US Politics December: Ferguson Explains It All

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > US Politics December: Ferguson Explains It All

Fried Chicken: Jan 9, 2011; Don't fry me, I'm no chicken!

My Imaginary GF posted:

That's like asking if Afghanistan in 2001 had any known international terrorist affiliations. They are the terrorists, and don't play by the same rules as civilized nations.

E:

Hezbollah and Hamas, if you're looking for somewhere to start. They have a variety of arms exports operations.

Get a map. Find North Korea. Then find Iran. Note that they are not the same country. We are talking about the former. You are talking about the latter

# ? Dec 18, 2014 03:18

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 2, 2024 09:23

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Fried Chicken posted:

Get a map. Find North Korea. Then find Iran. Note that they are not the same country. We are talking about the former. You are talking about the latter

You ARE talking to a guy that has, in the past, emphasized using preemptive nuclear strikes as foreign policy

# ? Dec 18, 2014 03:19

Joementum: May 23, 2004; jesus christ

Fried Chicken posted:

Get a map. Find North Korea. Then find Iran. Note that they are not the same country.

They're both Axis powers though.

# ? Dec 18, 2014 03:19

sullat: Jan 9, 2012

CommieGIR posted:

Thorium reactors will still be pressurized, but their cooling medium is molten sodium salt, which if the vessel becomes compromised will solidify and cease the reaction.

Its exciting to say the least, because it could create a power production 'arms race' similar to the cold war, in fact there is reason to suspect that NASA's budget raise had some influence from the strides China is trying to make into space, along with our new found angst with Russia.

The problem with the US is still thus: There is a failure to emphasize R&D as a profit generator and futureproofing, and the US is so hung up on cheap fuels like Coal and Natural Gas to pay much attention to thorium reactors right now. We've made great strides in Fusion research both in the private sector and public with the NIF, however thorium is still largely on the back burner in the West outside of the EU. As long as the Gas/Coal lobby continues to push to make nuclear unaffordable and unobtainable, we won't see many gains for a while

If the Chinese get a reactor operation and demonstrate its effectiveness, we might see a resurgence, but a lot of the Greens in the US oppose nuclear on purely ideological grounds, despite our excellent safety record

Isn't the issue that you have a ton of contaminated sodium to deal with afterwards? I once took a field trip to see Hanford, they have a mothballed liquid sodium-cooled reactor there. But no funding to run it, obviously.

# ? Dec 18, 2014 03:20

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

sullat posted:

Isn't the issue that you have a ton of contaminated sodium to deal with afterwards? I once took a field trip to see Hanford, they have a mothballed liquid sodium-cooled reactor there. But no funding to run it, obviously.

Its a closed loop system, unless there is a leak (which is a problem, as sodium is flammable), you should never have to deal with contaminated sodium outside of the primary cooling loop. Even if the primary cooling loop loses all coolant, the reaction stops, whereas in the BWR you have a core overheat and possible meltdown on your hands.

Kinda like water coming out of the BWR, while the water might be SLIGHTLY radioactive from contacting the primary cooling loop, its nowhere near the contamination of the primary cooling loop water.

Also: loss of primary cooling loop results in the reaction stopping. Either through loss of the coolant through a leak due to whatever happened, or if the reactor overheats, the freeze plug melts and dumps the sodium into tanks. The Thorium must also remain heated in order to remain liquid as thorium fluoride is almost entire meltdown proof.

CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 03:32 on Dec 18, 2014

# ? Dec 18, 2014 03:25

My Imaginary GF: Jul 17, 2005; by R. Guyovich

Fried Chicken posted:

Get a map. Find North Korea. Then find Iran. Note that they are not the same country. We are talking about the former. You are talking about the latter

http://www.cfr.org/state-sponsors-of-terrorism/state-sponsors-north-korea/p9364

quote:

Relationship with other State Sponsors of Terrorism
It has been reported that North Korea sold ballistic-missile technology to Iran and Syria, both of which are on the U.S. State department’s list of sponsors of terrorism, and Libya, which was removed from the list in 2006. North Korean missile technology has also been transferred to Pakistan and Yemen. The alleged missile sales represent a prime concern for the U.S.-led “war on terrorism,” expanding the range of receiving nations that could potentially deploy their own chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons. Yet the sales also generate much needed income for North Korea, allowing it to further its own military research and development. Following a September 2007 Israeli air strike in Syria, some analysts speculated that Pyongyang had sold nuclear material to Damascus, which Israel then discovered and destroyed.

http://www.cfr.org/north-korea/why-should-united-states-pay-attention-impoverished-economically-devastated-north-korea/p30684

quote:

North Korea, formally called the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK), remains a top security concern for the United States, despite its moribund economy. The DPRK poses a serious potential military threat to its neighbors and to U.S. military bases and allies in the Pacific.

DPRK leadership calls the United States its enemy; since Kim Jong-un came to power in 2011 its threatening rhetoric has escalated. The DPRK reaffirmed its commitment to its nuclear program in 2013 and tested a nuclear device in February. It may attempt to proliferate nuclear weapons technology or materials to organizations or other states hostile to the United States, such as Iran. If the DPRK's stance was combined with technology that enabled missiles to reach the United States, it must be assumed that they might follow through on their threats.

http://m.state.gov/md224821.htm

quote:

DEMOCRATIC PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF KOREA

Overview: The Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) is not known to have sponsored any terrorist acts since the bombing of a Korean Airlines flight in 1987. In October 2008, the United States rescinded the designation of the DPRK as a state sponsor of terrorism in accordance with criteria set forth in U.S. law, including a certification that the DPRK had not provided any support for international terrorism during the preceding six-month period and the provision by the DPRK of assurances that it would not support acts of international terrorism in the future.

Four Japanese Red Army members who participated in a 1970 jet hijacking continued to live in the DPRK. The Japanese government continued to seek a full accounting of the fate of 12 Japanese nationals believed to have been abducted by DPRK state entities in the 1970s and 1980s. As of the end of December 2013, the DPRK had yet to fulfill its commitment to reopen its investigation into the abductions.

Legislation, Law Enforcement, and Border Security: In May, the United States re-certified North Korea as a country “not cooperating fully” with U.S. counterterrorism efforts pursuant to Section 40A of the Arms Export and Control Act, as amended. In making this annual determination, the Department of State reviewed the DPRK’s overall level of cooperation with U.S. efforts to combat terrorism, taking into account U.S. counterterrorism objectives with the DPRK and a realistic assessment of DPRK capabilities.

Countering the Financing of Terrorism: The DPRK is not a member of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) or the Asia-Pacific Group (APG) on Money Laundering, a FATF-style regional body. North Korea engaged both the FATF and the APG throughout the year and applied to join the latter as an observer, although its application was ultimately unsuccessful. In addition, the DPRK failed to demonstrate meaningful progress in strengthening its anti-money laundering/combating the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) infrastructure, its accession to the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism in July notwithstanding. Although the FATF welcomed DPRK’s engagement, it highlighted a continuing concern about North Korea’s “failure to address the significant deficiencies in its [AML/CFT] regime,” noting the “serious threat this poses to the integrity of the international financial system.” At each of its plenary meetings throughout the year, the FATF renewed its call on members to “apply effective countermeasures to protect their financial sectors” from the “ongoing and substantial [AML/CFT]…risks” posed by the DPRK. For further information on money laundering and financial crimes, see the 2014 International Narcotics Control Strategy Report (INCSR), Volume 2, Money Laundering and Financial Crimes: http://www.state.gov/j/inl/rls/nrcrpt/index.htm.

With this attack, I'd anticipate calls to re-designate North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism.

# ? Dec 18, 2014 03:29

Accretionist: Nov 7, 2012; I BELIEVE IN STUPID CONSPIRACY THEORIES

Joementum posted:

Mitt Romney is on Seth Rogen's side.

If only he were this copacetic during the campaign.

# ? Dec 18, 2014 03:39

Fried Chicken: Jan 9, 2011; Don't fry me, I'm no chicken!

My Imaginary GF posted:

http://www.cfr.org/state-sponsors-of-terrorism/state-sponsors-north-korea/p9364

http://www.cfr.org/north-korea/why-should-united-states-pay-attention-impoverished-economically-devastated-north-korea/p30684

http://m.state.gov/md224821.htm

With this attack, I'd anticipate calls to re-designate North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism.

My Imaginary GF posted:

http://www.cfr.org/state-sponsors-of-terrorism/state-sponsors-north-korea/p9364

http://www.cfr.org/north-korea/why-should-united-states-pay-attention-impoverished-economically-devastated-north-korea/p30684

http://m.state.gov/md224821.htm

With this attack, I'd anticipate calls to re-designate North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism.

Hezbollah is Lebanon, Hamas is Palestine. Neither are Syria.

North Korea sells to the heroin traffickers in Central Asia and cocaine cartels in South and Central America (and largely sells counterfeit American currency, lol at CFR claiming they are selling uranium, that's probably as accurate as the last time they accused a ME country of having wmds). They buy weapons and expertise from Pakistan.

Iran sells illegal oil and uses it to arm Hezbollah and Hamas.

Again, get a map.

# ? Dec 18, 2014 03:46

Istvun: Apr 20, 2007; A better world is just $69.69 away.; Soiled Meat

CommieGIR posted:

Its a closed loop system, unless there is a leak (which is a problem, as sodium is flammable), you should never have to deal with contaminated sodium outside of the primary cooling loop. Even if the primary cooling loop loses all coolant, the reaction stops, whereas in the BWR you have a core overheat and possible meltdown on your hands.

Kinda like water coming out of the BWR, while the water might be SLIGHTLY radioactive from contacting the primary cooling loop, its nowhere near the contamination of the primary cooling loop water.

Also: loss of primary cooling loop results in the reaction stopping. Either through loss of the coolant through a leak due to whatever happened, or if the reactor overheats, the freeze plug melts and dumps the sodium into tanks. The Thorium must also remain heated in order to remain liquid as thorium fluoride is almost entire meltdown proof.

My big concern about that's been the pipe to the drain tanks getting blocked because of an earthquake or maintenance issues. Though I haven't really studied them too hard.

# ? Dec 18, 2014 03:50

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Istvun posted:

My big concern about that's been the pipe to the drain tanks getting blocked because of an earthquake or maintenance issues. Though I haven't really studied them too hard.

Could be solved by multi point freeze valves and tanks, naturally.

# ? Dec 18, 2014 03:54

sullat: Jan 9, 2012

CommieGIR posted:

Its a closed loop system, unless there is a leak (which is a problem, as sodium is flammable), you should never have to deal with contaminated sodium outside of the primary cooling loop. Even if the primary cooling loop loses all coolant, the reaction stops, whereas in the BWR you have a core overheat and possible meltdown on your hands.

Kinda like water coming out of the BWR, while the water might be SLIGHTLY radioactive from contacting the primary cooling loop, its nowhere near the contamination of the primary cooling loop water.

Also: loss of primary cooling loop results in the reaction stopping. Either through loss of the coolant through a leak due to whatever happened, or if the reactor overheats, the freeze plug melts and dumps the sodium into tanks. The Thorium must also remain heated in order to remain liquid as thorium fluoride is almost entire meltdown proof.

Well, the primary cooling sodium is still contaminated, right? Yeah, if its designed right the secondary coolant is gonna be fine, but eventually you're going to have to do something with the primary stuff, right? And if there is an incident and it all solidifies, you're going to have a bunch of solid contaminant to deal with. Which is probably a lot easier than liquid, now that I think about it.

# ? Dec 18, 2014 04:11

GWBBQ: Jan 2, 2005

Buckwheat Sings posted:

What's funny is that the FBI doesn't even think it's NK behind it.
http://www.wired.com/2014/12/north-korea-did-not-hack-sony-probs/

I'm relieved to read this because I've been feeling like a conspiracy theorist for the past few days feeling completely unconvinced that North Korea had anything to do with it.

# ? Dec 18, 2014 04:26

esto es malo: Aug 3, 2006; Don't want to end up a cartoon

In a cartoon graveyard

I guess people are reporting that NK "ordered" someone else to do it, not that they actually did it themselves.

# ? Dec 18, 2014 04:28

FlamingLiberal: Jan 18, 2009; Would you like to play a game?

This news got buried with all of the stuff going on today, but single-payer healthcare in Vermont is dead.

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/news/local/2014/12/17/shumlin-right-time-single-payer/20547557/?from=global&sessionKey=&autologin=

# ? Dec 18, 2014 04:42

Dr. Faustus: Feb 18, 2001; Grimey Drawer

zoux posted:

I know that's the joke we tell but c'mon, that's way too simplistic.

My anecdote for the day:
The Tea Bagger Fundie Xtian (Protestant) bigot Nazi-lover that I work and debate with took this announcement completely in stride. Didn't bat an eye. He basically said, "Good. It was a stupid policy anyway. What the law couldn't do, US Corps will!"

No clarification of what that means, I didn't ask.

# ? Dec 18, 2014 04:43

computer parts: Nov 18, 2010; PLEASE CLAP

FlamingLiberal posted:

This news got buried with all of the stuff going on today, but single-payer healthcare in Vermont is dead.

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/news/local/2014/12/17/shumlin-right-time-single-payer/20547557/?from=global&sessionKey=&autologin=

Is the problem one of scale? As in, if California did a single payer system, would it be cheaper per person or are fixed costs actually low?

# ? Dec 18, 2014 04:46

Joementum: May 23, 2004; jesus christ

FlamingLiberal posted:

This news got buried with all of the stuff going on today, but single-payer healthcare in Vermont is dead.

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/news/local/2014/12/17/shumlin-right-time-single-payer/20547557/?from=global&sessionKey=&autologin=

Realistically this was always a big reach for a small state, but :rip:

this sucks and I'll be having strong words with anyone I know who didn't turn out last November and triggered this.

# ? Dec 18, 2014 04:47

Joementum: May 23, 2004; jesus christ

computer parts posted:

Is the problem one of scale? As in, if California did a single payer system, would it be cheaper per person or are fixed costs actually low?

Vermont has one of the lowest GDPs in the US, so this isn't entirely surprising and California could probably make a better system of it if it tried. Obviously, a national system is the correct solution to this issue.

# ? Dec 18, 2014 04:50

FAUXTON: Jun 2, 2005; spero che tu stia bene

Oh my god this picture of Cruz:

# ? Dec 18, 2014 04:50

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

FAUXTON posted:

Oh my god this picture of Cruz:

You gonna cry? One two three cry Teddy cry!

# ? Dec 18, 2014 04:51

Nintendo Kid: Aug 4, 2011; by Smythe

Chard posted:

You called corn sustainable dude.

How high are you that you think it isn't? Serious question.

# ? Dec 18, 2014 04:54

Spaceman Future!: Feb 9, 2007

FAUXTON posted:

Oh my god this picture of Cruz:

This is every picture of Cruz, he has resting whineface.

# ? Dec 18, 2014 04:54

zoux: Apr 28, 2006

FAUXTON posted:

Oh my god this picture of Cruz:

He's looking kinda gaunt.

# ? Dec 18, 2014 04:54

Spaceman Future!: Feb 9, 2007

Nintendo Kid posted:

How high are you that you think it isn't? Serious question.

Nitrates are going to be a thing, corn is not long term sustainable.

# ? Dec 18, 2014 04:55

FlamingLiberal: Jan 18, 2009; Would you like to play a game?

computer parts posted:

Is the problem one of scale? As in, if California did a single payer system, would it be cheaper per person or are fixed costs actually low?

Yeah I think it's too costly to just do in a small state like Vermont, unfortunately.

# ? Dec 18, 2014 04:56

Nintendo Kid: Aug 4, 2011; by Smythe

Spaceman Future! posted:

Nitrates are going to be a thing, corn is not long term sustainable.

Corn absolutely is. You have to literally know nothing about farming to think otherwise.

It's not some sort of bizarre crop with hyper-specific needs.

# ? Dec 18, 2014 05:05

Venom Snake: Feb 19, 2014; by Nyc_Tattoo

FAUXTON posted:

Oh my god this picture of Cruz:

this is the face of a man who knows his entire party hates him.

# ? Dec 18, 2014 05:16

Rexicon1: Oct 9, 2007; A Shameful Path Led You Here

Nintendo Kid posted:

Corn absolutely is. You have to literally know nothing about farming to think otherwise.

It's not some sort of bizarre crop with hyper-specific needs.

I kinda wanna see some evidence that corn is or is not sustainable as a crop bc this is the first time I've heard this argument and neither of you presented any evidence.

# ? Dec 18, 2014 05:19

Nintendo Kid: Aug 4, 2011; by Smythe

Rexicon1 posted:

I kinda wanna see some evidence that corn is or is not sustainable as a crop bc this is the first time I've heard this argument and neither of you presented any evidence.

My evidence: it's literally been grown for hundreds of years in its current form in many areas that still grow it today, and does not appear to require any special treatment that other staple crops don't.

# ? Dec 18, 2014 05:23

Spaceman Future!: Feb 9, 2007

Nintendo Kid posted:

My evidence: it's literally been grown for hundreds of years in its current form in many areas that still grow it today, and does not appear to require any special treatment that other staple crops don't.

This is where you tell us your magical unending source of Phosphorus, is it your posting?

# ? Dec 18, 2014 05:28

My Imaginary GF: Jul 17, 2005; by R. Guyovich

Rexicon1 posted:

I kinda wanna see some evidence that corn is or is not sustainable as a crop bc this is the first time I've heard this argument and neither of you presented any evidence.

http://www.ceres.org/resources/repo...-sustainability

Read all about it. Corn farming is essential to 16 economic sectors, with the 2013 revenue of the top 45 corporations in the corn value chain earning $1.7 trillion in revenue. Its a drat fine base to generate institutional development.

Corn is loving sustainable as poo poo. Increase the efficiency of the corn value chain and decrease significant CO2 emissions. If corn ain't a sustainable crop, ain't none that is.

Spaceman Future! posted:

This is where you tell us your magical unending source of Phosphorus, is it your posting?

Its covered in the report I posted. Corn is one of, if not the, most sustainable crops. Efficiency may be improved with the proper incentives, and there have been.

My Imaginary GF fucked around with this message at 05:32 on Dec 18, 2014

# ? Dec 18, 2014 05:30

Brannock: Feb 9, 2006; by exmarx; Fallen Rib

Nintendo Kid posted:

How high are you that you think it isn't? Serious question.

Incredible top tier post by fishmech. Insinuate that the other person is insane while holding up your own based on specious evidence.

# ? Dec 18, 2014 05:33

Nintendo Kid: Aug 4, 2011; by Smythe

Spaceman Future! posted:

This is where you tell us your magical unending source of Phosphorus, is it your posting?

By that standard no crop is sustainable, aka your definition of sustainable is useless.

# ? Dec 18, 2014 05:35

Spaceman Future!: Feb 9, 2007

Nintendo Kid posted:

By that standard no crop is sustainable, aka your definition of sustainable is useless.

So your gripe is that unsustainable agriculture is unsustainable, and thus inconvenient, and therefore we need to change textbook definitions to suit your false statement? Hahah, did you just think that population levels and crop levels could just go on indefinitely and you could classify them as "sustainable" despite them having a dangerously limited shelf life under the current practices? Wow. Woooooooow.

# ? Dec 18, 2014 05:40

computer parts: Nov 18, 2010; PLEASE CLAP

Spaceman Future! posted:

So your gripe is that unsustainable agriculture is unsustainable, and thus inconvenient, and therefore we need to change textbook definitions to suit your false statement? Hahah, did you just think that population levels and crop levels could just go on indefinitely and you could classify them as "sustainable" despite them having a dangerously limited shelf life under the current practices? Wow. Woooooooow.

Is it Malthusian time? I forgot my hat.

# ? Dec 18, 2014 05:41

Homura and Sickle: Apr 21, 2013

Okay, but Phosphorus is not a renewable resource and is a vital component in corn production since the Green Revolution. Our current methods of agriculture result in approximately only 20% of the phosphorus in fertilizer actually winding up in the plants and a lot of phosphorus is lost elsewhere in the cycle. There are concerns that we'll hit "peak P" around 2030, after which it will be more difficult to meet global agricultural demands. Saying "we've been corn farmin fer hundreds of years" does not really address that we have only been farming corn the way that we do for less than a century.

# ? Dec 18, 2014 05:41

Nintendo Kid: Aug 4, 2011; by Smythe

Spaceman Future! posted:

So your gripe is that unsustainable agriculture is unsustainable

By your definition literally no agriculture is sustainable.

Jagchosis posted:

Okay, but Phosphorus is not a renewable resource and is a vital component in corn production since the Green Revolution.

That has nothing to do with corn being sustainable. It's like saying cities are unsustainable because Phoenix and Venice exist.

# ? Dec 18, 2014 05:45

Rexicon1: Oct 9, 2007; A Shameful Path Led You Here

My Imaginary GF posted:

http://www.ceres.org/resources/repo...-sustainability

Read all about it. Corn farming is essential to 16 economic sectors, with the 2013 revenue of the top 45 corporations in the corn value chain earning $1.7 trillion in revenue. Its a drat fine base to generate institutional development.

Corn is loving sustainable as poo poo. Increase the efficiency of the corn value chain and decrease significant CO2 emissions. If corn ain't a sustainable crop, ain't none that is.

Its covered in the report I posted. Corn is one of, if not the, most sustainable crops. Efficiency may be improved with the proper incentives, and there have been.

I'm not sure if I missed the joke, but several times in that Ceres report, they mentioned that corn has a very high water and fertilizer demand and that farmers will forego crop rotation with soybean in order to meet more demand and cause once fertile land to go fallow.

# ? Dec 18, 2014 05:45

Doctor Butts: May 21, 2002

And all the phosphorus gets into lakes and causes algae blooms.

# ? Dec 18, 2014 05:45

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 2, 2024 09:23

My Imaginary GF: Jul 17, 2005; by R. Guyovich

Jagchosis posted:

Okay, but Phosphorus is not a renewable resource and is a vital component in corn production since the Green Revolution. Our current methods of agriculture result in approximately only 20% of the phosphorus in fertilizer actually winding up in the plants and a lot of phosphorus is lost elsewhere in the cycle. There are concerns that we'll hit "peak P" around 2030, after which it will be more difficult to meet global agricultural demands. Saying "we've been corn farmin fer hundreds of years" does not really address that we have only been farming corn the way that we do for less than a century.

That sounds a lot like "peak oil." The more input prices rise, the greater the incentive to maximize input efficiency.

How the gently caress is that unsustainable? If corn ain't sustainable, no crop is.

Rexicon1 posted:

I'm not sure if I missed the joke, but several times in that Ceres report, they mentioned that corn has a very high water and fertilizer demand and that farmers will forego crop rotation with soybean in order to meet more demand and cause once fertile land to go fallow.

Page 45, Exhibit 4.2

My Imaginary GF fucked around with this message at 05:50 on Dec 18, 2014

# ? Dec 18, 2014 05:46

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > US Politics December: Ferguson Explains It All

«‹›173 »