Free Republic

You may have me beat. My worst jobs: 1) picking up cigarette butts in a huge parking lot in the hot North Carolina summer sun. For breaks, I got to clean out garbage receptacles. 2) Working as a dishwasher in a very hot, very humid and sometimes very smelly North Carolina restaurant. I never knew how much fungus and how many rashes one could get in the nether regions until I had that job. I also learned that after you cut Jalapeno peppers you must wash your hands before your go to the restroom. I was in so much pain, my eyes bled.
3) Having my clients found "not guilty" even though I believe that they committed the crimes (some heinous like forcible rape with a minor victim) I just had to keep telling myself that the United States Constitution provides for the right to an attorney.

So it's ok to starve your wife to death, right? Wrong!

You are correct. Bush allows our warships to visit communist dictatorships such as Viet Nam and China but won't allow our navy to pay a visit to the democracy of Taiwan.

I like Thailand's solution to the drug problem. You deal drugs, the police kill you. Reportedly, thousands of drug dealers have been sent on the path to Nirvana with the aid of a 7.62 round.

The next most pressing problem is the Muslim situation which, I assume will eventually be dealt with like the drug problem.

Hope to retire in Thailand where the mountains are green, the food is great, and most everything is inexpensive.

And you don't think that Las Vegas is a sex tourism destination?

Unlike many priests, Buddhists do not favor little boys.

Las Vegas or Amsterdam probably holds the title of sex capital of the world.
As for the pedophile priests, I think they do most of their perverted acts on American soil.

As in Bucknell in Lewisburg PA?

Notice how Condi failed to visit Taiwan? Instead, she acknowledged and reaffirmed the "One China" policy which is so dear to Communist China, and hence subjugating morality for monetary policy.

Bush often speaks of freedom. In the case of China, it is the freedom to continue the policy of forced abortions, religious genocide, slavery, and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

For one, he was democratically elected (sort of)

I believe that France shouldn't have nuclear weapons.

The last I checked, men are incapable of becoming pregnant. Women, however, are capable of holding a gun...

Many women treat equality selectively. They want equal pay, equal opportunity, equal access to government. However, when it comes to sharing the burden of democracy and freedom, the clarion call of equality grows silent among women.

1) My posts always refer to the Kidd Class of destroyers and the aegis missile system. By virtue of this distinction, one should be able to discern that the Kidd is the class of ship and the aegis is a system.

2) Your intimation that a "friend" is providing me information is a mark of either condescension or paranoia. Either way, get some help.

3) Jane's, the foremost authority on defense, has stated and the United States shipyard manufacturers have recognized the fact that we have not built a diesel powered submarine since the SS581 which was decommissioned in 1990.

There is nothing in the article concerning your claim that Kidd Class destroyers have aegis systems. Nor is there any evidence as to where the subs are to be manufactured. Still waiting to hear about the US shipyard that makes diesel subs.

Now if only the FBI could do something about the Las Vegas City Counsel

Whether Lee is in the legislature or not does not obviate the fact that 1) you falsely claimed the American shipyards build diesel submarines-they don't 2) that the Kidd class is equipped with the Aegis Missile System. It is not.
Here is the news from the Bush administration:
On April 24, 2001, President George W. Bush authorized the sale of a major package of arms to Taiwan, including destroyers, diesel-powered submarines, and anti-submarine aircraft, but he deferred Taipei's request for U.S. destroyers equipped with the advanced Aegis combat system.

Is Jane's a good enough source for you?

A major arms package, but no AEGIS, for Taiwan

By Peter Felstead, janes.com Web Editor

China was today lodging official protests over the US announcement yesterday of a major arms deal for Taiwan: a move that signals a continued US preparedness to support the island state that Beijing has always considered a renegade province.

A sizeable package
The arms package announced for Taiwan yesterday may be even larger than the biggest previous US sale to the island: the 1992 supply of 150 F-16 fighters worth US$6 billion. Its major components are as follows:
# Four Kidd-class destroyers (currently mothballed). Further details of the Kidd-class destroyer are available here.
# Eight diesel-electric patrol submarines
# 12 P-3 Orion maritime patrol aircraft
# Paladin self-propelled howitzers
# MH-53E minesweeping helicopters
# AAV7A1 amphibious assault vehicles
# Avenger surface-to-air missiles
# Submarine- and surface-launched torpedoes

The defence package agreed for Taiwan was influenced largely by the build-up of missiles facing Taipei from the Chinese mainland, although the recent strain in Sino-US relations over the collision between a US EP-3 surveillance aircraft and a Chinese J-8 interceptor will not have put the US government in a conciliatory mood. China critics in the US Congress were dismayed by President Bush stopping short of selling Taiwan warships equipped with the AEGIS integrated combat system, but they were somewhat mollified by the decision to go ahead with the supply of submarines. These would provide a potent blockade-breaking capability and serve as a deterrent to any invasion of Taiwan by the People's Liberation Army.

Submarines from where?
How these submarines will be supplied is another matter, since the USA no longer has an indigenous capability to build diesel-electric patrol submarines. One obvious potential source of supply would have been the link-up between US companies Litton Ingalls Shipbuilding and Lockheed Martin and Dutch boatbuilders RDM, a joint venture formed to offer Moray class submarines to Egypt.

RDM, however, has been blocked in the past from selling submarines direct to Taiwan by the Dutch government - despite the Dutch having supplied Taiwan's two Hai Lung-class patrol submarines in 1987/88. Yesterday a Dutch Foreign Ministry spokesman told the Bloomberg News Service that current Dutch policy meant that "no weapons are to be sold to Taiwan or to third parties for resale to Taiwan".

Germany would be a possible alternative source, but Berlin, too, has shied away from selling submarines to Taiwan for fear of incensing the Chinese. A spokesman for German Chancellor Gerhard Shroeder told Bloomberg yesterday: "We wouldn't permit the sale."

France, which also builds diesel-electric submarines, has in the past supplied Taiwan with six Kang Ding (La Fayette) class frigates, Mirage 2000 fighters and other weapons - but at the cost of much deteriorated relations with Beijing.

Still waiting for you to name the US shipyard that builds diesel subs. In the interim, I will defer to Jane's

Name one shipyard in the United States that has built a diesel submarine in the last 5 years.

As for the Kidd Class:
- That the DDG-993 Kidd-class destroyer is more than 20 years old and its structure and equipment are aged;

- That the destroyer has a displacement of 9,783 metric tons with a draught of 10 meters, meaning it would be unable to anchor at any of Taiwan's existing military ports;

- That with its huge size and low mobilization speed during wartime, it would be an easy target for Beijing's forces;

- That the destroyers were designed exclusively for Iran and its combat system is less efficient than its counterpart Spuance-class destroyers that the U.S. Navy is currently using;

- That its special design and specifications require expensive logistic and maintenance costs;

- That the destroyer was designed for long-haul ocean-going combat missions, which runs counter to Taiwan's need for vessels capable of coastal combat missions;

- That the number of personnel aboard one single Kidd-class destroyer is around 400, making it a heavy financial burden simply in personnel costs and related training fees;

- That its mechanical 3D radar system is less sophisticated than the Aegis radar system of the Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, which he claimed are the backbone of the U.S. Navy, while its air surveillance capability is not as good as that of early-warning surveillance aircraft;

- That its Standard II anti-aircraft missile system is not capable of deterring missile attacks;

- That its command, control, communications and intelligence systems are incompatible with those of the Lafayette-class frigates which are currently in ROC Navy service;

- That the cost of NT$25 billion for four Kidd-class destroyers, plus costs for initiation of weaponry systems and related equipment, port reconstruction, logistics and personnel will be a mammoth expense for the government; and

- That the United States tried twice in 1998 and 1999 to sell the four Kidd destroyers to Greece and Australia, but were turned down.

Hence, are not Aegis equipped destroyers.

So you are the one with the lock on Ecuador. What really gets my goat is the the INS seems to focus its attention on Asian university students. Once educated, they are immediately contacted and forced to leave. Seems counterintuitive to increasing the national intelligence quotient.

Where I live, there is apparently a ongoing special at the local supermarket: If you purchase a gallon of milk, you receive a free shopping cart.

So you agree with Bush's solution of granting amnesty, not adequately funding the border patrol, and providing no leadership with regards to illegal aliens?

Encouraging illegal conduct and engaging in a dereliction of duty is not going to fix the problem.

Sort of runs counter to the notion of "free" doesn't it? Often, people are champions of freedom only when the opinions expressed are there's.

Bush has been a major engine behind illegal immigration. He has refused to fortify the borders. He has failed to provide the necessary funding for border patrol. He has bandied about rewarding illegals with amnesty. There has been no leadership from the Bush administration that you could point to which has resulted in stemming the tide of illegal aliens. Bush has had over 4 years to protect the sovereignty of this nation. In this regard, he has been an utter failure.