In Leaked Tape, Hostile Obama Tries to Force PM to Accept Truce
US president markedly unfriendly, interrupted prime minister as he attempted to push unfavorable truce on Israel.
Damning evidence has emerged of US President Barack Obama’s dismissal of Israel’s position in favor of supporting the position of Hamas and its allies during ceasefire talks.
A “senior US official” leaked an audio recording of a telephone conversation between Obama and Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to Channel One. In it the 35-minute conversation, which took place on Sunday, the US President appears downright hostile at points, and even cuts off Netanyahu in the middle of his protestations over a one-sided truce proposal which would have seen Hamas receive all its key demands, but that Israel ultimately rejected.
Obama: I demand that Israel agrees to an immediate, unilateral ceasefire and halt all offensive activities – particularly airstrikes.
Netanyahu: What will Israel receive in return for a ceasefire?
Obama: I believe that Hamas will stop firing rockets – silence will be met with silence.
Netanyahu: Hamas violated all five previous ceasefires, it is a terrorist organization which is dedicated to the destruction of Israel.
Obama: I repeat and expect Israel to unilaterally stop all its military activity. The pictures of destruction from Gaza distance the world from Israel’s position.
Netanyahu: Kerry’s proposal was completely unrealistic and gives Hamas the military and diplomatic advantage.
Obama: Within a week of the end of Israel’s military activities, Qatar and Turkey will begin negotiations with Hamas on the basis of the 2012 understanding [following the end of Operation Pillar of Defense - ed.], including Israel’s commitment to removing the siege and restrictions on Gaza,
Netanyahu: Qatar and Turkey are the biggest supporters of Hamas. It is impossible to rely on them to be fair mediators.
Obama: I trust Qatar and Turkey, and Israel is in no position to choose its mediators.
Netanyahu: I object, because Hamas is able to continue and to fire rockets and to use tunnels for terror attacks…
Obama – interrupts Netanyahu mid-sentence: The ball is in Israel’s court – it is obligated to end all military activities.
ths update: Whole lotta “It’s a fake! It’s a fake!” going around, with a healthy shake of “But…” on top. Could well be, as Allah speculates, SOMETHING got said, translated, re-translated and then again. I like that theory.
The inference that Senator Paul’s major foreign policy mistake is that he’s against non-Congress sanctioned engagements is ignorant; purposefully or otherwise. One need only read the differences between his 2013 Platform to Revitalize America and the 2014 version to watch him stumble left and right on that issue, military funding as well, which still doesn’t show the issue that is Paul’s primary foreign policy flaw.
Sen. Paul, like his father, has been talking about downgrading, severely, the American presence overseas, all the while using our “strike anywhere” capabilities and prior demobilizations as primary premises for that debate. Unfortunately for Paul, that argument is innately fallacious: fast response with sufficient military assets is directly linked to a logistical supply chain that would evaporate with the degradation of forward bases throughout the world, both on allied and US territories. Sen. Paul seems to forget that there is a necessary logistical supply chain allowing these activities to occur. A prime reference for this was the materiel movement issues in the early years of Afghanistan for resupply, as our limited basing and restrictive airspaces of neighboring countries not favorable to the US put significant squeeze on the ability to project power into the area in the short term. His continuing wish to “scale back”, seeming code for “largely remove”, foreign allied or “friendly” operations would exponentially compound the initial supply difficulties in Afghanistan to worldwide dilemma at a near exponential level, instead of a limited AOR issue.
The prior demobilizations, which Paul references repeatedly as a defense of his projected cuts, then oddly removed in 2014, resulted in training surges that left troops poorly fitted and prepared for mobilization in a conventional conflict. Spin up time was something the United States could afford when crossing international distances required quite a bit of time, like WWII and even into Vietnam. With increasing technological reliance, spin up time on the materiel end is increasing, rather than decreasing in time on the general scale; concurrent with troop and operator training. Scaling back on defense purchases would further increase both R&D and line production for the weapon systems, EO targeting, etc necessary for the modern warfighter. Sen. Paul also has a huge issue in that he tries to argue the military budget, ignoring that he calls for cuts in 2013 PRA, then argues for restoration of sequestered funds under the guise that they will now “keep the military complex of yesterday in check.” I’m personally left questioning how removing funds, then returning funds, keeps anything “in check”.
Statements like these would rapidly raise eyebrows with our Marines serving at embassies, as their sole detail is not simply to secure TS documents and HDs. The entire detail does not simply fall in for destruction or securing of classified materials. The reasoning is simple: if you’re under attack, collecting documents without overwatch gets everyone killed. To quote the MSESG Mission Statement:
” The primary mission of the Marine Security Guard (MSG) is to provide internal security at designated U.S. diplomatic and consular facilities in order to prevent the compromise of classified material vital to the national security of the United States. The secondary mission of the MSG is to provide protection for U.S. citizens and U.S government property located within designated U.S. diplomatic and consular premises during exigent circumstances (urgent temporary circumstances which require immediate aid or action).” http://www.mcesg.marines.mil/About/MCESGMission.aspx”
The inane exercise of cross-analyzing the US military budget against the Chinese and broadly declaring the US budget is six times the size shows a callous misunderstanding of military funding. A simple example is the fact that the Chinese can more cheaply produce arms, due to state manufacturing infrastructure and lower pay, while paying a 3M strong active military force far less per capita than the US due to lower standards of living. Further, and more disturbing, is the fact that he makes an apples to apples comparison based on gross expenditure, while the Chinese budget does not cover R&D, acquisitions, their 1M strong paramilitary units and other huge categories of military expenditure.
As for the WMD bit, we found plenty of things in Iraq, simply no nuclear material. That is readily glossed over along with little to no interdiction on routes into and out of Syria, which we know were being used both during and after the buildup by our forces.
There are considerable other issues in his 2013/2014 documents alone, on the foreign policy front, but I’ve typed too long for my comfort.
They take the wind data readings from all over the counrty, feed them into this program (updating HOURLY) and voila! You have a REAL TIME representation what’s happening over your head and where the clash of the fronts coming together actually occurs, instead of a vaguely drawn line drooping southward.
…Surface wind data comes from the National Digital Forecast Database. These are near-term forecasts, revised once per hour. So what you’re seeing is a living portrait. (See the NDFD site for precise details; our timestamp shows time of download.) And for those of you chasing top wind speed, note that maximum speed may occur over lakes or just offshore.
We start off with Beau growling, snarling and lunging at their crate, as if their presence was THE single greatest surprise ever.
By the end of EVERY day, we’ve made ~ oh, shoot ~ sometimes LEAPS and BOUNDS of puppy peace progress. For instance: by the end of last evening, with only Beau on the barest minimum dosage of amitriptyline (cheap Prozac), I had NO muzzles on anyone. Dead dogs laying everywhere. Exiting politely through the patio door to go outside. A tiny flicker of hope in my bosom renewing yet again.
Everyone to OUR bedroom (Yes. FIVE dogs.) for seepy-time. Newbies together in the crate, ours OWNING the field…the floor…and our bed as usual. Snores ensue almost immediately.
This morning? Ozzie does his gentle morning shake, by tradition being the first to rise. Beau slides off the living room couch, where he wandered to sometime in the wee hours of the night. Cassie and ‘Chilles stir in the crate as Beau rounds the bedroom door…and we have an INSTANT case of:
“WHO the HELL are YOU??!!!“
Snarl. Snarl. Chomp. Chomp.
Grab him by the collar. Explain to his knucklehead they’ve been there for GOING ON TWO WEEKS NOW.
Park his ruffled ass on his palatial dog bed to get them safely out of the room.
Start the day.
ths update: So much for progress. It’s been a many stitches = many dollars day.
Five dogs, four different sized muzzles and NO one seems to think of theirs as a fashion statement.
Well, I take that back. Except Ozzie. He’ll wear anything.
On the upside, they’ve all been moving freely around the house for several extended periods today, as long as “freely” is defined as “wide circle around Beau”. We have strategically placed water bottles for face-blasts when eruptions occur. Thanks to the mesh-muzzles, it’s 90% sound and fury, vice immediate bloodbath.
…we are attempting to integrate Ebola’s two sweet puppies into our household for the 2 1/2 months while he’s in school, prior to LEAVING HIS MOMMY TO PCS TO GUAM FOR YEARS. (WWWAAAHHHHH!!!!!!! Of course, he’s THRILLED.)
It’s not going well, thanks to the general intransigence and overall surliness of two of OUR three cabal of ancient canines. (It just dawned on my math-challenged mind last night that Beau was NINE, not the seven I’ve been telling everyone. Katrina was in 2005, duh, ths.) They don’t brook intruders, however welcome, lightly, Cesar Millan and all the doogie advice online to the contrary and be damned.
As of yesterday, I have a bottle of Xanax for 3 of them, with enough pills lefover, I’m assured by the vet tech, for needy, anxious owners.
By this afternoon, I will also have three muzzles, so maybe we can have all five loose in the house at one time with a minimum of blood spilled, since the big crate the pups are in is just turning into a target at the moment.
Disney Shuts Down LucasArts, Cancels Star Wars 1313 And Star Wars: First Assault
Disney has laid off the staff of LucasArts and cancelled all current projects.
Staff were informed of the shutdown this morning, according to a reliable Kotaku source. Some 150 people were laid off, and both of the studio’s current projects—Star Wars: First Assault and Star Wars 1313—were cancelled. Disney will still use the LucasArts name to license games, but the studio is no more.
Publicly, Disney is saying their current games could be licensed out to a different publisher or developer, but according to our source, that’s unlikely. Our source says Lucas has pursued the option for “one or both games,” but nothing happened. “With the teams now basically being dispersed I think both games are effectively dead forever,” our source said.
A second source also told Kotaku this afternoon that the chances of Lucas licensing out 1313 are very slim. The odds are “effectively zero,” the source said.
Sheesh. I can hardly believe it myself. Lucas Arts has been almost as much a part of our lives as the Brat has. In the early 90′s, when he was a young lad and world famous Jedi, breaking into the online games to design starships, make custom skins for people and DOS bombing miscreants who cheated (not to mention win copious amounts of tournaments), the folks at Lucas Arts liked what his evil, creative, self-taught little brain could do, going so far as to offer him a spot at Skywalker Ranch for his freshman summer of college, if he [insert DUM DUM DUMMMM music] “kept his grades up”. If only he’d been a senior in high school instead of going into his sophmore year. So much for that carrot with his “oooh, something shiney/did-that-on-to-the-next-thing” personality, and any hopes we had of living off of our kid like any self-respecting Lohan or Jackson parent went ‘poof’.
My only consolation is that Ebola ~ never one to mince words ~ would have been canned the second he heard about JarJar Binks anyway, so it’s not like it would have been a long term thing.
So the subject of Rand Paul being the “front runner” for the distant 2016 GOP nomination came up today. I was asked why I wouldn’t vote for Rand Paul, even were he the GOP nominee. So let me explain my position:
Paul did what was right in the Senate concerning basic civil liberties protected under the Constitution. I respect him for it and supported him on it. Hell, I even watched the thing all day. The right continually bashes the left for voting for a man full of ideas that are not beneficial for the country. I don’t disagree with them. However, that is entirely hypocritical concerning Rand Paul and the Right’s current hardon for his doing the right thing on civil liberties with his filibuster. Simply put, one action does not make up for a laundry list of bad ideas. (That aside, McCain and little girl Graham can fuck themselves, I hope they lose their seats.)
The conservatives, many of my friends among them and myself, had a cardiac concerning the nomination of Hagel as Secretary of Defense. Why? Primarily due to his stand on Iran…which Rand Paul shares saying, “Our national security is not threatened by Iran having one nuclear weapon.” So, everyone up in arms about Iran, but currently attempting to rub one out at the thought of a Paul Presidency? He’s his father with better PR on the matter. When one looks at his statements on Iran, he plays the card of being staunchly against the regime while at the same time being quietly fine with their having a nuclear weapon. In fact he put forward an amendment that stated the US would not enter into war with Iran, with the most inane reasoning ever. I love in the video he mentions that we’ve contained North Korea, but his own vague planning looks to remove the very troops that provide that containment.
Which brings us to an even scarier father/son passage of ideologies. Paul’s very own “Platform to Revitalize America” argues that the military should be downsized (page 28) through attrition and our presence overseas in our allied bases with the following, “The ability to utilize our immense air and sea power, to be anywhere in the world in a relatively short amount of time, no longer justifies our expanded presence on the ground throughout the world.” Which is the most self-contradictory bullshit in history or shows such an amazing ignorance of how we project power as to make Biden look a military genius. Our logistical structure, dependent on both our allies and our overseas bases, is the reason we *have* the capability to project a forward conventional force in a rapid method. Removing it means you no long have the ability to project and have completely lost the singular major asset the US holds against every conventional and unconventional force on the planet. But no, just like daddy, Rand will happily hand that away. However, it will again be through a more muted fashion than his father’s outright declaration of issuing an executive order to return all deployed and troops stationed over-seas back stateside.
If you remember back to Georgia conflict, Paul went against Rubio’s attempt to get Georgia speedily into NATO.
On the foreign policy front, Rand Paul *is* his father with a nice facade. His father and he alike learned the lessons of the last few Presidential bids.
In the same aforementioned document, he makes the same more guarded arguments his father has made against the fed and the institution of a flat-tax. A number of these ideas many conservatives can at least to some degree agree with. The point remains, it is the exact same thing his father has been saying for years with far better packaging and no nasty history to deal with. The Salon piece, I hate to say, probably expressed this best: “Until a few months ago, that is, Rand Paul sounded just like Ron Paul. Yet where Rand formerly avowed his agreement with his father on most issues, today he emphasizes their differences. It is a tinge of opportunism that has infuriated some early supporters, who feel he solicited their money and endorsements and then sold them out to smooth his way into the Senate. On the website of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, for instance, where the true libertarian faith is upheld, one downcast Paul fan expressed deep frustration over his support of Gitmo and military tribunals: –What good is it to win if you don’t stand for anything? This is very disappointing. Rand Paul deceived his supporters, and took money from them without telling them about his fundamental ideological differences with his more principled and honest father.–”
I could go further, but I’ll leave it at this for the moment: I will not vote for Paul, or by proxy, his son. I see little difference between the two than a more aesthetically pleasing packaging. Doing the right thing does not excuse your beliefs in other areas as a President.
Sen. Loretta Weinberg takes pointed questions from gun control detractors in Teaneck
Sen. Loretta Weinberg laid out the state legislature’s agenda for gun control at the Ethical Cultural Society of Bergen County Tuesday, asking for help from supporters and and taking pointed questions from detractors.
There are more than 20 gun control bills under consideration in the state legislature in the wake of a deadly school shooting in Newtown, Conn.
Their aim isn’t to take guns away, Weinberg said, but to regulate them given their ability to kill or injure people. Most of the legislation calls for more stringent training and licensing.
While opponents to any limited on Second Amendment rights are always vocal, Weinberg said two provisions should have broad support:
Banning anyone on the federal no-fly list from buying a gun, and requiring basic safety training for anyone buying a gun.
Oh, yeah. The FNFL has been a WEALTH source of accurate information since its inception.
I’d lay all my eggs in THAT basket.
ths note: There’s wealth of info in the comments, like links to gunshops like “The Bullet Hole”, which are associated with the NJ Second Amendment Society, comments from folks who were actually at old Loretta’s townhall (“I give Miss Weinberg credit for admitting that she has never used a gun and has probably never held one.” YEAH. THAT’S who’s legislating AWAY YOUR RIGHTS…) and some pretty pithy observations that go straight to the heart of all the Ban-Bunnies’ arguments:
Ironically, Adam Lanza had gun training and gun safety. What he didn’t have was a nut house to reside in. His gun training didn’t prevent his murders, a nut house would have.
SIOUX CITY, Iowa — President Obama received a less than warm welcome and a warning upon arrival at the airport here on the second stop of his Iowa visit, which was aimed at recapturing some of the magic the state gave his run to the White House in 2008.
Greeting Air Force One as it touched down under sunny skies and sultry heat was a hand-painted banner draped across the top of an airplane hangar that reads, “Obama Welcome to SUX – We Did Build This.” “SUX” is the airport code for Sioux City.
FAU student threatens to kill professor and classmates
Associate Professor Stephen M. Kajiura was reviewing with his evolution class in GS 120 for a midterm when FAU student Jonatha Carr interrupted him: “How does evolution kill black people?” she asked. Kajiura attempted to explain that evolution doesn’t kill anyone.
Why is violence against women worse than violence against men?
As Ebola queried when he put this link up originally, can you IMAGINE what would have happened to the young (white, mind you) lad the woman in the video physically assaults during her unabated rampage through the class? She’s in his face over the desktop and winds up clocking him.
What if he’d shut her down and defended himself (possibly even restrained her until authorities arrived), as ~ in a normal society ~ he had every right to do? Would he have come out on the losing end?
I hope he presses charges, because there’s a damn fine chance Florida Atlantic will wash their hands quickly of this and she’ll be free to do it all over again, empowered by the experience. (Maybe next time with a weapon. I mean, a pen can go through someone’s skull just as easily as that hand of hers hit it.)
Yeah. Revolting organization with terrorist ties endorses tinfoil hat whackjob from Planet Ronulus who wants Imadinnerjacket to have the bomb, besides blaming America for everything since the War of the Roses.
Here’s a concept children: don’t vote for the old fraud.
[ths notes: this is unabridged/unedited (other than making the links live) for your comsumption and discussion, as sweet child, in an online fight-to-the-death with peer-group Ronulans, sent this along just as major dad and I were heading out for the morning. We haven't had a chance to it its proper due. Oh, we DO love this wonderous kid of ours, who actually takes time to research and "think".]
As much as I want to harp on multiple points outside of Foreign Policy, I’ll stick directly to what he’s actually said repeatedly strictly concerning foreign policy. I will analyze the initial individual policy and its subsequent impacts on (A) foreign relations/diplomacy, (B) trade, (C) logistics of military operations, (D) military operations and the continued ability towage force projected kinetic conventional and unconventional warfare in foreign and domestic defense of the United States, its territories, allies and assets.I will also investigate the historical fallaciousness Doctor Paul uses to legitimize his foreign policy decisions (ETC).
Ron Paul’s Foreign Policy thesis points:
I) Remove ALL troops from overseas. See also concerning historical accuracy of the overseas bases being the sole catalyst for Muslim terror operations.
III) (cont.) “If anybody dared touch us we could wipe any country off of theface of the earth within hours. And here we are, so intimidated and so insecure and we’re acting like such bullies that we have to attack third-world nations that have no military and have no weapon.”
IV) Illegality of conflicts outside of declared war hither to Constitutionality and his record on voting concerning “Unconstitutional” conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq.
REF: Here|| Attn: Sept 14, 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force, AKA PUBLIC LAW 107–40 which passed Congress as a whole Sept 18th, 2001.
I) Doctor Paul has repeatedly said his first order of business in office, through executive powers will be to recall all troops from overseas. Closing all bases and additional quotes:
(I-a) “All those troops would spend their money here at home. And besides those troops overseas aggravate our enemies, motivate our enemies. I think it’s adanger to our national defense and we can save a lot of money cutting out the military expenditures that contribute nothing to our defense.” Here
(I-b) “..We have 12,000 diplomats, I’m suggesting that maybe we ought to use some of them. But just think of how we prevented a nuclear war with the Soviets when the Soviet missiles were put in Cuba. We didn’t say we’re going to attack you, Kennedy and Khrushchev talked and they made a deal: “You take your weapons out of Cuba, we’ll take them out of Turkey”. That’s the kind of talk that I want. I think the greatest danger now is for us to overreact, and this is what I’m fearful of. Iran doesn’t have a bomb, there’s no proof, there’s no new information, regardless of this recent report. And for us to overreact and talk about bombing Iran, that’s much more dangerous. We got the Libyans to get rid of their nuclear power and their nuclear weapons, and look at what happened to them. So we got to understand that…” Here
These two statements show both a complete misunderstanding of history, economics, as well as strategic and tactical asset with their combined logistics.
Foreign relations/Diplomacy: The US currently has military accords and agreements with an amazing assortment of countries to the point that we do not have the space to list them so I’ll use specific examples and broaden as our discourse continues.
Imagine, if you will, that the US abruptly within 90 days of an executive order(the necessary time before Congress can act, provided it is issued properly) severs all military alliances, accords and agreements with its allies and trade/military partners as Ron Paul has repeatedly announced he will do. 12,000 diplomats do no good if the US breaks its word to hundreds of countries, never mind all at once. The impact here should be blatantly obvious, but I’ll illuminate further on it shortly.
Trade: With the dissipation of Status of Forces agreements with key regional allies, for this example we will use South Korea, Japan, Australia and European Union member states. Our trade with South Korea alone is projected at $10.1b for FY2010 additional GDP for the US, so let us assume thisis the mean amount for these four adding to a grand total of $40.4b additional GDP for the US. Far below the reality though enough to make a point for this argument. We can assume that there will be immediate non-military repercussions from our allies for failing to uphold our end of the bargain. There is no way to guestimate, but it would be irrational not to think that our once-allies would react quickly where trade is concerned and cut ties as well as free trade agreements as there would be little other way to react. However, even were they to maintain some semblance of the trade status quo, we haven’t accounted for the repercussions of removing our ability to protect trade militarily.
Logistics of Military Operations: This portion needs to be said in order to understand the direct impact on US military capability to project and conduct kinetic operations (blow shit up, bang bang, I realize a lot of people don’t get this term as it has recently popped up to more politely explain we’re killing people directly with conventional weapons).
The US military is limited by its logistic resupply capability, meaning that we are essentially dependent on hundreds of camps, stations, air fields, ports and War Reserve Stocks(WRS) around the world in order to project deadly force. By this I mean that in order to conduct effective missions against both insurgent activity and conventional forces (IE China, Russia). We do not have any platform, short of thermonuclear tipped Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs) that can strike targets reliably,much less in mass, without refueling and rearmament necessity not to mention forward operating maintenance. With a 90day limit before Congress can intervene concerning “President” Paul’s issued executive order the military will lose the majority of its assets in any local theater of operations. This is at the cost of trillions $US as the military will be forced to abandon gear on short notice and transport hundreds of thousands of troops through civilian means as military transport assets will bealmost assuredly locked up in transporting equipment rather than key personnel.
Military Operations: Assume now that the military is now inside of the Continental United States (CONUS). Our only military assets abroad are now strictly submarines, which we’ll cover later. We’ve established that short of ICBMs we’ve no way of responding militarily to any threat to ourselves outside of CONUS and its surrounding waters. More importantly we have no way to defend our allies in strategically important theaters of war.
Within five years, rest assured that South Korea will be annihilated by North Korea backed by China/Russia. We will likely also lose Taiwan and Japan to China within five years of the last US boot leaving foreign soil in the region.Chinese predation through the region, already increasing (I-c: below) as our military capabilities diminish under the current administration in the region, will continue to increase throughout the South Pacific. Given the event of conflict with China we can assume the loss of ALL trade from the West due to the ease of Chinese or even Russian interdiction on trade routes. We won’t be able to stop them concerning this as we’ll have absolutely no method of projecting firepower with our logistical supply line being non-existent past the Aleutian Straits in the North Pacific (NORPAC), the Hawaiian Islands in the Central Pacific with the South Pacific belonging almost uncontested to whoever wished to claim it. Guam as well as our other South Asian island chain territories will be cut off with absolutely no effort on the part of enemy conventional forces.
As for Europe keep in mind the Georgian–Ossetian conflict of 2008. Also recall that the EU’s military forces are almost solely dependent on the US for mass transport and “rapid” response to conflicts as well as the fact that Europe is almost completely dependent upon Russia for natural fuels. Now, the Georgian conflict came to a rapid conclusion because the Russians were flexing their muscle but we responded by rounding up military assets. Without US presence in the region do you seriously think for a second that Russia, especially given its current socio-economic issues, would hesitate for a moment to make a power grab against a neutered Western Europe?
Finally our lack of military assets concerning non-conventional forces: Ignore the early concept of direct conventional power grabs by Russia, China or anyother would-be world power in this rapid power paradigm shift thanks to Ron Pauls’ policy of military isolationism. Piracy, as evidenced with the increased last few years of piracy along the Somali coast, is already on the rise. Currently it is requiring a coalition force to even limit its already considerable effect. With our military essentially landlocked for all pertinent purposes we will no longer be able to stop nonconventional predation on US trade fleets, something that hasn’t happened since a decade after this great nation’s inception to the world stage. That means that “indigenous insurgent” Somalitype forces could feed on our tradeships along with essentially state sponsored profiteering of larger states. This alone, ignoring a direct military move against the US, would cripple the economy beyond repair in short order.
Further REF for Section I:
Fallacies and Word Play: Doctor Paul has made a number of unfortunate remarks to back his isolating the US and hamstringing the effectivenessof the Armed Services.
“All those troops would spend their money here at home. And besides those troops overseas aggravate our enemies, motivate our enemies. I think it’s adanger to our national defense and we can save a lot of money cutting out themilitary expenditures that contribute nothing to our defense.”
While no one would argue that if we could magically transport all our gear, goods and personnel back to CONUS in all brand new or revitalized bases to house said assets it would save money …the undertaking of such an effort IRL would be so costly even in a surplus economy that it would nearly be economically unfeasible. His assertion that the troops would be home spending money isn’t incorrect as much as it purposely ignores that the vast majority ofthose troops would be discharged due to the lack of housing these Brigades, Wings,etc. The amount of money required to revitalize and expand current bases, purchase old bases and revitalize them as well as build new bases to house the amountof troops, supplies, ordinance and tactical assets makes maintaining the current military numbers completely infeasible. That is even ignoring the costof bringing them home instead of the far lesser annual cost of maintaining existing offshore assets. This means that Paul is suggesting adding hundreds of thousands of veterans to an already dismal jobs market, raising unemployed numbers and likely costing more as troops cash in on their Post-9/11 and Montgomery GI bills in order to keep themselves and their families fed for at least a short while. There could not be worse doublespeak or economic naiveté than this statement displays. It’s all pretty until you actually start realizing the legitimate numbers involved. If you’d like I can easily do some gross estimates backed by current statistics.
As for a danger to our national defense, I think just the initial A-D of Section I readily displays what the true danger to national defense is: This policy.
Next: “..We have 12,000 diplomats, I’m suggesting that maybe we ought to use some of them. But just think of how we prevented a nuclear war with the Soviets when the Soviet missiles were put in Cuba. We didn’t say we’re going to attack you, Kennedy and Khrushchev talked and they made a deal: “You take your weapons out of Cuba, we’ll take them out of Turkey”. That’s the kind of talk that I want. I think the greatest danger now is for us to overreact, and this is what I’m fearful of. Iran doesn’t have a bomb, there’s no proof, there’s no new information, regardless of this recent report. And for us to overreact and talkabout bombing Iran, that’s much more dangerous. We got the Libyans to get rid of their nuclear power and their nuclear weapons, and look at what happened tothem. So we got to understand that…”
While I realize the first sentence of this statement can be attributed to hyperbole I find it morally repugnant coming from the “Moral Choice.” As for the Cuban Missile Crisis portion of the statement, I can’t get over how idiotic it is. We prevented nuclear war not through removing all military presence. President Kennedy activated the Air Force in such a way that an eighth or more of our strategic nuclear bombers were in the air at all times. He blockaded Cuba to keep further Russian assets from reaching Cuba and aiding in the rapid completion of the launch sites. Please explain where all of this is a slackening in strength? So, after this increase in responsive posture and DISPLAY of military might, Khrushchev calls Kennedy and backs down. It wasn’t Kennedy removing military armament. Actually, it should be noted that the government actually OFFERED to remove existing armaments in Turkey. That didn’t aid in the negotiations, in fact nothing but an aggressive posture did.
For a man that rides on both his military service and his supposed dedicated “veteran” following I, nor 99% of my active duty brethren I’ve spoken to on the subject, have never met, this is a large flaw.
As his mummy, I worry more than usual in this instance and NOT because my incredibly mature son is the issue.
“The idea that when a SWAT team breaks down the door of a home without a no-knock warrant and is thereby justified in firing on anyone who has a weapon in their hands — in their own home — particularly if that weapon might be aimed in their direction, is nothing less than horrifying. It is essentially saying that officers may shoot first — in fact that they may plan beforehand to shoot first — and be reasonably certain later.
If that is the case, anyone living in Sheriff Dupnik’s jurisdictiondoes indeed have to worry about “confrontation with the cops.”
Guess where he lives?
As I noted on his FaceBook page, young Jedi is a military member, out-of-state resident, with Florida plates on the Commando Wagon. The local sheriff has deputies who kill people with many holes in the body.
“Please to carefully research all local, state and installation laws before said weapon makes it to your vehicle.“, I said (Pleasepleasepleaseplease.). But even that knowlege isn’t going to save you against a rogue police department, so be polite and use common sense, while always being in the right.
New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism
NASA satellite data from the years 2000 through 2011 show the Earth’s atmosphere is allowing far more heat to be released into space than alarmist computer models have predicted, reports a new study in the peer-reviewed science journal Remote Sensing. The study indicates far less future global warming will occur than United Nations computer models have predicted, and supports prior studies indicating increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide trap far less heat than alarmists have claimed.
Study co-author Dr. Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and U.S. Science Team Leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer flying on NASA’s Aqua satellite, reports that real-world data from NASA’s Terra satellite contradict multiple assumptions fed into alarmist computer models.
“The satellite observations suggest there is much more energy lost to space during and after warming than the climate models show,” Spencer said in a July 26 University of Alabama press release. “There is a huge discrepancy between the data and the forecasts that is especially big over the oceans.”
In addition to finding that far less heat is being trapped than alarmist computer models have predicted, the NASA satellite data show the atmosphere begins shedding heat into space long before United Nations computer models predicted.
Ebola’s explanation accompanied the link for the article:
Idiots. No shit something that can only A) maintain atmospheric properties if attached to cloud conducting nuclei (CCN) B) At maximum can retain under .01% of said CCN ain’t gonna trap heat. That means it’s so miniscule it’s only capable of reflecting or “trapping” exceptionally short wavelengths.
We’re still waiting on a pie chart to turn that into English for us rubes, but, most assuredly, your taxpayer dollars have been well spent on at least ONE Air Force weather grad.
I wonder if Al heard the earth move under his feet?
UPDATE: Ebola plain Englishspeak:
Talking about carbon dioxide as a thermal reflector. Just the base idea that it can, on its own, reflect a significant enough portion of thermal radiation at any length to warm the atmosphere that much is a f*cking joke
…in the back of the Commando Wagon down by the river, since his apartment complex WON’T take the government vouchers for rent payment that Congress will be passing out to active duty members, because they can’t get their heads remove á vous from their asses in a timely fashion.
ths notes: After watching, I tried to get into their website yesterday, but the servers were all blowed up from traffic. Seems LOTS of folks had inquiring minds.
UPDATE: Thank you all for your concern, but, ONE day after his diagnosis, a night’s sleep and disregarding the best medical advice the AirForce had to offer (like a month in quarters), my intrepid son was on his next secret mission for the country’s security: acquiring a virus known as H-A-N-T-A…
At least the medicine’s free for another four years.