evilgEEk
Aug 11, 08:55 PM
Why not just ring someone and ask where you are? Or wait for the guy on the seat next to you to ring his girlfriend?
If you don't know where you are, how is someone else going to know where you are? And what if the guy next to you just dumped his girlfriend? Then you're in real trouble! ;)
My next phone will be GPS capable as well. If the iPhone doesn't have GPS then I probably won't get it.
If you don't know where you are, how is someone else going to know where you are? And what if the guy next to you just dumped his girlfriend? Then you're in real trouble! ;)
My next phone will be GPS capable as well. If the iPhone doesn't have GPS then I probably won't get it.
Spagolli94
Nov 28, 10:51 PM
I was just reading some of the Zune comments on Amazon. Wow. Sounds like a really GREEEEAAAAT product.
theBB
Mar 31, 07:13 PM
If you're going to licence your project as open source, then you do actually have to release the source. I know there's often a delay with commercial products. I suppose the tolerance of the open source community depends on the reason and the amount of time the code is held back.
Well, the rules for GPL say you need to release the source code along with the software and you actually have to offer them through the same channel, so that you cannot make it practically impossible for people to get to the source even if it is theoretically available. Of course, GPL is not the only "open source" license. This is Google's playground, so they get to define it any way they wish.
Well, the rules for GPL say you need to release the source code along with the software and you actually have to offer them through the same channel, so that you cannot make it practically impossible for people to get to the source even if it is theoretically available. Of course, GPL is not the only "open source" license. This is Google's playground, so they get to define it any way they wish.
AppleScruff1
Apr 11, 05:46 PM
Iphone 5 on Sprint?
Verizon will buy Sprint since AT&T is buying TMobile.
Verizon will buy Sprint since AT&T is buying TMobile.
Bill McEnaney
Apr 27, 12:27 PM
I guess you missed the part where the one that is being shown is a certified copy.
Maybe?? For someone who isn't a birther, you sure sound like one.
Apparently the short form wasn't convincing enough...which is why the long form has now been presented.
I suspected it was a copy, I've never trusted the president, and I probably never will. It's one thing to doubt that the certificate is legitimate. It's quite another to believe that the certificate is not legitimate.
Maybe?? For someone who isn't a birther, you sure sound like one.
Apparently the short form wasn't convincing enough...which is why the long form has now been presented.
I suspected it was a copy, I've never trusted the president, and I probably never will. It's one thing to doubt that the certificate is legitimate. It's quite another to believe that the certificate is not legitimate.
technicolor
Sep 19, 10:15 PM
Why do you care?
Why shouldnt I?
Why shouldnt I?
mattsh
Sep 19, 06:24 AM
to be honest - i've been looking at the lenovo offerings and i'm attracted. i have been a diehard apple fan my entire life, but if all it means is i have to use tiger clone (aka vista) but at least have hardware that is current with technology i'll buy.
so yes, apple has a monopoly, but they can't be to jack ass about it because people will start to go other places no matter how good ilife is.
there is no excuse that one of the top 5 notebook venders in the united states on intel architecture is behind this much its competitors.
You know I've been thinking about this. Does Apple really NEED to update now? I mean what's the purpose of the update? Yes there is 64bit, but other then that? Not much. A LITTLE more speed, but OSX already runs pretty fast... faster then Windows would with comparible hardware. OSX already does more then Windows does and does it better. Maybe Apple doesn't NEED To stay up with the latest processor fad because they are already better then the competition.. maybe the competition NEEDS faster hardward because they OS is so bloated it runs slowly unless they have it. Ever think of that? Honestly, I'm 100% happy with my current MB which does not have the new processor in it. I launch most programs in under a second.:D
so yes, apple has a monopoly, but they can't be to jack ass about it because people will start to go other places no matter how good ilife is.
there is no excuse that one of the top 5 notebook venders in the united states on intel architecture is behind this much its competitors.
You know I've been thinking about this. Does Apple really NEED to update now? I mean what's the purpose of the update? Yes there is 64bit, but other then that? Not much. A LITTLE more speed, but OSX already runs pretty fast... faster then Windows would with comparible hardware. OSX already does more then Windows does and does it better. Maybe Apple doesn't NEED To stay up with the latest processor fad because they are already better then the competition.. maybe the competition NEEDS faster hardward because they OS is so bloated it runs slowly unless they have it. Ever think of that? Honestly, I'm 100% happy with my current MB which does not have the new processor in it. I launch most programs in under a second.:D
Bill McEnaney
Mar 3, 10:05 AM
And I don't see the point in being sexually attracted to anyone of the opposite sex, but since society tells me it's "normal" I live with it nonetheless. It's all a matter of perception and experience. You have yours, I have mine and they're both normal to us.
Sure, different people have different experiences. That's partly why some people feel same-sex attractions and why others feel opposite-sex attractions. Macaroony doesn't see any point in opposite-sex attractions. I don't see any point in same-sex attractions. Here are two videos that explain what I believe about why some people feel same-sex attractions. I think the speaker works for NARTH.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFAJXvxcGrk&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UziWSdC8Zhw&feature=related
Pedophilia is immoral - no matter man or woman. Please do not put both homosexuality and pedophilia into the same boat. There are plenty of grown men who abuse underage girls, it's when they happen to be gay that elevates the problem and lazily ties it to homosexuality.
Just as no one chooses to feel same-sex attractions, no one chooses to be a pedophile. I know some pedophiles. But some pedophiles do choose to molest children. I don't want to conflate pedophilia and immoral actions that some pedophiles do because they're pedophiles.
Many people ignore the difference between homosexuality and homosexual acts. Many Christians insist that homosexuality is immoral. But homosexuality is a property, not an action. Nor is it a sin of omission. Homosexuality the property is morally indifferent. Homosexual acts are, I think, immoral. An action can be immoral, even if someone doesn't deserve any blame for doing it.
No, I shouldn't put homosexuality and pedophilia in the same boat. I mentioned the Catholic Church's homosexual-abuse because skunk seems to think my opinions about sexual morality are feelings, not beliefs that are either true or false. Even psychotherapists I've talked with have agreed that feelings are neither truths nor falsehoods. Feelings are neither of those, but there are truths about feelings and there are falsehoods about them. If I only feel that homosexual acts are immoral, should some government outlaw feeling that way?
The phrase "a fact" is ambiguous. It can mean "a truth." It can also mean "a set of actual set of circumstances." There are truths about feelings, and there are feelings about truths. But my feelings aren't truths. Even if moral relativism is true, there are still objective truths about whether some society or other considers some action morally acceptable. And some relativists still hold a self-inconsistent belief when they believe that since every belief is relative to some context or other, there's no such thing as absolute truth. In one sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true about every context. In that sense of the phrase "absolute truth," I imply a self-contradiction myself when I say that since every truth is relative to some context or other, I imply that it's an absolute truth that there's no absolute truth.
In another sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true whether anyone believes it or not. Even if I'm mistaken when I believe that homosexual sex is gravely immoral, it's still true that either they're moral or not moral.
Too often, people who feel same-sex attractions suffer needlessly partly because they, others, or both ignore important distinctions. Unfortunately, people often ignore them when their feelings determine too much of what those people believe.
Immoral behavior continues partly because of moral relativism. Instead of conforming our minds to reality, we try to conform reality to our minds. Moral relativists talk as though an action is moral if and only if someone believes that it's moral. Some moral relativists even insist that if you believe that homosexual acts are morally acceptable, and I believe they're immoral, then we're both right. A moral relativist might say the same about the morality or immorality of gay-bashing. But someone is right when he thinks that gay-bashing is morally right, should a court punish him for gay-bashing someone?
Sure, different people have different experiences. That's partly why some people feel same-sex attractions and why others feel opposite-sex attractions. Macaroony doesn't see any point in opposite-sex attractions. I don't see any point in same-sex attractions. Here are two videos that explain what I believe about why some people feel same-sex attractions. I think the speaker works for NARTH.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFAJXvxcGrk&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UziWSdC8Zhw&feature=related
Pedophilia is immoral - no matter man or woman. Please do not put both homosexuality and pedophilia into the same boat. There are plenty of grown men who abuse underage girls, it's when they happen to be gay that elevates the problem and lazily ties it to homosexuality.
Just as no one chooses to feel same-sex attractions, no one chooses to be a pedophile. I know some pedophiles. But some pedophiles do choose to molest children. I don't want to conflate pedophilia and immoral actions that some pedophiles do because they're pedophiles.
Many people ignore the difference between homosexuality and homosexual acts. Many Christians insist that homosexuality is immoral. But homosexuality is a property, not an action. Nor is it a sin of omission. Homosexuality the property is morally indifferent. Homosexual acts are, I think, immoral. An action can be immoral, even if someone doesn't deserve any blame for doing it.
No, I shouldn't put homosexuality and pedophilia in the same boat. I mentioned the Catholic Church's homosexual-abuse because skunk seems to think my opinions about sexual morality are feelings, not beliefs that are either true or false. Even psychotherapists I've talked with have agreed that feelings are neither truths nor falsehoods. Feelings are neither of those, but there are truths about feelings and there are falsehoods about them. If I only feel that homosexual acts are immoral, should some government outlaw feeling that way?
The phrase "a fact" is ambiguous. It can mean "a truth." It can also mean "a set of actual set of circumstances." There are truths about feelings, and there are feelings about truths. But my feelings aren't truths. Even if moral relativism is true, there are still objective truths about whether some society or other considers some action morally acceptable. And some relativists still hold a self-inconsistent belief when they believe that since every belief is relative to some context or other, there's no such thing as absolute truth. In one sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true about every context. In that sense of the phrase "absolute truth," I imply a self-contradiction myself when I say that since every truth is relative to some context or other, I imply that it's an absolute truth that there's no absolute truth.
In another sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true whether anyone believes it or not. Even if I'm mistaken when I believe that homosexual sex is gravely immoral, it's still true that either they're moral or not moral.
Too often, people who feel same-sex attractions suffer needlessly partly because they, others, or both ignore important distinctions. Unfortunately, people often ignore them when their feelings determine too much of what those people believe.
Immoral behavior continues partly because of moral relativism. Instead of conforming our minds to reality, we try to conform reality to our minds. Moral relativists talk as though an action is moral if and only if someone believes that it's moral. Some moral relativists even insist that if you believe that homosexual acts are morally acceptable, and I believe they're immoral, then we're both right. A moral relativist might say the same about the morality or immorality of gay-bashing. But someone is right when he thinks that gay-bashing is morally right, should a court punish him for gay-bashing someone?
nealibob
Mar 31, 03:00 PM
John Gruber's take:
Can't say I disagree.
The real Android bait-and-switch is calling the platform "open" to consumers. Sure, there are a few "Google Experience" devices that have not been mutilated by handset makers, but even those often have closed hardware. The way I see it, Google uses this ruse of openness to get geek support. Geeks then advocate their platform, which is a great form of marketing.
The reality is that any Android handset with a locked bootloader or no root access from the factory is just about as closed as any iOS device (or BlackBerry, WebOS, Windows, etc. device). The open vs. closed = Android vs. iOS argument is ridiculous, because it focuses on the part of the platform (underlying source code) that matters the least to almost all users.
Can't say I disagree.
The real Android bait-and-switch is calling the platform "open" to consumers. Sure, there are a few "Google Experience" devices that have not been mutilated by handset makers, but even those often have closed hardware. The way I see it, Google uses this ruse of openness to get geek support. Geeks then advocate their platform, which is a great form of marketing.
The reality is that any Android handset with a locked bootloader or no root access from the factory is just about as closed as any iOS device (or BlackBerry, WebOS, Windows, etc. device). The open vs. closed = Android vs. iOS argument is ridiculous, because it focuses on the part of the platform (underlying source code) that matters the least to almost all users.
yg17
Apr 27, 08:49 AM
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2711155/posts?q=1&;page=101
There you have it. The birthers aren't satisfied. I knew it.
There you have it. The birthers aren't satisfied. I knew it.
Small White Car
Apr 10, 12:20 AM
Oh, we are totally getting an iPad app to go along with this program. I can feel it.
I would oh-so love the ability to down-rez a Final Cut project and send it to an iPad...do all my rough cutting there...and then bring it back to the Mac and re-link it to the real footage to do the detail work.
I've had a lot of fun playing with iMovie on the iPad. I am drooling for something similar that works as part of a Final Cut Pro workflow.
Interesting news, but the bit about booting competitors is downright disgusting.
I'm a little confused...why was Avid presenting at a Final Cut Pro User Group's meeting anyway? Do they just come in and are like "Hey, you've all made a mistake!" or something?
I would oh-so love the ability to down-rez a Final Cut project and send it to an iPad...do all my rough cutting there...and then bring it back to the Mac and re-link it to the real footage to do the detail work.
I've had a lot of fun playing with iMovie on the iPad. I am drooling for something similar that works as part of a Final Cut Pro workflow.
Interesting news, but the bit about booting competitors is downright disgusting.
I'm a little confused...why was Avid presenting at a Final Cut Pro User Group's meeting anyway? Do they just come in and are like "Hey, you've all made a mistake!" or something?
KnightWRX
Apr 9, 11:12 AM
I thought the 320m was also integrated? Wouldn't that mean that would be your only graphics card were nvidia allowed to add them to sandy bridge? I don't see why you would have integrated intel hd 3000 along with an integrated 320m (or successor).
Why not ? A 320m successor would just destroy the Intel HD 3000 which is sub-par compared to the current 320m. Why not use 2 IGPs and go for a 2 chip solution instead of using a dedicated GPU and have to rely on a 3 chip solution if that 2nd IGP just blows away the first ?
Heck, just disable the Intel 3000 HD entirely.
Intel got greedy.
Why not ? A 320m successor would just destroy the Intel HD 3000 which is sub-par compared to the current 320m. Why not use 2 IGPs and go for a 2 chip solution instead of using a dedicated GPU and have to rely on a 3 chip solution if that 2nd IGP just blows away the first ?
Heck, just disable the Intel 3000 HD entirely.
Intel got greedy.
osofast240sx
Apr 8, 07:54 AM
I think this makes somewhat sense... When i went to best buy on launch day they ran out... and then i went back and they were doing $100 pre-orders to be put on a list (which i never ended up doing)... so what they did is had a ton of people pay a hundred bucks to put on a best buy gift card and then "shorten" the supply so that people would have to be impatient and go buy somewhere else--which forced people to spend that hundred dollars at BB.
Kind of a cheap selfish way to make money. hundreds of pre-orders and then only a few ipad sales...
it still doesn't make sense to not sell what you have in stock though... stupidI was one of the ones that put $100 down then receive my pad 4 days later. i thought that was a little suspect.
Kind of a cheap selfish way to make money. hundreds of pre-orders and then only a few ipad sales...
it still doesn't make sense to not sell what you have in stock though... stupidI was one of the ones that put $100 down then receive my pad 4 days later. i thought that was a little suspect.
conradzoo
Aug 11, 05:49 PM
Confused.
Can somebody explain me the differences between the cellphone market between the US and Europe.
Will a 'iPhone' just be marketed to the US or worldwide (as the iPod does)?
C.:confused:
Can somebody explain me the differences between the cellphone market between the US and Europe.
Will a 'iPhone' just be marketed to the US or worldwide (as the iPod does)?
C.:confused:
blahblah100
Mar 31, 05:51 PM
I used to have a friend who would spend days tweaking the LINUX OS code so that his browser would look super duper cool.
How many people like that do you know?
Really? I would have thought he would have tweaked the code to the actual browser.
How many people like that do you know?
Really? I would have thought he would have tweaked the code to the actual browser.
OzyOly
Apr 6, 11:43 AM
Can't wait. Shall be my new Work machine. :)
BaldiMac
Apr 19, 03:20 PM
You're wrong. Apple is losing marketshare for over 2 years now. Just because they are selling MORE iPhones doesn't mean they are gaining marketshare. The market grows much faster than the iPhone sales. Have a look at Nokia: In Q4/10 Nokia sold almost 7 million more smartphones but they lost about 10% marketshare.
http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=985912
http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1372013
iPhone Worldwide smartphone market share
Q1 2008 5.3%
Q1 2009 10.8%
Q1 2010 15.4%
Q1 2011 ???
How have they been losing market share for two years now?
In Q1/11 Apple lost about 2% marketshare despite the fact that they sold about 2.5 million more iPhones. Just read the latest GfK numbers (needs registered account), it's all in there. NDP numbers for Q1/11 will be released next week if you trust them more.
2.5 million more? Apple has likely sold more than double then number of iPhones in q1 2011 than q1 2010 (8.75 million).
http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=985912
http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1372013
iPhone Worldwide smartphone market share
Q1 2008 5.3%
Q1 2009 10.8%
Q1 2010 15.4%
Q1 2011 ???
How have they been losing market share for two years now?
In Q1/11 Apple lost about 2% marketshare despite the fact that they sold about 2.5 million more iPhones. Just read the latest GfK numbers (needs registered account), it's all in there. NDP numbers for Q1/11 will be released next week if you trust them more.
2.5 million more? Apple has likely sold more than double then number of iPhones in q1 2011 than q1 2010 (8.75 million).
bruinsrme
Apr 27, 08:51 AM
And now Trump is demanding to see Obama's educational records. It's not going to end. If Obama releases those, then what will Trump demand?
When this whole birther bullcrap started back before the election, I said that if he ever releases the long form, they'll claim it's fake and then demand more proof. Looks like I'm right.
Funny I had to prove my education credentials and proof of citizenship for 3 companies that extend offers.
Is it really out of line for the president to furnish such information?
Did I cross the the line of being a racist?
When this whole birther bullcrap started back before the election, I said that if he ever releases the long form, they'll claim it's fake and then demand more proof. Looks like I'm right.
Funny I had to prove my education credentials and proof of citizenship for 3 companies that extend offers.
Is it really out of line for the president to furnish such information?
Did I cross the the line of being a racist?
gugy
Aug 11, 12:22 PM
Seriously - unlocked phones won't float in the US. The carrier gives huge discounts and most of us don't really care about switching services (a lot people just get all their friends on the same network so all calling is free). I don't care how sweet the iPhone is. I'm not gonna pay 300-400 dollars for a phone when I can get one for 20 or less and stay with the carrier I plan to stay with anyway. Also note that I get a pretty nice company discount with the big guys on my plan and most all of my friends/family are with 1 carrier so it'd really be stupid of me to go with a diff carrier...
I agree with you. Unfortunately the USA cell phone market is sucks.
For me Apple has these options to make the iphone as popular as the ipod.
� offer it to all USA carriers. GSM and CDMA
� offer their own Apple network (hard option, because people would wait to see first if the network is reliable and wait for the end of their current carrier contracts to move to it)
� Make it very affordable to entice people to buy it. Less than $200
I agree with you. Unfortunately the USA cell phone market is sucks.
For me Apple has these options to make the iphone as popular as the ipod.
� offer it to all USA carriers. GSM and CDMA
� offer their own Apple network (hard option, because people would wait to see first if the network is reliable and wait for the end of their current carrier contracts to move to it)
� Make it very affordable to entice people to buy it. Less than $200
puckhead193
Aug 6, 10:29 AM
all i care about is an updated iMac...... i guess tomarrow i will find out.
DeVizardofOZ
Aug 27, 04:46 AM
No hard feelings indeed, but please show me numbers and facts, not anecdotal evidence of some dozens/hundreds of people (as compared to millions of purchasers). I will take your point when you do that, thanks very much. And really, to say that 25% of Apple products are lemons is to be, at very least, extremely glib.
Besides, if Apple is able to replace/fix those that have problems, there is no reason to complain whatsoever...this is what guarantees and technical support are for.
Especially the last paragraph of your rebuttal shows that you have not read ALL the threads about MB and MBp problems. I really would like to hear you, when you had your MBP replaced 3 times and still have problems... I have friends who just upgraded to MBPs all have one or more problems, ranging from screen, heat, whine, keyboard, and other problems, some of which they still have to discover. Sorry, buddy, but it truly looks like getting a good MBP is LUCK. I own a couple of laptops, my oldest ones are 9 years old (TOSHIBA), and never ever did I have problems like the ones described on these boards.
Proof my butt.... Wouldn"t it be nice if these threads had only happy APPLE fans? Dream on.
We are consumers, and should not accept getting a refurb lemon... but a new, preferably working product.
Besides, if Apple is able to replace/fix those that have problems, there is no reason to complain whatsoever...this is what guarantees and technical support are for.
Especially the last paragraph of your rebuttal shows that you have not read ALL the threads about MB and MBp problems. I really would like to hear you, when you had your MBP replaced 3 times and still have problems... I have friends who just upgraded to MBPs all have one or more problems, ranging from screen, heat, whine, keyboard, and other problems, some of which they still have to discover. Sorry, buddy, but it truly looks like getting a good MBP is LUCK. I own a couple of laptops, my oldest ones are 9 years old (TOSHIBA), and never ever did I have problems like the ones described on these boards.
Proof my butt.... Wouldn"t it be nice if these threads had only happy APPLE fans? Dream on.
We are consumers, and should not accept getting a refurb lemon... but a new, preferably working product.
shawnce
Sep 13, 12:04 PM
Whilst true in that regard, BeOS also had threads for event queues too if you used BLooper, which could also be overused.
Mac OS X has runloops which are flexible event processing constructs that can be run per thread. So nothing really unique in regards to BeOS in that regard.
Mac OS X has runloops which are flexible event processing constructs that can be run per thread. So nothing really unique in regards to BeOS in that regard.
ergle2
Sep 13, 01:00 PM
So Merom(Merom Santa Rosa)/Conroe/Woodcrest(Clovertown) are the end of the road of separate chips. No more mobile/desktop/sever chip... all are the same (should expect mobiles to have the lowest MHz, then desktop, then toping out with server)
I think you've misunderstood.
Merom/Conroe/Woodcrest are one microarch now. That's Intel's point -- the core is essentially the same. Then they package as appropriate for a given market. Merom is lower-voltage/lower-clockspeed, Woodcrest has the external pins for multi-processor exposed and has a higher FSB, etc.
There will still be different chips for different markets, but the arch is the same across the board. This is a significant difference from the Pentium-4/Pentium-M days, where the arch was very, very different.
The other big difference is the support chipsets -- the Xeon range use a different chipset that supports FBDIMM vs DDR2 for the Core 2 branded chips. This is the reason Intel kept the memory controller off the CPU die, so that they had more flexibility with memory types.
I think you've misunderstood.
Merom/Conroe/Woodcrest are one microarch now. That's Intel's point -- the core is essentially the same. Then they package as appropriate for a given market. Merom is lower-voltage/lower-clockspeed, Woodcrest has the external pins for multi-processor exposed and has a higher FSB, etc.
There will still be different chips for different markets, but the arch is the same across the board. This is a significant difference from the Pentium-4/Pentium-M days, where the arch was very, very different.
The other big difference is the support chipsets -- the Xeon range use a different chipset that supports FBDIMM vs DDR2 for the Core 2 branded chips. This is the reason Intel kept the memory controller off the CPU die, so that they had more flexibility with memory types.
hulugu
Mar 22, 12:05 AM
It's hard to argue against sysiphus's summary. The depressing corollary to that is, I don't see any realistically electable candidates on the horizon who can improve on Obama. Presidents have become more alike over time. Perhaps that is because the US is so out of step with the rest of the world that all presidents find themselves involved in similar international adventures.
It will be interesting to see how Obama handles the next phase of the the situation, as he has promised to "tone down" US military involvement in Libya. Unlike Iraq, there is an opposition movement in-country and there is no invasion. So while I'm disappointed that we are involved in yet another conflict in the middle east, this one stands a better chance of aiding a legitimate opposition movement in removing a dictator rather than creating another tragic, expensive mess.
I agree. The Democrats will, of course, push Obama for a second-term and thus our opposition candidates are all GOP, none of whom are serious contenders for improving our present situation.
If I read the Obama administration correctly, the US involvement will be very limited and while "advisors" are certainly on the ground�I be amazed if there weren't forward-air controllers and Green Berets in Libya�the US's role will remain very limited. Like the Gulf War, we will let our Arab League allies be the first ones across the border, and give the security operations to the French and British.
It will be interesting to see how Obama handles the next phase of the the situation, as he has promised to "tone down" US military involvement in Libya. Unlike Iraq, there is an opposition movement in-country and there is no invasion. So while I'm disappointed that we are involved in yet another conflict in the middle east, this one stands a better chance of aiding a legitimate opposition movement in removing a dictator rather than creating another tragic, expensive mess.
I agree. The Democrats will, of course, push Obama for a second-term and thus our opposition candidates are all GOP, none of whom are serious contenders for improving our present situation.
If I read the Obama administration correctly, the US involvement will be very limited and while "advisors" are certainly on the ground�I be amazed if there weren't forward-air controllers and Green Berets in Libya�the US's role will remain very limited. Like the Gulf War, we will let our Arab League allies be the first ones across the border, and give the security operations to the French and British.
No comments:
Post a Comment