Ken Nelson

It turns out that one expert think it is a bad idea to use a gun to defend an oil super tanker from pirates:

As Roger Middleton, a piracy expert at London-based think-tank Chatham House, says, "You’re sitting on a huge ship filled with flammable liquid. You don’t want somebody with a gun on top of that.

Instead they suggest non-lethal approaches:

And hey, I’m all in favor of not turning the boat I’m riding on into a fireball….

BUT the article report that the pirates are armed with RPGs and guns. And it even covers that the last tanker attacked used guns to defend themselves:

According to a statement from the US 5th Fleet, when a pirate skiff approached the ship, the security team on board responded with evasive maneuvers, and blasted them with Long Range Acoustic Devices (LRADs) and small-arms fire. The pirates then broke off the attack.

It seems odd to not list firearms as a valid approach WHEN IT JUST WORKED!

Sure, an interviewed expert said no firearms, but IT WORKED. IN. REAL. LIFE. Maybe its time to ask another expert or two….

Is this an example of some liberal journalist, who wants to be the next Karl Woodward, but is stuck earning a paycheck at a trade rag but still injects liberal bias?  I don’t know. I’ve only known one trade rag journalist, and that description fit him to a tee.

THE PATRIOT MICRO CHIP is intended to be implanted in terrorists. 
The implant is specifically designed to be installed in the forehead. 
When properly installed, it will allow the one implanted, to speak to God. 

It comes in various sizes:

The exact size of the implant will be selected by a well-trained and highly skilled technician.  The implant may or may not be painless. Side effects, like headaches and nausea, are temporary. Some bleeding or swelling may occur at the injection site.

H/T e-mail from Rob M.

Among the many things that bugs me about this notion of  trying KSM in civilian court is that if KSM is found innocent is he released and free to go?  I’m not very happy with that notion.

If he will be kept in custody no matter the outcome, then why are we doing it? Why go to the expense? Why share secrets with his, likely, traitorous sieve to Al Qaeda defense council? Why give Al Qaeda a public forum?  And why put New York through it?

It makes no sense. Which, of course, means it is a typical policy from this administration.

Usually when something stupid comes from them, I can see a bribe to a constituency group or donor (whether the UAW or China).  The stimulus bill is a prime example of something stupid but that makes sense from a self-centered political corruption point of view.

There are two sides to this administration. The first is a “machine politics, corrupt, bribe, our job is to steal for our constituencies” side.  The second is a “we hate America, we suck, we are the problem” side. And maybe that is the side driving this decision.

That terrorists like so much?

The news that Dr. Nidal Hasan served on a Presidential Transition task force and helped set national security priorities continues to be ignored by the media.

I don’t know. But like him they do.

Something tells me his decision angst is more about the political risk to him, than wanting to get the decision right for the nation’s security.

It sucks that troops that risk all every day are “led” by a man unwilling to risk a small drop in his polls.

"I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God." (DA Form 71, 1 August 1959, for officers.)”

On the wall of my office is my commission as an officer in the United States Army.  In order to get it I had to swear an oath (above)  to defend the Country and the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic and to swear true faith and allegiance to the same.

This was given to me long ago and I never really gave much thought to anything but the foreign enemies part. Nor did we receive training in anything other than how to deal with foreign enemies (violently but with certain rules).   I had no training in identifying or defending against domestic enemies. And I had no training on what it meant to defend the Constitution.

I’m going to leave the Commission on my wall, because it reflects an achievement I’m proud of.  But if asked to accept it again, I’d be tempted to say “Gosh… I’m not willing to defend the Constitution as currently written, and I think you are a domestic enemy, is one out of three okay?”. 

Oh sure Ken, you say, you don’t like Obama so you call him a domestic enemy. I despised Clinton, but I would have accepted a commission from him.   I believe that Obama is a domestic enemy. I do not believe he likes or respects this country and I think he actively works against our interests and the good parts of our Constitution. I believe he and others in  his government have long term plans to subvert the freedom parts of our Constitution.

Not all parts though. I think there is one part he really likes.  And that leads me to the other reason I’d have a problem accepting a commission today… there are parts of our Constitution I would not be willing to defend.   In particular the 16th amendment – the right to tax us any darn well the Government wants to.   Put it in context with the other amendments, which detail what the Government can’t do, the 16th amendment is the most “unconstitutional” amendment one could imagine other than “this document is nullified”.

The 16th amendment led to the growth of government that threatens our rights and economic freedom and security.  Why defend it?

This is not to disparage any serving today. If I were younger I’d probably be serving as well – we clearly have foreign enemies that are actively fighting against us.

But… I’d do so with a sour taste in my mouth as I knew I’d only be willing to do a third of the job.

The Army’s aircraft carrier?

Morale declines when men disappear from families 6 months of every year on average (deploying 4 times in 8 years).

I wouldn’t be surprised if not having a clear mission and a sense of futility regarding the Afgani culture contribute to declining morale as well.  I know that having a Commander-in-Chief finding time to golf, visit with Andy Stern 22 times and go on dates every Friday but NOT deciding my fate for 4 months would drag me down.  That plus the gnawing concern that my efforts will be thrown away at the first political convenience.

Army people expect to disappear sometimes but repeated no-dependent deployments is new.  This isn’t the Navy, where the 6 months a year gone requirement is known by all when they enter and that has developed support systems for families that can help.

If this persists I’m sure the Army and its members will adapt, but the transition period will be a challenge.

Via Drudge

Drudge inserts the knife so deftly…

Ralph Peters does not like nation building in Afghanistan. I agree.

BTW: “Surge too Far” refers back to Operation Market Garden in WWII.  There, the Allies, tried to go a “bridge too far”, overextended, and got their hats handed to them.

Given resources and time our military could “nation build” Afghanistan.  I doubt the cost would be worth it. Or the results durable.

I favor Peter’s approach instead.  Does this mean I’m not “listening” to McChrystal?  No – I changed the mission.

Muslims total 1.57 billion world-wide.

I’d like to see an immigration ban on Muslims to America as well as deportation of non-citizen Muslims and severely reduced and supervised visit visas from Muslim countries.

When Muslims congregate, trouble follows. We already have a couple million here and we can see our home grown terrorism problem increasing.

And if other religions caused trouble like they do, I’d say the same.

Sergeant Christopher Hughes, 37, from Detroit, has lost six colleagues and survived two roadside bombs. Asked if the mission was worthwhile, he replied: “If I knew exactly what the mission was, probably so, but I don’t.”

From an article about dropping morale in the 10th Mountain Division in Afghanistan.

The desire to fight Afghanistan on the cheap dragged it out 8 years, with no end in sight. Yearly deployments, and no clear mission.  The Taliban, for all their faults, mainly just want to hose up Afghanistan.  They learned their lesson about harboring/training foreign terrorists, and that less could be reinforced from the air.

Fight it to win (which means Northern Territories). Or come home.

Soldiers expect to be away from family. I was.  They expect and hope the mission to be worth it.

What does Obama think of when he thinks of Afghanistan?

As Obama considers what to do about Afghanistan, I urge him to read this Belmont Club posting about “what happens if Islamic jihadists get nukes”:

In stark contrast, the nuclear threshold against a terrorism may be crossed once they get the capability to attack with weapons of mass destruction. Unlike the old early warning systems, designed to gauge Soviet intent, the intelligence systems of the War on Terror are meant to measure capability. The relevant Cold War question was ‘do they intend to use the Bomb?’.  In the War on Terror, the relevant question is simply ‘do they have the Bomb?’

The question isn’t if they would use it, but when they will get it. Because once they have nukes, they will use them.

Low nuclear threshold needs to be part of the  “strategy evaluation”. Are Afghanistan and the Taliban part of the jihadist nuclear risk?  

My main problem with Obama is that I suspect his strategy evaluation looks more at political effects on him than on the long term security of the nation.

I believe we cannot move forward in the region without addressing Pakistan. Thus,  if we are willing to go after Pakistan’s Northern Territories, I’d go with McChrystal/Patreaus counter insurgency model.  If not, I’d use air power and precise deployment of ground troops to disrupt any terrorist gatherings.

A President can have a personal life, but only after taking care of the nation.

There are a lot of soldiers missing date nights. 10 of them forever.