports for revenue - this played a part in the collapse of the Soviet Union, and it will almost certainly lead to another collapse when the fossil fuel driven industrial age draws to a close.

you are the media you consume.

by MillMan (millguy at gmail) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 05:58:16 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: When is the New Cold War Not New? (none / 1)

Ok. So if that's what you believe, why did you bother to ask?

Talking nonsense is the sole privilege mankind possesses over the other organisms.

by poemless on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 06:02:14 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: When is the New Cold War Not New? (none / 1)

For the purposes of discussion!

Obviously "things" have "changed" enormously. My litmus test is standard of living and political freedom and I discount changes in ideology, hence (I think) our differences on what "change" means.

you are the media you consume.

by MillMan (millguy at gmail) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 06:25:03 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: When is the New Cold War Not New? (none / 1)

"Standard of living" and "political freedom" were not your answer when I asked "what"?

The standard of living has improved overall, though in fairness, some of the more rural areas are fairing worse since Communism. But even that is slowly changing. I'm not sure we have a lot of information about the standard of living under Communism. Or how you quantify that. People are buying homes and cars for the first time. There is a "middle class" for the first time...

Political freedom? Just because it is worse than under Yeltsin (though freedom of speech is not high on your list when you are starving) does not mean it is as bad as it was under Communism. Russia has one of the most active Internet communities on the planet. Most of the nationalization of the media has been limited to TV. At this point, there is no possible way they could return to a Soviet-style repression.

Talking nonsense is the sole privilege mankind possesses over the other organisms.

by poemless on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 06:32:24 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: When is the New Cold War Not New? (4.00 / 6)

In standard of living, there was an enormous change for the worse, then again a change for the better, and ignoring what was in-between and saying "so nothing much changed" will sound enormously arrogant and dismissive for those who lived through it.

*Traitor*, n.
A benighted individual who perceives an illusory distinction between serving his nation and abetting the criminals who govern it.

by DoDo on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 06:41:22 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: When is the New Cold War Not New? (none / 0)

Exactly.

Talking nonsense is the sole privilege mankind possesses over the other organisms.

by poemless on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 06:52:23 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: When is the New Cold War Not New? (4.00 / 2)

Being contrary for its own sake...fine.

Magnifico said:

I think the New Cold War would need to survive at least one leadership change on both side of the U.S.-Russia equation... Russia has already "changed". So, if relationships do not improve with a new U.S. president in 2009, then it's no longer the New Cold War... it's just Cold War II: The Climate Change.

To which I asked, mostly as an agreement with his post:

Has either country changed significantly at the institutional level since 1990?

The answer, in terms of foreign relations, seems to be no. The US has always been belligerent towards the Soviet Union / Russia, and having "won" the cold war, decided that the rest of the world really does have to do its bidding, and pressed its influence into Eastern Europe and Central Asia. The Soviets were nominally belligerent while in power, but the threat they posed was overstated by the western media outside the nuclear threat, and despite a non-belligerent Russian government today, the nuclear threat still remains, if for no other reason that the continued existence of the missiles.

Somehow this turned into me being insensitive toward the suffering of the people living in the former Soviet Union. Herding cats indeed - we can knick each other with a 1000 cuts, or maybe engage with people who, you know, actually hate Russia, of which there is no shortage.

you are the media you consume.

by MillMan (millguy at gmail) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 07:15:46 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: When is the New Cold War Not New? (4.00 / 2)

Just like DoDo said downthread about living standards that collapseing and improving again to a level similar to pre-1990's levels doesn't mean "it hasn't changed", so it is politically and geostrategically.

The fact is that the Soviet Union under Gorbachev was already a sort of regime change, and then you have a couple of constitutional crises: the reactionnary 1991 coup which destroyed the USSR and then the 1993 Russian Constitutional Crisis which changed the constitution of Russia, ended up with prominent politicians in jail and altered the political landscape. Then you had the domestic political ramifications of the Chechen wars, and the transition from Yeltsin to Putin which in my view had the biggest effect in reining in the oligarchy created in the 1990's.

So even if now Russia's international stance looks as confrontational as in the 1980's (though I don't believe for a minute Russia would embark in an imperialist adventure like Afghanistan - and Abkhazia and South Ossetia don't count given that we're talking about ethnic Russians many of which are Russian citizens) it can hardly be said to "not have changed".

On the other hand, the Bush administration is full of cold warriors who cut their teeth in the 1970's fabricating intelligence assesments about the Soviet threat, and even Obama has Zbigniew Brzezinski (who claims to have meddled in Afghanistan to draw the USSR into a war they couldn't win) as foreign policy advisor, so that side hasn't changed. I think Russia finds itself confronting the US despite themselves because of how confrontational the US continues to be.

When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri May 9th, 2008 at 06:08:36 AM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: When is the New Cold War Not New? (none / 0)

If you have not already, please read the article "America's New Cold War" I've linked to above. It lays all of this out much better than I can.

Talking nonsense is the sole privilege mankind possesses over the other organisms.

by poemless on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 05:57:44 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: When is the New Cold War Not New? (none / 1)

I'm not running with the Anglo media narrative.

you are the media you consume.

by MillMan (millguy at gmail) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 06:00:05 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: When is the New Cold War Not New? (none / 0)

Stephen Cohen is a rather reliable source on the topic. One of the very few people I'd trust. You can dismiss him out of hand, but doing so doesn't make him any less worth reading.

Talking nonsense is the sole privilege mankind possesses over the other organisms.

by poemless on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 06:03:43 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: When is the New Cold War Not New? (none / 0)

Oh i wasn't talking about him, I got the impression that you thought my views were similar to what is presented in the MSM.

you are the media you consume.

by MillMan (millguy at gmail) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 06:21:06 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: When is the New Cold War Not New? (none / 1)

I do. Which is why I pointed you to that Nation article. ;)

Talking nonsense is the sole privilege mankind possesses over the other organisms.

by poemless on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 06:25:25 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: When is the New Cold War Not New? (none / 0)

1990? Seriously?

I guess it depends on what you mean by "changed significantly at the institutional level". Russia has changed radically several times. Starting with that pesky fall of the Soviet Union bit. (Sorry for the snark.) Yes, Russia has changed. And changed.

The US? No and we're seeing very severe consequences of that refusal to change...

More importantly, their relationship has changed as well. Not nec. in the way either would have preferred...

Talking nonsense is the sole privilege mankind possesses over the other organisms.

by poemless on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 05:06:26 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: When is the New Cold War Not New? (4.00 / 7)

The USSR had that whole 'Let's invade Europe' thing going on, which modern Russia doesn't seem quite so interested in.

Also, modern Russia is quite rich, at least in parts. The USSR was always shabby and poor, with a few token exceptions like the occasional marble metro. With its energy reserves Russia has the potential to be richer than either Europe or the US a decade or two from now, and that's not making Washington happy.

So the US needs a Cold War. The first Cold War was started knowingly and deliberately with the usual bullshit massively exaggerated claims of Soviet nuclear capability.

The MilInd people really only have just the one pony, and they keep dragging it out over and over painted a different colour each time. But really - it's always the same animal with different stick-on horns and a dogwhistle around its neck.

So now that Bin Laden has ascended to heaven, or hung up his beard and moved to Florida, or wherever, it's time for a new enemy. Calling out China would be a little too intimate, so Russia makes a good a target as any.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 05:23:53 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: When is the New Cold War Not New? (none / 1)

I don't think Russia was concerned with invading Europe in 1990, just holding on to what bits they had left...

Talking nonsense is the sole privilege mankind possesses over the other organisms.

by poemless on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 05:40:03 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: When is the New Cold War Not New? (4.00 / 4)

No, but there was serious interest in expanding into Europe from the end of WWII onwards. It wasn't consistent and some parts of the Politburo were always keener than others, but it wasn't a total fabrication.

By 1990 the USSR had run out of options, so it wasn't a serious possibility any more.

The US will probably go through the same process, but it's looking more likely it will try to collapse outwards in a very messy way rather than collapsing inwards as the USSR did.

You could probably make a case for suggesting that Iraq and Afghanistan are parts of the process. Aside from the oil, they're about trying to prove that it's still possible to project force successfully.

But that didn't work so well for the USSR in Afghanistan, and it's not working so well for the US either. So if Obama wins I wouldn't be totally surprised to see some serious military cutbacks - especially if he gets a second term.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 06:10:00 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: When is the New Cold War Not New? (none / 1)

Obama is the new Gorby?

When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri May 9th, 2008 at 02:53:35 AM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: When is the New Cold War Not New? (none / 1)

Yes, I'm being serious. An overthrow of a government doesn't have to mean anything more than a new set of people in power.

you are the media you consume.

by MillMan (millguy at gmail) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 05:23:28 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: When is the New Cold War Not New? (none / 0)

Uhm, the end of the Soviet Union does, though...

Talking nonsense is the sole privilege mankind possesses over the other organisms.

by poemless on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 05:39:07 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: When is the New Cold War Not New? (4.00 / 3)

Sorry, that sounded mean.

But if something like the fall of the Soviet Union is just a "meet the news boss, same as the old boss" scenario on your book, I sincerely do not know what would constitute actual change. And entire empire collapsed. And entire economic system was destroyed. And ideological war was lost. The government was actually disolved at one point. (maybe more.) All the laws on the books became nullified, either literally or through lack of enforcement. Yes, the people in power were from the same elite group as those in Communism, because that was the ONLY system before. It's not as though democrats were waiting in the wings. Communists became democrats. Anyone with any qualifications to run any government entity got those qualifications from going through the Soviet system. People use this fact to suggest that nothing really changed between Stalin and Putin. It's like looking at a family and complaining all the children had the same parents. Where else were they supposed to come from? Outerspace? There were lots of Westerners coming into the country to advise the newly democratic government. And as a result, the bloody country crashed. People starved to death. So you can understand why they don't really trust us to tell them how to run their country.

Talking nonsense is the sole privilege mankind possesses over the other organisms.

by poemless on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 05:52:24 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: When is the New Cold War Not New? (4.00 / 2)

And entire empire collapsed. And entire economic system was destroyed. And ideological war was lost.

Is this a series of interesting typos (And for An), or a literary construction just unfamiliar to me?

*Traitor*, n.
A benighted individual who perceives an illusory distinction between serving his nation and abetting the criminals who govern it.

by DoDo on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 05:56:02 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: When is the New Cold War Not New? (none / 1)

LOL. It's me typing too fast and not previewing and being a literary genius at the same time!

Talking nonsense is the sole privilege mankind possesses over the other organisms.

by poemless on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 06:00:18 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (4.00 / 13)

Some scary shit going on in Beirut today. I suspect the TV networks are overhyping it a bit -- CNN and Al Jazeera keep calling it "heavy fighting," which may be an exaggeration given that at this point the death toll appears to be nil and the dozen or so reported casualties seem to be people who've been hit with rocks. Trust me, if these guys wanted to kill each other, they'd be killing each other. This is something else. But it is still very deeply troubling that there are clearly rival groups of armed men shooting at each other with automatic weapons and RPGs.

For those interested in following things, there's a blog aggregator here and I've found that this blog also has good up-to-date postings, even though I think the authors are both in Canada.

This news site is pretty pro-March 14 (that's the government), which you can probably see from headlines like "Hezbollah chief inspires renewed violence in Beirut." But all English-language news sites that I know of are pretty pro-government. Well, except for the English site of Al-Manar, Hezbollah's TV station.

The Daily Star is probably a good thing to check out tomorrow, but doesn't seem very up-to-date at the moment.

I've been unable to access Naharnet, the English site of An-Nahar, the newspaper most closely linked to March 14 (its former editor and publisher was Gebran Tueni, who was assassinated in 2005), but the Arabic site is still up, so I'm not sure what's going on there.

This blog by a journalist is also pretty good and a bit less pro-March 14, and the always cynical Angry Arab also has running updates, most of which are just his thoughts, but worth reading.

by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 01:07:09 PM EDT

Re: Thursday Open Thread (4.00 / 4)

Also, some interesting posts on this blog, which is a Christian guy who I think is pro-government, but I haven't read him in a while.

Saad Hariri is on TV right now, appealing directly to Hassan Nasrallah to stop "dividing Muslims" and to "lift the siege on Beirut," and accusing him of essentially treating fellow Lebanese as if they were Israel, i.e. The Enemy.

by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 01:11:39 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (4.00 / 4)

Gen. Aoun on TV now, saying "the responsibility lies with the government."

Jesus H. Christ. There are people shooting RPGs in the streets, and these assholes are too busy blaming each other to stop it.

by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 01:35:30 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (4.00 / 2)

Someone needs to tell the Al Jazeera English anchor how to pronounce Gen. Aoun's surname. He keeps calling him "General Ai-yoon."

by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 01:40:53 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (4.00 / 2)

that's how they say it on BBC as well. How should it be said ?

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 01:55:15 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (4.00 / 2)

Hmmm, that's interesting, BBC World usually gets it pretty close to right.

The name is really only one syllable, with a first sound that's very hard for English-speakers to pronounce, sort of an AAA in the back of your throat, and the change between that sound and the OON that follows is what makes some people give it two syllables. So it's sort of exactly the way it looks: AAOUN. Or maybe AOWN. Or AAOON. But that first sound is hard to describe in writing.

by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 02:08:11 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (none / 1)

always remember BBC saying AH-oon

As we journey through life, we should keep an iron grip, to the very end, on the capacity for silliness. It preserves the soul from dessication.

by ceebs (bunchofwankers (at) gmail (dot) com) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 02:27:33 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (none / 1)

Probably the easiest way to approximate it is "crown" without the "cr."

by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 02:13:15 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (4.00 / 8)

A friend of mine says she has gunmen shooting in the alley below her apartment. She can't tell which side they're on...

by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 01:53:19 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (none / 0)

I hope this ends and your friends are ok.

Talking nonsense is the sole privilege mankind possesses over the other organisms.

by poemless on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 03:51:28 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (4.00 / 5)

Thanks. So do I.

I heard from another friend, who, um, knows a little something about what real fighting is like, and he says that although "thugs" have been shooting outside his apartment for five hours, he doesn't have any idea what they're shooting at, since (a) it's not a mixed neighborhood and (b) nobody's shooting back at them.

He says he's hearing occasional RPGs and even these. Pretty heavy weaponry for what seems to be mostly just a bunch of guys showing off their new guns.

He also says it seems more amateurish than military, which makes it more dangerous.

by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 05:29:11 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (4.00 / 6)

Reuters says at least eight dead now. This is only getting worse.

The blogger who calls himself Charles Malik says Amal and Future Movement militias are controlling different sections of the neighborhood where I usually stay when I'm there. (It's mostly a Sunni, Future Movement neighborhood, but there's a section near the corniche that for many years has been populated by supporters of Amal, one of the Shi'ite parties with a rather notorious reputation during the civil war.)

by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 06:30:30 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (4.00 / 3)

A YouTube video from Beirut of low-level urban combat. Can anyone make-out what they are saying?

I guess the Revolution will be televised.

z=z²+c. It's the Law. Obey it.

by ATinNM on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 07:45:08 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (4.00 / 2)

Forgot to include: this is reported to be Mazraa Street, if that tells anyone anything.

z=z²+c. It's the Law. Obey it.

by ATinNM on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 07:47:09 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (4.00 / 2)

Scary stuff. Hopefully this ends soon.

Where's your motherf*%&ing flag pin?

by Drew J Jones (blahblahblah@blahblahblah.com) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 07:56:27 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (none / 1)

They were shooting down the street from the middle of the intersection without taking cover?

When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri May 9th, 2008 at 02:51:04 AM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (none / 1)

Yes. It doesn't make any sense.

z=z²+c. It's the Law. Obey it.

by ATinNM on Fri May 9th, 2008 at 11:23:31 AM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (none / 1)

Funny, there isn't much in the news about Lebanon this morning.

by Fran (fran at eurotrib dot com) on Fri May 9th, 2008 at 01:13:16 AM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (4.00 / 2)

Maybe because nobody knows what's going on so they don't know how to spin it yet?

When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri May 9th, 2008 at 02:48:45 AM EDT
[ Parent ]

adventures on a pub crawl (4.00 / 3)

Went on a pub crawl last night. We went to a small pub and the lone barman was pretty overwhelmed...and then one of the barrels of beer ran out. He oculdn't leave the bar so he called out "Anyone know how to change a barrel of beer ?"

So muggins volunteered.

I haven't done it for several years and I was a guy back then, and a lot stronger. To knock the bung through you have to hit it with a crisp hard tap whihc is quite straight forward if you do it regularly and know your strength. But I thought I hit it as hard as I used to, but that just meant it got there a lot slower and nothing happened. So I hit it harder and harder till it went in. 5 times in all.

Guess what ? The beer was pretty damn frothy, in fact unsaleable {hangs head in shame}. But he poured me a pint anyway, which reduced to a half and it was pretty good drinking.

Then he poured me another beer, so it was worth it.

Thing is, it wasn't real ale. The cask was vertical which meant it was bright, ie filtered and therefore not real. And they were trying to get into the real ale guide too. Naughty.

Really frayed today even tho I only had 6 pints. May have an early night.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 01:10:30 PM EDT

Re: adventures on a pub crawl (4.00 / 2)

Well you do know how to change full barrels for empty ones....

As we journey through life, we should keep an iron grip, to the very end, on the capacity for silliness. It preserves the soul from dessication.

by ceebs (bunchofwankers (at) gmail (dot) com) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 02:30:13 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: adventures on a pub crawl (4.00 / 3)

a gal's gotta do what a gal's gotta do.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 02:42:53 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: adventures on a pub crawl (4.00 / 2)

it's good to see someone so dedicated to the cause.

As we journey through life, we should keep an iron grip, to the very end, on the capacity for silliness. It preserves the soul from dessication.

by ceebs (bunchofwankers (at) gmail (dot) com) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 04:13:21 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: adventures on a pub crawl (4.00 / 3)

Man comes home very much the worse for wear at 4am.

Finally works out where the stairs are and works his way up them...

...crash, bang, crash....he makes such a noise he wakes up the missus.

"What the hell are you doing making all that noise on the stairs at this time in the morning....!!!!"

Crash, thump, wallop....!!!

"I'm bringing up a barrel of beer!!!"

Crash, thump, wallop...!!!

"you what???!!!!! ...wtf are you doing bringing up a barrel of beer!!!???"

"I have to, I drank it!!!"

by ChrisCook (cojockathotmaildotcom) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 02:54:43 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: adventures on a pub crawl (none / 1)

The aluminium in those barrels is worth north of £100, so theft is pretty common and the brewing industry sponsors some heavy development on a cheaper plastic alternative. So far, no luck.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 03:27:28 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: adventures on a pub crawl (none / 1)

I know loads of people who used to work at the main manufacturing site for beer Barrels in the UK. they all had to sign the official secrets act, as they were a wartime emergency contractor, who in case of strife would be converted to constructing incendiary bombs in the sheds at the back.

I also remember being taken to London in my youth, because an uncle of mine had won a design council award for designing a new and improved Beer tap.

As we journey through life, we should keep an iron grip, to the very end, on the capacity for silliness. It preserves the soul from dessication.

by ceebs (bunchofwankers (at) gmail (dot) com) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 04:17:58 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: adventures on a pub crawl (none / 1)

In case of strife, wouldn't people rather have the beer? ;)

Talking nonsense is the sole privilege mankind possesses over the other organisms.

by poemless on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 04:24:12 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: adventures on a pub crawl (4.00 / 2)

well but in conflict how often do people get what they want? the people might want drinks and jollies, but governments tend to want to burn things down and blow things up for shit and giggles, I think it's all some obscure penis size thing they've got going on.

As we journey through life, we should keep an iron grip, to the very end, on the capacity for silliness. It preserves the soul from dessication.

by ceebs (bunchofwankers (at) gmail (dot) com) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 04:31:39 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: adventures on a pub crawl (none / 1)

A microbrewery is opening in Cardiff! I walked past it last night - they have all the vats in but it's obviously still in the process of being built. How exciting though! It's on Westgate Street.

Ad astra per aspera

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Fri May 9th, 2008 at 02:04:41 AM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: adventures on a pub crawl (4.00 / 2)

there's already a microbrewery in Cardiff : Bullmastiff.

There's several close by as well;-
Barry - Vale of Glamorgan
Pontypridd - Otley
Machen - Carter's
Merthyr Tydfil - Rhymney
Newport - Dobbins & Jacksons

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Fri May 9th, 2008 at 05:09:48 AM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (4.00 / 5)

BBC NEWS | UK | 'Respect atheists', says Cardinal

The Archbishop of Westminster has urged Christians to treat atheists and agnostics with "deep esteem".
Believers may be partly responsible for the decline in faith by losing sense of the mystery and treating God as a "fact in the world", he said in a lecture.
Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor called for more understanding and appreciation between believers and non-believers.

What are they up to saying this, it's a bit of a change from "Burn the heretic"

As we journey through life, we should keep an iron grip, to the very end, on the capacity for silliness. It preserves the soul from dessication.

by ceebs (bunchofwankers (at) gmail (dot) com) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 02:22:34 PM EDT

Re: Thursday Open Thread (4.00 / 3)

I think we need to see how this unfolds. Those two are obviously working together on some plot to advance superstition somehow and are trying to gull their critics with weaselry.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 02:35:56 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (4.00 / 5)

The leader of Roman Catholics in England and Wales said that a "hidden God" was active in everyone's life.

How about you fuck off? Thanks. Bah.

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 02:36:19 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (4.00 / 3)

My hidden god is called chocolate.

by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 02:43:26 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (4.00 / 9)

My son went on a school trip to the Millfield area yesterday. It's Peterborough's melting pot-most immigrants start off in the area. So they visited Pakistani, Polish, Italian and Portuguese shops and met some of the older residents.

However-one of the buildings they passed was a Christian community centre. Why, the head asked, did they think it was there?

To make new arrivals feel welcome, piped up the class.

"Because they want to convert them into Christians," said my son.

Oh, dear... :)

by Sassafras on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 05:19:05 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (4.00 / 2)

Good to see there's some thinking happening in the youth of today.

is the Lithuanian centre still there? and the synagogue? watching gangs of different factions youth chase each other from community centre to community centre in the early 80's was always entertaining.

As we journey through life, we should keep an iron grip, to the very end, on the capacity for silliness. It preserves the soul from dessication.

by ceebs (bunchofwankers (at) gmail (dot) com) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 06:04:31 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (4.00 / 4)

There's the odd violent clash, though things seem to have been quiet for a while. Mostly, any trouble was between British born ethnic-minority youths (in this area almost all are the children or grandchildren of immigrants) and dispersed asylum-seekers, who were mostly young men in enforced unemployment.

It will be...ahem...interesting to see what happens when the children of recent Eastern European migrants reach their teens. They do face prejudice, both from the indigenous population (if the UK can truly be said to have such a thing) and more established immigrant communities. And it would be fair to say that, in my experience, some of the newly-arrived families have brought their own prejudices against other ethnic minorities with them.

by Sassafras on Fri May 9th, 2008 at 02:32:49 AM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (none / 1)

It very rarely got to violence, yelled insults (or in winter snowballs) would result in the younger youth following the opposing pack to the point where there were older youths outside their community centre where discretion would become the better part of valour. My youthful taste for alcohol was developed in pubs in and around that part of town before moving on to a place that sold jug served real ale in the centre of town.

As we journey through life, we should keep an iron grip, to the very end, on the capacity for silliness. It preserves the soul from dessication.

by ceebs (bunchofwankers (at) gmail (dot) com) on Fri May 9th, 2008 at 04:19:00 AM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (4.00 / 2)

Sounds to me like you have a very smart son. :-)

by Fran (fran at eurotrib dot com) on Fri May 9th, 2008 at 02:35:29 AM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (none / 1)

Great marketing strategy for getting people into the pews: "Church, it's not just for God anymore."

I was told by an English person that today some vicars, or whatever it you call them there, are openly atheist. I have a hard time believing this, but the person swore it was true. And in fact, they did have a family friend who was a minister, or whatever it you call them there, who was actually an atheist, and having an affair with a parishioner to boot. I don't get it, really...

Talking nonsense is the sole privilege mankind possesses over the other organisms.

by poemless on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 02:33:20 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (4.00 / 2)

Cormac Murphy-O'Connor ain't Anglican. Not by a long way!

But Church of England is infamous for being more social club than religion - Church of Ireland is possibly even worse.

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 02:35:30 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (4.00 / 2)

The definition of "atheist" is what isn't known here.

It's an open secret that many serious and high-ranking theologians understand that the bible "fairy" story as told to the laity is at serious divergence with the original source texts. Their understanding of the relationship god is supposed to have with Jesus and the rest of us wouldn't be recognised as "theistic" by many of the more fundamental literalist religions more commonly found in the USA. Hence they're atheists.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 02:41:26 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (4.00 / 2)

It's fairly common over here as well. About half the members of the church I went to as a kid were actual Christians, the rest were there for the social network. No one talked about it openly, of course.

you are the media you consume.

by MillMan (millguy at gmail) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 04:56:47 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (none / 1)

Are you talking about Unitarian Universalists or some more mainstream Christian denomination?

When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri May 9th, 2008 at 02:47:18 AM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Thursday Open Thread (4.00 / 2)

We used to have a Bishop in the CofE who was frequently harangued by the daily mail for his borderline atheism. By chance I was at college with a trainee priest who was his nominee. He was a former central committee member of the Communist party of Great Britain. and although he would have been spectacular at the pastoral side of the job, I don't think he was the worlds greatest believer.

As we journey through life, we should keep an iron grip, to the very end, on the capacity for silliness. It preserves the soul from dessication.

by ceebs (bunchofwankers (at) gmail (dot) com) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 02:42:17 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

'Massive Environmental Damage' (4.00 / 3)

Suppressed Aviation Report Forecasts 'Massive Environmental Damage'

Climate change emissions by the airline industry, airport noise, and local air pollution are all trending sharply upwards, according to a suppressed report based on information contained in U.S., European and UK government databases maintained by regulatory agencies.
The technical report was submitted to the 7th US/Europe Air Traffic Management Research and Development Seminar held in Barcelona, Spain last summer.
But it was not accepted for publication by seminar organizers and remained unpublished until released to the public on April 24 by the Aviation Environment Federation, the principal UK nonprofit concerned with the environmental effects of aviation.
Calling it a "shock report," the Aviation Environment Federation says that between the years 2000 and 2025 the rapid growth in aviation globally is set to generate "massive environmental damage."
Emissions of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide from aviation are forecast to more than double - from 572 million metric tonnes in 2000 to 1,229 million metric tonnes in 2025.
"Aviation emissions on this scale run a severe risk of overwhelming all CO2 reduction targets," said Jeff Gazzard of the Aviation Environment Federation, AEF.

At the bottom of the article you can download the full report.

You can't be me, I'm taken

by Sven Triloqvist on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 03:14:59 PM EDT

Our politicians work very hard... (4.00 / 4)

De Morgen: Binnenland - Meer ongevallen door windmolens langs autosnelwegen?		De Morgen: Domestic - More accidents by windmills along highways?
Vlaams minister voor Mobiliteit Kathleen Van Brempt (sp.a) zal stappen ondernemen om de cel mobiliteit van het Vlaams Gewest deel te laten uitmaken van de interdepartementale werkgroep windenergie.		Flemish Minister for Mobility Kathleen Van Brempt (sp.a) will take steps to the cell mobility of the Flemish Region to be part of the interdepartmental workgroup windenergy.
Deze werkgroep adviseert de ministers over het inplanten van windturbines. De vraag tot maatregelen komt van Vlaams parlementslid Jan Verfaillie.		This group advises the ministers about the implantation of wind turbines. The demand for action comes from Flemish MP Jan Verfaillie.

The story is that this mr.Verfaillie is also the mayor of a small town where there is an initiative to put up some windmills.
But he is afraid this might be a security-risk for the nearby motorway, hence his question to the minister if indeed there were more car-accidents near windmills ?

The minister of course had no clue so she made this important decision.

The struggle of man against tyranny is the struggle of memory against forgetting.(Kundera)

by Elco B (elcob at scarlet dot be) on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 03:19:36 PM EDT

Re: Our politicians work very hard... (4.00 / 8)

while there are always accidents with any advanced and deployed technology, with windmills it's not an accident. Reports (albeit anecdotal) coming out of the lowlands indicate that windmills get bored late at night, at least when the the winds have decreased below cut-out... and Particularly the younger windmills, as discussed in a current diary here. Preliminary investigations have shown alcohol to be involved, though the turbines deny this. We've begun to see younger turbines moving their yaw bearings below the tower joint, exposing their variously colored "yaw drives." It is apparently these turbines, the so-called "rebel punks," who are alleged to be the perpetrators.

I understand there are at least two scripts on this theme floating in Hollyweird, one modeled after "Killer Tomatoes."

Skennah Kowa

by Crazy Horse on Thu May 8th, 2008 at 03:36:36 PM EDT
[ Parent ]

Re: Our politicians work very hard... (4.00 / 4)

that should be:

While there are always accident