must revise my mental index to change the version of staggering associated with losses.
Usually I had associated your selection with drunk.
Maybe another one of Willy's "new rules"
White Phosphorus, hype vs reality
- (marlowe)
- (20)
- Nov. 26, 2005, 02:38:43 PM EST
Phil vs Pentagon
- (rcareaga)
- (1)
- Nov. 26, 2005, 02:59:03 PM EST
you mean when I was calling in rounds of WP to Mark
- (boxley)
- Nov. 26, 2005, 06:35:21 PM EST
Looks like I hit a nerve!
- (tuberculosis)
- (17)
- Aug. 21, 2007, 12:40:46 PM EDT
One nit
- (bepatient)
- (12)
- Nov. 26, 2005, 03:49:30 PM EST
staggering losses
- (rcareaga)
- (1)
- Nov. 26, 2005, 03:53:43 PM EST
I see
- (bepatient)
- Nov. 26, 2005, 04:08:08 PM EST
Nit again...
- (Simon_Jester)
- (4)
- Nov. 26, 2005, 04:09:08 PM EST
Point taken
- (bepatient)
- (3)
- Nov. 26, 2005, 05:04:31 PM EST
Big nit
- (ben_tilly)
- (2)
- Nov. 26, 2005, 06:58:16 PM EST
I should know better.
- (bepatient)
- (1)
- Nov. 26, 2005, 08:47:11 PM EST
Right. Not by a factor of 10.
- (ben_tilly)
- Nov. 27, 2005, 12:47:16 AM EST
I was talking about monetary cost.
- (tuberculosis)
- (3)
- Aug. 21, 2007, 12:42:16 PM EDT
Cost of containment is $380 billion so invading was cheaper
- (boxley)
- (2)
- Nov. 27, 2005, 10:35:19 PM EST
Um, box...did you read that article??
- (Simon_Jester)
- Nov. 27, 2005, 10:54:44 PM EST
I hope their analysis is better than their OS analysis.
- (Another Scott)
- Nov. 27, 2005, 11:13:46 PM EST
To the sufficiently staggerable, anything is staggering.
- (marlowe)
- Dec. 3, 2005, 09:09:58 AM EST
staggering loss of materiel maybe
- (boxley)
- (3)
- Nov. 26, 2005, 06:38:09 PM EST
Add in economic casualties - start with your kids
- (tuberculosis)
- (2)
- Aug. 21, 2007, 12:42:20 PM EDT
nice slide from under your prognostications of doom :-)
-NT
- (boxley)
- (1)
- Nov. 27, 2005, 10:30:17 PM EST
Who needs prognostications - just look around.
-NT
- (Ashton)
- Nov. 28, 2005, 05:19:06 AM EST