dieseltaylor

Is there a fundamental problem now in the US that the two parties and their supporters are locked into a vicious fight. Either side will do anything to get their hands on the levers of power and vilifying fellow Americans is now embedded practice. I realy have a problem on seeing the US become more accepting/moderate from here on in. Short of being attacked by another power. And why would anyone bother?

It is hard for us outside of the US to understand the level of political "debate" that goes on there. I browse quite a lot of American sites and it is rather disturbing, to say the least, as to what is written and the general polarisation of the country. This might be a little misleading as obviously the huge majority of Americans do not write on the Net. However bearing in mind Fox's viewing figures and the quality of information and it does reinforce the idea of warring sides. There are two things for sure : Two party systems are likely to lead to polarisation The "people" know they have been stiffed by Wall St. and the politicians I have a certain degree of sympathy for the original Tea Party however it has been subsumed by the Republicans. It is easy when "Your either for us or against us." is the gut reaction of a lot of Americans. I always find it vaguely depressing that the US constitution borrowed so heavily from the Roman Republic.

ArgusEye, I have the greatest respect for what you are attempting. 1. However if look at this from my possibly jaundiced view you have been around for two years with 81 posts so whilst you are the lynchpin you are also the person with a short track record. Your staying power is relevant. I did suggest previously that you may be better served by joining one of the clubs where a deputy might step into the breach if you were overtaken by RL. 2. I think that you are appealing to a very limited market if you are going into this detail. And perhaps revealingly you seem to ignore the despatch-rider, and the use of existing telephone lines - as used by the French in 1940. Perhaps a viable solution is to arrange for several players per side to hold, or attack a front and your role is to release the forces/reinforcement/artillery assets at the direction of the Commander as he assesses the verbal/written reports he is given. In detail: Say five maps. The attacking CO will always have copies of each map but will only ever be able to plot what is reported to him - never borg-spot actual active maps. He will allocate his forces in line with the overall plan. Reserves will be positioned as desired. However to make things easy all maps will have the reinforcements on a strip at the back of the board so if the CO orders them into action the GM will advise how long they will take to reach the actual battlefield. That is if the reserve is central it will be X+ or - turns to be released to a flanking map. FOO's can be active on all boards but will only be allowed to to use higher level artillery when authorised by the CO. The GM of course will be checking this for both sides - especially as all messages will be copied in to him. That is the rough outline. Given a 60 minute maximum possible the attacking CO will probably need to make commitments no later than 15 minutes in. This does mean the early assaults need to be pressed to assess the situation asap. Nowhere as complex but it does I think provide a flavour of higher command problems and with a good GM feeding information and calculating other effects it could go quite well. It could be made more realistic but I think if I were touting a higher level without too much complexity* this might be a starting point. ** Allocated airpoints for "bombing" bridges. If undefended by AA the attack gets through and an existing TRP on the bridge recieves a salvo of 152mm or 170mm artillery : )

Nice Speedy http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/30114 U boat Commander ww1 & the other side http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/29685 and a book covering many types of WW1 warfare with pictures http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/30047 Title: Submarine Warfare of To-day How the Submarine Menace was Met and Vanquished, With Descriptions of the Inventions and Devices Used, Fast Boats, Mystery Ships

Hillary Clinton's great-great uncle, Remus Rodham, was hanged for horsestealing and train robbery in Montana in 1889. The only known photographof Remus shows him standing on the gallows. On the back of the pictureis this inscription: "Remus Rodham; horse thief, sent to MontanaTerritorial Prison 1885, escaped 1887, robbed the Montana Flyer sixtimes, caught by Pinkerton Detectives, convicted and hanged in 1889. Judy Wallman, a professional genealogical researcher, e-mailed Hillary Clinton for comments. Hillary's staff ofProfessional image adjusters sent back the following biographicalsketch: Remus Rodham was a famous cowboy in the Montana Territory. His business empire grew to include acquisition of valuable equestrian assets and intimate dealings with the Montana railroad. Beginning in 1883, he devoted several years of his life to service at a government facility,finally taking leave to resume his dealings with the railroad. In 1887,he was a key player in a vital investigation run by the renowned Pinkerton Detective Agency. In 1889, Remus passed away during an important civic function held in his honor when the platform upon which he was standing collapsed. And THAT is how it's done when you're a politician, folks!

Sorry to be boring on a subject not really relevant to us forumites - but this is an very in depth survey of Fast food and insight into to the industry. Including a huge amount on modern marketing using sMS etc http://www.fastfoodmarketing.org/media/FastFoodFACTS_Report.pdf What sort of stood out for me more than the normal growth in FFeating was that in the last few decades most items introduced in ff outlets are 2 to 5 times bigger.!!!

I thought of Port Townsend : 0 Ox-Team Days on the Oregon Trail by Howard R. Driggs and Ezra Meeker Mr Meeker travelled out on the Oregon trial in the 1850's and back in 1922 so kind of interesting. http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/29543 More militarily interesting: http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/27244 this has lots of facts - once you get beyond the title. http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25075

I am always interested in why things turn out the way that they do. The recent implosion being a case in point. This item is illuminating as it looks at why, given identical lending, some banks have much higher problem rates:

Your right Moon that book is a little cracker with more action in it than most books. But then an anthology of the best bits should! : )

You could look at Osprey's "Into the Reich". Perhaps not tactical enough.

BD6 Your logic is irrefutable : ) The point being is the Fronts get larger as you advance into Russia and compact as you travel West. Therefore the supply requirements are diffused one way and concentrated the other. And much assisted by improved communications net going West.

http://www.alternet.org/story/149273/the_10_greediest_people_of_the_year?page=1 I beleive none of them is able to play CM!

Intelligence and BMW drivers : the survey

Notable people Lisa Maddix - UK X-Factor Finalist!!!

Any on-board artillery unit that has not moved is assumed to be pre-registered on all the TRP's. Foo's arriving after the start or mortars arriving subsequaently would not get the bonus.Therefore original non-moving can drop fire on those TRP whenever you wish. However switching fire from one TRP to another makes for a delay. If you play with your various Russian artillery modules you can see the delay on switching TRP's and also the fire per minute to calculate how long it might last fired continuously at one TRP or extend it by switching. Russian artillery tends to be slow to register new targets so TRP's are important. Also spotters can misdirect from non-TRP targets. Please search the forums for the lengthy detail on when your spotting round is right or wrong. : ) Its quite a big subject. BTW all-non-moving units from set-up with DF weapons and direct line of sight to a TRP are also deemed to be zeroed in on the TRP and will receive bonus accuracy when firing into that area. Archive search here will reveal tons of stuff, and experimenting on map by setting up a dummy game and playing both sides will reveal how troops react to shell-fire.

BP was paying Hayward an annual salary of £1,045,000; his 2008 bonus was £1,496,000 and in 2009 his bonus was £2,090,000.[15] Arse. Eight hours huh!

What it is actually called for the gurus is irrelevant as if they think I am going to hit two extra keys for them they can kiss my ... : ) So , typing wise I think CMBN works fine. And on the BF forums it would be stupid to do anyhting else.!!

I would agree thta successive administrations and Goverment bodies have all got their fingers in and the ineptness is breathtaking. To my mind there is little practical difference between the parties in how they allow business to write the agendas. This following piece shows how Wall Street helped matters along - hugely. It makes me squirm to see that the perpetrators of what is actually a fraud on shareholders are running free. And of course wealthy In litigious America how come no shareholder has sued the Board in their persoanl capacities ? Is it only now that the evidence is seeping out? Or should it be criminal charges - sure looks like it.

Your first expert is substantially demolished here and here: http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/06/25/john-carneys-bizarre-crusade-against-the-cra/ http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/kroszner20081203a.htm BTW I did agree that it had perhaps a minor role, and given the comments by the FederalReserve guy truly minor, however the major point about fraudulent sales and greed feeding greed as outlined in the long Wikipedia article were the main drivers. Perhaps you could give your views on what their responsibility for the crash was? BTW the central tenet of your piece is that the CRA drove down lending standards, I have worked for the three major banks so I am very au fait with lending and lending criterias. An institution does not have to lend and one of the Banks had a reputation for being a cautious lender. Others like the Scottish banks were incredibly lax and both went seriously tits-up. Cheap money feeding a lending frenzy. Like it has never happened before in banking history? That is what is so so annoying - it is basic history. How come nobody but nobody spilled the beans on this idiocy.

MSBoxer - well thats a load of crock. The extension of homeownership beyond those who could have afforded it under responsible criteria was not in itself a major cause of the bubble. That required chicanery with a vast number of pigs at the trough all eager not to let on what was going on as they got rich. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_crisis_of_2007%E2%80%932010 A prime cause was the relaxation of sensible deposit ratios for banking type operations, the ramping of lending based on falsely rated paper, criminality in forging applications to show high earnings , and AIG being completely stupid [or more probably individuals paid off to accept rubbish]. Anyway to show what nice guys they are see what BoA are doing now. You ask for the legal proof they own your mortgage and they cut your credit rating. And they hassle people who show they have been falsifying document signings. http://www.alternet.org/story/149302/as_bank_of_america_tries_to_strong-arm_consumers%2C_will_wikileaks_bring_it_to_its_knees?page=entire Does it not seem strange that if a Bank provides a mortgage, and you believe it may have been sold on, that you want to know who you are due to pay the money to? If they own the mortgage it should be perfectly simple to provide the evidence. If they have sold it on then should thye not be able to say to whom - and it should have been registered properly at the county office. ooops no that brings back to subverting the system whereby the Banks tried not to pay filing fees .. what was it say $30. What a ********* mess. And like nobody called foul? Or this is a broken system? What was going on in the US?

Great example.

A long but very interesting article on the introduction of a "pretend" mortgage company that allowed mortgage companies to avoid paying filing fees to counties, and facilitated the bundling of mortgages easily. If there was ever an example of why gritty systems are better than electronic slickness this is it. If after you read it you do not see that the old method was better/safer for the population whilst the new system was a tax dodge then you are naive. http://www.alternet.org/story/149189/dude%2C_where%27s_my_mortgage_how_an_obscure_outfit_called_mers_is_subverting_our_entire_system_of_property_rights?page=5 I have to admit to being shocked at the combined idiocy and greed rampant in the US mortgage industry. Perhaps because I also know that some companies trashed the paperwork giving title. It is gobsmackingly insane.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smedley_Butler Please note that Haliburton is definitely not included in Butler's list. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halliburton

http://armorama.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=SquawkBox&file=index&req=viewtopic&topic_id=151864&page=1 So perhaps not all M109 experience is equal. And several re-designs!

Clubs are important if you want a pool of reliable players. I have avoided the serious ladder clubs as I play for fun. Winning is nice but it is better to lose an exciting game than win a boring game. One thing that I had never really formalised was how many games I played and at times with CMBB I was playing eleven at once so it was nice to have a club were statistics were kept. So officially I have now played around 140 CMAK PBEM games since joining WeBoB! On eday I am going to go through my stock of older computers and count up my old games not recorded : )