Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE Pentagon Thread (merged)

A forum for discussion of regional topics including oil depletion but also government, society, and the future.

Re: Weaponizing the Pentagon's Cyborg Insects

Postby Kaj » Mon 31 Mar 2008, 17:29:06

I am not so worried about the potential for technologies to produce a die off. I am more worried about the power of technologies to supress societies and crush revolutionary potential. I worry that the human element of warfare will become increasingly irrelevent.
User avatar
Kaj
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 373
Joined: Wed 06 Dec 2006, 04:00:00

Re: Weaponizing the Pentagon's Cyborg Insects

Postby mos6507 » Mon 31 Mar 2008, 20:08:36

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pedalling_faster', '
')we're already seeing a controlled die-off. in Iraq, for example, using nuclear devices, for real (hundreds of tons of depleted uranium).


US troops have suffered from that DU as well. It's just a testament to military incompetence. Nothing more devious than that.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 08667.html
mos6507
 

Re: Weaponizing the Pentagon's Cyborg Insects

Postby EnergyUnlimited » Tue 01 Apr 2008, 03:06:53

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Kaj', 'I') am not so worried about the potential for technologies to produce a die off. I am more worried about the power of technologies to supress societies and crush revolutionary potential. I worry that the human element of warfare will become increasingly irrelevent.

1. Revolutionary potential can do little to change our fate.
Revolutions were working well in environment of expanding economy.
2. Resources crunch, food production crunch and environmental mess will stale and soon after that reverse technological progress.
You don't need very high tech to suppress societies either.
Militias armed with AK-47 will do and these are cheaper to run.
User avatar
EnergyUnlimited
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7537
Joined: Mon 15 May 2006, 03:00:00

Re: Weaponizing the Pentagon's Cyborg Insects

Postby Kaj » Tue 01 Apr 2008, 04:05:32

1. Revolutionary potential can do little to change our fate.
If by 'fate' you mean having the authoritarian boot stamped over us all (my worst fear) then I disagree. At least in the present day. If people wanted revolution they could make it happen. It would take just 10% of a capital city to overturn a government.

Revolutions were working well in environment of expanding economy.
Sorry, don't understand that comment? Do you mean that revolutions will stop when the economy shrinks?

2. Resources crunch, food production crunch and environmental mess will stale and soon after that reverse technological progress.
I wish I could believe that. However, scientific knowlege isn't going to regress. We have everything written down. People are going to continue to write down new scientific theory, by candlelight if they have to.
Also there is always going to be energy in the system somewhere. Chances are it will remain be monopolised by the rich. Chances are they will find inventive uses for that energy.

You don't need very high tech to suppress societies either.
Militias armed with AK-47 will do and these are cheaper to run.

True, but militias aren't always reliable. Maliki's recent militia performance is a good example. Sometimes you just need a remote controlled insectoid robot stormtrooper.
User avatar
Kaj
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 373
Joined: Wed 06 Dec 2006, 04:00:00

Re: Weaponizing the Pentagon's Cyborg Insects

Postby Specop_007 » Tue 01 Apr 2008, 10:08:11

The nice thing about the US of A. Our founding fathers built revolution right into the operation of the government. Its called the "vote". Dont like the current individuals? Vote them out.
"Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster, and if you gaze into the
Abyss, the Abyss gazes also into you."

Ammo at a gunfight is like bubblegum in grade school: If you havent brought enough for everyone, you're in trouble
User avatar
Specop_007
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5586
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2004, 03:00:00

Re: Weaponizing the Pentagon's Cyborg Insects

Postby EnergyUnlimited » Tue 01 Apr 2008, 11:16:48

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Kaj', '[')i]1. Revolutionary potential can do little to change our fate.
If by 'fate' you mean having the authoritarian boot stamped over us all (my worst fear) then I disagree. At least in the present day. If people wanted revolution they could make it happen. It would take just 10% of a capital city to overturn a government.

You do not understand that peoples will demand this authoritarian boot to step over their faces.
Once troubles arrived, they will just demand government to do something about it, regardless what that might be.

Democracy is a full belly product.
Once belly gets empty, it will be gone.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')i]Revolutions were working well in environment of expanding economy.
Sorry, don't understand that comment? Do you mean that revolutions will stop when the economy shrinks?

I mean, revolutions will achieve nothing except of worsening overall situation in shrinking economy environment.
That is, because it will not be possible to create/maintain meaningful wealth in shrinking economy environment.
There will be next to nothing to redistribute.
What would you like to redistribute in shrinking economy world?
Useless and abandoned suburban infrastructure?

Power elites might change [by revolution] but nothing will improve.
In fact catabolic collapse will accelerate.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')i]2. Resources crunch, food production crunch and environmental mess will stale and soon after that reverse technological progress.
I wish I could believe that. However, scientific knowlege isn't going to regress. We have everything written down. People are going to continue to write down new scientific theory, by candlelight if they have to.
Also there is always going to be energy in the system somewhere. Chances are it will remain be monopolised by the rich. Chances are they will find inventive uses for that energy.

Once manufacturing base collapses, science will become to be an esoteric exercise of few still wealthy gentlemen.
Knowledge is useless, if you cannot apply it due to basic resource constraints.
Heck, as time pass most of it will be forgotten due to a lack of opportunity of practical application.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')i]You don't need very high tech to suppress societies either.
Militias armed with AK-47 will do and these are cheaper to run.
True, but militias aren't always reliable. Maliki's recent militia performance is a good example. Sometimes you just need a remote controlled insectoid robot stormtrooper.
[/quote]
Your insect robo-warriors will be sensitive to DDT, organophosphates etc.
Some of these could well make you losing control and your wunderwaffe would start to attack anyone at random (including your troops).
I doubt they would help Maliki in any way.
Situation is simply intractable there.

But hey, your high tech insects cyborgs will cost you next $ trillions to weaponize and make you bankrupt even before new war begun.
User avatar
EnergyUnlimited
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7537
Joined: Mon 15 May 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Weaponizing the Pentagon's Cyborg Insects

Postby gnm » Tue 01 Apr 2008, 12:52:37

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', 'T')he nice thing about the US of A. Our founding fathers built revolution right into the operation of the government. Its called the "vote". Dont like the current individuals? Vote them out.


Brilliant Spec!, perhaps you could point out which candidate is supporting a sustainable no growth platform while scaling back all government spending and entitlements, eliminating unconstitutional, pointless and invasive laws, and withdrawing our military from 120 odd countries around the world? hmmmm?

:evil:

-G
gnm
 
Top

Re: Weaponizing the Pentagon's Cyborg Insects

Postby hornofhubris » Tue 01 Apr 2008, 13:07:40

Ron Paul. ding ding ding ding ding ding ding ding
Just hang my kewpie doll on my big horn.

And don't call them the Pentagon's Cyborg Insects.
Use their given names.

George Bush and Dick Cheney.

Wait until we have to drop food before we invade so
the cameras don't catch us killing starving people.
User avatar
hornofhubris
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri 28 Mar 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Weaponizing the Pentagon's Cyborg Insects

Postby gnm » Tue 01 Apr 2008, 13:16:13

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('hornofhubris', 'R')on Paul. ding ding ding ding ding ding ding ding
Just hang my kewpie doll on my big horn.


And as such I have just that bumper sticker on my car. But since all voting systems and media have been co-opted by the one party nannie state it won't make any difference...

-G :-x
gnm
 
Top

Re: Weaponizing the Pentagon's Cyborg Insects

Postby Kaj » Tue 01 Apr 2008, 14:12:58

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergyUnlimited', ' ')You do not understand that peoples will demand this authoritarian boot to step over their faces.
Once troubles arrived, they will just demand government to do something about it, regardless what that might be.

Actually you will find me saying similar things in the 'Will America have a Revolution thread'. I presume you are talking mainly about the Western world? I am well aware of the power of manipulation that keeps people passive. Its not a foregone conclusion, however.
Luckily, in much of the poorer world, there is a much more lively civil society. And not everyone takes starvation and poverty lying down. How do you account for the hundreds of revolutionary movements around the world now.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') mean, revolutions will achieve nothing except of worsening overall situation in shrinking economy environment.
That is, because it will not be possible to create/maintain meaningful wealth in shrinking economy environment.
There will be next to nothing to redistribute.
What would you like to redistribute in shrinking economy world?

Lots of things can be redistributed that will result in gains. Water for one. Currently there are countries where the poor are dying of thirst, while the rich are sprinkling their lawns. How can redistrubuting resources NOT be good in such a situation??
I think the opposite of what you say is true. A redistrubutive society can make effeciency gains that an expansionist capitalist society cannot, due to co-operation and pooling resources. Cuba, for example, is one of the poorest countries in the world, but it has become a model for post-peak sustainability.
How Cuba Survived Peak Oil

I mean, we all know that as the energy pool contracts, the poor are going to suffer first. This will widen the divide. That divide is already massive, bigger than it has ever been in history. The only way I see that the elites will be able to defend themselves from this powderkeg is if they invest their energy, while they still have it, in extraordinary technologies that can make them invulnerable.
User avatar
Kaj
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 373
Joined: Wed 06 Dec 2006, 04:00:00
Top

Re: Weaponizing the Pentagon's Cyborg Insects

Postby Kaj » Tue 01 Apr 2008, 14:48:00

N.B. How do I explain the fact that the rich/poor divide is so wide and yet revolution seems to be on the decline?

This is because neoliberalism has yet to be completely deligitimised. All the economic institutions, like most banks, still support this senseless project and people go along with it, while it brings the toys in.
But once the fallacies of infinite growth have been exposed (a decade more of PO should do it) you will see an explosive demand for an alternative economic model that doesn't favour the few.
User avatar
Kaj
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 373
Joined: Wed 06 Dec 2006, 04:00:00

Re: Weaponizing the Pentagon's Cyborg Insects

Postby EnergyUnlimited » Tue 01 Apr 2008, 14:58:15

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Kaj', '
')Actually you will find me saying similar things in the 'Will America have a Revolution thread'. I presume you are talking mainly about the Western world? I am well aware of the power of manipulation that keeps people passive. Its not a foregone conclusion, however.

You are correct. I am taking West centered view here.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'L')uckily, in much of the poorer world, there is a much more lively civil society. And not everyone takes starvation and poverty lying down. How do you account for the hundreds of revolutionary movements around the world now.

In environment of starving masses it is not much what one can do to change their fate.
Failing to secure international aid (usually from rich, capitalist nations), you may try to invade your better off neighbors if your army is strong enough.
If your territory is inhabited by several tribes you may also try to find internal enemy and reduce it's population with machetes.

You may note that overwhelming majority of revolutions in Third World are achieving literally nothing except of creation of failed state environment with rampant crime, warlord rule, prostitution, children-soldiers and substantial body counts.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'L')ots of things can be redistributed that will result in gains. Water for one. Currently there are countries where the poor are dying of thirst, while the rich are sprinkling their lawns. How can redistrubuting resources NOT be good in such a situation??

That is an extreme example and you will not find such situation in many places.

On the other hand Bedouins on the desert will always claim that this well is mine and they will wish to die defending it.
Just their local culture...
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') think the opposite of what you say is true. A redistrubutive society can make effeciency gains that an expansionist capitalist society cannot, due to co-operation and pooling resources.

There is nothing much, what you can redistribute in collapsing first world capitalist societies.
Plenty of paper wealth, useless suburban infrastructure, gadgetry which will turn useless in collapse environment etc.
Could you name few examples of assets in such societies, which you would like to redistribute so we get some detailed subject to discuss?
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'C')uba, for example, is one of the poorest countries in the world, but it has become a model for post-peak sustainability.
Zimbabwe is a more recent example...
They begun with latyfundial land redistribution to poor and look what have happened.
Life expectancy dropped from 63 to 37.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he only way I see that the elites will be able to defend themselves from this powderkeg is if they invest their energy, while they still have it, in extraordinary technologies that can make them invulnerable.
Such weaponry already exist.

Did you hear a story how a dozen of Brits defended themselves from an attack of few thousands Arab horsemen during WW I?
All what they had was few heavy machine guns and plenty of ammo.

Blackwater mercenaries will surely lend their helpful hands to those frightened rich PTB in US, btw.
Don't you think so?
Last edited by EnergyUnlimited on Tue 01 Apr 2008, 15:42:42, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
EnergyUnlimited
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7537
Joined: Mon 15 May 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Weaponizing the Pentagon's Cyborg Insects

Postby EnergyUnlimited » Tue 01 Apr 2008, 15:19:34

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Kaj', 'N').B. How do I explain the fact that the rich/poor divide is so wide and yet revolution seems to be on the decline?

This is because neoliberalism has yet to be completely deligitimised. All the economic institutions, like most banks, still support this senseless project and people go along with it, while it brings the toys in.
But once the fallacies of infinite growth have been exposed (a decade more of PO should do it) you will see an explosive demand for an alternative economic model that doesn't favour the few.

There is simpler explanation.
All communist revolutions have failed and ruined affected states/nations.
North Korea is still around, but I wouldn't like to live there...
User avatar
EnergyUnlimited
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7537
Joined: Mon 15 May 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Weaponizing the Pentagon's Cyborg Insects

Postby Specop_007 » Tue 01 Apr 2008, 16:35:24

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('gnm', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', 'T')he nice thing about the US of A. Our founding fathers built revolution right into the operation of the government. Its called the "vote". Dont like the current individuals? Vote them out.


Brilliant Spec!, perhaps you could point out which candidate is supporting a sustainable no growth platform while scaling back all government spending and entitlements, eliminating unconstitutional, pointless and invasive laws, and withdrawing our military from 120 odd countries around the world? hmmmm?

:evil:

-G


Ron Paul would be the cloest match.

However, most of your concerns are NOT under the control of the President. Your concerns would be addressed by Congress and their laws. You should write your congresscritters. Or vote in new ones.
"Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster, and if you gaze into the
Abyss, the Abyss gazes also into you."

Ammo at a gunfight is like bubblegum in grade school: If you havent brought enough for everyone, you're in trouble
User avatar
Specop_007
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5586
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Weaponizing the Pentagon's Cyborg Insects

Postby Kaj » Tue 01 Apr 2008, 23:15:34

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergyUnlimited', '
')In environment of starving masses it is not much what one can do to change their fate.

Yes there is, its called land reform. Much of the starvation of the world is unecessary, involving situations where export plantations owned by a privileged few truck out all their produce so that Western restaurants and supermarkets and consumers can chuck half of it on the garbage. South American countries have enough food to feed themselves. It is a disgrace that starvation should occur there.
I'm not trying to defend all aspects of the CCP, but initial land reform in China was one sucess story. Peasants still have rights to land. China not only feeds itself, but outside countries too. About a 1/5 world population. Say what you want about their food security, but this is more impressive than if China's land was owned by a few export-intensive capitalists. (And it may go that way).
There is enough food to feed the world. It just needs to be organised differently.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')here is simpler explanation.
All communist revolutions have failed

A simple explanation indeed. An oft-repeated oversimplification. Certain aspects of these revolutions failed, certain of them suceeded. When you compare the revolutions to the context that preceeded them, in many cases, though not all, there were significant improvements. In time those improvements were often eroded by the hostility of other nations.

You have to examine other aspects of why those failures occured. They didn't merely fall over. Such countries became the target of a hegemonic force with an expanding economy. They became the targets of coups, of bribes, of sanctions, of propaganda, of interventions. And often they responded brutally too, which deligitimised them.

But that was yesterday. The battle of ideas will be different tomorrow because of at least 2 trends:
1) Communications technology (internet etc. which is NOT very energy intensive, especially when community organised, so it won't just disappear). Such technologies have made imperialist adventures increasingly difficult. It also makes global solidarity easier.
2) Contracting world energy will completely deligitmise any economic theory that we can continually growing economies. Such arguments are going to have less appeal in a future war of ideas.

Look: a lot of what you say is correct and worries me. But it simply isn't a foregone conclusion that we will end up under that black boot. There's no such thing as fate. History always throws up black swans.
User avatar
Kaj
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 373
Joined: Wed 06 Dec 2006, 04:00:00
Top

Re: Weaponizing the Pentagon's Cyborg Insects

Postby PenultimateManStanding » Tue 01 Apr 2008, 23:28:53

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', 'T')he nice thing about the US of A. Our founding fathers built revolution right into the operation of the government. Its called the "vote". Dont like the current individuals? Vote them out.
Nice to see you back, Specop. Any closer to making it back to pappy's farm or are you still in the belly of the beast? I'm still here in SD, scoping swimming pools on google earth. No water, no luck.
Turn those Machines back On! - Don Ameche in Trading Places
User avatar
PenultimateManStanding
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11363
Joined: Sun 28 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Neither Here Nor There
Top

Re: Weaponizing the Pentagon's Cyborg Insects

Postby Kaj » Tue 01 Apr 2008, 23:37:04

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')here is nothing much, what you can redistribute in collapsing first world capitalist societies.
Plenty of paper wealth, useless suburban infrastructure, gadgetry which will turn useless in collapse environment etc.
Could you name few examples of assets in such societies, which you would like to redistribute so we get some detailed subject to discuss?

The West is a little different. Redistrubution of wealth within these societies is not such a crucial issue. Adapting to reduced consumption is the crucial issue -- for reasons of global equity and for PO reasons. We don't need continuous growth. We don't need artificial scarcity. We don't need packaging. We can walk more. We can share more.
Imagine if instead of buying books, you just borrowed your neighbour's? Same for tools, toys, cars and all the other crap in the house that gets used once a year. The effeciency gains would be massive. The energy used for production and buying could be put somewhere more useful.
I mean, theres a bazillion ways we can achieve this. But it will require a break with the conventional capitalist wisdom of growth.
User avatar
Kaj
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 373
Joined: Wed 06 Dec 2006, 04:00:00
Top

Re: Weaponizing the Pentagon's Cyborg Insects

Postby EnergyUnlimited » Wed 02 Apr 2008, 03:35:13

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Kaj', '
')Yes there is, its called land reform. Much of the starvation of the world is unecessary, involving situations where export plantations owned by a privileged few truck out all their produce so that Western restaurants and supermarkets and consumers can chuck half of it on the garbage. South American countries have enough food to feed themselves. It is a disgrace that starvation should occur there.

I agree, that some sort of land reform, eg in Brazil, could be beneficial to their peoples.
However you have to be very careful with land reforms.
Look, what have happened in Zimbabwe, where land was taken away from rich white farmers and given to black poor...
That was an ultimate national disaster.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')'m not trying to defend all aspects of the CCP, but initial land reform in China was one sucess story.

Initially about 100 millions of Chinese have died out of hunger due to Mao's lunacy when farmers were asked to smelt steel.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'P')easants still have rights to land. - [in China - EU]

Disagree.
They are frquently displaced to arbitrary places to fulfill fantasy of local party leaders.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'C')hina not only feeds itself, but outside countries too. About a 1/5 world population.

Base on few articles what I have red, I think that China is now a net food importer, though I will check again.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')ay what you want about their food security, but this is more impressive than if China's land was owned by a few export-intensive capitalists. (And it may go that way).
I think, their government would ban food exports if problems with hunger re-occurred.
Incidentally US government would do exactly the same in such scenario.
I think, it is inevitable that nations will return to protectionism, isolationism and mercantilist practices in environment of scarcity.
Globalization already is in a dead end.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')here is enough food to feed the world. It just needs to be organised differently.
Yes, if you resign from biofuels and Western diet.

Incidentally it is worrying for me, that there is still enough food.
It will allow for global population to grow and precipitate even greater environmental disaster and human suffering in the future.
Every year we have additional Britain to feed.
Hopefully peak phosphates, GW, water shortages and few other factors will ensure collapse of large proportion of food supply pretty soon.

I firmly support view of some environmentalists in this respect.
They are concerned that continuous success of agriculture is perhaps the greatest threat to life on this planet.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'Y')ou have to examine other aspects of why those failures occured. They didn't merely fall over. Such countries became the target of a hegemonic force with an expanding economy. They became the targets of coups, of bribes, of sanctions, of propaganda, of interventions. And often they responded brutally too, which deligitimised them.
I think, much of troubles was caused by communist party members assuming authority and life styles of aristocracy of the past.
My belate grandfather could tell you more about that - he was local communist secretary (read: "chieftain") in one of districts of Poland.
Incidentally he was privately not believing in communism, what he was frequently explaining to my father.
However he was spoiled by sweeping powers at his disposal.

Another troubles were coming from disrespect of commons by an average folk.
Wastefulness was enormous.
Machinery was not owned by anyone, so it was mistreated by all with access to it.
Those who worked on state farms (which were fortunately rare in Poland) often didn't care about collecting harvests, because it was not theirs. Large proportion of harvest was simply abandoned to rot on fields.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '1')) Communications technology (internet etc. which is NOT very energy intensive, especially when community organised, so it won't just disappear). Such technologies have made imperialist adventures increasingly difficult. It also makes global solidarity easier.
Chinese are already doing something about it. Naturally imperialists are assisting them here.
Others will follow a suit, if need arise.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '2')) Contracting world energy will completely deligitmise any economic theory that we can continually growing economies. Such arguments are going to have less appeal in a future war of ideas.
Agreed, but IMO that will simply lead to chaos.
Various authoritarian setups, communist or fascist, does not matter, will only prove to be temporary stops on our relentless path to ultimate ruin of mankind.
If there is any hope at all to avoid this fate, it will rest within timely ability to shift to new ecological paradigm, as proposed for example by Ibon.
10% chance of success, I guess...
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'L')ook: a lot of what you say is correct and worries me. But it simply isn't a foregone conclusion that we will end up under that black boot. There's no such thing as fate. History always throws up black swans.
Agreed.
We don't know the future.
We can only discuss probabilities of various scenarios.
User avatar
EnergyUnlimited
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7537
Joined: Mon 15 May 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Weaponizing the Pentagon's Cyborg Insects

Postby Specop_007 » Wed 02 Apr 2008, 10:50:56

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PenultimateManStanding', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', 'T')he nice thing about the US of A. Our founding fathers built revolution right into the operation of the government. Its called the "vote". Dont like the current individuals? Vote them out.
Nice to see you back, Specop. Any closer to making it back to pappy's farm or are you still in the belly of the beast? I'm still here in SD, scoping swimming pools on google earth. No water, no luck.


I'm still in the city. I'm doing whats called hedging my bets :-D

I have a farm I can run off to if things go to shit, but in the meantime I have a goood job in the city.

Well, no sense giving up the goood job and income with benefits to move to the farm and make half as much with no benefits. And I have the luxury of still having a place to run off to should I have to get the hell out of Dodge.

Yes, I realize how damned lucky I am. Most have to choose and have no fall back plan. Pops was lucky enough to be old enough he didnt really need to do the 8-5 anymore to make ends meet. Us younger folk arent quite so lucky so what we choose has to get us by and we cant easily change. I'm fortunate enough to be able to choose one path and if it doesnt work out then quickly and relatively easily step to another.

So I enjoy the city life and hustle and bustle in as much as I can and use the goood pay I get to fortify up some loose areas. Get some supplies put away and things of that mature. Most city folk buy bigger TV's and boats then brag about it over beers. I buy guns, seeds, food and ammo then sit around and listen in mock jealousy to those who pissed their money away on the fancy TV's and boats with payments. :-D
"Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster, and if you gaze into the
Abyss, the Abyss gazes also into you."

Ammo at a gunfight is like bubblegum in grade school: If you havent brought enough for everyone, you're in trouble
User avatar
Specop_007
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5586
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Top

Pentagon preparing for presidential transition

Postby Ferretlover » Thu 29 May 2008, 08:02:47

May 28th, 2008
Pentagon preparing for presidential transition
Posted: 08:19 AM ET
WASHINGTON (CNN) — The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has ordered his top military personnel to start planning for the post-election period, CNN has learned.
Admiral Michael Mullen ordered last week that a military team be established to identify what needs to be done to brief the president-elect, and identify possible vulnerabilities to national security in the transition period, said a military official with knowledge of the chairman’s actions.
The military official said the team will consider the top military issues for the new president. The list is expected to include Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan.
The official emphasized that there is no current intelligence indicating a specific threat to the country during the transition, but that Mullen is simply planning for the potential of “foes that want to take advantage” of that time frame.
Link
"Open the gates of hell!" ~Morgan Freeman's character in the movie, Olympus Has Fallen.
Ferretlover
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 5852
Joined: Wed 13 Jun 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Hundreds of miles further inland

PreviousNext

Return to North America Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests