There have been some team trying to get Hadidi (I think that's his name?), Memphis the main one I think, but there was a warning from the US government telling teams that they weren't allowed to deal with anyone from Iran!

Everyone from Iran is so dangerous and scary... Just let him play!

God forbid allowing tolerance and encouraging understanding between different cultures Isaac. That is simply un-American!

God forbid allowing tolerance and encouraging understanding between different cultures Isaac. That is simply un-American!

Easier just to invade 'em.

Interesting political side comment....John McCain, republican candidate for the US presedential election, was recently asked about his thoughts on Georgia/Russia. This is a guy who has openly stated that he's happy fr US troops to stay in Iraq and Afghanistan for 100 years if necessary, and thinks that it's OK for the US to be planning to go into both Iran and North Korea (after building up the military with another 500,000 men. His comment on Georgia/Russia?....

"In this day and age, in 2008, no country has the right to invade another country."

The issue with Haddidi is simple - and the NBA are making a deal with the body responsible for international trade to work around it. No US corporation or individual may have commercial dealings with an Iranian party (except in special circumstances or under a waiver - i`d imagine oil being one)... So technically negotiating with Haddidi falls under this (even through a neutral middleman) - Stern is aware of it and getting a waiver sorted out... It`d be the same if NBA teams were dealing with Cuban/North Korean nationals (not including asylum seekers etc)... All Haddidi needs to do is defect and hey presto - problem solved (a la the scene in "Moscow On The Hudson"). Of course that would probably result in extreme hardship (or worse on his family) - and he along with the whole team is probably under 24 hour watch...

Isaac - Not everyone in Iran, just the guys in power - and they are scary... as far as i am aware the average Iranian wants the clerics/fundamentalists/wowsers out or at least reined in - but that won`t happen (at least witout another Iranian Revolution)...

Not that much scarier than half of the powers in the US, but probably a little more open about it.

Dicko, there is a massive difference between the two situations. One was to liberate the people (which was achieved) the other was to stamp their power without any decent cause what so ever.

Since America's attacks in Iraq and Afghanistan there have been no significant terrorist attacks. It has been a successful cause in my opinion.

KingJames

"Since America's attacks in Iraq and Afghanistan there have been no significant terrorist attacks. It has been a successful cause in my opinion."

IMO that is an extremely ill-informed and naive comment.

But this is not a political forum, so let's not get caught up in that stuff.

even more impressive - australia has taken care of the ball better than any other team...we have the least turnovers...

we'll need to do that against the usa...

"Since America's attacks in Iraq and Afghanistan there have been no significant terrorist attacks. It has been a successful cause in my opinion."

Correlation is not causation.

If you think that the Iraq occupation is anything more than having a presence where all the oil is, you're kidding yourself.

Yep - i remember a while back Newsweek did a servey in the States and something like 40% of Americans believed in the coming of Armageddon/Rapture as outlined in the Bible... This is only my opinion (to which i am entitled) - that is super scary (along with the fact that they gave GWB not 1 but two terms - while screwing his old man (who is worth a grain of salt) with 1 - go figure)...

http://www.preteristarchive.com/dEmEnTiA/1999_newsweek_poll.html

Yeah, Madrid, London, Saudi Arabia, a number of African, South East Asian, Middle and Far Eastern countries, all of which have had terrorist attacks since the allied 'intervention' in Afganistan, might want to say 'what about me?'

You might want to watch SBS news a little more KingJames.

KingJames - not quite true. Russia retaliated after Georgia attacked the separatist/breakaway republics of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. That's hardly "without any decent cause what so ever".

And this could hardly be further from the truth:

Since America's attacks in Iraq and Afghanistan there have been no significant terrorist attacks.

Here's a quick timeline with a couple of "significant" terrorist attacks on the West that you might remember:

Late 2001, US Special Forces invaded Afghanistan.
March 2003, coalition invaded Iraq.
March 2004, Madrid train bombings (191 killed, 1,755 injured).
July 2005, London bombings (52 killed, 700 injured).

Terrorist incidents in 2008 that you may not have even noticed (100+ deaths in July alone). The numbers in 2007 might surprise you also.

Back track through 2003-2008 and then through pre-2003 lists (Incidents by year) - notice how Iraq starts to feature more or less after the 2003 invasion. There's even a page highlighting it as something fairly new for Iraq.

Or did you mean that there haven't been any significant attacks on Western nations that were bad enough for you personally to notice?

Does anyone else find it funny that the a topic about the Boomers' offence ended up as a full-on political and current affairs discussion? Haha. What will we end up talking about if the Boomers get a medal?

The end of the mining boom and share price of various gold miners?

I'm just waiting for Godwin's Law to kick in ...

Sorry my comment was too generalised. I was referring to Al-Qaeda and (partially on) Muslim Extremist whom pose the biggest threat on Western societies.

The Madrid bombings was ruled to have no al-Qaida link at all. However, the London bombings I was wrong about in my statement. but I still believe that there is less likely hood to have a significant (1000's killed) terrorist attack in America, Australia, England etc Then there was before the invasions.

There has been a significant amount of suicide bombings since, however I don't think the causalities would be close to that of the causalities of civil wars in Iraq prior to the occupancy of the US. Including the gassing of 30,000+ Kurds.

The majority of other Terrorist attacks are on going feuds that have been going on for years and years for various reasons such as political and religious believes and have no bearing on America occupancy of Iraq and Afghanistan.

We all have our right to our opinion. I think War is never good however if it means short term loss for long term gain then I think it is somewhat justified. I would say its not the worlds biggest problem the worlds biggest problem is people dying of starvation in Africa and poverty in general. Unfortunately, the world turns a blind eye to that.

Dale C is right the topic should be on the Boomers. War topics can be an ever ending debate with valid points on either side.

King James - why does the US get to decide when Iraqi people "need" its help, and in what capacity?

Why not put the same effort into Sudan where the human rights atrocities and number of deaths make Iraq look like the Gold Coast? No oil - that's why.

How many "1000's killed" terrorist attacks had we seen in "America, Australia, England" prior to 2001?

No comment on the situation in South Ossetia?

OMG they have just run out of doughnuts at our local minimart........

That list wouldn't be all the terrorist attacks either. Some of them don't make the news....

I agree with you, thedoctor.

Funny how when there's something beneficial to the US, they simply must liberate the poor downtrodden citizens from the horrible opressive regime, yet when there is no financial incentive (eg Zimbabwe, Sudan) they conveniently turn a blind eye.

The one thing that 9/11 and the US invasion of Iraq demonstrated is that fundamentalist Christians are just as scary as fundamentalist Islamics.

But back to the topic:

Out of all the teams in the Olympics, I think Australia matches up with team USA the best. We're the next most athletic team, the second highest scoring team in the tournament and have solid defence-both perimeter and interior. We're coming off 2 huge wins, have nothing to lose and have the confidence to not be intimidated. The problem will come if we try to beat them at their own game- We really have to slow up the tempo and protect the ball or it's all over; they'll kill us in transition.

If we're going to win (or at least give them a fright), we have to:

1. Protect the ball when they press us- CJ and Mills on the court would be a perfect solution in offence, but then the USA could go big with Deron and one of those guys would have to guard Kobe, which would kill us. Newley has to help out, because Barlow panics and turns it over when he's double teamed.

2. Take care of the ball in offence- USA have been getting almost 30% of their points from fast breaks. The Boomers need to move the ball well and not make stupid passes which will result in an easy fast break highlight film.

3. Move the ball and find the open man- USA's weakness is their below average team/help defence- they're freakishly athletic but seem to struggle rotating in D and getting out to shots, because the NBA style of 1 on 1 D doesn't really focus on guarding a team playing Euro ball. Mills seems to have a knack for the drive and dish to an open man.

4. Use our big men wisely. Anstey, Bogut and Andersen have 3 point range. Bosh and Howard can not defend the perimeter (Dwight in particular is a typical, low-post NBA centre), and Tayshaun Prince is too short to stop a 7 footer. This isn't rocket surgery. If Andersen does one of his little post up/fadeaway moves, Dwight will swat it into the cheap seats like he's auditioning for the US volleyball team.

5. Don't let Dwight get the ball in the post. Ever. And if he does, hack him into the middle of next week.

6. Kneecap LeBron before the game. Failing that, try to stop him and Wade getting those drives into the lane and force them to take outside shots.

7. If we're going to take it to the rim, do it HARD and try to get Bosh or Howard into foul trouble and make Team USA pay for not bringing another big man instead of Prince.

P.S. I love how in the exhibition game the Boomers refused to call the US players by name and only referred to them by their number. Awesome mind game.

There would be many a Lithuanian ball supporter claiming that Australia conducted an act of terrorism yesterday.

The USA team as is their Foreign Policy want, will remain oblivious to this strike as the act does not alter the asset exchange into the commodity that is the NBA.

Some USA players and many of their supporters will state that Austria is a piss poor version of Germany and that they already beat Germany comfortably in the rounds. They will universally utter "Wot me Worry?", fart, turn onto their side and resume snoring just after wondering "How cum that thar Bogun aint playin for tha Croats"?

Possibly, this is the most opportune time to bomb balls into the USA buckets in a sustained 40 minute attack. This will have to be accomplished in a submersive manner as the septics become slightly toey at the mention of the words "Bomb" and "Attack". Lucky there was no mention of the word "Oil".



Damn

Lets hope Hidadi does not get to the NBA and throw up a half court bomb....

Sturty - they ran out of donuts??? Oh no, best get out of there, brutha, it's not safe anymore