Worldwide Nightmare Theatre, Empire of Chaos Enhanced and Expanded

[Xyzzy]

Originally Posted by chalsall

No offence meant.

Mr. Dennit: Ricky, your little obscene gesture is going to cost you 100 points. Do you know how much that costs us in sponsorship dollars?
Ricky: With all due respect, Mr. Dennit, I had no idea you'd gotten experimental surgery to have your balls removed.
Mr. Dennit: What did you just say to me?
Ricky: What? I said it with all due respect!
Mr. Dennit: Just because you say that doesn't mean you get to say whatever you want to say to me!
Ricky: It sure as hell does!
Mr. Dennit: No, it doesn't--
Ricky: It's in the Geneva Conventions, look it up!

[Dr Sardonicus]

I don't know anything about "DNC talking points." I just keep track of the news. I am aware, for instance, that in the wake of Russia's attempt to assassinate yet another of its expatriate ex-spies in the UK -- by means of nerve gas, no less -- Il Duce invited Putin to the White House for a summit. Apparently Il Duce has no aversion to adults being killed this way.

Why would Putin & Co decide to use poison gas on civilians when they were "already winning?" Several obvious reasons: First, because they decided they could. Why not? They don't care about "bad press." Is the US, the UK, Israel, or anyone else going to do anything that would make them hurt enough to deter them? No. Hell, Russia has been steadfastly vetoing any attempt by the UN even to investigate any allegations of chemical warfare against Syrian civilians. And there have been dozens in the past year. What are they trying to hide? In a word, everything. Second, being able to do something like that, and get away with it, is a great way to dishearten the enemy. Third, killing off the enemy with poison is a lot less destructive to buildings than high explosives. Nobody seems to be quailing over Putin and Assad killing off civilians by blowing them to smithereens, so why not just keep doing that? Maybe they just got impatient. Yes, they could simply have kept bombing until the entire local populace was strawberry jam and all the buildings were rubble, and they had made the rubble dance, and dance, and dance again, but killing enough of the populace to terrify the rest into leaving is quicker and less destructive.

I would also point out that Vladimir Putin is a past master of killing his own people for political advantage. Unless, of course, you don't think he had anything, anything at all, to do with the 1999 Russian apartment bombings.

I never said Il Duce was Putin's puppet. I did say he's been brown-nosing him. And he has. If you don't think so, I'd say you were delusional. Il Duce refuses to criticize Putin, refuses to acknowledge his bad acts, and refuses to act against him. It isn't that he's Putin's puppet. It's that he's a narcissist, and Putin knows how to exploit that. As long as Il Duce thinks Putin can help him make lots of money, and Putin says nice things about him, Il Duce will acquiesce to anything Putin does. It is also possible that Putin has a stick to go along with that carrot. That wouldn't be anything to do with Il Duce's personal foibles. Even if someone threatened to publish videos of Il Duce getting a "golden shower" or if such videos were made public, Il Duce wouldn't care (and neither would I). A threat he would care about was something that would endanger his financial assets. And if I were Il Duce, I would be very wary indeed about any business ventures in Russia. There have been a number of American business ventures there that have ended badly.

I wholeheartedly agree, Il Duce has been dancing to Net and Yahoo's tune. Seems strange, in a way, since Il Duce is practically an object of adoration for neo-Nazis of every stripe.

But then, Il Duce is, as Rex Tillerson (allegedly) said, a moron. I mean, geez, on March 20 he invited Putin to the White House for a summit. On April 11 he said

Our relationship with Russia is worse now than it has ever been, and that includes the Cold War.

Good grief, I thought everyone knew not to mix bleach and ammonia. Another household chemical mixture causing a noxious smell (I don't know how toxic) is when "Comet meets Dawn." Mixing chlorine bleaching cleanser and dishwashing liquid creates something that is quite irritating to the ol' nasal passages. I learned this one time when I decided to scrub out the sink with the same sponge I'd just used on the dishes.

[ewmayer]

Dr.S, the fact that the word "alleged" (to say nothing about drilling down into the various allegers' extensive histories of false-flagging and pro-war propagandizing) appears to be absent from your vocabulary when it comes to demonizing Russia is telling. But you've admitted to being a dyed-in-the-wool American exceptionalist (your recent lilting "the good America" soliloquy comes to mind), so your lack of skepticism re. official narratives peddled by known liars and warmongers and their MSM mouthpieces should perhaps not be surprising. Nor should the highly selective outrage - where is your ire at the US-aided Saudi slaughter in Yemen, for instance? Ah, but in Yemen there's no slick western and gulf-states-funded White-Helmets-style PR campaign carried near-nightly on the MSM. It's not on the nightly n00z or on facebook news feeds because it kinda clashes with "the good America" thing, so down the memory hole it goes.

As annoyed as I am at Trump's inane schizophrenic tweets on the matter, you know what appals me the most? Seeing the Dem establishment and their pals in the Military/Intelligence complex aggressively, almost gleefully attempting to goad Trump into a shooting war against a fellow nuclear-armed sovereign in order to prove his not-a-Putin-puppet bona fides, and partisan tribalists like yourself cheering them on.

Mass-murderous imperial sociopathy carried on under a banner of faux liberalism is still mass-murderous imperial sociopathy. They couldn't get Hillary elected, but by golly, they're going to get her bloody-minded foreign policy, no matter the cost.

[Dr Sardonicus]

Originally Posted by ewmayer

(your recent lilting "the good America" soliloquy comes to mind)

If you'd bothered to read what I wrote, you would know that I quoted the phrase "the good people of the United States of America" from the Declaration of Independence. But then, I don't expect someone who could flub the basic fact that US Representatives serve 2-year terms to be any more familiar with the Declaration of Independence than they are with the Constitution.

You seem to have completely missed my point that most Americans you're likely to run into are good people, and it is they who can, and often do, hold those in power to the ideals on which this country was founded -- assuming, of course, that the public is informed about what is going on.

And if you, as you have declared, consider those ideals to be "highfalutin claptrap," and that anyone who believes in them is delusional, then it occurs to me to wonder on what basis you express outrage at what our political leaders are doing -- indeed, why you find their activities even worthy of note.

where is your ire at the US-aided Saudi slaughter in Yemen, for instance?

Funny you should ask. One of my neighbors had a Yemeni exchange student staying at their house when all hell broke loose over there, and she couldn't go home. Among other things, her governor back home was assassinated, and two tropical cyclones struck.

As annoyed as I am at Trump's inane schizophrenic tweets on the matter, you know what appals me the most? Seeing the Dem establishment and their pals in the Military/Intelligence complex aggressively, almost gleefully attempting to goad Trump into a shooting war against a fellow nuclear-armed sovereign in order to prove his not-a-Putin-puppet bona fides, and partisan tribalists like yourself cheering them on.

Oh, yes, I'm sure it's the Dems who are responsible for Il Duce getting the Republican nomination, for his being of the "Whambozambo Comix" school of foreign policy research, and for his selection of John Bolton as National Security Advisor. If you want to blame the Dems for running the one candidate who would lose the election to him, though, fair enough.

[ewmayer]

Originally Posted by Dr Sardonicus

If you'd bothered to read what I wrote, you would know that I quoted the phrase "the good people of the United States of America" from the Declaration of Independence. But then, I don't expect someone who could flub the basic fact that US Representatives serve 2-year terms to be any more familiar with the Declaration of Independence than they are with the Constitution.

I read your post as conveying that you believed contemporary America actually resembled the idealized (even then, in slave-economics-driven colonial America) version of that quote. And please, you've never done a 2x or 3x or 10x flub when juggling figures?

You seem to have completely missed my point that most Americans you're likely to run into are good people, and it is they who can, and often do, hold those in power to the ideals on which this country was founded -- assuming, of course, that the public is informed about what is going on.

Can a people which - irrespective of their individual local-interaction behavior - sanctions imperial slaughter by the millions [just look at the sorry post-WW2 history of such, from Korea to Vietnam to the middle east] decade after decade fairly be described as "good"? [And I say this as an American myself]. Because the only way to reconcile your lofty ideals-invocation versus present reality is to abandon the "we are good, both as individuals and as a nation" claim, or to conclude that the people have no say in what their government does, which puts the lie to your "hold those in power to the ideals" claim. Ever heard the expression "we are what we repeatedly do?" In this case "we are what we repeatedly allow to happen in our name".

Please tell us when the American people last held a president to account for his misdeeds, not just by voting in someone else, but by actually punishment of lawbreaking. Last one I can think of is Nixon, and he was immediately pardoned by his successor. Where are the war crimes indictments, for example? [Of which every president going back to Reagan can plausibly be accused].

And looking at the volume of sheer bald-faced propaganda and outright falsehood which dominates the MSM newscasts in the U.S., 'well-informed' is utterly the last phrase I would use to characterize it. You yourself repeatedly trot out allegations as if they were proven fact when it suits you, e.g. in your neo-McCarthyite Russophobia campaign.

And if you, as you have declared, consider those ideals to be "highfalutin claptrap," and that anyone who believes in them is delusional, then it occurs to me to wonder on what basis you express outrage at what our political leaders are doing -- indeed, why you find their activities even worthy of note.

Not the ideals themselves, but rather their invocation as if they in any meaningful sense resembled the reality.

Funny you should ask. One of my neighbors had a Yemeni exchange student staying at their house when all hell broke loose over there, and she couldn't go home. Among other things, her governor back home was assassinated, and two tropical cyclones struck.

And your previous expressions of outrage over the US-abetted slaughter there, which started with Obama, are where? Oh yeah, they're alongside the ones about the US-led destruction of Libya, right?

Oh, yes, I'm sure it's the Dems who are responsible for Il Duce getting the Republican nomination, for his being of the "Whambozambo Comix" school of foreign policy research, and for his selection of John Bolton as National Security Advisor. If you want to blame the Dems for running the one candidate who would lose the election to him, though, fair enough.

You just admitted that the Dems are responsible for him becoming president. Because there is no way in hell he would've won against Bernie Sanders.

But enough sniping - besides the ideals-versus-reality our major point of disagreement appears to be whether Trump is a one-off singular evil amongst a series of more or less decorous presidents, or a sympton of a profoundly sick national culture and a violently flailing empire in decline.

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by Uncwilly

Surprised that no one else mentioned that this is blatantly false. C₂H₂ is the gas in question. All of that extra energy comes from the triple bond. C₂H₄ does not yield as much energy as C₂H₂, per mole.

You are of course correct. I miss-remembered the chemistry of ethylene (C₂H₄) from acetylene (C₂H₂). The latter is the skinny stuff, and loves to escape almost as much H₂.

I understand this is why many "clean" rockets are going to be using CH₄; relatively fat.

Sorry; its been a busy week...

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by ewmayer

Please tell us when the American people last held a president to account for his misdeeds, not just by voting in someone else, but by actually punishment of lawbreaking. Last one I can think of is Nixon, and he was immediately pardoned by his successor.

As I understand it, Nixon resigned rather than be impeached.

Currently it takes something like 2/3 of Congress to actually remove a US President. Even if Trump is impeached, how likely is it that the needed backbone (read: votes from "representatives of the people") would be achieved?

Originally Posted by ewmayer

...or a sympton of a profoundly sick national culture and a violently flailing empire in decline.

You said it; not me.

[ewmayer]

Originally Posted by chalsall

As I understand it, Nixon resigned rather than be impeached.

I meant "held to account" there in the sense that public sentiment was such that the latter would surely have occurred, had it not been pre-empted by the former.

Originally Posted by chalsall

You are of course correct. I miss-remembered the chemistry of ethylene (C₂H₄) from acetylene (C₂H₂). The latter is the skinny stuff, and loves to escape almost as much H₂.

I understand this is why many "clean" rockets are going to be using CH₄; relatively fat.

Sorry; its been a busy week...

Speaking of busy, I forgot to answer your earlier question - yes, I have used an oxyacetylene cutting torch. Back in my misspent youth a friend and I also built a spud gun which took C2H2 and O2 from a pair of repurposed fire extinguishers mounted on a backpack frame ... that was an interesting experiment of the "do not try this yourself" variety. [Hint: look up "Chapman-Jouguet resonant detonation wave".] Good thing we used a really heavy-duty aluminum pipe as a barrel...

[kladner]

Originally Posted by ewmayer

I meant "held to account" there in the sense that public sentiment was such that the latter would surely have occurred, had it not been pre-empted by the former.



Speaking of busy, I forgot to answer your earlier question - yes, I have used an oxyacetylene cutting torch. Back in my misspent youth a friend and I also built a spud gun which took C2H2 and O2 from a pair of repurposed fire extinguishers mounted on a backpack frame ... that was an interesting experiment of the "do not try this yourself" variety. [Hint: look up "Chapman-Jouguet resonant detonation wave".] Good thing we used a really heavy-duty aluminum pipe as a barrel...

Umm...Your ears rang like after four or five hours of high-intensity rock concert?

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by ewmayer

Back in my misspent youth a friend and I also built a spud gun which took C2H2 and O2 from a pair of repurposed fire extinguishers mounted on a backpack frame ... that was an interesting experiment of the "do not try this yourself" variety.

I resonate...

One experiment I ran as a kid was to fill a large garbage bag with an almost perfect mix of C2H2 and O2, and place it in a 45 gallon steel drum we used as an incinerator. Not sure how many moles, but the bag of gas almost filled the drum.

While I was preparing the fuse it spontaneously reacted as I was standing about 60 cm away from it.

Medevaced to Kamloops; both ear drums blown out; eye concussion; legally blind for six weeks. The explosion was reported to have been heard in the town several kilometres away. I shouldn't be alive. (True story; I have a picture of the remains of the drum somewhere.)

[Uncwilly]

Originally Posted by chalsall

One experiment I ran as a kid was to fill a large garbage bag with an almost perfect mix of C2H2 and O2, and place it in a 45 gallon steel drum we used as an incinerator. Not sure how many moles, but the bag of gas almost filled the drum.

While I was preparing the fuse it spontaneously reacted as I was standing about 60 cm away from it.

Originally Posted by https://arlweb.msha.gov/alerts/hazardsofacetylene.htm

An acetylene molecule is composed of two carbon atoms and two hydrogen atoms. The two carbon atoms are held together by what is known as a triple carbon bond. This bond is useful in that it stores substantial energy that can be released as heat during combustion. However, the triple carbon bond is unstable, making acetylene gas very sensitive to conditions such as excess pressure, excess temperature, static electricity, or mechanical shock.

That is why it is not used in rockets. Also storage is an issue. To stablise it, acetylene is dissolved in acetone, the cylinders contain a porous rock. Withdrawal rates from a cylinder should not exceed 1/7 of the tank per hour. These factors make it bad as rocket fuel.