Ken Nelson

Ah… the good old days. 

I don’t understand all this “combat troops” out of Iraq talk.  It still is dangerous there. 50,000 troops remain, all with significant combat capability and with real world patrolling and defense missions. Sounds like “combat” to me.

Reports like this remind me that our newspapers and media outlets just have no idea what they write about. In this case, they just go along with what the Obama administration wants to tout.   The touting, btw, is in support of 100 billion in budget cuts, not “we won”.  It’s “yippee, it’s okay to cut”.  It is okay to be a tool, but at least know it. I doubt the media really get it.

I supported the initial invasion of Iraq. Maybe this was just me being patriotic, but also a lot of it was that I thought we would be smart in victory, not dumb. So after the first three weeks, I supported very little of what went on.  We did not need to drive around getting ourselves blown up. We did not need to defend Sunni against Shiite against Kurd against Wahhabi. Far better would have been to just seal off any WMD sites, and then go to the Iran border and let Iraq sort itself out.

Our military has done an amazing, but unnecessary, and unsustainable, job in Iraq but ultimately the Iraqi culture is not up to the task of being our democratic ally in the region.  Maybe I’ll be proven wrong, hope so, but… I’m usually right and expect to be here.

So at a cost of trillions, 4,000 US deaths, and thousands more casualties we now have a new, sort of democratic nation where only a few hundred are blown up each month in car bombings.  We now have a near nuclear Iran, and we now have a true ally (Israel) mortally threatened. And instead of a forward base against Iran we have a nation we are plotting to retreat from as soon as possible.

All in all… I’d have to say, if this is victory, losing must REALLY suck. Clearly, it wasn’t worth it, and all in all, I’d have to say it is just more evidence that we aren’t the country we once were.  Is it unpatriotic to say this?  Maybe. I’d certainly hate to have a son killed there and read stuff like this.  But… I’ve got a son getting older every day, and I’d like to avoid him being wasted on ventures like this.

Put another way… if I knew then, what I know now, I’d have never supported doing anything other than trying to assassinate Saddam Hussein, or possibly invading and making a sharp right turn.

And… it will take Pearl Harbor II to convince me that anything other than targeted assassination and massive bombing should be our next response against countries that act against our interests.

"Magnificent! Compared to war all other forms of human endeavor shrink to insignificance.
God help me, I do love it so!"
- General George Patton Jr

25% of the anemic 2nd quarter growth of 1.4% was caused by defense procurement or consumption (i.e. war):

Alas, even the GWOT has to end sometime. Or does it?  Will we have a permanent military-war-on-terror complex, like we have left over from the Cold War?  That seems likely.

Lots of idiots blather on about “rights”, as in “right to build a mosque”.  Most of these same fools just don’t see the right to property, or self-defense, or even the right to choose not to subsidize the marriage of two men.  So to a certain extent it is silly to argue with them because they are silly people based in an unreal abstract world leeching of the reality others fund and build.

To me it isn’t so obvious that Muslims have a “right” to build a mosque where ever they want. That generally may be true, but not at the site of a national tragedy caused by MUSLIMS.

Who should you be mad at?  First off… Muslims.  And not just radical Muslims, because, you see, every practicing, true, Muslim, is a radical by American standards.   Muslims flew airplanes turning an office tower into a cemetery. And Muslims want to pour salt on that wound by building a base symbolizing (to them) their sick victory. They have earned your concern and scorn.

Who else?  How about our State Department?  They let this fool Iman into our country. They let those 19 hijackers in. They are currently paying the Iman fronting this project $2000 a week and flying him around on our nickel.  This is a Department in serious need of change.

Who else? How about New York voters?  There… that you didn’t expect. But they elected these foolish local zoning commissioners that permitted this crazy scheme. And they elected Bloomberg.  Get a grip New York voters, this is what you get when you send fools to “represent” you. Who is the fool now? 

I’m sure, though, that New York will continue being stupid. And this mosque will be built. And the State Department will continue being a travel agent for our enemies.  Because ultimately, about 1/2 our country is flat out insane. They elect idiots like Obama, Pelosi, Gore, Clinton, Hatch, Graham, Collins, Byrd, and all the others who have spent the last 40 years bringing us to our knees.

I worry about Muslims, sure. They want to behead me.  But… they stand in line for those who want a piece of me – and most of them live here and claim to be Christian.

Read it here.

My take…. Nothing to be fired over. I like him more at the end of it than before.  But in it committed the unpardonable sin of praising Hillary Clinton and I suspect he will be gone by lunch.

And… (a bit later). He’s gone.

But… given a choice between him and Petreus, I’ll take Petreus.

He really is a patriot to take this on. He has done plenty and sacrificed much more than is called for.  But if this works, he is our Eisenhower and can write his ticket, so maybe he plays for a larger game.

Via Strategy Page’s update on what wars are going on right now:

For example, fighting back is considered, by Moslems, as culturally insensitive ("war on Islam"), and some of the Western media have picked up on this bizarre interpretation of reality.  It gets worse. Historians point out, for example, that the medieval Crusades were a series of wars fought in response to Islamic violence against Christians, not the opening act of aggression against Islam that continues to the present. Thus, the current war on terror is, indeed, in the tradition of the Crusades. And there are many other "Crusades" brewing around the world, in the many places where aggressive Islamic  militants are making unprovoked war on their Christian neighbors.

Just when I start to question why we should be in or stay in Afghanistan, I read stuff like this:

Suspected Taliban militants have executed a 7-year-old boy, accusing him of spying for the government, officials in southern Afghanistan said Thursday.

But… does it talk about the Taliban, or the culture in the region? And if that is the culture, is it “salvageable”, or worth saving if it is?

I’m dubious.   And then I wonder about the 7 year olds we’ve drone bombed, not on purpose, but dead none the less, and I start to get into moral relativism infinite loops.

And I revert back to “this probably ain’t  worth doing”… especially when I consider that our current President would give all the sacrifice away in a heart beat if the SEIU asked him to.

We need to neuter jihadist Islam, and Taliban and Al-Queda need some serious killing, but I’m dubious places like Afghanistan or Iraq can be anything other than just  neutered.  I doubt their joining the league of effective democracies is really on the table.  Our military may pull it out, if anybody can, they can, but I’m starting to wonder about the cost.

If it were up to me, I’d kill their leaders and bomb/attack any terrorist concentrations, and also ban Muslim immigration to the US. I think that would work better and be a lot cheaper.

The last 5 plane trips I’ve taken, I’ve been singled out for special searching.

Random?

Anyway, I’m in Atlanta, GA at the airport waiting to come home.  Things went smoothly but it still tool an hour and 15 minutes to get from the rental car through to the gate.

I’d rather drive 5 or 6 hours than put up with this.

I had the full body scan today. What was funny was you could see 50 yards ahead in line who was getting scanned and who wasn’t, and where you needed to stand to avoid it. 

Anyway, today’s trip through security hasn’t been awful, but it certainly hasn’t inspired confidence.

Shut him down

I get these notes about my support for Draw Mohammed day. “reckless”, “counter productive”, “what if it were Jesus” they ask.

I thank those concerned for my safety, but I’d add that I didn’t draw Mohammed. Mainly cause I suck at drawing, but also because I don’t know what he looked like. If they pick me out for a beheading they really are reaching low, aren’t they?  I’d add that while I’m not looking for a fight, my house and myself would be a really bad choice to go after. I pay attention and I’m usually well armed. Go pick on some weenie artist type crazy Muslim.

As to counter productive… those who think it a bad idea just don’t get how bullies work. There are few (none?) moderate Muslims for two reasons… the religion isn’t moderate, but also because fanatics threaten those who would moderate Islam.

So when you adjust your behavior to accommodate a bully, you get what? More bullying of course.

As to if it were Jesus… draw what you want.  I see images of Jesus all the time, doesn’t bug me. Even the ones where he has blond hair and blue eyes.   Even the cross in the urine didn’t bug me, other than I was paying for it (and didn’t want to).  Do what you want. I believe in self-determination and free agency. Go to hell if you want, it’s your call.  What I say has no sway on the matter. The man upstairs sorts it out.

Is irking Muslims counter productive?  I don’t see it. Muslims need to be shown that they need to behave in this world. They need to have consequences for their actions, just like everybody else.  And frankly, what doesn’t irk a Muslim?  That’s the whole problem. They go from zero to beheading over just about everything.

Follow my lead and tell Muslims that we aren’t going to put up with their shenanigans anymore. Quit rewarding foul behavior and you will get less of it.

On a normal day you might draw Mort. Or Marty. Or Myron. But today is Draw Mohammed day.  So get busy!  Entry form follows!

The idea is to spread the risk – they can’t behead everybody – right?  Or can they?

I can’t draw worth a lick, and a stick figure Mohammed I’m capable of might inspire a shaving cut more than a beheading.  But what I can EMPHATICALLY say is that a religion that beheads due to cartoons isn’t one we should permit in our country.

Islam isn’t a “Great” religion – it is a dangerous religion that the USA should strive to keep from spreading within our borders.  That means preventing any further Muslim immigration, and evicting non-citizen Muslims that reside here now.

From a series of photos in the Denver Post by an AP correspondent in Afghanistan.

Hanks was talking stupid again:

“Back in World War II, we viewed the Japanese as ‘yellow, slant-eyed dogs’ that believed in different gods. They were out to kill us because our way of living was different. We, in turn, wanted to annihilate them because they were different. Does that sound familiar, by any chance, to what’s going on today?”

Hanks ignores many truths from the past to try and highlight an untruth today.

Hanson takes him to task:

Despite Hanks’ efforts at moral equivalence in making the U.S. and Japan kindred in their hatreds, America was attacked first, and its democratic system was both antithetical to the Japan of 1941, and capable of continual moral evolution in a way impossible under Gen. Tojo and his cadre. It is quite shameful to reduce that fundamental difference into a “they…us” 50/50 polarity. Indeed, the most disturbing phrase of all was Hanks’ suggestion that the Japanese wished to “kill,” us, while we in turn wanted to “annihilate” them. Had they developed the bomb or other such weapons of mass destruction (and they had all sorts of plans of creating WMDs), and won the war, I can guarantee Hanks that he would probably would not be here today, and that his Los Angeles would look nothing like a prosperous and modern Tokyo.

In other words… Tom Hanks should be glad we won, and should hope we win against fascist Islam. After all, what would your typical jihadist mullah do with a guy who dressed like this:

 
Tom Hanks’s in Bosom Buddies

I’ve set the DVR to record “The Pacific”. Not cause I like Tom Hanks, but because I’d really like to see two of my favorite books – “Helmet for My Pillow “ (Robert Leckie) and “With the Old Breed” (Eugene Sledge) set to film.

 
Or Privacy SHOULD not be a crime

With Utah just trying, and failing, to do its own Patriot Act for all crimes, I thought it appropriate to look at the Patriot Act, which is up for renewal now.

I’m inclined to not like laws claiming to be patriotic. Nor laws that have names that are really acronyms: Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act

Note that name specifically includes terrorism ONLY.  I do think we need to fight terrorism hard. My main problem with the Patriot Act is that it doesn’t JUST fight terrorism. It also permits intrusive law enforcement techniques for drugs, money laundering, computer crime, border, and crime in general.

And in action most of the uses of the law have NOT been for terrorism. Not just most, nearly all.  For instance, of the 763 sneak and peak warrants used in 2008 only 3 were used for anti-terrorism. 65 percent were used for drug enforcement. And that leaves about 34% for “other” crimes.

I do not support fishing expeditions, like the BLANKET requests  for records on all customers of a number of Las Vegas businesses.

I do not support imprisoning over 200 people under this act for petty crimes committed on airliners. They weren’t terrorists.

This is so like government to use fear of one thing to spur invasive activity in another.

So, in a nutshell, I favor renewing a modified Patriot Act, limited to JUST terrorism.

Frankly, I think the law hasn’t helped anti-terrorism much and I’d be happy to see it die if that was what was needed to kill the non-terrorism stuff in it.

But if we can start over and craft a simple bill FOCUSED on terrorism and not containing every wish list the Federal law enforcement bureaucracy wants to use against citizens, then I’d support it.

Lacking that, I’d just as soon say sayonara to the PATRIOT Act and hello to the POTO (Prevention of Terrorism Only) Act.

Competitors can teach the Army about cool and clean running M16s
Shown: The JP Rifles JP-15 AR.

The NY Times covers the Army’s attempts to build an M4 (shorter variant of the M16) that won’t jam:

Watch the video closely. After several magazines, the barrel smolders. Then it becomes red hot. After 1 minute and 20 seconds the barrel begins to droop between magazines — like a piece of warm licorice. Then comes the catastrophic ending, at 1 minute and 51 seconds and after the 535th round, when the barrel ruptures.

They Army has decided to make the barrel heavier to help avoid the problem:

The barrel gets hotter and hotter, and the heat spreads throughout the weapon. The shooter wears a heat-resistant glove even to pull the trigger. Soon the barrel smolders and glows, but it does not droop and does not rupture. At 2:22 the hand guard assembly catches fire. It burns for about two and a half minutes. But the rifle keeps firing, magazine after magazine, until it stops firing on automatic at 4 minutes and 47 seconds, after 911 rounds.

In my experience fouling, not shooting too much/too fast, causes most M16 jams.  Although I have seen M16 barrels begin to get soft from heat, this was before the introduction of the 3-shot burst automatics the soldiers of today use.

The M16 runs very dirty because the gas used to blast  the bolt back to cycle a new round comes directly back into the receiver depositing all sorts of nasties that collect quickly there.  Shoot a 100 rounds through an M16, or AR-15, then put your finger in there and it comes back black.

Competitive shooters don’t risk their lives due to jams, but they do risk losing, which motivates them to modify the guns to never jam.  Most serious competitors in multi-gun, or 3-gun, shooting (pistol, shotgun, carbine) have moved to a gas-piston system of cycling the action. In this approach the gas doesn’t go all the way back to the bolt, instead it operates a piston that moves the bolt. The action runs clean and cool. You can go a 1000 or more rounds and not have to clean the action (you should clean the barrel to extend its life however).

These systems also typically minimize the bolt slap against the back of the receiver.  Most AR-15’s come back too hard, making recoil much worse than need be.

The Army, IMHO, would be better served moving to a clean running, lower recoil, gas-piston variant of the M16/AR-15.   The guns would jam a lot less.  And valuable soldier time wouldn’t be wasted cleaning the weapons.

I’d note that soldiers given a choice, usually in Special Ops or other specialties, generally prefer the gas-piston systems. Reliability plus less maintenance and lower recoil… you can have it all!

Missing

We were promised a “surge” in air marshal coverage after the “fruit of the boom” idiot. Now comes reports that 4 passengers on a flight from Amsterdam to Detroit were unruly… and no air marshal:

A Delta Airlines spokeswoman says the crew of a Northwest Airlines flight has requested that authorities meet the plane as it landed in Detroit because four passengers did not follow their instructions.

Were these Nigerian muslims? Or were they on strike over wanting to keep their blankets the last hour of the flight?   Big difference and I wish Delta would tell us. I’d also like to know why we don’t have air marshals on all flights from Amsterdam, at least until we have confidence in their security system again.

Uhmmm… President Ken would end that doubt in a heartbeat. How?  By turning back all non-US citizens on flights from airports that didn’t comply.  Who wants to ignore what I want now?

Oh… and I wouldn’t run a crazy debt and leaders of terrorist sponsoring countries would be dead by my first week in office.

Write in Ken Nelson in 2012!