Archive for the ‘War’ Category

Yay Monday

Monday, September 10th, 2007

Sorry for not posting anything.  I have taken a great interest in firearms lately and that combined with school starting, my step daughter moving away, and a general distaste for the political climate I have not wanted to post at all.

With General Petraeus being labeled a traitor by the far left and the ensuing fiasco surrounding his briefing to congress combined with Osamma Bin Laden’s lates rant deing debuted I decided to weigh in on the issues.

The far left’s outcry over Petraeus’s findings is of no surprise to me.  With Democrats, only potitics and what is best for them matters.  Remember when “The Surge” was first being talked about Democrats were for it before they were against it.  Not only that, the word of an Army General that the left agreed with was akin to the word of god.  Now that the facts are against them the Democrats can’t wait to shout General Petraeus down.

Business as usual for Democrats.

If you didn’t read this Sunday’s “Get Fuzzy” check it out.

And last but certainly not least:  Britney Spears might be an out of practice nutbag, but she looks good as far as I am concerned.

Lessons Learned by Mistakes in Iraq Safeguard Our Future

Wednesday, March 28th, 2007

My late wife Cara had a child when she was 17.  Although easily characterized as a mistake at the time and the enormous struggle brought about by raising a child at that age Alli was easily the greatest thing that ever happened to Cara and Alli, along with me, was the love of her life.  The point is that though mistakes happened and consequences dire at the time, the greatest of joys was brought about as a direct result of those mistakes.

I recently learned about a vehicle in testing for our armed forces that are IED proof.  The vehicle is based on a V shape that directs the blast outward as opposed to straight up on today’s military vehicles.

Another weapon I learned of on Discover Channel’s “Future Weapons” is an AT-4 rocket launcher that can be fired from enclosed cover.  Previously if the weapon were fired from cover it would cause harm to the operator due to concussive blasts from the firing of the rocket.  The improved version of the AT-4 is perfectly safe to fire from a small room.

Innovations such as these are a direct involvement in an urban based guerilla style conflict such as we are seeing in Iraq today.  From my perspective these innovations are a direct result of our shortcomings in Iraq.  If we had vehicles practically immune to IEDs how many of our brave warfighters would still be alive?

Now that both houses of congress seek to deliver us a defeat in Iraq these innovations may not ever have the chance to fully blossom and help our armed forces deliver a swift and crushing devastation that our enemies in Iraq deserve.  Future efforts to safeguard our freedoms will be stifled not only due to the raucous resolve of terrorists enabled by congress’ democrats as a result of the “timetable” legislation but also the stifling of current the War on Terror’s lessons.

Like it or not, wars will be fought.  Binding the hands of innovation, even as a direct result gruesome misjudgments, will cause more problems in the years to come and hamper our ability to defeat our enemies, present and future, home and abroad.

The solution?  Stay the course and adopt a warfighting strategy that is not politically correct.

Discussion: Iraq Campaign of WoT

Friday, February 16th, 2007

This page will be for discussions on the war in Iraq .  Should the discussiont  devolve into another area those comments will be stricken from this discussion and will be asked to carried on in another discussion area.  Things that should be discussed here the events leading to the war and the handling of the war.  The following are the assertions I make about the war in Iraq that I hold to be true:

  • The war in Iraq is a part of the larger War on Terrorism
  • Iraq had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks and the Bush Administration never made any allegations as such
  • Iraq violated multiple UN security council resolutions and violating those resolution is a case for war in itself. Not only were they violated since the ’90s, but also up into the war when multiple missiles were fired from Iraq that violated the UN’s distance requirements for Iraq’s weapons (I know because one of them landed on the camp I was in).
  • President Bush did mislead the nation about Iraq’s possession of WMDs, but he did not lie.  There is a difference.
  • The Bush Administration did not pressure intelligence officials to over-hype the evidence, as proved by the Robb-Silbermann report.
  • Iraq did at one time possess WMDs but when we liberated the people the weapons had either been destroyed or moved.
  • As per the Duelfer report Saddam Hussein did intend to reconstitute is nuclear and biological weapons programs once UN sanctions were lifted
  • Saddam Hussein and the Iraqi government had extensive ties with terrorist organizations including Al-Qaeda, although that specific relationship is debated
  • The handling of the war has been terrible, but that is no reason to cut and run, de-fund the military, or make any  motion that would empower our enemies and demoralize our forces.
  • I contend that we must create permanent bases in Iraq given the volatile nature of the Middle East region.
  • We must do our very best to stabilize the nation and give democracy a chance.  However, I also believe our strategy must change to destroy our enemies and end the violence in Iraq.

Those are my assertions and feel free to agree or disagree. If you disagree and decide to post a response please be polite. If you would like a source please ask.

Surge!

Wednesday, February 14th, 2007

I have been reading a lot about the “Surge” resolutions that failed in the Senate and is currently being debated in the House.

As I have said before, if that is what the people want, that is what the people get.  Though I disagree with the basis for the resolution I think the Democrats should be allowed to do as they please with the Republican’s voicing opposition.  I don’t believe in obstructionism. (For the record the Senate Republicans didn’t obstruct Warner/Levin.  The Republicans wanted fair debate on their amendments and the Dems wouldn’t allow it)

That being said I think it is really funny how critics of the ware like to say that the Bush Administration should have listened to General Shinseki when he said that “hundreds of thousands” of troops would be needed to handle Iraq.  Now critics of the war aren’t listening to General Petraeus when he says more troops and the surge are crucial to the success in Iraq.  This is evidence by the support of the anti-surge resolutions in congress.

Funny how that works isn’t it?

Another funny thing I found is the list of Democrats for the surge before they were against it.  As soon as Bush was for the surge they changed their positions.

How to win a war

Friday, July 14th, 2006

Today all thinking people are watching with great concern the events transpiring in Israel. Opinions of all sorts are being tossed around but one thing is for certain we are fast approaching real and total war.

I like my liberal friends dread the idea of total world war. But unlike my liberal friends, I realize that war may be forced upon us. There are monsters in the world. Monsters are neither liberal nor conservative they are simply monsters. Hitler, Stalin Pol Pot and Osama are but a few.

How do monsters come to such great power? Again, many opinion fly through the blogs and traditional media. Most will say they gain power thru fear. I would say they rule because of cowardness. Is fear and cowardness the same? Did the fire fighters of NYC feel fear as they tried to ascend the world trade towers to fight the fire while bodies crashed to the earth all around tem? Of course they did. Were they cowards? No. They were heroes. They controlled their fear and entered into what they all certainly knew would be their deaths. Did the marines at Iowa Jima feel fear? Of course, but they controlled their fear and most went to their deaths to stop a monster. Monsters don’t rule by fear, they rule by the cowardness of the populations they rule.

The Civil war was the greatest tragedy to ever befall this great nation. And in essence the out come of the war was decided by only two men. General Lee and General Sherman. General Lee was considered a man of great integrity, honorable above all others. General Sherman was considered a monster by the south and more importantly by his own men. General Sherman was a monster of war. General Lee had given specific orders that no civilians and no civilian property were to be harmed. General Sherman destroyed every thing in site. Homes, crops, civilians, infrastructure, industry. He took the war not only to the soldiers but also to the civilian populous. He starved them, raped the women and killed them. In short he knew how to win a war. He freed the slaves.

In WW2 Patton, MaCarthur, and Eisenhower also were monsters of war. They fire bombed German towns incinerating hundreds of thousands of women and children. They nuked Japan again, incinerating hundreds of thousands in a single act. They knew how to win a war. They took the war to the populous. The people who were more willing to wear the chains of slavery than risk their lives in the quest for freedom.

President Bush after 911 said to the world, “decide either you are with us are you are against us.” And almost as quickly he adopted the liberal and weak policy of avoiding “innocent” deaths at almost any cost. He became like General Lee, a man of great honor. A warrior in the most elevated version. But he like General Lee will in the end, be a looser. The policy that Bush has put us on, the minimal collateral damage theory, will be as it was in Vietnam be a loosing path

If we are to win the war on terrorism, if we are to stop the proliferation of, and control over nuclear weapons, weapons that eventually will be used against us then we must become monsters of war. IslomoNazis are coming for us. They are monsters and, they are monsters of war. They exist because of the cowardness of their populations. If we are to win we must take the war to the cowards who enable the monsters. We must kill them men, women and children. We must starve them men, women and children. We must make their lives so painful, so horrible that they beg us to stop. To them this is a war of religion. To us it is a war of freedom. If we are to continue to enjoy freedom then we must become monsters of war.