XDR-TB will arrive in the U.S. at some point and then we'll see how public health collides with modern progressive/socialist civil liberties.
JOHANNESBURG (Reuters) - South Africa should forcibly isolate patients infected with a highly drug-resistant strain of tuberculosis to stop the disease from spreading on the AIDS-hit continent, researchers said on Monday.
South Africa's outbreak of extreme drug resistant tuberculosis (XDR-TB), which has killed at least 74 people in the last several months, may force authorities to override patients' personal rights in favor of the greater public's health, the study in the journal PLoS Medicine said.
"XDR-TB represents a major threat to public health. If the only way to manage it is to forcibly confine then it needs to be done," said Jerome Singh, study co-author and lawyer at Durban's Center for the AIDS Program of Research in South Africa. "Ultimately in such crises, the interests of public health must prevail over the rights of the individual."
TB, an airborne bacillus spread through coughing or sneezing, can usually be cured through treatment. However, the XDR-TB strain may have mutated when patients skipped treatment or were dispensed inadequate antibiotic cocktails.
South Africa has logged almost 400 cases of XDR-TB, which is virtually impervious to treatment by most common TB drugs, and an unprecedented 30 new cases are diagnosed every month, according to the study. The outbreak has alarmed medical experts who say XDR-TB poses a particular danger to HIV-positive people whose immune systems are already severely compromised by the AIDS virus.
South Africa's post-apartheid constitution contains some of the world's strongest safeguards of individual liberties and the government has thus far been silent on whether it may isolate XDR-TB patients. Singh said it is the public's duty to press the government into opening the debate.
In South Africa, XDR-TB patients may visit hospitals as out-patients and then go home, which means they can easily pass the disease in their community, the paper said.
Posted by: Steve White ||
01/23/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
Bangladeshs new interim government began work Monday to crack down on corruption after vowing it would hold credible elections as soon as possible. In his first speech to the nation late Sunday, caretaker government chief Fakhruddin Ahmed did not give any timetable for the polls, originally scheduled for Monday but cancelled amid opposition complaints of rigging. We are determined to transfer power to an elected government after holding free, fair and meaningful elections as soon as possible, Ahmed said.
Ahmed, a Princeton-educated economist and former governor of Bangladeshs Central Bank, also pledged tough reforms to rid elections of corruption and links to the underworld. We will take tough reform measures in the total electoral process and system so that muscle power and black money cannot hinder free and fair elections and stand in the way of peoples true verdict, he said. According to anti-graft watchdog Transparency International, Bangladesh is one of the worlds most corrupt nations.
With a population of 144 million, it is a young democracy where many political leaders have been accused of links to mafias and crime bosses. The televised address was Ahmeds first public statement since the countrys President Iajuddin Ahmed imposed a state of emergency on January 11 in a bid to halt months of unrest over claims that the elections were being rigged.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/23/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
President Hugo Chavez told U.S. officials to "Go to hell, gringos!" and called Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice "missy" on his weekly radio and TV show Sunday, lashing out at Washington for what he called unacceptable meddling in Venezuelan affairs. The tirade came after Washington raised concerns about a measure to grant the fiery leftist leader broad lawmaking powers. The National Assembly, which is controlled by the president's political allies, is expected to give final approval this week to what it calls the "enabling law," which would give Chavez the authority to pass a series of laws by decree during an 18-month period.
On Friday, U.S. State Department deputy spokesman Tom Casey said Chavez's plans under the law "have caused us some concern." Chavez rejected Casey's statement in his broadcast, saying: "Go to hell, gringos! Go home!" He also attacked U.S. actions in the Middle East.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/23/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Thanks for the invite, but we'd rather not visit Venezuela. I'll leave it to the Army.
#3
Must have been watching some of Foodel's early speeches. He used to rant, rave, and call us names for hours on end. Look where it got him. Rotted guts.
#4
Just look at this site, under Chavez these poor girls have barely any clothes to wear! s@xyc@rAcasdotcom
Show these pics to any marine and I'm sure he will want to help!
Sarcasm off and if you haven't figured it out not work safe.
Posted by: bruce ||
01/23/2007 8:08 Comments ||
Top||
Internal Pentagon documents in the US has revealed that China has deployed more than 900 ballistic missiles against rival Taiwan that could obliterate the island's air force in the event of a war breaking out with mainland China.
The missiles had ranges of 300 to 600 miles and the number deployed against the island kept on increasing, the United Daily News said citing an unnamed US intelligence source.
Taiwan's three US-made Patriot anti-missile batteries which comprises of some 200 anti-missile weapons, would be insufficient against an intensive Chinese bombardment, unidentified Taiwanese defense ministry officials told the newspaper.
Taiwanese President Chen Shui-bian said in July last year that China's People's Liberation Army had aimed 784 ballistic and 36 cruise missiles at the island with the number rising by 120 per year, he added.
The missiles could paralyze Taiwan's communications, transportation and command centers in a 10-hour bombardment, Taiwan's defense ministry says.
#6
And a lot of them deployed within 10 miles of here...weehee!
One of the military scenarios for a war with Taiwan consists of an endless barrage of Chinese missiles which smash everything on the island. The problem of amphibious assault fades away as the island's government surrenders.
Posted by: ed ||
01/23/2007 12:25 Comments ||
Top||
#8
gromky: One of the military scenarios for a war with Taiwan consists of an endless barrage of Chinese missiles which smash everything on the island. The problem of amphibious assault fades away as the island's government surrenders.
We dropped tens of thousands of bombs on Serbia during the Kosovo campaign. If the Taiwanese surrender after getting hit by 900 bombs, they belong under Chinese rule.
#9
The best bet for the Taiwanese would be to develop in secret a less-expensive defensive weapon, much like that laser Phalanx mentioned elsewhere. Something that utterly negates the (military, if not 100%) effectiveness of the mainland's missiles.
Then through a little diplomatic finesse, sneer at the mainlanders in such a way that they sink all sorts of money into increasing and maintaining weapons that don't work.
Ideally, the mainland will spend endless billions of dollars on lots of a weapon that won't work, so that money can't go elsewhere.
#10
Frank G (#3), did you read my real-life story on 80% flyash? Or are you makin' fun of Alabama engineers?
Posted by: BA ||
01/23/2007 13:45 Comments ||
Top||
#11
nope - it's been a long-running amusement for Alaska Paul and I - IIRC they used up to 45% or so Flyash in their Dam mix....cleaning out the blast furnaces and cheapening the cost...Safety B Damned :-)
Posted by: Frank G ||
01/23/2007 14:08 Comments ||
Top||
#12
presumably they use the 900 missile to knock out airfields, AA radars, AA sites, etc. Then, having established air superiority, they do a Serbia, focusing on ports, fuel storage facilities, etc. If you take out the air fields completely, not only do you get the Taiwan AF, but you make it hard for the US to move in land based air, so its all up to the carriers to contest the air. Of course as we've found out, its possible to repair airfields, depending on the nature of the damage. One presumes Taiwan is preparing for that.
#13
This all assumes that the Taiwanese are stupid enough to leave their air force sitting out in the open ala Hickam air field on a day in December. I suspect the Taiwanese air force has put some thought into dealing with a missile barrage.
What a missile barrage would do to the Taiwanese military, I dunno -- I suspect not a lot beyond upsetting them terribly. It would certainly shut down all the high-tech industry on the island, a fair bit of which makes stuff for US markets.
Posted by: Steve White ||
01/23/2007 15:01 Comments ||
Top||
#14
It would also cut off China's income - we'd shut down all shipping. Whose economy would suffer the most?
Posted by: Frank G ||
01/23/2007 15:04 Comments ||
Top||
#15
Zhang Fei,
I'm thinking a better comparison would be the V-1/V-2 barrage on London towards the end of WWII. Not quite 2500 V-1s hit their targets out of more than 10,000 launched, and at least 1400 V-2s hit London alone.
900 IRBMs with HE warheads would be a VERY bad day for the Taiwanese, but it's been done before against a smaller target...and still failed.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
01/23/2007 15:17 Comments ||
Top||
#16
Are Chinese missles required to be labeled 'MADE in CHINA'?
#17
I think Taiwan has a plan (aka Israel on start of 6 day war) if they thought China was really gonna push the button. 900 missiles is starting to become a really easy target to hit with cruise missiles, planes and stand off munitions and I doubt China has them all on mobile trucks.
#19
nope - it's been a long-running amusement for Alaska Paul and I - IIRC they used up to 45% or so Flyash in their Dam mix....cleaning out the blast furnaces and cheapening the cost...Safety B Damned :-)
Well, then sit back and enjoy (you too, AP)! I was in school (at Auburn) for Civil Engineering, when my Concrete professor came in and had a "funny" real-life story (we were studying different fillers for concrete at the time, and he'd just discussed flyash). Anyhoo, they were building a new overchange over I-85 a couple exits north of Auburn (in the lovely twin-city of Opelika, AL), and had just finished pouring the decking. Anyhoo, the contractor involved poured (supposedly) to specs, but the specs had been reversed and they poured with 80% flyash. Stuff never even thought about curing, and they had to rip it all up and start over! No one thought to use some freakin' common sense and just think about if 80% flyash sounded even reasonable! Even I, a young, non-graduated engineer to be knew better than that! So, it's not just China! Of course, we always quibbled that the design engineer must've been from GA Tech (a.k.a. North Avenue Trade School), lol!
Posted by: BA ||
01/23/2007 15:32 Comments ||
Top||
#20
My question about the 900 missiles is this : they use conventional blast warheads, so what is their CEP? If it is 100 meters or so, a standard NATO hardened aircraft shelter defeats those missiles. Also if it is a 100 meter CEP, then are no guarantees that the actual runways will be hit enough to stop their use. However, even with that large of CEP, the Chinese could effectively cancel all civilian airline traffic, and all largo cargo ship transit. So the Red Chinese could enforce a form of siege on the Taiwanese.
Of course, if the Chinese fit nukes as the warheads, CEP in the main is irrelevant. But then, all China conquers is a radioactive wasteland. And all indications are that the Reds want gobble up a functional economy and all the benefits of industrialization that Taiwan has, not turn it into a post-apocalyptic wasteland.
Also, even if the Reds take out the Taiwanese Air Force bases, can they take out all the navy bases, all pre-positioned artillery sites guarding the beaches, the Army bases, the Marine bases, and the forces at sea? Can that missile barrage ensure that no ground forces are in place around the major air fields that the Reds would need to seize to air transport in their light armor for their airborne troops - BMPs and assault guns?
This article sounds suspiciously like the old "Chinese can run people in human waves at your position and never run out" myth of the 1950s. It assumes that all courage and determination are on the side of the Reds, and none on the side of the Taiwanese. And it leaves out one BIG point : what about the US Navy and the aircraft carriers over in the region? Do they just suddenly disappear or are the Reds convinced that the US will just lie back and take it?
#21
One last point : the article seems to assume a zero warning start point for the barrage. Does anyone believe that the Reds could initiate a full-blown bombardment of Taiwan, without preparations of the missile network, or warnings being sounded by the Taiwanese spy network? Especially considering the amount of political in-fighting that would precede such an attack : there is a known large faction in the PLA that regards Taiwan as important but not worth the whole economy, or a straight up battle with the US Navy. Think they are NOT going to be pulling strings and calling in favors to head off such an attack? And that every intelligence agency in the area would miss that?
#22
Missiles like the M-9 that China would use to bombard Taiwan have a CEP of 100-150 meters. With GPS and radar guidance, 30 meters and improving. And an attack can come out of the blue. It would require 30 minutes or less to launch the missiles. Once in the air, these is not enough reaction time for aircraft or ships to launch. Dig deep, disperse and decoy what you can. Also think what an attack will do to the Kadena flight line.
Posted by: ed ||
01/23/2007 16:41 Comments ||
Top||
#23
Steve - Sure, lets assume the planes of the Taiwan air force are all in secure underground bunkers. And the fuel depots too. The runways have to be out in the open, but theyre not all that hard to repair, a waste of a very valuable missile. Best targets? Again, probably the radars, and the AA. I think PRC could still do a lot of hurt to the Taiwan AF with 900 ballistic missiles. If not you could add them to their counter value campaign, and trust the PRC AF to go head to head with the Taiwan AF without benefit of a counter force campaign by the cruise missiles.
If I was using them for counter value, Id hit the port facilities mainly rather than the chip factories. In the short term that will do more damage to Taiwans ability to stay in the fight.
Of course they could also use the missiles for something less than an all out fight. Assuming their goal was NOT to conquer the island, but simply to get it to walk back from say a UDI. they could simply target shipping, with the goal of inflicting enough harm to the Taiwanese economy that they decided the UDI wasnt worth it.
#24
"Also, even if the Reds take out the Taiwanese Air Force bases, can they take out all the navy bases, all pre-positioned artillery sites guarding the beaches, the Army bases, the Marine bases, and the forces at sea? Can that missile barrage ensure that no ground forces are in place around the major air fields that the Reds would need to seize to air transport in their light armor for their airborne troops - BMPs and assault guns? "
No, not with 900 missiles. But if you can take out the AF and the air defence, you dont have to. You let the PRC airforce do that. Thats kinda the way we play it (Iraq 91, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003, and, IIUC, Serbia 1999) You use the missile to take out the stuff that can hurt YOUR air force, (and anything else you want to take down before you have assured air superiority) and then you send in the piloted aircraft to do the rest.
#25
"It would also cut off China's income - we'd shut down all shipping. Whose economy would suffer the most? "
depends on the circumstances when war starts. If Taiwan is minding its own business, and going along with the status quo, and PRC attacks out of the blue, we can cut the shipping. It WILL hurt our economy, but man, look at those aggressive PRCers. If on the other hand, Taiwan declares a UDI, while PRC has been playing good global citizen, will Suzy Housewife want to give up cheap goodies at Walmart for the sake of some adventurers in Taipei? (thats how it will be spun) That, incidentally, is ONE of the reasons PRC has to play "good global citizen"
#27
Okay, so the PLAAF is now assigned to take out the anti-aircraft batteries on land. What do they do about the shipboard Standard Mark 2s and 3s that the Taiwanese Navy has? Or the Patriots in the hardened silos? Or any of the vehicle-mounted SAMs like the Avenger, Chaparral, and the Taiwanese knockoffs? And that does not into account any MANPADs or Vulcan-style AAA.
We were able to do the takedown on the Iraqis because we had the superior equipment in LARGE numbers, and we used every excuse in the form of a shot at the overflights to hammer the Iraqi air defenses BEFORE we attacked. Remember one point : the PLAAF has about 150 modern aircraft, the rest are 1950s and early 1960s MiGs and MiG knockoffs. Would you want to do Wild Weasel in a Chinese knockoff of a MiG-19? {Chinese quality control is worse than the Soviets during WWII}.
30 meter CEP is good but not great : NATO standard hardened shelters are designed for 10 meter CEP attacks by FROGs. Plus Taiwan is mountainous and has a lot of road tunnels running through the mountains - ready-made emergency aircraft shelters.
And what about the 4 Aegis destroyers the Taiwanese have? Anyone care to try them on in a J-7, J-8, J-10, or even Su-29?
#28
I had a pretty horrifying thing pointed out to me by a WWII vet: that it would have been acceptable to have 90% casualties on D-Day, as only 10% getting and maintaining a beachhead was enough.
To think that Washington and London were willing to accept such losses is staggering. Not desirable, of course, but acceptable.
That thought haunts me when I consider a massive flotilla attack against Taiwan.
A plan using the following scheme: land as many personnel as possible on Taiwan; have them *avoid* direct conflict with the Taiwan military, instead have them invade the cities.
Using the civilian population as hostages, force the Taiwanese army to fight an *urban* war to re-take their own cities.
Importantly, once a significant landing would take place, the mainland would declare that China was unified, and that any action taken to *free* Taiwan was an unprovoked act of war.
#29
Shield - I assume they would go after the Taiwanese navy with the PLA-Navy.
The problem of aircraft quality would be big for the PLAAF. Really they have only 150 quality AC? 900 ballistic missiles, and 150 quality AC isnt gonna go that far against an extensive air defense system, Id agree.
#30
anon - that wouldnt work. They have to secure a beach to move supplies in over, and establish a supply line to the beach. As long as there are intact Taiwanese forces, those forces can attack PLA supply lines, they dont have to go into the cities, if that doesnt seem like a good idea. Now the PLA could threaten to massacre the pops of the cities, (is that what you mean by hostages?) but that would probably lead to major international isolation that a trading nation cant afford, and perhaps internal problems on the mainland as well.
And im not sure where your friend got his 10% number. There were 5 divisions landing on D-Day. if only half a division had survived, it would have had extreme difficulty resisting a German counter attack on the beachhead. It would have had to rely completely on air superiority to do so. And air superiority is precisely what we are talking about.
If the PLAAF cant gain air superiority over Taiwan, an amphib invasion is very difficult.
#31
4 Aegis destroyers and shipboard Standard Mark 2s and 3s
Taiwan has no Aegis. While the US has expressed willingness to sell Aegis, the Taiwanese have been diddling around with the $15B arms package. Besides, then they will have to find someone willing to build the ships some years down the line (2010 or later). They recently received 4 ex-US Kidd class with SM-2s and twin missile launchers (no vertical MK-41s). They are not designed to intercept ballistic missiles in a near vertical trajectory (if caught in port). In addition, the Kidds' defenses can be saturated much more easily than Aegis. Their frigates are ex-US Perry (anti-air w/ SM-1) and Knox (anti-sub and surface, ASROC and Harpoon) and new build Lafayettes (Exocet and Crotale). Not a confidence builder, except for the ex-Knoxes.
Or the Patriots in the hardened silos?
Don't know about silos. Patriot is mobile and better stay that way. Get fixed and die. The Patriots are PAC2 and PAC2 GEM, not PAC3 (hit to kill ABM). PAC3s are part of the US arms package offer.
Chaparral, MANPADs or Vulcan
Useless for defending high value assets when aircraft come in high with LGBs. More useful around the invasion beaches.
Taiwan's best fighters are 200 F-16A and Mirage 2000s. They would get owned by the 200+ SU-27/30s. Best hope is to stay in the clutter and ambush the Su-XXs from below. Behind them are another 2,000 combat aircraft. The F5s and Ching-kuos will have a handful taking on attacking bombers and invasion ships. Taiwan needs lots of the latest F-16s or better to have a chance in the air.
Taiwan best chance is to arm up to delay invasion, close off Chinese ports with mines and anti-ship missiles, attack leadership and control nodes with cheap and plentiful cruise missiles, and hope to God the US comes to the rescue.
Posted by: ed ||
01/23/2007 19:19 Comments ||
Top||
#32
Pragmatically, post-Cold War Taiwan represents nuthin to the Chicommies save as offshore WARM-WATER PORT [WWP]wid good distance to and between JAPAN, SK, PHILIPPINES, WEST-PAC-CENTPAC and all points OTH. Iff they can't control-contain Taiwan for beneficial trade advantages, they'll deny = destroy her utility as WWP. Chicom altern mil options vv PACOA's appear to be VIETNAM = [NORTHERN] JAPAN. China's already in process of establishing herself on both sides of INDIA + East Africa. IMO, should war take place, CHINA> ASSASSINS MACE/BATTLE ZONE schemes > overwhelm Taiwan conventionally? despite any level of PLA casualties, followed by immed NUCLEARIZED/WMD ARTY REINFORCEMENT while battle for control of island still going on, as backed up by mainland missle-bomber forces. Opportune time is post-new 9-11/Amer Hiroshima, when US NPE is heavily damaged iff not destroyed, Nationa + US Two-Party politix in chaos, + OWG anti-Amer Americans = anti-US Amer Socialists demanding USA protect itself by getting out of ME, plus calling for Gubmint-wide investigations [ITS DUBYA'S-GOP-RIGHT-USA's FAULT], impeachments, and recomm panels ON WHY ISOLATIONISM, ANTI-SOVEREIGNTY, OVERT ANTI-AMER AMER SOCIALISM + USA SUBORNED OWG IS "JUSTIFIED", .......etal.
#33
The PLAAF has around 250 modern Su27/30; ROC has 146 F-16 A/Bs, 56 Mirage 2000-5, 128 IDF {F-16 Lite, homegrown), and 60+ F-5E/Fs. As for the 2000 other "fighters" that the PLAAF has, only 600 have the range on them to be able to reach Formosa with any time over target {at least 1-3 minutes}, without splashing into the ocean on the way back.
The ROC practices twice as many hours as the PLAAF; ROC pilots logged twice as many hours in the air, in their aircraft; ROC pilots have contacts with Western air forces, including visits by friendly Western pilots; and the ROC only needs to be operating within 15 miles of their bases for MIGCAP. Also, the ROC has 6 E2 Hawkeyes which if they orbit over central Formosa give an AWACs view of all of Formosa, the Taiwan Straits, and up to 200 miles into mainland China.
One last question for everyone : name ONE time that a Soviet/Russian equipped and trained air force has defeated a Western equipped and trained air force, in full scale open combat.
Also for those talking about amphibious landings, there was a reason to choose the beaches at Normandy : closer point from England, less distance on open water. Also, the US/allies enjoyed total air superiority/supremacy during Operation Overlord. Plus, the German Navy was effectively shutdown prior to the operation.
PLA has to cross over 80 miles of open ocean, {5 time further than Overlord's crossing}, in an environment without surety of air superiority, active naval resistance, and without anything approaching the transport ships or landing craft that the Allies used during Overlord. Excluding US/Allied operations, name ONE other successful amphibious assault.
There is a reason that the US kept the Marine Corps and all of those Army and Navy landing craft : we are essentially the only ones in the world who are able to do amphibious ops. And unless or until the Chinese build even Austin class ships in numbers and have 800-900 Su-27 or better aircraft, the PLANF will be the originator of the "Million Man Swim" in any amphibious operations.
#34
As of today, the Taiwanese are going to get beat badly in the air. They have less than 1 AMRAAM (120) per F-16A and no reloads of AIM-7s (600 and inadequate performance). The short ranged MICAs on Mirage2000s are inadequate to fight off SU-27s and R77s.
Without contesting the air, defense of a seaborne invasion is doubtful. The only saving grace is the MiG21 clones have very range, enough to get to Taiwan but not loiter. The Taiwanese are relying on Uncle Sam's Cavalry to come to the rescue.
One last question for everyone : name ONE time that a Soviet/Russian equipped and trained air force has defeated a Western equipped and trained air force, in full scale open combat.
Indo-Pakistani War of 1971
Posted by: ed ||
01/23/2007 21:04 Comments ||
Top||
#36
Pakistan lost to India, a numerically superior Soviet equipped force, much like China. In 1965, when the odds were more even (Pakistan outnumbered, but better aircraft), the result was a draw. Today, Taiwan is both outnumbered and qualitatively inferior (at least in the high end).
Posted by: ed ||
01/23/2007 21:27 Comments ||
Top||
#37
Shieldwolf: The mainland has been practicing very large amphibious operations for a while now:
http://tinyurl.com/3y942t
'Last week, Chinese troops and transports were massed for a large military exercise opposite Taiwan. According to the Chinese press, the People's Liberation Army will practice an attack against "an outlying Taiwanese island while fighting off an aircraft carrier..."'
"...The Chinese exercises are said to involve at least 157 amphibious craft and vehicles..."
#38
ed,
Taiwan has a lot of stuff underground in the marble caves under mountains.
They have Matsu and Ginmun
They have lots of surprises.
If the KMT told the current gov about all their little surprises is another story but... you can bet the generals know.
The ROC has a very aggressive military. They accept that the best defense is a good offense.
Strategies could be interesting.
The PLAAF would be wise to double check all their facts before an attack.
Also, don't forget the financial angle. Over half the overseas investment in the PRC is directly or indirectly (US fronts and such) from the ROC. The home front employment picture could get hazy.
Most of this investment is in Southern China.
Most of the aggressive military PRC types are from Northern China. A civil war in the PRC could well begin as a difference in North/South interests to the detriment of the South....
China said on Tuesday it had shot down one of its own satellites, confirming U.S. reports, but denied it was threatening an arms race in space. A Foreign Ministry spokesman said he knew of no plans for a second test.
Spokesman Liu Jianchao said his government had briefed the United States, Japan and other countries some time after the test. He said they had voiced worries about dangerous space debris and escalating military rivalry in space, but said such fears were groundless. "This test was not directed at any country and does not constitute a threat to any country," he told a crowded regular news briefing. "What needs to be stressed is that China has always advocated the peaceful use of space, opposes the weaponisation of space and arms races in space."
Liu said he had not "heard of plans for a second test".
This was the first time that Beijing had publicly confirmed the satellite strike, revealed by U.S. officials last week. The belated response appeared unlikely to silence complaints from other capitals that Beijing had eroded security in outer space, and its own claims to be an entirely peaceful power, by pulverizing the aging weather satellite on January 11.
Japanese Chief Cabinet Secretary Yasuhisa Shiozaki said on Tuesday China should be more open over its plans for outer space. "Unless there is transparency, there will be suspicions. It's not enough for China to just say there was one test," he told a news conference in Tokyo.
The United States staged the most recent previous missile strike against a satellite in September 1985. No international treaty bans such strikes, but experts say the floating debris they cause endangers other satellites vital to commerce and security. Beijing fears the Bush administration's plans to bolster U.S. dominance in space security could undermine its own security, analysts say. Analysts say China could use its ability to down satellites to counter any spy satellite support Washington might offer Taiwan if war were to break out between the self-ruled island and the mainland.
A Taiwan official in charge of China policy said on Tuesday that the satellite test flouted international norms and showed Beijing's space ambitions were not benign. "It demonstrated that China has been trying to militarise the use of space and clearly it is against the international interest, not just the interest of Taiwan," Joseph Wu, chairman of Taiwan's Mainland Affairs Council, said in a speech in Tokyo.
On Monday, a State Department spokesman said Chinese officials had acknowledged the test when they met Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill in Beijing over the weekend. Asked about China's delay in reporting the test, Liu said: "China has nothing to hide. After various parties expressed concern, we explained this test in outer space to them." Facing volleys of queries from reporters, Liu said he could not immediately answer questions about the dangers posed by the thousands of metal fragments released into orbit.
A senior adviser to the Pentagon's National Security Space Office, Peter Hays, told Reuters on Monday that the satellite scrap could even harm the International Space Station. "This is a highly technical question, I can't give you an accurate answer," Liu said of the satellite fragments.
MULTICULTURALISM as an official Federal Government policy was quietly killed off yesterday. Apocalyptic way of saying it, but I expect that from the media.
And if not quite dead yet, it is being slowly asphyxiated by the Howard Government. It's easier to kill Rasputin than P.C.
In a subtle rebadging of a key portfolio, Prime Minister John Howard changed Immigration and Multicultural Affairs to the Department of Immigration and Citizenship. And the Ministry of Silly Walks will be henceforth known as the Unnecessary Movement Department.
But critics have argued the policy has become an expensive exercise in social engineering, with some claiming it has created ghettos, inter-racial violence and a cover for radical Islamists. One of the architects of multiculturalism, Prof Jerzy Zubrycki, yesterday described the change as a "deliberate act of trying to stamp it out". "But it won't die. It should always be within the purview of government," Prof Zubrycki said. A horrifying threat by the professor.
#9
Iron spike through the temples, beheading, cut out the heart and burn it - all time honored East European methods for killing the undead. Which is what any government agency becomes 24 hours after its activation.
Airbus has warned customers of a potential three-month delay on its 20 billion euro ($26 billion) A400M transport aircraft program, a senior executive said Jan. 17.The European aircraft company said in December that an audit of the A400M program identified areas of risk and had approved a recovery plan. The program review recognized the risk of a three-month delay in starting final assembly of the aircraft, Tom Williams, Airbus executive vice president, programs, said at Airbus New Years press conference Jan. 17.
The potential delay was due to an extensive redesign of the aircraft, which called for structural changes to meet performance commitments, he said. The redesign had been completed by the time the program audit was done. But to avoid repeating the production fiasco that has delayed deliveries of the A380 superjumbo aircraft, Airbus will only begin assembly of the A400M if the sections delivered are at the required level of completion, Williams said.
If A400M assembly were delayed, time could be made up in the test phase by using several airframes in concurrent testing, Williams said. It can be done. That could allow Airbus to meet a target of first flight, due in January 2008. A three-month delay was probably not critical in a military program, he said.
Never did stop the USAF.
The A400M program is a challenging one, involving a new aircraft, new turboprop engine and new propeller, the largest ever built, Williams said. Jean-Paul Herteman, chief executive of Safrans Sagem Defense Security unit, said Jan. 16 that development of the TP400 engine was very challenging. He added he is personally following the programs progress. The TP400 is due to be tested on a C-130 test bed this year.
#3
Pratt & Whitney Canada originally won the competition for the A400M's engines but Chirac vetoed it, insisting on a European (read French) engine. Now it comes to bite Airbus.
Posted by: ed ||
01/23/2007 17:26 Comments ||
Top||
PARIS French Interior Minister and presidential candidate Nicolas Sarkozy pledged to reduce France's overall tax take by four percentage points of gross domestic product if elected, in an interview published Monday.
Sarkozy, the candidate of the conservative governing Union for a Popular Movement, or UMP, also criticized the 35-hour week introduced by the last Socialist government in an attempt to create more jobs, in the interview with the Le Monde newspaper.
"France's moral crisis has a name _ it's a work crisis," Sarkozy said. Jobs are not created by "the sharing out of work," he said. "Work creates work."
That's going to cause some teeth to itch throughout progressive camps ...
Sarkozy said plans to cut taxes by a total of euro68 billion (US$88 billion) a year would reduce France's overall tax revenues by four percentage points of GDP from the current 45.3 percent. Cuts would be concentrated on "taxes that weigh on jobs," he said. Overtime hours would be exempt from both welfare taxes paid by the employer and income tax paid by the worker. Inheritance tax would be abolished for all but the wealthiest 5 percent of estates.
The UMP is seeking to exploit apparent discord among the Socialists over their tax plans. Earlier this month, Socialist presidential candidate Segolene Royal publicly distanced herself from a pledge by party leader Francois Hollande, who is also her partner, to raise taxes for wealthier households. "The Socialists want to raise taxes. We want to reduce them," Sarkozy said. "This is one of the major debates of the presidential election."
He could have borrowed that line straight out of 2000 and 2004.
Posted by: Steve White ||
01/23/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
He actually has a plan for accomplishing this, although he didn't mention it. He's going to deport 2 million muzzies a year on flat barges out of Marseilles. Getting their dead asses off the dole easily allows the tax cuts and still preserves the French to enjoy their 40 days of vacation each year. A Double-double.
Richardson touts role as underdog candidate for presidency
Posted by: Fred ||
01/23/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Billary as Prez. Richardson as V. Prez. He could bring along the entire South and West with Hispanic vote. Plus, she probably trusts him ( to follow the commandantes orders and shut his mouth) as he was in Billy's cabinet.
For the first time since the United States launched its grand experiment with publicly financed presidential campaigns, three decades ago, major party nominees in 2008 are expected to turn down all public funds. The reason: the grant, expected to be $83.8 million, might not be enough to run a winning campaign.
Good. That's several hundred million dollars back to the taxpayers.
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., is the first top-tier candidate to tip her hand that she intends to leave the public money on the table. Senior Clinton adviser Howard Wolfson said in an e-mail Sunday that she would not take matching funds in the primary or the general election campaigns if she won the Democratic nomination. On her campaign Web site, Clinton is asking that donors give her $2,100 for the primary and another $2,100 for the general -- a tangible sign that she won't seek matching funds in the general election. Candidates who take public money in the general election must forgo fundraising for their November campaigns.
For $500,000 you too can sleep in the Lincoln bedroom. Less if you're a woman and Bill likes you.
Abandonment of the public financing system would threaten the survival of a Watergate-era change that was supposed to limit the influence of big donors in presidential politics and let more candidates compete. If major candidates walk away from public financing, "it really calls into question why it exists at all," said Robert D. Lenhard, chairman of the Federal Election Commission, a supporter of the system.
There's an interesting thought.
The current system is being rendered obsolete by escalating campaign costs, sophisticated fundraising techniques, tepid public support and candidates such as Clinton who could raise $100 million before the first 2008 primary -- and $500 million by Election Day.
It remains to be seen whether the heavy spending predicted for 2008 will trigger public disgust and lead to changes, as public-finance advocates expect.
They've been advocating this for a while; they and their friends helped get us McCain-Feingold. No thanks.
Posted by: Steve White ||
01/23/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
The NWFP government cannot change the name of the province to Pakhtunistan without amending to the Constitution, Federal Minister for Political Affairs Salim Saifullah Khan said on Monday. Commenting on a statement by NWFP Chief Minister Akram Khan Durrani, Saifullah said only the federal government could change a provinces name. The province is currently referred to in the Constitution as the NWFP. If the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA) wants to change it, it has to amend the Constitution with a two-thirds majority, he said. This is not possible under the prevailing circumstances.
He said the issue was an old one and various names had been proposed for the province, but there has never been a consensus on any one of them. The MMA was losing popularity, he said, and was trying to exploit peoples emotions. Its just another political stunt, as the general elections are just around the corner, he said.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/23/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Can we pick the new name?
I'll take Fuckedupistan.
Pakistan is a democratic country and there is no room for a theocracy here, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Sher Afgan Niazi told the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA) during a debate in the Senate on Monday over the demolition of two mosques in Islamabad.
MMA members shouted slogans and called Afgan a lota, or a turncoat, while Ports and Shipping Minister Babar Ghauri led the treasury members in shouting slogans demanding the MMA resign.
Amir Hamza Mosque on Murree Road and a mosque built by police on Islamabad Highway were recently demolished. Quaid-e-Azam categorically stated in a party meeting in Bombay in 1940 that he would never struggle for a theocratic state, said Afgan.
Afgan said the government would not allow theocracy to take root in Pakistan or mullahs to politicise Islam. Instead of making speeches in parliament, mullahs should resign, go to mosques and preach, he said. Responding to the issues raised by the MMA on points of order, Afgan said clerics should tell people that the demolished mosques were built on encroached land.
MMA members shouted slogans and called Afgan a lota, or a turncoat, while Ports and Shipping Minister Babar Ghauri led the treasury members in shouting slogans demanding the MMA resign.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/23/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
Equality and protection of rights are not possible in Pakistan without real democracy, National Assembly member Tehmina Doltana said at a ceremony to launch Emanuel Zafars book Concise History of Pakistani Christians at the Lahore Press Club on Monday. She said the world was a global village in which diverse people coexistence. Why, then, is everyone not treated equally? she asked. She said Muslims and minorities of Pakistan were a bunch of flowers and the bouquet would lose its beauty if any one of them was removed.
All religions teach love, peace, harmony and friendship and to there was a dire need for democracy in Pakistan to promote these values. Real democracy means everyone, regardless of religion, cast and creed, has the right to seek his rights. Being citizens of Pakistan, everyone was responsible to implement the principles for which Pakistan was founded, she said.
Educationist and human rights activist Dr Mehdi Hassan said there was no concept of minorities in Pakistan until 1974. He said the founder of the country had said in his speeches that Pakistan was not founded only for Muslims, but was a country where everyones rights would be guaranteed without discrimination.
People belonging to minorities felt the need to highlight their contribution in the Pakistan Movement because they do not feel secure and are denied their rights. The country, he said, had made them second-class citizens and it was obvious from the law that only a Muslim could be the head of the state.
Democracy did not mean elections, he said, but required the rule of law, transparency and accountability. He said people belonging to religions other than Islam do not need to be defensive or highlight their contributions to Pakistan because they were the citizens of this country and had the right to full liberty.
Emanuel Zafar said his book was about the Christian communitys contribution to the Pakistan Movement and their efforts for peace and religious harmony in the country. Former provincial law minister Syed Afzal Hayder said the book was the first of its kind and could be used as a reference book by historians and researchers. Arch Bishop Lawrence John Suldana was also present on the occasion.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/23/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Can also add GOVERNMENT = SOCIALISM needs a dynamic PRIVATE SECTOR. Fixed/Static levels of Revenue = DOWNWARD-MOVING,Fixed/Static levels of DEVELOPMENT.
U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon yesterday ordered a thorough audit of the U.N. Development Program's operation in North Korea, the first in a sweeping assessment of all U.N. agencies, funds and programs. Mr. Ban said he wants the UNDP audit completed within three months, the first phase in an ambitious accounting that could take years and millions of dollars to complete. The audit will specifically look at hard-currency transactions, the independence of locally hired staff, and the agency's ability to monitor ongoing projects. UNDP spends about $3.6 million annually on a dozen projects inside the repressive country.
The United States -- which funds 11 percent of UNDP's annual budget but does not contribute to the North Korea program -- has raised serious concerns that hard currency from UNDP may be finding its way into the government's nuclear weapons program. An editorial in Friday's Wall Street Journal suggested that hundreds of millions of dollars had been diverted by the government from UNDP programs, and said the agency was undermined by permitting the Pyongyang government to choose local personnel for its programs. The program has four international staffers in North Korea.
UNDP has undergone three internal audits of the North Korea program, in 1999, 2001 and 2004; a fourth will be under way shortly. Those audits are not made public or even shared with the 36 nations that serve on UNDP's Executive Board, which will discuss the North Korea program on Thursday. Instead, the reports are reviewed by an external auditor, then distilled further and presented to the executive committee. U.S. officials, among others, have demanded access to the initial audits, as well as source material, saying that as major donors to UNDP programs they have a right to know how those programs are managed. Until now, however, UNDP officials have maintained the audits are internal management tools and not intended for general distribution.
UNDP is also the coordinating agency for other U.N. efforts in the country, including programs of the World Food Program and UNICEF.
Toyota Motor Corp. plans to build a low-cost car undercutting Renault's emerging-market Logan through a "radical" rethink in design and production, the president of the fast-growing Japanese automaker said.
"The focus is on low-cost technology," Toyota president Katsuaki Watanabe told Britain's Financial Times newspaper in an interview published Monday. He declined to set a price for a low-cost car but said it would be "at least" less than the Logan.
Renault has started production of the Logan, which will cost from 5,000 euros (6,200 dollars) on up, touted as a budget model for consumers in emerging economies such as China and Russia that conforms to European standards. Watanabe said that Toyota could slash the price by targetting costs throughout production.
"Everything from design to production methods will be radically changed and we are thinking of a really ultra-low-cost way of designing, using ultra-low-cost materials, even developing new materials if necessary," he said.
The plan would create a new challenge to struggling US automakers.
Toyota is set this year to overtake General Motors as the world's largest automaker. The Japanese automaker has cashed in by pioneering environmentally friendly hybrid cars and has also seen success with its luxury Lexus line.
Today we're producing a $7,000 car, the Indica. Here we're talking about a $2,200 car, which will be smaller and will be produced in larger volumes, with all the high-volume parts manufactured in one plant. We're also looking at more use of plastics on the body and at a very low-cost assembly operation, with some use of modern-day adhesives instead of welding. But the car is in every way a car, with an engine, a suspension, and a steering system designed for its size. We will meet all the emissions requirements. We now have some issues concerning safety, mainly because of the car's modest size, but we will resolve them before the car reaches the market, in about three years' time.
In addition--and this again touches on the social dimension--we're looking at small satellite units, with very low breakeven points, where some of the cars could be assembled, sold and serviced. We would encourage local entrepreneurs to invest in these units, and we would train these entrepreneurs to assemble the fully knocked-down or semi-knocked-down components that we would send to them, and they would also sell the assembled vehicles and arrange for their servicing. This approach would replace the dealer, and therefore the dealer's margin, with an assembly-cum-retail operation that would be combined with very low-cost service facilities.
Posted by: john ||
01/23/2007 17:13 Comments ||
Top||
#4
So Renault makes a low cost car it named after the worst airport in the world?
No thanks...seeing "Renault" was enough.
Didn't Ford develop a plastic engine a few years ago? They could probably sell a license to both Toyota and Tata
Posted by: john ||
01/23/2007 17:22 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Didn't somebody try this back in the 1980's?
I think it was called the Yugo.
(Except for the station wagon, which was called the Wego.)
*ducks and runs for cover* ;-p
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
01/23/2007 17:37 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Hell, sounds like every Soviet/Eastern Bloc "people's car" ever made. What will kill these concepts is a little thing called the used car market. Japan is already dumping its used cars on Russia (Japanese laws make it more expensive to fix a 10 year car than the car is worth); the US tends to dump its used cars down the line into Mexico and Central America; and a huge number of West European used cars are heading East to Russia and South to North Africa. Hell, Iraq has become the used car dumping grounds for the wealthier ME countries.
These are cars with predominately metal components and bodies, which can be worked on/repaired/rigged by very low-tech locals. The plastic car sounds like the VW Bug replacement for Europe and Southeast Asia.
Ford's hybrid Edge, a battery-powered, plug-in, with a fuel cell to charge the battery and no gasoline engine, debuts this week at the Washington, D.C. auto show. In essence, the vehicle is powered by a portable generator. Because there is no gasoline or diesel engine, the vehicle's exhaust is just water vapor from the fuel cell. The fuel cell generates electricity only to recharge the battery, not to directly power the car. That allows a smaller, simpler, cheaper fuel cell. But that's partly offset by the need for a bigger, heavier, pricier, more exotic lithium ion battery.
Even so, Ford (F) says there would be a net savings in cost and weight in a production vehicle based on the prototype. Ford says it will build one more, but has no plans to put the vehicle into production.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/23/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Just an electric motor? To provide minimally adequate performance at 5800 lb, I would require on the order of 275 HP. That would be one (or two) huge motor(s).
I don't think you can get an electric motor at less than the weight of a comparable IC engine plus drivetrain.
#3
And why are they using a fuel cell to charge a battery? Fuel cells are supposed to replace batteries.
Coal to electricity then via distribution system charge fuel cell, charge battery, drive car. That's 3 energy coversions, plus the loss in the electricity distribution and of course in the car's drive train. Overall energy efficiency probably not much more than 5%, certainly less than 10%.
So it will use approximately 5 times as much energy as a gas powered car. Geat idea!
#4
phil_b:
Fuel cells can't provide the quick surge that batteries can for breakaway and hard acceleration, so you'd still need a battery, but it could be much smaller and not need to have long-term storage. Capacitors could also work, if we get the dielectric constant high enough.
As for the energy issue, that's true if the energy comes from natural gas or oil. But, if it comes from hydro or nuclear or solar (or coal, I guess), that's energy that otherwise can't be used for transportation (unless we adopt My proposal and electrify the railroads). So, in a sense, efficiency doesn't matter, as even 1% gives you more than you had before. It may not be as efficient, but you are using a cheaper domestic source rather than an expensive foreign one. Then we can destroy the oil wells in the ME, rather than defending them.
My 300C weights 4100 lb. and has 340 HP. Now, not everyone wants 14 second ETs, but the base 300 has 190 HP and is barely adequate (it would be OK in a 3400 lb car, and quite zippy in something under 3000 lb, but not the 3900+ it weighs). So, to keep the same power-to-weight ratio in a 5800 lb. vehicle (it doesn't look that big), you need about 275. Now, arguably, you can get by with less since an electric motor has a better torque curve, but as owners of diesels have found out, a huge torque number is really no substitute for horsepower. A tranny can multiply torque (at the cost of RPM), but there's no way to fake HP you don't have. (No, a coffee-can exhaust pipe won't do it.)
#5
Ford (or was it GM) had a brilliant design that used a seperate little engine for each wheel. The plan was to have a skateboard design that could have any type of autobody attached ontop that would have fly-by-wire controls. This would allow Ford (or was it GM) to sell the skateboard to other autocompanies who would finish up the design.
It was a very impressive display, only problem was it was hydrogen. If they retooled the plan to an electric engine or hybrid you might have something.
#6
From API: As of October 2006, the average amount of tax imposed on a gallon of gasoline sold in the United States was 45.5 cents per gallon. For diesel fuel, the national average amount of tax was 52.5 cents per gallon.
Posted by: Steve ||
01/23/2007 12:02 Comments ||
Top||
#7
$1.91 in most spots here in Atlanta. Some are even at $1.89. I imagine Costco/Sam's are even a few cents less than that! Can we say $1.50???
Posted by: BA ||
01/23/2007 13:35 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Hey, it's after 14:00 and nobody has blamed Bush yet!
#13
#5 And how much of what is left constitutes local, state, and federal taxes?
The Tax Foundation has that information click on figure 1 (federal tax) and figure 2 (Combined Local, State and Federal Gasoline Taxes, August 2005. For taxes on other fuel products visit the Flying J web page and click on 'fuel pricing' then 'state tax structure'.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
President Hugo Chavez told U.S. officials to "Go to hell, gringos!" and called Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice "missy" on his weekly radio and TV show Sunday, lashing out at Washington for what he called unacceptable meddling in Venezuelan affairs. The tirade came after Washington raised concerns about a measure to grant the fiery leftist leader broad lawmaking powers. The National Assembly, which is controlled by the president's political allies, is expected to give final approval this week to what it calls the "enabling law," which would give Chavez the authority to pass a series of laws by decree during an 18-month period.
Airbus has warned customers of a potential three-month delay on its 20 billion euro ($26 billion) A400M transport aircraft program, a senior executive said Jan. 17.The European aircraft company said in December that an audit of the A400M program identified areas of risk and had approved a recovery plan. The program review recognized the risk of a three-month delay in starting final assembly of the aircraft, Tom Williams, Airbus executive vice president, programs, said at Airbus New Years press conference Jan. 17.
For the first time since the United States launched its grand experiment with publicly financed presidential campaigns, three decades ago, major party nominees in 2008 are expected to turn down all public funds. The reason: the grant, expected to be $83.8 million, might not be enough to run a winning campaign.
Pakistan is a democratic country and there is no room for a theocracy here, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Sher Afgan Niazi told the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA) during a debate in the Senate on Monday over the demolition of two mosques in Islamabad. 
Renault has started production of the Logan, which will cost from 5,000 euros (6,200 dollars) on up, touted as a budget model for consumers in emerging economies such as China and Russia that conforms to European standards. Watanabe said that Toyota could slash the price by targetting costs throughout production. 
Toyota is set this year to overtake General Motors as the world's largest automaker. The Japanese automaker has cashed in by pioneering environmentally friendly hybrid cars and has also seen success with its luxury Lexus line. 
