If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   Russia comes to the defense of the Syrian government, says U.N. chemical report on the attacks is a bunch of hooey   (nytimes.com) divider line 65
    More: Interesting, Syrians, Russia, hooey, poison gas, Secretary of State John Kerry, Sergey V. Lavrov  
•       •       •

538 clicks; posted to Politics » on 18 Sep 2013 at 4:29 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



65 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-09-18 10:58:38 PM  

Crazy Lee: As regards trajectories, I have a PhD in physics and know a bit about the sorts of craters meteors make under different circumstances and I greatly doubt that you could calculate a missile trajectory with any reliability based on a hole in the ground.


Fortunately, they're basing it on more than just one hole in the ground. They have multiple holes to go off of. We know how a missile arcs. Tell me, is two points and a defined curve enough to determine a trajectory?
 
2013-09-18 11:03:12 PM  

cptjeff: Hint: The Russians are lying because it serves their strategic interests to keep the Assad regime in place.


What did the Russians lie about? I know the Russians wanna keep Assad and don't want the rebels to take control, and the US is fine with Israel having nukes because it serves their interest. Granted they haven't used them yet, but the US likes to talk about the region destabilizing effects of nuclear weapons when it comes to Iran.
 
2013-09-18 11:05:18 PM  
Oh, I'm done with this herp and derp it is.
 
2013-09-18 11:11:11 PM  

cptjeff: Crazy Lee: As regards trajectories, I have a PhD in physics and know a bit about the sorts of craters meteors make under different circumstances and I greatly doubt that you could calculate a missile trajectory with any reliability based on a hole in the ground.

Fortunately, they're basing it on more than just one hole in the ground. They have multiple holes to go off of. We know how a missile arcs. Tell me, is two points and a defined curve enough to determine a trajectory?


I was pointing out, to the original poster (not my quote), that he needs to review real world applications of his `specialty'... (see the links).
 
2013-09-18 11:13:19 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: cptjeff: Hint: The Russians are lying because it serves their strategic interests to keep the Assad regime in place.

What did the Russians lie about? I know the Russians wanna keep Assad and don't want the rebels to take control, and the US is fine with Israel having nukes because it serves their interest. Granted they haven't used them yet, but the US likes to talk about the region destabilizing effects of nuclear weapons when it comes to Iran.


Israel has nuclear weapons as a defensive deferent. Iran's stated mission is to destroy Isreal.

Which one of those country's positions is destabilizing?
 
2013-09-18 11:14:12 PM  

max_pooper: tinfoil-hat maggie: cptjeff: Hint: The Russians are lying because it serves their strategic interests to keep the Assad regime in place.

What did the Russians lie about? I know the Russians wanna keep Assad and don't want the rebels to take control, and the US is fine with Israel having nukes because it serves their interest. Granted they haven't used them yet, but the US likes to talk about the region destabilizing effects of nuclear weapons when it comes to Iran.

Israel has nuclear weapons as a defensive deferent. Iran's stated mission is to destroy Isreal.

Which one of those country's positions is destabilizing?


deterrent...
 
2013-09-18 11:26:36 PM  

Crazy Lee: cptjeff: Crazy Lee: As regards trajectories, I have a PhD in physics and know a bit about the sorts of craters meteors make under different circumstances and I greatly doubt that you could calculate a missile trajectory with any reliability based on a hole in the ground.

Fortunately, they're basing it on more than just one hole in the ground. They have multiple holes to go off of. We know how a missile arcs. Tell me, is two points and a defined curve enough to determine a trajectory?

I was pointing out, to the original poster (not my quote), that he needs to review real world applications of his `specialty'... (see the links).


Sorry, I thought it would pull him in on the quoting too. I just like to quote the most recent post in a discussion so that everyone involved gets the notification, not just one party.

tinfoil-hat maggie: cptjeff: Hint: The Russians are lying because it serves their strategic interests to keep the Assad regime in place.

What did the Russians lie about? I know the Russians wanna keep Assad and don't want the rebels to take control, and the US is fine with Israel having nukes because it serves their interest. Granted they haven't used them yet, but the US likes to talk about the region destabilizing effects of nuclear weapons when it comes to Iran.


They lied when they asserted that it's still an open question of whether the regime ordered the attacks. It's not. We have the evidence, both from public and non-public sources, both from UN data and US data. Russia almost certainly has the same intel, but, well, they're lying about it. Iran certainly knows it, and that's almost certainly why they're backing off of their support for Assad. See, Iran has a thing about chemical weapons, having been victims of some of the only CW attacks since WWI.

And I really don't see how Israel's nuclear capability comes into this, it's been an open secret for years. We're talking about Syria and the Assad regime's use of chemical weapons. Yes, our nuclear nonproliferation stance is hypocritical. What does that have to do with Syria and the fact that Assad gassed a largely civilian population?

It seems to me that a lot of people are grasping for any way to avoid admitting to themselves that a true atrocity has occurred. Because if you do admit to yourself that this actually happened, it gets really hard to reconcile opposition to an intervention to a belief in peace and human rights. It strikes me that the crowd most vocal about not intervention in Syria is comprised of many of the same people that were raising holy hell about the fact that the US was doing nothing in Darfur. Or Somalia. You want hypocrisy? Forget about the US stance towards Israel's nuclear policy and look in a mirror.
 
2013-09-19 12:07:34 AM  

cptjeff: They lied when they asserted that it's still an open question of whether the regime ordered the attacks. It's not. We have the evidence, both from public and non-public sources, both from UN data and US data.


Oh captain my captain have you seen the US data you like to talk about? That was the link I was asking for not news reports that it exist somewhere. I'll leave it at that and I'm not responding anymore for tonight.

max_pooper: Israel has nuclear weapons as a defensive deferent. Iran's stated mission is to destroy Isreal.

Which one of those country's positions is destabilizing?


All a mater of perspective isn't it.
/Again I really am done with this thread the Nationalism is a bit thick here..
 
2013-09-19 12:12:54 AM  

sparkeyjames: I see Enemy of the state has decided to play devils advocate. Hmmm Popcorn sounds about right for this.


Funny, I just decided to play "Punt the troll" at the same him he did that.
 
2013-09-19 01:20:51 AM  

RexTalionis: The UN report on the August 21st chemical weapons attacks are, by the terms negotiated by the Syrian government as a precondition for allowing UN inspectors into the country, not allowed to assign blame to either Syria or the rebels.


Wait, what?
 
2013-09-19 06:34:08 AM  

Pichu0102: RexTalionis: The UN report on the August 21st chemical weapons attacks are, by the terms negotiated by the Syrian government as a precondition for allowing UN inspectors into the country, not allowed to assign blame to either Syria or the rebels.

Wait, what?


Probably so the report wouldn't say "We cant tell you who did it, but it was definitely  notthe rebels."
 
2013-09-19 09:20:17 AM  
It's funny cuz in Russian, the word "hooey" means penis
 
2013-09-19 11:17:18 AM  

Crazy Lee: enemy of the state: cptjeff: enemy of the state: 3) I've heard or seen no information of any sort that proves the Syrian government did it. Too be fair, that's true of the rebels. Apparently we're supposed to act on faith either way.

The missiles were consistent with those used in regime attacks, and were launched from regime controlled areas. Oh, and the chemical weapons are probably the most heavily secured assets in the Syrian government's arsenal. Not to mention the wire intercepts, the fact that rebels were killed... Do you really think the rebels would kill their own children and aid workers for some vague hope of US aid? On what planet does that happen? Not to mention that if the rebels wound up with Chemical weapons, don't you think Al Qaeda or Hezbollah, which would almost certainly wind up in control of them, if just by virtue of their technical capability, would find better uses for them than gassing their own people?

If you think that there's any chance the rebels were the ones who launched the chemical weapons attack, you're either a moron or Russia. I'm sorry, but there is no remotely plausible scenario where that happens. It's on the level of the lizard people arranging the JFK assassination with Bigfoot being the second shooter.

I haven't seen any information about missiles. It sounds like heresay to me, after the fact. It could be true, of course. But it sure hasn't had a high profile in the news. Are there any reliable Western journalists in that part of the country who know enough to say what kind of missiles they were?

As regards trajectories, I have a PhD in physics and know a bit about the sorts of craters meteors make under different circumstances and I greatly doubt that you could calculate a missile trajectory with any reliability based on a hole in the ground.

I'm sure that Syrian soldiers could be bribed, or killed, or just going over to the rebels' side. I just don't see rebels getting hold of sarin or even small missiles as a big st ...


Thanks for the reference from globalsecurity on trajectories. Note that per the article there are dozen of variables that have to be known to come up with a guess as to a howitzer's trajectory. If you have have *all* the information, you can figure out just about anything, of course. Without *all* the information then any number of trajectories work.

I'm not saying the Syrian government did or didn't do the attacks. I'm saying that even with the NYT articles cited here on fark and information elsewhere, there still seems to be nothing absolutely conclusive. People say they have good evidence, but they're not showing it. Pardon me if I'm a bit skeptical at this point.

Before beginning yet another war which has no possible good outcome for the US, it would be nice to at least have something rock solid to go on.  That just doesn't seem to be the case at this point in time. That's what I'm saying.

/I'm an idiot to post anything on fark.
 
2013-09-19 12:03:57 PM  

CryoMax: student loan looks frugal


OK, look at the moon. See how all the craters are circular? Do you think every meteor that hits the moon goes in straight down?

In most cases, a projectile will make a circular crater, regardless of the angle it comes in at, especially if it explodes. No, we're not talking about a bullet going through a block of wood here which is obviously a different case.

Calculating a trajectory from a crater is an example of a very bad inversion problem, which are invariably ill-conditioned from a computational standpoint.

I didn't have student loans for my PhD, I had $200K in research grants from NASA. And no, the money wasn't wasted.
 
2013-09-19 03:15:59 PM  

enemy of the state: CryoMax: student loan looks frugal

OK, look at the moon. See how all the craters are circular? Do you think every meteor that hits the moon goes in straight down?

In most cases, a projectile will make a circular crater, regardless of the angle it comes in at, especially if it explodes. No, we're not talking about a bullet going through a block of wood here which is obviously a different case.

Calculating a trajectory from a crater is an example of a very bad inversion problem, which are invariably ill-conditioned from a computational standpoint.

I didn't have student loans for my PhD, I had $200K in research grants from NASA. And no, the money wasn't wasted.


I bet you got a lot of it paid for by the marine core.
 
Displayed 15 of 65 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report