Belgian_Draft

Answer what? HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

Can't say Reagan didn't take responsibility. www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRUbwnkEPqc&feature=related HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

You're absolutely right, Regan actually underspent and GHWB / Clinton cutting the military.....treasonous bastards. We need to start by quadrupling the current military and then see where we are. Ya nevr know where the commies are hiding. Oh wait, we manufactured a new axis of eveil; the Arabs/Palestine. Right, as long as we have'manufacture an enemy then we'll have a reason to piss our future away on delluded parahoia. Wow Ever hear the pot/kettle analogy? HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

BTW, I found your attempt to use the "reasonable man" standard to the USSR a great deal entertaining. What the hell is reasonable about anybody, American or Soviet, sitting with their finger on a button capable of killing millions of people? HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

Without knowing what Reagan and his cabinet knew, i cannot make that call anymore than you can. Are you naive enough to think all executive decisions are made solely on information that is readliy available to the public? Ironic, isn't it? The goal of the attack on Pear was to eliminate our Naval capabilities in the Pacific, not just deminish them. They were surprised when no carriers were in port, some of the main targets of the attack. With vitually all escort vessels damaged or otherwise out of service the carriers were sitting ducks for the Japanese forces. They left and headed west without accomplishing all of their goals and it cost them dearly. We were very lucky they made a poor (from their viewpoint) decision. One key point, but by no means the only point: A detachment of Japanese subs sent to patrol between Midway and Pearl were late getting to their destination. By the time they did the American carriers had already sailed past. Had the subs been on time they would have easily spotted our ships and any advantage of surprise we had would have been lost if not a carrier or two to torpedoes from those subs. The several months after Pearl that it took us to get our military forces populated, trained, armed, equipped, and sent to where they were needed. Are you lost in a time warp or something? Pearl was the final straw that pulled us into WWII. That happened first, then we had to ramp up for the European theater. Yep, that's what you knew. Or, at least, that's the way you saw things. You still don't understand that decisions arte made by the President often based on information not made public. Reagan may or may not have had such info. You and I don't know if he did. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

I will decline to debate the point any longer. You seem to have a wanton knack for leading a thread off on tangents totally unrelated to the OP. If you want to know how luck was involved at Midway then you'll just have to give yourself a little history lesson. I won't address that here. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

Yes sir, i could not agree more. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

Depends on wha you consider to be credible. To let your defense capability suffer because nobody is challenging you at the time is stupid. Yes, there is and whether we missed it or not is a matter of opinion. I feel we haven't. Caught sleeping. Unless you believe the conspiracy theirists who (wrongly) think Roosevelt knew of the impending attack. Taking months to recover was a result of Roosevelt allowing our military to degrade to a minimum. We got lucky at Pearl in that the Japanese Navy decided not to send another wave of aircraft. Our defenses were shattered and Pearl could have easily been taken from us if the Japanese had decided to try. Midway was a battle that should have been a disaster for us but everything that could go right for us did and everything that could go wrong for the Japanese went wrong. Yes, our men fought bravely but there is no doubt that we got lucky. Sometimes in war things just happen that way. The invasion of Europe was long after the time period I was referring to. By then we had ramped up our military forces and supply system all the way from raw materials to ammo in hand. You have the luxory of being able to allow yourself to believe that. It's even easier now 25+ years later. Fact is, you have no idea as to what information the President had available to him and you most likely never will. Airmchair diplomacy is as easy as airmchair quarterbacking. And has about as much influence. You entire last paragraph is nothing but a rant so I won't bother responding to it. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

If the only reason for having a military was the Soviet Union, then there would be no reason to build up the military if they were no threat. Problem with that is twofold: The consequences of not being prepared to defend our country if they were a threat or if they were the only possible threat. Yes, we got slammed at and after Pearl because our military was not prepared. Leaving out the unforeseen attack on Pearl it took ous months to bring our military up to speed enough to put up a good fight. Yes, we had some victories soon after Pearl, but the fact is we got damn lucky. Reagan lived through that and wasn't about to let it happen again. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

I am at a loss for words. I honestly don't know what to say about that. Tasteless? Nope, I love bacon.

Typo corrected. (1945 changed to 1941.) A reasonable man would be reasonably prepared for any situation that had a reasonable chance of happening. Roosevelt didn't and we got slammed. Reagan was prepared. If Reagan had not built up our conventional military the only options we would have had would have been to surrender or to use nukes. I'd rather build up the military, thank you. Yeah, I did. You just can't read. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

I am so sorry. How could I, or anyone for that matter, ever think that a conventional military force could be of use other than to defend against an attack by the USSR. Here I was thinking it might come in handy to protect US interests around the world as well as assist here in times of disaster if the NG became overwhelmed. You have changed my mind. I'm with you now. Reagan wasted money on conventional weapons. Hell, we had NUKES!

1: The only ones who know whether or not the Soviet Union was an imminent thereat were the Soviet leadership and those who had access to intelligence pointing one way or the other. I'm pretty sure you don't fall into either one of those categories. That means you have to make your best guess without the benefit of knowing what Reagan knew. Were they an imminent threat? My guess is the same as yours; No. But that doesn't mean that status could not change at the drop of a hat. Since you are so fond of diiging in the past, the US cut off trade with Japan in July of 1941. Less than 5 months later they attacked Pearl Harbor and caught the US with our pants down. 2: Exactly my point, thank you very much. Since we didn't know what the future of US-Soviet relations was going to be we had no choice but to be prepared for any eventuallity. That includes conventional as well as non-conventional warfare. If you don't understand that concept, watch the Reagan ad again. Selling lots of grain to the Soviets is a poor reason to think we were immune from any conflict with them. Most wars through history have been over one of two things: Resources or religion. Sometimes both. BTW, I did post an example of you contradicting yourself. Re-read my post and pay attention to what lines of yours i quoted. edited to correct typo HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

In one post you use the relative weakness of the Soviet army in WWII to show whay the US didn't need to buildup its military under Reagan, yet in the next you essentially agree that the strength of the Soviet army in WWII was immaterial during the 80s. I don't get it. Anybody with a brain knows it sucks and why. You pretty much answered that question in the previous sentence. "Small countries just need nukes with a finger hovering over the button, large countries need both conventional and nuclear, but they canniot use the nuclear option unless at the last moment." Reagans campaign ad from 1984 answers all your questions perfectly. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpwdcmjBgNA HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

Once the Soviets had attained nuclear capabilities the strength of their army in WWII was, from that time forward, a moot point. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

By who's standard is this "better" and why the fuck should you try to make this a contest? Fuck that shit. Seriously. Right on. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=LL-0mdEg0U4&feature=related HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

Ok Bill. I'm off this thread. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

Say WHAT???? Are you so busy arguing with everybody here on SC you can't even keep track of what threads you are posting to? And now you expect ME to show you where you need to post? HAH! That has got to be a perfect "10" for irony! HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

15 years metal fab, then a BSME, then CWI & CWE added in the 20 years since. Worked for big oil, small oil, big construction, small construction, inspection, repair, and testing facilities. Now I work for myself. Certificated pilot. Built and flew my own experimental aircraft (a DR-107) from blueprints. Yeah, I'd say I have a slightly larger knowledge base to "draw" from. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

Hmmm...refusing to answer questions. In the thread i started about Ford and UAW, you eventually offered to dispur our arguments one at a time. I was all in favor of that. But after the first reply you disappeared. Poof. Gone. Now you are starting the same crap here of posting God-awful long and disordered posts. Why should i even bother? You accuse me of misquoting but, if you check, it is you who have been misquoting everybody. Maybe you should stick to sweeping the men's room. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

Damn you are entertaining to watch squirm! HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

Yes, I know. That's what I pointed out in my reply. Read it again and this time pay attention. I try to keep my replies short so you can follow along. Exactly my point You said 6061 was the only Al alloy you have seen in aircraft that has been welded. That shows a very limited exposure. It also is not the most weldable alloy used in aircraft. Weldability takes into account a number of variables, some of which I am sure you are familiar with but some I am just as sure you are not. Since you brought it up, yes, different alloys can be welded together. There are even processes by which dissimilar metals, such as Fe and Al, can be welded together successfully. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

-All aluminum alloys can be welded. Some alloys are easily welded, some aren't. Some can be fusion welded, some have to be solid state welded. Quality and retained strength vary considerably. What alloy is the best to be welded depends entirely on the application. -Aircraft use many different welded alloys. If the only one you have ever seen that was welded is 6061 then you have been around aircraft even less than I. -What is it about what Hoover did that I disagreed with you on? BTW, your question was "swell and draw", not "swell then draw". There is a world of difference in the wording. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.

To revisit your question to me, you asked what riveting method uses swell and draw. You didn't say the most common, the most known, etc. I told you blind riveting. In case you need reminding a riveting tool is used to draw the rivet pin which swells the head before the pin pulls apart. Plainly blind riveting uses both aspects you asked for. Sorry you don't like the answer but I'm sure you'll live through the dissappointment. No, I never said anything about the stock market. Again, sorry to dissappoint you. I think you are just arguing with too many other posters to keep them all straight about who said what. Dude, just from that statement alone there is no way on this earth you could ever offer testimony as an airframe expert of any kind. Why do you keep bringing up Hoover? Are you so hard up for an argument that you now want to argue about points you agree on??? HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit.