Dwayne Day has a review of a new documentary on the Mars movement starring (for better or worse), Bob Zubrin:
One of Zubrin
Dwayne Day has a review of a new documentary on the Mars movement starring (for better or worse), Bob Zubrin:
One of Zubrin
Grant Bonin discusses the papers put out by the Space Frontier Foundation and the GAO on problems with NASA’s exploration plans in todays issue of The Space Review.
It’s worth the read, but being busy working on same plans, I would comment only on this bit:
Human-rating either the Atlas 5 or Delta 4 is likely to be an expensive proposition regardless of the fact that both boosters have already been developed (especially since no one really knows what it means to
Martin Peretz on Ned Lamont and the “netroots”:
Mr. Lamont’s views are…not camouflaged. They are just simpleminded. Here, for instance, is his take on what should be done about Iran’s nuclear-weapons venture: “We should work diplomatically and aggressively to give them reasons why they don’t need to build a bomb, to give them incentives. We have to engage in very aggressive diplomacy. I’d like to bring in allies when we can. I’d like to use carrots as well as sticks to see if we can change the nature of the debate.” Oh, I see. He thinks the problem is that they do not understand, and so we should explain things to them, and then they will do the right thing. It is a fortunate world that Mr. Lamont lives in, but it is not the real one. Anyway, this sort of plying is precisely what has been going on for years, and to no good effect. Mr. Lamont continues that “Lieberman is the one who keeps talking about keeping the military option on the table.” And what is so plainly wrong with that? Would Mahmoud Ahmadinejad be more agreeable if he thought that we had disposed of the military option in favor of more country club behavior?
Martin Peretz on Ned Lamont and the “netroots”:
Mr. Lamont’s views are…not camouflaged. They are just simpleminded. Here, for instance, is his take on what should be done about Iran’s nuclear-weapons venture: “We should work diplomatically and aggressively to give them reasons why they don’t need to build a bomb, to give them incentives. We have to engage in very aggressive diplomacy. I’d like to bring in allies when we can. I’d like to use carrots as well as sticks to see if we can change the nature of the debate.” Oh, I see. He thinks the problem is that they do not understand, and so we should explain things to them, and then they will do the right thing. It is a fortunate world that Mr. Lamont lives in, but it is not the real one. Anyway, this sort of plying is precisely what has been going on for years, and to no good effect. Mr. Lamont continues that “Lieberman is the one who keeps talking about keeping the military option on the table.” And what is so plainly wrong with that? Would Mahmoud Ahmadinejad be more agreeable if he thought that we had disposed of the military option in favor of more country club behavior?
Martin Peretz on Ned Lamont and the “netroots”:
Mr. Lamont’s views are…not camouflaged. They are just simpleminded. Here, for instance, is his take on what should be done about Iran’s nuclear-weapons venture: “We should work diplomatically and aggressively to give them reasons why they don’t need to build a bomb, to give them incentives. We have to engage in very aggressive diplomacy. I’d like to bring in allies when we can. I’d like to use carrots as well as sticks to see if we can change the nature of the debate.” Oh, I see. He thinks the problem is that they do not understand, and so we should explain things to them, and then they will do the right thing. It is a fortunate world that Mr. Lamont lives in, but it is not the real one. Anyway, this sort of plying is precisely what has been going on for years, and to no good effect. Mr. Lamont continues that “Lieberman is the one who keeps talking about keeping the military option on the table.” And what is so plainly wrong with that? Would Mahmoud Ahmadinejad be more agreeable if he thought that we had disposed of the military option in favor of more country club behavior?
For a Monday morning. From “Grim“:
I suspect that we will one day speak of the war in Iraq the way we speak of the Spanish Civil War — that is, rarely by comparison to the greater war that followed it. Peace is not in the cards. Things are going to get worse. Our enemies are glad to employ terrorists, who will try to bring the war to our homes. The wise man will prepare his sword, and the arm that may wield it.
GM may survive, if you can believe this journalist’s take. Of course, he’s a Detroit journalist.
I should point out that I have a semi-emotional stake in the outcome.
I’ve never been a big fan of In’n’Out Burgers, but perhaps some of my readers are. And more importantly, Patricia is. She makes a point to go there whenever we go “home” to LA.
My major memory of them is all the corporate bumper stickers I used to see when I first move to LA, when many had removed the “B” and the “rs” from the name.
Anyway, one of the co-founders of the chain has died.
Omar (of the Iraqi blog Iraq the Model) is concerned that it is. It certainly can’t be rejected out of hand, given the insanities that have been spouting from Ahmadinejad’s mouth recently. He certainly seems of a mind to immanentize the Islamic eschaton.
Morons who think that I’m a right-wing neocon Christer will, of course, scratch their heads at this post, thinking that my only concern is that it will preempt the Rapture.
Omar (of the Iraqi blog Iraq the Model) is concerned that it is. It certainly can’t be rejected out of hand, given the insanities that have been spouting from Ahmadinejad’s mouth recently. He certainly seems of a mind to immanentize the Islamic eschaton.
Morons who think that I’m a right-wing neocon Christer will, of course, scratch their heads at this post, thinking that my only concern is that it will preempt the Rapture.