BDBGoalie

Removing Saddam was not necessarally a terrible thing. Eliminating the Baathist (sp?) party was a very poor decisions and left the country without a way to effectively maintain control. Eliminating the army just left a bunch of Iraqis anrgy, without work, and with weapons... If the process of effective nation building had actually been executed Iraq may have turned into a functioning country. Unlikely, but maybe.

ISIS is a nasty group of militants that have learned exactly how to use terror, crime, and intimidation to force all around them to join them or die. I agree that they need to be eliminated, but I don't think US troops need to be on the ground again (Other than SOCOM and black). This group is not under the Geneva convention, or any other real set of rules.

If we are going to remove this group, we need to do it the right way: Low yeild tactical nuclear weapons. They have done us a favor by removing anyone not friendly to their cause from anywhere they are, so we don't even have to worry about RoE and collateral damage. Liquify 30,000 terrorists and their supporters, specfically targeting a major CnC region, and you eliminate a major leadership resource. A juicy secondary target would be logistics and supply locations. The key thing is no hesitation. We go all in: no warnings and no pussyfooting around. We send a message that we (The US) is done tolerating this, the gloves are off, and we will kill you and everyone around you.

At the same time we coordinate strikes from Kurdish and Iraqi forces to swing in after the detonation and eliminate any survivors with no quarter. Should get most of them, and the rest should scatter or be significatly weakened.

Militant and muslim groups might hate us more for it, but who cares? We will have eliminated a threat in a quick and effective manner with minimal friendly casualties, all while broadcasting a nice deterrance message. We also will have regained control of the oil regions, which is always economically beneficial.

Our allies will bitch and moan about the use of nuclear arms, but that is all they will do. No nation really has the balls to attack anyone else anymore over something that isn't directly threatening them. So let's go wave our dick around again, but without getting troops killed/wounded this time.

Oh yea, some infrastructure and policital building needs to happen afterwords, which we should monitor, but if we do it all for them, it all will fall apart as soon as we turn control over...

I've been down plenty, on the track and on the street. All were a result of my pushing the limits of the situation or not adaquately reading the situation and adjusting for it. Most were lowsides, and I don't try and save the bike in those situations. If it's gone I let it go because its just money and major injuries aren't worth getting tossed trying to save it. I've had two highsides, one slower speed caused by morons in the riding group and one because I got cut off on the freeway and the guy slapped his brakes.

I think one of the most important things is to get back on a bike quickly. The longer you wait the more time the fear will set in and be an obstacle for you. However, if you hop back in the saddle while still focused on the fear of making the same mistake you likely will make the same mistake or another because you are not comfortable and focused on errors rather than riding. So it is a two-headed coin, and you shouldn't try and go full bore right away again.

All of my accidents were avoidable IMO and I think learned something from each of them.

• I accept that riding may involve crashing.
• I accept that others may hit me or cause me to crash and that is out of my control. I can mitigate a lot but the danger is still out there.
• I wear all my gear every time. I've crash tested most of it and I have confidence in it's damage mitigation abilities.
• I ride with a large safety bubble and always have my head on a swivel.
• My focus is always on riding and what is around me. I never ride with music.
• I avoid riding with people I don't know. If I can't avoid it I try and ride trail.
• I respect the warm up time of cold tires and the limitations of cold weather riding.
• I can't take roundabouts at race pace. Kneedragging on the street is bad.
• I always expect and plan for people to do the worst in every situation.
• Whenever someone new starts riding I drag them to the MSF course. If nothing else it is a good refresher for me and keeps them alive longer.
• I minimize stupid things on public roads. No endangering others for the sake of my fun.

Yes

When I make that turn I don't go if ppl are in front of me. But I'm safety conscience. I'd put the car at minor fault.

The bikes speed, choice of time to accelerate, and the inability to stop because of the wheelie puts him mainly at fault IMO.

Biker was turning from Sawmill headed east on Federated in the right lane.

Car was heading west on Federated turning left into the shopping center South of Federated right before Sawmill.

My POV was from the side but behind the rider. Bike was screened by another vehicle that turned just before him in the left lane. Bike was into a wheelie before he cleared the screen. The headlight was in the air before the bike would've been in sight so the car may have never really seen him before impact.

Person that turned could have been tight, but was likely clear. Bike ran into him because he picked it up and accelerated on the rear wheel at the same time the car had started turning. Bike couldn't even have slowed down cause he was on the rear.

Been a while since i posted anything but tonight makes me feel the need to do so

Walked out of work tonight just in time to watch someone on a sport bike pop up the front end heading East on Federated from Sawmill. Popped it up immediately after turning and accelerated hard on the rear wheel right into a car turning left. Impact was likely 50 mph - 70 mph directly into the front quarter.

I was first responder and didn't pay attention to the bike, but it looked to be a white 600. Rider was pretty rough off. I did what I could in the situation, but as soon as the EMS arrived and I gave a sit rep I cleared out.

He was helmeted with light gloves but that was about it. Hopefully he makes it through and heals up.

Just a reminder to make good choices and be careful out there.

I shoot at Briar Rabbit as well. Great range and good people. Indivdual pistol bays are wonderful for real shooting.

As VF already said, the rifle range is a bit of a mud pit atm, but that'll change.

Update on my eariler comments:

I sent my SOG Aegis and my SOG Powerlock back to SOG for warranty repairs (I destroyed the spring assist in the Aegis with sand from overseas, and broke off one of the plier tips) before my AK trip this past summer. I mailed both items to them on a Thursday and they were back, returned to like new condition, in one week. No charge other than shipping to them. Awesome service.

I also picked up an ESEE 3 Mil-Spec and an ESEE Izula for the AK trip. I never really used the Izula (The SOG was just more convienent), but the 3 was a wonderful camping tool. Perfect size and durable as hell. Only downside to them is you have to oil the blades and the cost.

Sign me up. Gotta shoot it at least once

I got into 1911's recently and it is an addiction. They are the most beautiful pistol hands down, and the trigger and egros can't be beat. Completely customizable as well.

Only downside is the cost and fitting parts. Never go any shorter than a 4" barrel, keep it in .45ACP, and clean it and it will never give you problems.

As far as cost, you get what you pay for.  Most of the time in the more expensive pistols you're paying for better parts or features (Checkered MSH/Front strap, different cocking serations/carry cuts, etc.) Something to consider is the sights it comes with. If it has adjustable sights, you will always have to keep that style (Slide is modified to fit them). Same goes for Novak or GI. You can always change things you don't like, just more parts on a 1911 require fitting (Drop-in parts really don't exist for 1911s).

Manufacturer is pretty important IMO. Custom Shops, Springfield, Ruger, Remington all good stuff. I haven't seen anything come from Kimber recently that would make me want to buy one...

If you'd like to shoot a few this weekend I've got an AW2 event at Briar Rabbit on Saturday and I'll have mine with me.

Fucking awesome. This way if you pop a dead guy it still has afterlife effects. Its a win-win!

I've been thinking about getting another rifle and even though I've been hankering for an M1A for quite awhile the idea of getting an AR based .308 is still of interest.

 

Case in point, the Sig Sauer R716 Patrol Rifle - anyone have one or know of someone who has one with good feedback?

What kind of shooting you looking to do with the rifle?

If it is just fun, paper punching, or anything that doesn't require rapid fire, I'd lean towards a 700 chambered in .308 (Or other .30 Cal options. .30-06, 300 WM...)

A Savage 10 chambered in 7.62x39 is a cheaper ammo alternative as well.

Bolt rifles are fun too.

In semi there is lots of options.

i find that shooting a flare gun into the space between the windshield and hood usually gets their attention.

 Why not side mounted shotguns with beanbags loaded?

.39/round vs .24/round for the current going price. Even with the $25 can (.36/round) that is still rough.

http://wideners.com/itemdetail.cfm?item_id=6884&dir=18|830|852

Not Putin, Kerry. I love how Kerry was trying to drum up support for this retarded intervention plan and instead managed to find an out for the whole thing.

Now lets see if everyone is willing to take it.

Yup. I've been tempted to get one of those telescoping batons to beat cars with if it wasn't illegal and I never get people merging on my left side (Hard to beat their car and hold the throttle)

My cousin is currently serving (in hawaii at the moment) and He's 100% for a full on invasion...

 

Are you an enlisted man? No, then why do YOU have an opinion?

Guess what? Your family member serving in no way excuses you from your obligation that you are ducking at any opportunity.

Plenty of us joined up when we had responsibilities and obligations here at home or with our family. Try another excuse.

They let you enlist at 17, and even in a deferred status if you are in High School. Try again.

You have no ground to stand on when talking about serving in the Military. You sign up and join the fight and you can talk all you want. Otherwise just remember the rest of us that raised our hands when you were to chickenshit to do so will always be better than you.

YOU asked me who was innocent... I answered

 

Then you missed a few steps in between...

1. Were chemical weapons used on these children? (seems pretty apparent now)

 

Media derived information. Children have been targets for this area of the world, and this style of warfare for years.

 

2. Who supplied these chemical weapons? (becoming clearer that it is syria)

 

Media derived information. Even if they did supply them, as long as they are not attacking Americans, it is not our problem. Less of both sides is a good thing.

 

3. Who used these chemical weapons? (becoming clearer that it is syria's government)

 

Media derived information. Again, as long as they are just killing each other and not us or our civilized allies, who cares?

 

4. Is the UN or Nato willing to do anything about it? (seems the answer is no)

 

Of course not. There is no endgame for the involvement. Once we get involved we have to stay until the fight is over and then rebuild the country. Both are expensive and not in the best interests of most of the nations in the UN/NATO.

 

5. Are we willing to accept that this country uses chemical weapons against it's citizens without any consequence whatsoever?

 

Yup. If they attack us with chemical weapons, we nuke them. Hard. Elsewise it is not our fight.

 

6. If yes, What message does THAT send?

 

The US is putting down the Sherriff badge when regarding countries that we don't have a vested interest in.

Don't kill us, and we won't kill you.

We don't want to spend a few hundred Billion dollars on saving Arabs.

We don't want to send our troops to fight your war.

Etc...

 

Take your pick.

They finally made this jackass shave. AR 670-1 > Religious beliefs.

http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2013/09/04/nidal-hasans-beard-shaved-off-at-fort-leavenworth-prison/?hpt=hp_t2

So to hell with the geneva convention and international law? Fuck innocent civilians?

In a nut shell?

Geneva convention was written for protection of soldiers and civillians in a conventional battlefield. Those wars don't exist anymore.

The rules are a good guideline, but it isn't as practical when part of the battle plans for today's wars is to de-legitimize the governing/invading force by any means necessary. Attacking aid workers, civilians, social structures, etc, and all in a manner that doesn't disclose who made the attack, but rather emphasizes that the government can't defend them. Everything is fair game to them.

Long story short - insurgents are willing and able to target civilians with whatever means necessary to accomplish their goals. They don't give a shit about rules.

So to hell with the geneva convention and international law? Fuck innocent civilians?

In a nut shell?

Yup. We can't fix this unless we engage enough to DESTROY BOTH agressive parties. No way they are willing to do that. And we shouldn't be doing that anyways.

It is not our fight. That area of the world will continue to kill each other until they grow out of their antiquated religion (Which isn't happening anytime soon). They are just finding more effective methods of killing each other now, and the media is telling you about every person that gets killed.

We won't change anything by intervening. If anything, we'll create a vaccum like Iraq and fuck the situation up even more. Then we're responsible for the clean up. Not to mention re-aggravating the entire radical muslim world and putting us back into the center of the crosshairs.

Okay...

 

How about an "Undecided" option?

 

cause that's where I'm at currently... I don't think that syria should get away with using chemical weapons, and if that is the case, then I think Someone should punish them...

 

If nobody else is going to do it, then we are going to have to. (assuming they actually did use chemical weapons)

No. Thats the kind of thinking that has been getting us into messes for the past few decades.

They don't want us there.

If we "assist" both side will seize the target of opportunity and attack us. They will continue to attack us once the conflict is over.

There is no endgame strategy set up, nor is there any endgame that will satisfy the region.

We don't have the finances to support another war.

We definately don't have the finances to single-handedly play world policeman.

The regime hates us and is allied with Iran/China/Russia. The rebels are extremists and muslims and they hate us too. Neither is a side I want to help in the slightest. Less of either of them is a good thing.

They are killing each other and seem quite happy about it. I say go ahead and let them keep going. Saves us millions in ordinance.

However, all Obama has succeeded in thusfar is making the US look even weaker and indececive than before. First rule of leadership: Make a decision and stick with it. Deterrant and power projection strategies won't work anymore because the other nations know we don't have the balls to back up what we say we are going to do.

Looking good.

Until those murdering our brothers and sisters are charged with murder, not manslaughter, sent to jail and forced to pay back the family 5 years of wages, this is going to continue.

It isn't murder. Murder (Or Voluntary Manslaughter) requires intent of some form or another. Involuntary Manslaughter is more than a slap on the wrist, but still a lighter charge.

Civil courts can handle the back pay and other damages fine if people are willing to file and fight for it.

Changing the laws won't fix anything. People ignore them anyways. Unless you can eliminate all people that don't put driving as their priority when on the road, the problem will always be there. That will likely never happen. Sadly most people only truely learn after a traumatic experience cements it in their brain.

Ride very defensively with a huge safety bubble and plan for people to try and run you over at every intersection. Defensive riding and looking forward are the best defense.

Another thing to consider is that most of the time stopping in a straight line will not avoid the collision, whereas a swerve will avoid or mitigate it.

RIP rider. My friend lives 100m from that intersection so glad it wasn't him.

I also ride thinking that everyone is out to kill me at every point they can. Also, if the person that cut me off/merged into me/attempted to run me over is sharing a stoplight with me shortly after the incident I take the time to scream at them. I figure if I can add a little trauma in the form of a Campaign Hat beratement to their day maybe they will remember to look next time.