Iran Threatens to Walk Away From Nuke Deal:
Iran is firing missiles and the US is whimpering again -- oh, and Iran is threatening to just walk away from the "deal" if we do more than whimper.
In the past seven years we have become exceptionally good at whimpering -- perhaps "America, exceptional whimpering" as a motto? EVERY nation is exceptional at something! Even Greece has the gyro!
If Hillary gets in we can combine whimpering and whining! She whines exceptionally well I think.
'via Blog this'
Showing posts with label military. Show all posts
Showing posts with label military. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 09, 2016
Wednesday, January 13, 2016
Two Boats, 10 Sailors
Iran's Propaganda Victory in One Illegal Image:
I'm sure this one is going to be GONE very quickly!
So TWO US military boats end up "drifting" into Iranian waters and are "rescued" by our "friends" the Iranians, who manage to violate the Geneva Convention by showing photos of the sailors in captivity (as covered in linked article).
Hmm ...
I used to go out on big water with my 1850 Tyee ... I had a GPS, a handheld GPS, marine radio, and of course cell phones. Are we to believe that TWO Navy craft can't navigate well enough to avoid getting within 12 MILES of shore? We used to find spots out in the middle of Mille Lacs that were 10 to 20 FEET across with NO PROBLEM with units that cost well under $1K when purchased 20 years ago!
Oh, "maybe they ran out of gas". BOTH OF THEM???? !!!! Did they forget a tow rope? Are we to believe that between BOTH boats there was no operative communications gear?
Not much makes any sense here other than GROSS incompetence.
It seems nearly certain that this was some sort of ill conceived Special Forces Op, which doesn't make you feel very confident in the current state of our Special Forces. One certainly HOPES that they were within the 12 mile limit by design and simply got caught. Getting caught definitely doesn't reflect well on Special Ops, but it is a hell of a lot better than "getting lost and running out of gas", which sounds more like a couple of carloads of teens drinking beers on the backroads kind of "operation".
I'm reminded yet again of the "Jimmuh Carter Desert Classic", the perfect Democrat military operation where nobody but Americans and the stature of the American Military died -- no Iranians were harmed or even stressed in the debacle!
We knew the military would decline rapidly under BO. There was apparently enough momentum to carry out a successful op to get Bin Laden in May of 2011. Things have obviously gone down hill a good deal since then!
'via Blog this'
I'm sure this one is going to be GONE very quickly!
So TWO US military boats end up "drifting" into Iranian waters and are "rescued" by our "friends" the Iranians, who manage to violate the Geneva Convention by showing photos of the sailors in captivity (as covered in linked article).
Hmm ...
I used to go out on big water with my 1850 Tyee ... I had a GPS, a handheld GPS, marine radio, and of course cell phones. Are we to believe that TWO Navy craft can't navigate well enough to avoid getting within 12 MILES of shore? We used to find spots out in the middle of Mille Lacs that were 10 to 20 FEET across with NO PROBLEM with units that cost well under $1K when purchased 20 years ago!
Oh, "maybe they ran out of gas". BOTH OF THEM???? !!!! Did they forget a tow rope? Are we to believe that between BOTH boats there was no operative communications gear?
Not much makes any sense here other than GROSS incompetence.
It seems nearly certain that this was some sort of ill conceived Special Forces Op, which doesn't make you feel very confident in the current state of our Special Forces. One certainly HOPES that they were within the 12 mile limit by design and simply got caught. Getting caught definitely doesn't reflect well on Special Ops, but it is a hell of a lot better than "getting lost and running out of gas", which sounds more like a couple of carloads of teens drinking beers on the backroads kind of "operation".
I'm reminded yet again of the "Jimmuh Carter Desert Classic", the perfect Democrat military operation where nobody but Americans and the stature of the American Military died -- no Iranians were harmed or even stressed in the debacle!
We knew the military would decline rapidly under BO. There was apparently enough momentum to carry out a successful op to get Bin Laden in May of 2011. Things have obviously gone down hill a good deal since then!
'via Blog this'
Saturday, December 19, 2015
Capt Kirk to the Bridge! Meals on Keels
The Buoy and the Sci-Fi Destroyer | The American Spectator:
Mostly a post because I like one-liner humor.
Referring to the natural progression of problems that can arise on ships at sea; first you become a buoy, then you become a reef! Funny unless it happens to you ... and as was in the news recently and covered in the linked article, our new $362M destroyer "Milwaukee" had to be towed back to port after a couple weeks at sea due to "metal filings" completely stopping their propulsion systems. One likes to imagine that a ship that might face battle would be designed with some level of redundancy -- apparently not enough.
The Capt Kirk reference is relative to the actual captain of our new "USS Zumwalt" (James Kirk), a stealth littoral defense ship that runs $3 BILLION a copy! It also looks odd -- as the columnist opines "like the box a destroyer comes in".
"Meals on Keels" is a snide reference to His Potent Odiferousness believing that the Navy (and the military in general) is largely for "social engineering".
I firmly believe that **ALL** human endeavors, even mine, definitely need to have humor poked at them FREQUENTLY. From Adam on, the propensity of humans to be FAR "too big for their britches" is universal, and unfortunately it doesn't really go away once we get through our "terrible twos".
That's the biggest take away from the enjoyable article -- new technology will break, things will cost too much and commanders in chief will have random thoughts about what the military might do forever -- and hopefully we remember to enjoy our follies!
'via Blog this'
Mostly a post because I like one-liner humor.
Referring to the natural progression of problems that can arise on ships at sea; first you become a buoy, then you become a reef! Funny unless it happens to you ... and as was in the news recently and covered in the linked article, our new $362M destroyer "Milwaukee" had to be towed back to port after a couple weeks at sea due to "metal filings" completely stopping their propulsion systems. One likes to imagine that a ship that might face battle would be designed with some level of redundancy -- apparently not enough.
The Capt Kirk reference is relative to the actual captain of our new "USS Zumwalt" (James Kirk), a stealth littoral defense ship that runs $3 BILLION a copy! It also looks odd -- as the columnist opines "like the box a destroyer comes in".
"Meals on Keels" is a snide reference to His Potent Odiferousness believing that the Navy (and the military in general) is largely for "social engineering".
I firmly believe that **ALL** human endeavors, even mine, definitely need to have humor poked at them FREQUENTLY. From Adam on, the propensity of humans to be FAR "too big for their britches" is universal, and unfortunately it doesn't really go away once we get through our "terrible twos".
That's the biggest take away from the enjoyable article -- new technology will break, things will cost too much and commanders in chief will have random thoughts about what the military might do forever -- and hopefully we remember to enjoy our follies!
'via Blog this'
Saturday, April 10, 2010
If We Drop Our Pants, So Will They
Charles Krauthammer : Nuclear Posturing, Obama-Style - Townhall.com
Slick Willie walked the halls of power with his pants around his knees, but BO is raising it to a national security posture. "Getting caught with your pants down" used to be something to be avoided, but we now have "Change".
If some small rogue nation unleashes a biologic plague on the US and kills 150 million people, will we nuke them? According to BO, absolutely not! I'm sure that is comforting for any terrorist working on transmissible hemorrhagic fever in some backwater, but somehow, to me, the idea that we want to provide aid and comfort there is insanity. What else is going to come of this new "posture".
I'd think it might be kind of good for such a person to feel very assured that something really bad, up to and including being nuked, was LIKELY if they were to "succeed" in leaving 10's or even 100's of millions of our loved ones and fellow Americans dying in pools of our own blood, vomit and excrement with nobody left healthy enough to help. On this particular policy it is hard for me to imagine it really being selected by stupidity -- based on his two books, I'd have to say there is an over 50% chance that BO would find the vision of that bio-threat creator to be something "justly deserved" for the former "colonial power".
Think of all those slaves, think of all those Indians, think of all those poor in the slums -- America being humbled in messy death may be just the "Change" BO would find to be "just".
Let's see, I'm 6'4", 280lbs and have a permit to carry. I suppose that if I have my legs cut off at the knees and carry a sign that says "unarmed", that will make me safer? Seems odd that I've been able to walk into some pretty rough places from time to time over the last 30 years or so and never have a problem.
I've always thought that being big, ugly and looking like you might have a couple howitzers and a machete on you was good way to AVOID problems -- I at least HOPED so, since "blending in" isn't that good an option at my size. There are some folks that like to fight, but most of them would like to think their chances of winning were high and of getting shot were low. I believe that ambiguity as to retaliation is a GOOD thing.
Not so BO! Would he not be safer if he gave up Secret Service protection? or maybe just promised that if no attackers were going to use any guns, then neither would his protection detail? That seems like an obvious way to prove the intelligence of his nuke posture -- at least unless he has some other purpose in mind for what he is doing.
Slick Willie walked the halls of power with his pants around his knees, but BO is raising it to a national security posture. "Getting caught with your pants down" used to be something to be avoided, but we now have "Change".
If some small rogue nation unleashes a biologic plague on the US and kills 150 million people, will we nuke them? According to BO, absolutely not! I'm sure that is comforting for any terrorist working on transmissible hemorrhagic fever in some backwater, but somehow, to me, the idea that we want to provide aid and comfort there is insanity. What else is going to come of this new "posture".
I'd think it might be kind of good for such a person to feel very assured that something really bad, up to and including being nuked, was LIKELY if they were to "succeed" in leaving 10's or even 100's of millions of our loved ones and fellow Americans dying in pools of our own blood, vomit and excrement with nobody left healthy enough to help. On this particular policy it is hard for me to imagine it really being selected by stupidity -- based on his two books, I'd have to say there is an over 50% chance that BO would find the vision of that bio-threat creator to be something "justly deserved" for the former "colonial power".
Think of all those slaves, think of all those Indians, think of all those poor in the slums -- America being humbled in messy death may be just the "Change" BO would find to be "just".
Let's see, I'm 6'4", 280lbs and have a permit to carry. I suppose that if I have my legs cut off at the knees and carry a sign that says "unarmed", that will make me safer? Seems odd that I've been able to walk into some pretty rough places from time to time over the last 30 years or so and never have a problem.
I've always thought that being big, ugly and looking like you might have a couple howitzers and a machete on you was good way to AVOID problems -- I at least HOPED so, since "blending in" isn't that good an option at my size. There are some folks that like to fight, but most of them would like to think their chances of winning were high and of getting shot were low. I believe that ambiguity as to retaliation is a GOOD thing.
Not so BO! Would he not be safer if he gave up Secret Service protection? or maybe just promised that if no attackers were going to use any guns, then neither would his protection detail? That seems like an obvious way to prove the intelligence of his nuke posture -- at least unless he has some other purpose in mind for what he is doing.
Monday, May 26, 2008
Mistreatment of the Military, Memorial Day
Millionaires in the Making Millionaires in the Making: The Shifrins «
When I looked at the link title, I was thinking "Generals". A couple of Captain's, 3rd level of officer up the ranks. O-3. I look at this as GREAT, and not that surprising when one thinks of it. We naturally only hear about the buck private that overspends, loses money gambling and maybe has a drug or alchohol habit to boot, and then "how the country has failed them".
Have to give CNN credit, a little snippet of good news! Wow, the world could be so much more upbeat with just a smidgen more of this. They must be getting revved up for the "good times of BO" that are just around the corner.
When I looked at the link title, I was thinking "Generals". A couple of Captain's, 3rd level of officer up the ranks. O-3. I look at this as GREAT, and not that surprising when one thinks of it. We naturally only hear about the buck private that overspends, loses money gambling and maybe has a drug or alchohol habit to boot, and then "how the country has failed them".
Have to give CNN credit, a little snippet of good news! Wow, the world could be so much more upbeat with just a smidgen more of this. They must be getting revved up for the "good times of BO" that are just around the corner.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)