She said the US doesn't know just what the Iranians want, and perhaps a diplomatic conference with Iran would lead to an exchange of views and we would learn what Iran wants. Right.
I got news for Hillary. You don't negotiate just for the fun of it. It's a horse trade, you give us this, we give you that, and it's gotta be a fair trade or both sides will welsh on the deal. If we don't know what the Iranians want, and how bad they want it, before sitting down with them, forget it.
Actually, we do know what the Iranians want, they want nukes, and they want them badly. With nukes they become regional hegemon, and they gain insurance against sudden regime change, the kind that happens should US tanks roll thru Tehran like they did thru Baghdad.
We are not happy with a nuclear Iran, and there is nothing the Iranians can do to make us happy, short of giving up their nuclear program, which they won't do, at least not voluntarily. Does not look like the basis of fruitful negotiations. In fact the Euro's have been having fruitless negotiations over this point for years. It has given Tehran more time to work on their nukes, but other than that, a wasted effort.
Sunday, June 7, 2009
Why Window Envelopes?
Every single bill comes with a return envelope, a window return envelope. Which means I gotta take a just a little bit of extra care to get the return slip right way round and in front of the check. Not the end of the world I suppose.
On the other hand, window envelopes ought to cost more than plain ones, if only a fraction of a cent. The only bennie to the billing company is the ability to change the address of the payment center without having to dump stocks of old pre printed envelopes. But how often does the phone company, the bank, or the electric company move a billing center?
On the other hand, window envelopes ought to cost more than plain ones, if only a fraction of a cent. The only bennie to the billing company is the ability to change the address of the payment center without having to dump stocks of old pre printed envelopes. But how often does the phone company, the bank, or the electric company move a billing center?
Saturday, June 6, 2009
Another US diplomat shows lack of cluefulness
"How to Deal with a Dictator" by Robert Joseph in the Wall St Journal. Author comes on strong for bearing down hard on North Korea, often referred to as the Kim Family Regime. He decries past US policy for first bearing down and then backing off. Then he gets around to one of the keys to the matter, Chinese support for North Korea.
"China must know there are costs and risks for not acting to end the North's nuclear programs. Some of those costs we can impose if we are willing to pay an economic price."
Right. Just what is the economic price to us for China dumping her $700 billion worth of T-bills on the international market? What cost can we impose on China greater those Great Depression II has already laid upon them? We have here an ex State Dept. weenie with no idea about economics, business, finance, and economic power. Like Thomas Jefferson's embargo against the British, which ruined American traders and helped the British by taking a competitor out of play. Before you pull the trigger, make sure the gun isn't pointed at your own feet. In actual fact the US lacks any means of pressuring China other than talking to them.
Robert Joseph completely ignores another key fact about the situation. North Korea is in such bad shape that the communist government may collapse at any moment. The only thing keeping the current government in power is the perception that the army will shoot North Korea civilians to maintain order, and keep the Kim family in power. Should that perception wane, all hell will break loose. A single platoon refusing to fire upon civilians might unleash chaos.
When the regime falls, a tidal wave of refugees will slosh into South Korea. China will be under great pressure to send troops to maintain order. So will South Korea. A second Korean war could be touched off by a single firefight between the People's Liberation Army and the South Korean army.
Only modest diplomatic and economic pressure on the Kim Family Regime might touch off the revolution. Robert Joseph doesn't discuss the existence or the solution to these problems at all. For the sake of the US I sincerely hope we have some more clueful diplomats, somewhere.
"China must know there are costs and risks for not acting to end the North's nuclear programs. Some of those costs we can impose if we are willing to pay an economic price."
Right. Just what is the economic price to us for China dumping her $700 billion worth of T-bills on the international market? What cost can we impose on China greater those Great Depression II has already laid upon them? We have here an ex State Dept. weenie with no idea about economics, business, finance, and economic power. Like Thomas Jefferson's embargo against the British, which ruined American traders and helped the British by taking a competitor out of play. Before you pull the trigger, make sure the gun isn't pointed at your own feet. In actual fact the US lacks any means of pressuring China other than talking to them.
Robert Joseph completely ignores another key fact about the situation. North Korea is in such bad shape that the communist government may collapse at any moment. The only thing keeping the current government in power is the perception that the army will shoot North Korea civilians to maintain order, and keep the Kim family in power. Should that perception wane, all hell will break loose. A single platoon refusing to fire upon civilians might unleash chaos.
When the regime falls, a tidal wave of refugees will slosh into South Korea. China will be under great pressure to send troops to maintain order. So will South Korea. A second Korean war could be touched off by a single firefight between the People's Liberation Army and the South Korean army.
Only modest diplomatic and economic pressure on the Kim Family Regime might touch off the revolution. Robert Joseph doesn't discuss the existence or the solution to these problems at all. For the sake of the US I sincerely hope we have some more clueful diplomats, somewhere.
Welfare for Lawyers
According to the Wall St Journal, Justice Dept. lawyers are deciding whether to bring charges of violating the 1994 Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act against Scott Roeder. State officials have already brought charges of first degree murder against Scott Roeder for the shooting of Dr. George Tiller, an abortion provider, killed while attending church on Sunday.
First degree murder is what was done, the penalties for same are very stiff. Why are we messing around bringing obscure charges under a forgotten act of Congress when plain first degree murder charges are highly appropriate?
First degree murder is what was done, the penalties for same are very stiff. Why are we messing around bringing obscure charges under a forgotten act of Congress when plain first degree murder charges are highly appropriate?
Friday, June 5, 2009
What does GM do with Bailout Money?
Lends it to private equity firms? My tax money, given to GM so they can lend it to someone else?
According to the Wall St Journal, GM is going to lend $2.5 billion dollars to Platinum Equity so it can buy bankrupt parts supplier Delphi. Platinum Equity only puts up $750 million of its own money, with us taxpayers, thru GM, supplying the rest???
Delphi is an important supplier to GM, and probably needs to stay afloat in order for GM to keep making cars.
But why offer a slice to this Platinum Equity run by Tom Gores? Why does Platinum have to come to GM for money as opposed to borrowing for a bank? Could Delphi be such a disaster that no bank will touch it with a ten foot pole? In which case, our tax money should not be poured down a drain.
If there is any chance of Delphi becoming profitable why does not GM buy the place outright. Why let this Platinum Equity profit at all. Buy it outright and keep any future profits.
Delphi is a UAW company, and used to be owned by GM. GM spun the thing off years ago, thinking to unload union health care and retirement liabilities. The newly independant Delphi never managed to get it's labor costs down enough to stay in business. It's been in bankruptcy for the last four years, hobbling along on loans from GM. Now that GM is flush with taxpayer bailout money it's doing something to keep Delphi going. But why cut this Platinum Equity into the deal? Platinum isn't bringing any money to the table.
How much money did Platinum or it's owner Tom Gores contribute to the Obama campaign?
According to the Wall St Journal, GM is going to lend $2.5 billion dollars to Platinum Equity so it can buy bankrupt parts supplier Delphi. Platinum Equity only puts up $750 million of its own money, with us taxpayers, thru GM, supplying the rest???
Delphi is an important supplier to GM, and probably needs to stay afloat in order for GM to keep making cars.
But why offer a slice to this Platinum Equity run by Tom Gores? Why does Platinum have to come to GM for money as opposed to borrowing for a bank? Could Delphi be such a disaster that no bank will touch it with a ten foot pole? In which case, our tax money should not be poured down a drain.
If there is any chance of Delphi becoming profitable why does not GM buy the place outright. Why let this Platinum Equity profit at all. Buy it outright and keep any future profits.
Delphi is a UAW company, and used to be owned by GM. GM spun the thing off years ago, thinking to unload union health care and retirement liabilities. The newly independant Delphi never managed to get it's labor costs down enough to stay in business. It's been in bankruptcy for the last four years, hobbling along on loans from GM. Now that GM is flush with taxpayer bailout money it's doing something to keep Delphi going. But why cut this Platinum Equity into the deal? Platinum isn't bringing any money to the table.
How much money did Platinum or it's owner Tom Gores contribute to the Obama campaign?
Nuclear Cluelessness
The TV announced the discovery of "Manmade Uranium" in the rubble of the Syrian reactor site bombed out by the Israeli Air Force three years ago. Clueless.
There are man made elements, but uranium isn't one of them. What the clueless newsie probably meant is enriched uranium. Natural uranium is mostly isotope U238 which is too stable to fission and be useful in power reactors or bombs. Only a tiny percentage (0.07%) of natural uranium is the fissionable isotope U235. It is possible to concentrate (enrich) uranium in the the fissionable U-235 isotope. Power reactors commonly run on uranium enriched to a few percent of U235. Nuclear weapons require enrichment to 90% and above. Uranium enriched to 90% or more is commonly called "weapons grade". The newsie didn't say if the enrichment was just a few percent or or weapons grade.
Enrichment to weapons grade is the hard part of making a uranium fission bomb.
Morale to the story. If its even slightly technical, expect the newsies to get it wrong.
There are man made elements, but uranium isn't one of them. What the clueless newsie probably meant is enriched uranium. Natural uranium is mostly isotope U238 which is too stable to fission and be useful in power reactors or bombs. Only a tiny percentage (0.07%) of natural uranium is the fissionable isotope U235. It is possible to concentrate (enrich) uranium in the the fissionable U-235 isotope. Power reactors commonly run on uranium enriched to a few percent of U235. Nuclear weapons require enrichment to 90% and above. Uranium enriched to 90% or more is commonly called "weapons grade". The newsie didn't say if the enrichment was just a few percent or or weapons grade.
Enrichment to weapons grade is the hard part of making a uranium fission bomb.
Morale to the story. If its even slightly technical, expect the newsies to get it wrong.
Testing, Testing from Aviation Week
"The nuclear test produced 'less than a 2-kiloton explosion,' says a Washington-based intelligence official. 'It was bigger than last time,but somewhat less than predicted.' perhaps only 10% of expectation. ... However it has yet to be determined if this was a uranium or plutonium device."
Translation. It was another fizzle. Twenty kilotons, the yield of the Hiroshima bomb, is always the design goal for beginner's nukes. Very few nukes less than 20 kilotons have ever been built, because it's hard to get them to go off. The only hard evidence is the 4.7 Richter scale reading for the current test, compared to 4.1 for the 2006 test which everyone agrees was a fizzle.
"I am fairly certain we will see much more interest in ballistic missile defense in Japan and South Korea," says Bernard Loo of the S.Rajaratnam School of International Studies in Singapore.
No kidding.
"For China, that could be one of the worst results of the test", says Loo. "Beijing does not want missile defense systems preliferating in its neighborhood since it maintains a nuclear arsenal the is modest by the standards of the US and Russia and would not bear significant attrition."
Maybe. Mr. Loo obviously thinks anti ballistic missile defenses are effective. I disagree, and I used to design the radar that guided the antimissiles. Plus, if the Chinese really didn't want the North Korean's to do nuclear tests, they could shut off the North Koreans supply of food and fuel. That would get their attention. In actual fact, the Chinese are happy to keep a thorn in the side of Americans in business.
"Gathering intelligence about North Korea is tough say the experts. Human intelligence sources are non existant, while rugged terrain, underground facilities and lack of overflight all conspire against observation. "
Again, maybe. Koreans all speak the same language, were colonized by the Japanese in the 1930's, and there are plenty of South Koreans with relatives in the North. You'd think an effective South Korean intelligence agency (KCIA they call it) would exploit these ties and have some sources in the North. KCIA is undoubtedly reluctant to share this with the Americans, given the Americans record of leaking top secret stuff to the New York Times.
Translation. It was another fizzle. Twenty kilotons, the yield of the Hiroshima bomb, is always the design goal for beginner's nukes. Very few nukes less than 20 kilotons have ever been built, because it's hard to get them to go off. The only hard evidence is the 4.7 Richter scale reading for the current test, compared to 4.1 for the 2006 test which everyone agrees was a fizzle.
"I am fairly certain we will see much more interest in ballistic missile defense in Japan and South Korea," says Bernard Loo of the S.Rajaratnam School of International Studies in Singapore.
No kidding.
"For China, that could be one of the worst results of the test", says Loo. "Beijing does not want missile defense systems preliferating in its neighborhood since it maintains a nuclear arsenal the is modest by the standards of the US and Russia and would not bear significant attrition."
Maybe. Mr. Loo obviously thinks anti ballistic missile defenses are effective. I disagree, and I used to design the radar that guided the antimissiles. Plus, if the Chinese really didn't want the North Korean's to do nuclear tests, they could shut off the North Koreans supply of food and fuel. That would get their attention. In actual fact, the Chinese are happy to keep a thorn in the side of Americans in business.
"Gathering intelligence about North Korea is tough say the experts. Human intelligence sources are non existant, while rugged terrain, underground facilities and lack of overflight all conspire against observation. "
Again, maybe. Koreans all speak the same language, were colonized by the Japanese in the 1930's, and there are plenty of South Koreans with relatives in the North. You'd think an effective South Korean intelligence agency (KCIA they call it) would exploit these ties and have some sources in the North. KCIA is undoubtedly reluctant to share this with the Americans, given the Americans record of leaking top secret stuff to the New York Times.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)