classicrawker

45 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

He was in Apocalypse Now too in a small part.  Mississippi Burning too if I'm not mistaken and Se7en.  He plays the uh, the governor, the commisioner, the head cop in Se7en.  He was never meant to be in Full Metal Jacket, was just meant to be a technical advisor but Kubrick cast him.

Yeah  he was a natural in FMJ and has been in a number of main stream movies but was famous for playing military........in Mississippi Burning, another brilliant movie,  he played the local Mayor who hanged himself at the end of the movie even though not implicated in the crime or coverup.........

Man that hurts as he was epic in Full Metal Jacket

5 hours ago, Padme said:

Not anymore, the U.S. is about to become the oil number one producer in the world. Check google, you're gonna find plenty of information regarding oil production in the U.S. On top of that, the world is changing. Now we are in the era of developing clean energy. If you go to Texas, besides the oil you're gonna see plenty of farms with mills producing clean energy using wind. This is about the U.S. and western allies being the police of the world.

Please go back and carefully read my posts where I stated the US does not rely on oil from the  Middle East as it did in the past, although we get close to 10% from the Saudi's...

Controlling the oil supply is power to influence. While it may not impact us  directly it does influence other countries friend and foe which could impact us indirectly......much of the Middle East oil goes to China so controlling or influencing their oil supply is a valuable economic weapon.....

Also keep in mind that ISIS was pulling in close to  $40 million a month from selling Iraqi oil at one point which they used to fund their cause....... 

5 hours ago, Len Cnut said:

The Searcher, new two part HBO documentary on Elvis

Watched most of part 1 which is pretty good so far......

Lost in Space series reboot........starting a little slow, watched the first 6 episodes, as they are spending a lot of time on character development but hopefully this pays off later in the series.......

The Post.........good movie but a tough subject  to cover in a two hour movie........really could use a miniseries treatment....still give it an 8/10

21 minutes ago, soon said:

Well I wasnt posting to disagree with you, I will say that Im not totally in line with what you say here, in that I dont mean only that the stakes (outcomes) are different, but rather/also that the economic advantage that USA has over much of Africa means that they can achieve their goals differently and sometimes with much more ease than in the much of the Mid East.  I would say that US interest in Africa is high, but the cost and overt-severity-of-action to achieve a desired outcome are different.  Perhaps we're saying the same things with different terms though?

I think we are on the same page to some extent but maybe I am a little more skeptical about America's altruistic reasons for when it interferes in others countries affairs. If Somalia had a more attractive strategic asset for us, we and the EU, would more lkely be investing more capital there........think about the countries the US and the EU invested military capital in? What did they have in common? In most cases oil....look at Libya as an example......

2 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

And I don't think anyone has said otherwise, I thin I straight out said oil was a major reason for US' presence in the Middle East. But my point remains that that doesn't mean that every action US takes in the Middle East is in itself driven by oil (re: the discussion with Oldest Goat), and more specifically, I don't think these latest attacks has anything to do with oil. I think it is Trump demonstrating that he is a tough guy, I think it is posturing for Putin, I think it is rounding up voters at home, and I think it is genuine disgust with Assad's behavior.

I don't disagree Soul and never said anything different. My point has always been oil was/ is the reason the US is spending $ trillions of dollars fighting in the Middle East. 

IMHO Trump had little choice but to respond to the gas attack as we can't allow this behavior to become acceptible....my only concern is it would have been better to have definite proof Assad did it before acting.....

3 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

The US has definitely been in Somalia (Black Hawk Down anyone?). And it was a peace-keeping mission, wasn't it? So it is not all about oil, always. 

Never said we weren't Soul.  But we basically pulled up stakes and pulled out not committing  the  military capital we are expending in the Middle East this past 18years......my point stands in that the US is in the fight in the Middle East mainly  because of the oil.....

21 minutes ago, soon said:

Imo the USA is fairly active in Somalia.  I think the USA simply has different advantages in much of Africa that it doest posses in the Mid East. The geo-political and socio-economic situation is different, as is the timeline of US intervention; therefore the current US operations in Africa - and media interest in them - is vastly different.  

The true story that inspired the movie Black Hawk Down:

https://www.warhistoryonline.com/instant-articles/day-rangers-true-story-inspired-movie-black-hawk-m.html

CIA black site in Somalia:

https://www.thenation.com/article/cias-secret-sites-somalia/

Not sure how active we are in Somalia as it does not get a lot of press  but you are saying basically the same thing I already said in that  the political and economic stakes are different, and of higher strategic value  in the Middle East, which why the US is spending military capital there......

I think we are arguing the same thing Soul in that we agree the US interest in the area is because of the presense of oil. I also  don' t disagree that using chemical weapons violates the rules of war and must be kept from becoming the norm.

Concerning Somalia, from what I read it is similar to the situation the US  has in Afghanistan where the U.N. backed government controls  Mogadishu while al- Quada proxy, al-Shabab, controls the majority of the country so that sure that qualifies as "stabilized". Yet the US has little interest there........why?....IMHO because there is no strategic reason to go there....... But that is a conversation for another thread......

10 hours ago, SoulMonster said:

Who else is equally bad? Who else has repeatedly demonstrated a will to use chemical weapons on his civilian population? I am genuinely curious.

I think USA has a presence in the Middle East that harkens back to its preoccupation with oil, right, but doesn't mean that every thing they do there is motivated by oil.

Sure but oil is the main motivator for the US involvement in the Middle East.  We may not get a large percentage of our oil from there but some of our allies need that source and whomever controls that oil has tremendous power and influence. And our ties to supporting Israel certainly plays a role in our interest in the region..

Listen using chemical weapons is terrible but there are other regimes killing their own people by more conventional means that are all but ignored or there is no military action to stop it....think North Korea but there are other examples across Africa....

Another point is you don't see us fighting over Somalia? Why not?

5 minutes ago, Kasanova King said:

I agree that presence in the region for purposes of stability is important but it's not "just about oil" or who controls it.  If anything, a more stable Syria, which would lead to a more stable middle-east (no matter who controls Syria) would be better for U.S. oil companies.  A more stable middle-east would be the best scenario for U.S. oil companies and US allies.  

Nobody would give a shit about the Middle East if there was no oil mate....all you have you do is look at Africa where we don't get involved in wars where the countries have no strategic resources.....Oil is power.....

4 minutes ago, Kasanova King said:

I think that's his son trying to make his dad look like a martyr who brought down Russia and tried to bring down the U.S.  But from every interview I've read, the main reason Bin Laden declared a "Jihad" against the West is because of the presence of US military bases in the region and the US's support of Israel.  He wanted Western presence out of the area.

"Bin Laden's stated motivations of the September 11 attacks include the support of Israel by the United States, the presence of the U.S. military in the Saudi Arabian borders, which he considered to be sacred Islamic territory, and the U.S. enforcement of sanctions against Iraq. Bin Laden had a complicated relationship with the United States, as he was supported by the U.S. in the Soviet-Afghan war. However, he first called for jihad against the United States in 1996. This call solely focused on U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia; bin Laden loathed their presence and wanted them removed in a "rain of bullets"[24]

Bin Laden's hatred and disdain for the U.S. were also manifested while he lived in Sudan. There he told Al-Qaeda fighters-in-training:[25]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beliefs_and_ideology_of_Osama_bin_Laden

 

 

His son also said that if his father was ever captured or killed, that things would be much worse....which obviously has not been the case.

As far as ISIS goes, they have been defeated in Iraq. 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/21/isis-caliphate-islamic-state-raqqa-iraq-islamist

 

LOL, so some entry on Wiki knows Bin Laden's intent better then his son who was with his father during the time 911 went down...o.k. 

So you think ISIS is defeated and just going away? Yeah sure just like the Taliban did in Afghanistan who  we are still still fighting 18 years after they were "defeated"...how is that  working out for us?

In any case there is no point debating you mate as no matter how badly you are proven wrong you will never admit it so feel free to carry on...

1 hour ago, Kasanova King said:

That could be the main reason Russia has interest in Syria...in order to maintain a presence in the region, etc.  But the theory that the U.S. is interested in the region just for oil, including Iraq, is a myth.  The vast majority of the oil contracts from Iraq went to China...some even to Russia.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/world/article24747388.html

 

The region (Iraq, Syria), generally speaking, is too unstable for U.S. oil companies.  They'd rather get their oil from other, more stable regions, that would not affect their stock prices if something went wrong.  That's why China ended up with most of the oil. (They don't have to answer to shareholders if something "goes wrong" in the region).  Same exact thing would go for Syria. 

 

You are missing the big picture mate..oil is a strategic resource so just because we don't get our oil from Iraq and Syria does not mean we don't have interest in who controls it.  The power  that controls the Mideast East Oil wields massive power over  countries that rely on it. Some of which are our  allies and some who could hurt our National interests...The EU, our allies,  imports about 25%  of its oil from the Middle East which is not trivial.......and by the way we get a percentage of our oil, close to 10% from the Saudis so it would certainly impact us should we lose that source to an expanded conflict. 

26 minutes ago, Kasanova King said:

Since you think Osama Bin Laden's thoughts are "dead on" you think that Osama Bin Laden crippled Russia and ended the cold war? 

No, I think his son was dead on with his comments about his father's intent  which was to bait the U.S. into conflict in the Middle East and waste our resources on unwinable wars and he succeded....we need to get out of the Middle East as there is no happy ending there.....these wars are bleeding us from within.......and anyone who thinks ISIS will ever be defeated is being naive...........

47 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

I see a difference between using ammunition based on depleted uranium in warfare against military target that MAY affect civilians, and the deliberate attack on civilians with chemical weapons. Not that I approve of either, and not that I am a fan of US intervention in the Middle East. I just can't equal Assad with USA. 

I also don't see how we can sit idle by while civilians are subjected to mass murder. Not that I automatically defend the attacks by USA, England or France. Just that something has to be done. I certainly will not condemn these attacks just because USA has done bad before. 

The world sits by every day while, not only are civilians  murdered but also,  millions starve to death every year..........trust me I am no fan of Assad but let's not pretend he is the only bad guy in the world.......nobody would give a shit about what is going on in Syria if it was not for the oil........

The cream always rises to the top...................Stanton will turn it around...he is too good a hitter not to.......it is not the hitting that is killing the Yankees it is the pitching and the bullpen right now..........Should get better once the weather heats up but the Yankees may regret they did not ante up to get Cole from the Bucs as it is not often a young stud like him is offered for trade........They may have to overpay for a starter come trade deadline but lucky for them they have one of the best minor league systems in baseball so have the chips to do it..............

The US/ GB/ France strikes are just PR moves and will accomplish nothing IMHO....it is a temporary distraction for Trump from the Mueller investigation closing in on him and gives him a chance to show how tough he is and thump his chest.........

The real winner in the whole situatoins is not even alive today and we should not lose sight of why we are where we are today.....Osama Bin Laden must be smiling up in Jannah, hanging with his 72 virgins, about how he sucked the U.S. into a endless wars in the Middle East which is sucking the life out of our economy and dividing our country.

This is an interesting interview with one of his sons in RS magazine back in 2010 which gives us insight into Bin Laden's goals. I cherry picked some of his observations about his fathers thoughts, which are dead on, but the whole article was pretty fascinating IMHO.

It was my father who made Russia poor, in the war in Afghanistan. He ruined their economy. He is doing the same thing to America right now."

I ask Omar what he thinks of Barack Obama. He says the president seems like a very refined man — intelligent, widely read, capable. But he is certain Obama is on the verge of committing a massive error by sending more troops into Afghanistan. "Obama should ask for my advice about Afghanistan," he says. "I could help. But I have to see him personally. I would tell him you can't solve Afghanistan's problems with more soldiers. It is like adding water to sand, as we say in the Arab world — it only makes the sand heavier and messier. If I was in his position, the first thing I would do is make a truce. Then for six months or one year, no fighting, no soldiers. Afghanistan can never be won. It has nothing to do with my father. It is the Afghan people."

"I was still in Afghanistan when Bush was elected," he continues. "My father was so happy. This is the kind of president he needs — one who will attack and spend money and break the country. Even Bush's own mother says he is the biggest idiot boy of his family. I am sure my father wanted McCain more than Obama. McCain has the same mentality as Bush. My father would be disappointed because Obama get the position."

"Do you think Obama can win in Afghanistan?"

"Out of what you see," Omar asks, "what do you think?"

"Will there be more attacks?" I ask, "I don't think so," Omar says. "He doesn't need to. As soon as America went to Afghanistan, his plan worked. He has already won." As Omar sees things, his father had destroyed the Soviet empire. Now, nearly a decade after 9/11, his father's vision for an America of economic ruin and a soul-sapping war in Afghanistan has come to pass. As far as Omar is concerned, his father has brought ruin to two empires. 

 https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/osamas-prodigal-son-20100120 

Happy BDay mate and now  a message from the Donald.........

1 hour ago, DieselDaisy said:

The British love a bit of abba

You might change your mind if subjected to the same songs night after night at top volume   for month's on end at 2am with your drunken ex con neighbor singing along............

Probably the only band I can say I hate is ABBA and that is only because my drunken neighbor when I lived in a condo used to blast the same songs every night at 2am when he was on one of his benders.

Music I am not a fan of

1. Hip Hop-  I like some of the old school stuff but the new stuff all sounds the same to me

2. Kanye West- ONe of the most overrated acts in music IIMHO plus he is a douche which just adds to my dislike

3. Jack White- I will admit he is talented but never got his music

4. Dave Matthews- Some of the most bland elevator music I have ever heard. I went to a concert of his  with a buddy who has seen him over 100X just to party and have to say the women seem to love this guy so the talent was excellent at the show.

5. Bon Jovi- not terrible but a poster boy for 80's pop rock crap IMHO

6. Bob Dylan- Don't know why but as hard as I try I just can't get into his music.

7. 80's New wave- My wife's favorite music but just can't get into it

8. Modern Country music- I would rather listen to Bon Jovi

9. Iron Maiden-  I love metal but they  remind me of  head banging teenagers with bad mullets............

On 3/23/2018 at 12:54 PM, Stiff Competition said:

@RussTCB 

You're getting the same loot as me today just a few hours earlier it seems. My vault should be arriving today as well before I leave for work and then after work I am going to Amoeba to pick up HTWWW.

Can't wait to hear BHR though, I really enjoyed the new songs at the Nashville and LA shows over the past week here. I've only listened to Connected by Love/Respect Commander in terms of studio tracks because I hate getting an album and feeling like I've heard it all already.

Been debating whether to spring to the HTWW Vault  Super Deluxe version as it is not cheap.........I envy you living near Amoeba...nothing like that here in the Boston area anymore..........the Stones Leeds bootleg  I just posted actually was bought off of eBay from Amoeba.......

Almost forgot, also grabbed this as well. I really like the Coverdale / Hughes DP MKIII band and this was there last show ever before Ritchie Blackmore quit and  Tommy Bolin joined the band. You would think it would be a bad show, being the last of that lineup, but actually Blackmore must have been inspired because it is really is excellent.

Latest Stones bootleg which is the  famous "Get Your Leed Lungs Out" show from 1971. Looks mint so just need a quick cleaning before I give it a spin. The cover picture is actually from the cover for their  1966 single "Have You Seen Your Mother Baby, Standing in the Shadows" so that is Brian Jones on the far left smoking the ciggy........bootleggers have no shame...