Jump to content

Ghost of LL

Burnt Ends
  • Posts

    5857
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Ghost of LL

  1. You would prefer that I formally pontificate? I mean, that's a problem, because my tuxedo is at the cleaners. Let me be unequivocal since you don't like hedge words--there is no chance that China would use nuclear weapons first. It goes against their nuclear doctrine, and it would be suicidal to do so. We have more than 20 warheads for every one of theirs. So any nuclear attack by China would be met with massive retaliation that would destroy China. They can hit a carrier group--I assume you're using the term "nuke" there metaphorically and not to mean the literal use of a nuclear weapon--but that's the nature of warfare. And while they can hit one of our carrier groups, we can hit every last one of their military assets. Their ability to hit all of our military assets is extremely limited (for example, they can't attack Whiteman AFB, from which attacks against China would be launched). So chill the fuck out, man. It's just a little conventional world war we're talking about here.
  2. We're talking about China here. And that's very different from a war with Russia. China does not have first-strike capability. And its nuclear force is relatively small. Currently, China has fewer than 300 warheads. That's enough for a retaliatory strike; it's definitely not enough for a preemptive counterforce strike. And that's China's nuclear doctrine. China maintains a no-first-strike policy. It focuses its efforts on maintaining a survivable nuclear force (though how survivable it actually would be against a full American counterforce first strike is pretty debatable). So its nuclear doctrine is not based on "mutually assured destruction." It's based on "assured retaliation." A war with China, therefore, is not particularly likely to go nuclear. And the only way it would go nuclear is if we were pretty damned sure that we could take out their warheads with a counterforce strike. Because there's no real likelihood of China actually starting a nuclear exchange.
  3. Yeah, because I totally want to put another plane back into the approach pattern being handled by a guy who just fucked up a landing clearance. But honestly--what purpose is served by having Southwest go back and land? There's no mechanical issue with the plane or anything else that would hinder its ability to complete its flight. Conceivably you could recover the cockpit voice recorder, which only records the previous 30 minutes. But I don't really care what the pilots are saying. What I'm interested in is the flight data recorder. And that continues recording for 15 hours. So the data you actually want for the investigation is safe and can be recovered when the plane gets back from CUN.
  4. I'm not talking about small wars against regional powers. I'm talking about major wars against global powers (i.e., Russia and China). Vietnam was the equivalent of putting a hundo on the Super Bowl; a war with China would be a bet-the-farm undertaking. We haven't had a lot of those. Realistically, we've only really had one of those: World War II. And look at how that went. Just consider the diplomatic end. Look at the dates on which Latin America declared war on the Axis Powers. The United States didn't let Latin America sit around and be neutral (although Argentina and Chile were a scooch late joining the party). We made it pretty goddamned clear to them that they needed to declare that they were with us (particularly countries in Central America from which Japanese planes could conceivably be based to attack the Canal). If you think we wouldn't do the same thing in the event of a war with China, you're crazy. So don't assume that a war with China is a war simply against the United States. It's not. It's a war China would be undertaking against the United States and Japan and South Korea and Taiwan and the Philippines and the whole of NATO and probably Latin America and probably the Gulf Arabs. And for good measure Vietnam and India would probably jump in to get their pound of flesh from the Dragon, because they've got their own quibbles. We didn't go through any of that effort with Vietnam. Because fundamentally, we didn't need to. Losing in Vietnam didn't threaten our national existence. Losing to China would. Paradoxically, winning in Vietnam could have threatened our national existence, if "winning" came at the expense of escalating the war into a confrontation with the Soviet Union. And for that reason, we didn't do things that were probably necessary to win the war (including, but not limited to, bombing North Vietnamese bases from which Soviet advisors were operating). But in a war with China, there wouldn't be a similar consideration. We'd be at war with a major power. All the stops are coming out.
  5. I don't think you (or anyone else on this thread) is appreciating just what is involved in going to war against the United States, particularly for a country like China that is a net importer of food and fuel. In any real war against a global power (i.e., not a regional power like Iraq or North Korea or even Iran), the United States would not accept neutrality from any country. A full blockade would be implemented, making it impossible for China to import enough food and fuel to sustain its population, much less its economy and military. It's not like we'd have to sink a bunch of oil tankers, either (though we wouldn't hesitate to do so). It's that Saudi Arabia would be told that if they don't abide by the economic blockade of our enemy, all of their assets in the United States will be seized and they won't do business with the United States or anyone who wants to do business with the United States. And a naval blockade against China would be effective. We don't need carriers to pull it off, because China's seaports cannot be approached without coming within range of American basis in South Korea, Japan, and the Philippines. And that's kind of important, because 90% of China's population lives east of the Heihe–Tengchong Line. China's west is so vast and unpopulated as to make the importation of goods overland very difficult. In contrast, China can't blockade the United States. It doesn't have the navy to do so. And it doesn't have any allies close to our shores that would be able to enforce a blockade. And even if it did, the United States is a net exporter of food and fuel--we can feed ourselves. The United States isn't really a superpower. It's a megapower. It's simply not susceptible to being defeated in a major conventional war. And China really doesn't have the capability to undertake a nuclear war against the United States because it lacks full counterforce capabilities.
  6. My mother graduated from Bishop Ryan HS in Minot. CSB
  7. I'm not even sure Southwest would've known that there was a significant issue. Apart from a single radio call "Southwest abort" that didn't come from the Tower, there was nothing directed to Southwest telling them there was a problem. And that single radio call could've been missed among the communication that is going on in the cockpit during a takeoff roll. And after takeoff, Southwest would've switched over to Departure Control on a different frequency. So it wouldn't have heard any of the follow-on discussion.
  8. "Prosecutorial vindictiveness" is not a doctrine you see trotted out frequently. I bet the KeyCite for that is pretty damned slim.
  9. It was definitely FedEx calling "Southwest abort," because it's the same voice that then announces that FedEx is a "go" around. That you've got FedEx telling Southwest to abort is a real problem. ATC has completely lost control of the airspace. And FedEx can't tell Southwest to abort because he has no idea what speed Southwest is going (presumably Southwest had already passed V1, so it couldn't safely abort).
  10. Who the fuck is out there this offseason that you'd even want? Russell Westbrook?
  11. The audio makes pretty obvious this was the fault of ATC. And it’s not the first one of these at AUS. There was another near-miss just a few weeks ago involving American and Delta. There’s a real problem at Austin ATC, and it needs fixing now. Even without a collision, it’s remarkable that Southwest didn’t get caught up in the turbulence from FedEx. The 767 is a big plane, and a 737 trying to take off really shouldn’t be that close to one.
  12. We've had our trash cans out since Monday night. Trash day was Tuesday. Trash guys obviously didn't come. And I wasn't going to hump those things back down the driveway in the ice. Our office is empty. We have people who are without power and even without water. But they're still not coming to the office. Man--some fuckers are really committed to this work-from-home bullshit.
  13. I'm sorry about that Monterey Oak, but damned if that isn't the perfect tree for Austin. It does just fine in the heat, and it doesn't really mind the cold. I lost two branches off one of mine (there are four on my property), but for the most part they're hanging in there. They are oaks, after all. And the best part is that if you replace it, they grow so goddamned fast that it'll be huge in just a few years.
  14. I really don't know what you're talking about. I can show you the Texas Bar Journal, which every month publishes the list of lawyers who have been disbarred, suspended, or otherwise disciplined for ethical lapses. It's pretty clear evidence that members of the legal profession do face consequences for unethical or illegal acts. There are nine people who are not subject to those ethical constraints. That's it. Nine. And if you want to enforce some ethical constraints on them, then you need to petition your Congressman to do that. It's not the legal profession's job (or within its ability) to enforce standards the Constitution hasn't created.
  15. The drive in to downtown wasn't bad. There is a bit of ice on some of the bridges, but the roadways are fine. I think it just rained so goddamned hard overnight that it was impossible for any ice to form on the roads. Oh, and by the way--props to the half-dozen people I saw on bicycles riding around downtown. That's a special kind of stupid/dedicated/insane.
  16. I have to go into the office, as I have no power and a hearing today. So I can’t do my Zoom hearing from home (unless I want to go do it from my car). So I’ll report on the roads from downtown after a while.
  17. I thought it was lightning out there, but nope—it’s just the flashes of transformers exploding.
  18. I really hate to be like this, but on our way out the door I kind of think we need to be honest. Nobody gives a fuck about either ISU or KSU.
  19. No, but almost as random. I saw that the Astoria was due to be broken up and that it was the oldest cruise ship out there. So I went on a little Google dive, until I came to the story of Mrs. Hardberger, when I was like
  20. The MV Astoria is going to take her final trip to Rotterdam next week where she will be broken up for scrap. She is currently the oldest cruise ship out there. Astoria first went to sea in 1948 as the SS Stockholm. In 1956, the Stockholm collided with the Andrea Doria in heavy fog off Nantucket Island. The Andrea Doria sunk, 52 people were killed. Among the people aboard the Andrea Doria was 14-year old Linda Morgan, who was in bed in cabin 52 at the time of the collision. Cabin 52 was right above where Stockholm struck Andrea Doria, and Morgan was launched onto the deck of the Stockholm. Her mother and step-sister were killed. Twelve years after the collision, Linda Morgan married Phil Hardberger. They moved to San Antonio in 1970, and Phil became mayor in 2005. Linda is still around at age 81. She's a very nice lady.
  21. I mean, this has to be an inside job, right?
×
×
  • Create New...