Recommended Posts

More upcoming Horror from Islam: http://www.city-journal.org/2015/eon0526mt.html#.VWUVCriRqwc.facebook.

Why the hell can't America, Britain, France, Germany, Japan, NATO, or some other semi-decent nation land a few troops there, and protect the priceless and irreplaceable heritage of mankind? Must Raw Evil triumph so clearly and loudly in the face of the impotent and feckless West?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More upcoming Horror from Islam: http://www.city-journal.org/2015/eon0526mt.html#.VWUVCriRqwc.facebook.

Why the hell can't America, Britain, France, Germany, Japan, NATO, or some other semi-decent nation land a few troops there, and protect the priceless and irreplaceable heritage of mankind? Must Raw Evil triumph so clearly and loudly in the face of the impotent and feckless West?

A few won't do in asymmetric warfare....

Look what happened in Gulf 2 when Dumb Donny Rumsfeld thought he could pacify Iraq on the cheap with "only" 120,000 pair of boots on the ground. It was a fiasco and we -lost-. In Gulf 1 George W. .. put 500,000 pair of boots on the ground and we won in 5 days..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More upcoming Horror from Islam: http://www.city-journal.org/2015/eon0526mt.html#.VWUVCriRqwc.facebook.

Why the hell can't America, Britain, France, Germany, Japan, NATO, or some other semi-decent nation land a few troops there, and protect the priceless and irreplaceable heritage of mankind? Must Raw Evil triumph so clearly and loudly in the face of the impotent and feckless West?

A few won't do in asymmetric warfare....

Look what happened in Gulf 2 when Dumb Donny Rumsfeld thought he could pacify Iraq on the cheap with "only" 120,000 pair of boots on the ground. It was a fiasco and we -lost-. In Gulf 1 George W. .. put 500,000 pair of boots on the ground and we won in 5 days..

The major failure of Gulf II involved having zero plans for occupying Iraq.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Victory in Iraq requires permanent and continuous presence of the victors or the locals will revert to previous status with new ratios of power relationships. Thus the Vietnam War was lost and now the Iraqi War started with the 2003 invasion. Bush's conceit of "Mission Accomplished" was merely taken over by Obama who withdrew. The ratio between U.S. operative intelligence and military and economic power--political power--means the United States needs to disarm to the extent it cannot engage in destructive foreign adventures like it did, is doing (Ukraine) and will do again. Needs to but won't. The imperial impulse which is a leitmotif of America going back to colonial days and westward expansion has involved this country in war after needless war and double cross after double cross from Washington of everybody is has been convenient to screw over and a cycle of war that makes peace out of temporary exhaustion and memories of the last blast from which it recovers to do it again. It took 30 years to get over the Civil War and take on Spain. Then WWI, WWII and the Cold War inbetween with its little proxy wars including Korea, Vietnam and the oil wars as we gin up for nuclear war with Russia which is coming because nobody believes it will happen since the big and bad Soviet Union is gone, gone, gone. And Iran may slip Israel a detonation that completely ruins Israel which is a gigantic Jewish ghetto looking for Warsaw.

As an example of stupidity, the US is building bigger and more powerful aircraft carriers as if the navy was still being run by battleship admirals who can't see military obsolescence staring them in the face. Yeah, we're building aircraft carriers that are supposed to dominate the world's oceans for the rest of the century. The navy even claims they will be defendable against ICBMs. Those ships will end up death traps for several thousand sailors each (5500) as more and more countries get the technologies and weapons needed to utterly destroy them.

--Brant

the momentum of destruction

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an example of stupidity, the US is building bigger and more powerful aircraft carriers as if the navy was still being run by battleship admirals who can't see military obsolescence staring them in the face. Yeah, we're building aircraft carriers that are supposed to dominate the world's oceans for the rest of the century. The navy even claims they will be defendable against ICBMs. Those ships will end up death traps for several thousand sailors each (5500) as more and more countries get the technologies and weapons needed to utterly destroy them.

--Brant

the momentum of destruction

The Generals and the Admirals have -always- prepared for the -last war fought-. They never get their shit straight until they are bloodied by the narrowness of their vision.

Building aircraft carriers is the American version of building pyramids for Pharo. Our weapons production is a way of keeping the pot boiling..

Ba'al Chatzaf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding ISIS and the USA, Senator Rand Paul has some choice words for the hawks in his party. Takehome: it is Republican warmongers who have contributed to the rise of the psychopathic death cult. From CBS News:

Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul had some harsh words Wednesday for Republicans who have blamed the rise of Islamic extremism in Iraq and Syria on American disengagement with the Middle East.

In an interview on MSNBC's "Morning Joe," Paul was asked about the criticism he's received from GOP hawks like South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham and Arizona Sen. John McCain, who have argued that America's failure to arm moderate rebel groups in the Syrian civil war created space for the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) to grow.

"I would say it's exactly the opposite," Paul said. "ISIS exists and grew stronger because of the hawks in our party who gave arms indiscriminately, and most of those arms were snatched up by ISIS. These hawks also wanted to bomb [syrian dictator Bashar] Assad, which would have made ISIS's job even easier."

Paul has embraced a less muscular American approach to global events, arguing the U.S. should be more reticent in committing its own resources to foreign conflicts - either by sending its U.S. troops to intervene or sending U.S. munitions to warring parties.

See also, for fun, "Rand Paul discusses his 'libertarian-ish' positions." The reaction to the senator's ISIS remarks has been swift:

jindal_Paul.png

Edited by william.scherk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think all Republican war hawks should be taken seriously so long as they cut their personal ties to weapons and/or weaponry systems manufacturers. Ah yes, don't forget nation rebuilding industries.

Guess when that will happen...

I don't know who is worse, these assholes who make money sending young people to die in wars nobody wins, or progressives who try to keep young poor people spiritually dead with government dependency, left-wing tribal indoctrination at school and mental ineptitude.

They both deal in the death of the young and they both make tons of government money doing it.

Maybe that's why one looks so much like the other when you scratch away the jargon.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

btw - ISIS is easy to defeat for a country like the USA.

But not when the priority of our leaders is to make a shit-load of money and gain gobs of political power within the USA doing it.

The destruction of ISIS needs to be the mission, not just a propaganda tool for a different mission

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More upcoming Horror from Islam: http://www.city-journal.org/2015/eon0526mt.html#.VWUVCriRqwc.facebook.

Why the hell can't America, Britain, France, Germany, Japan, NATO, or some other semi-decent nation land a few troops there, and protect the priceless and irreplaceable heritage of mankind? Must Raw Evil triumph so clearly and loudly in the face of the impotent and feckless West?

A few won't do in asymmetric warfare....

I think a relative few would do. Maybe a few hundred paratroopers with strong air support (and rational rules of engagement). Those archeological antiquites and invaluable treasures are now effectively abandoned and unowned. They should all be captured by US soldiers, or private Western mercinaries, and then brought to the West. Then they should be sold, as is, to the highest bidder for a juicy profit. If people today were wise the precious historical heritage of mankind could be competently protected and a healthy profit made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More upcoming Horror from Islam: http://www.city-journal.org/2015/eon0526mt.html#.VWUVCriRqwc.facebook.

Why the hell can't America, Britain, France, Germany, Japan, NATO, or some other semi-decent nation land a few troops there, and protect the priceless and irreplaceable heritage of mankind? Must Raw Evil triumph so clearly and loudly in the face of the impotent and feckless West?

A few won't do in asymmetric warfare....

I think a relative few would do. Maybe a few hundred paratroopers with strong air support (and rational rules of engagement). Those archeological antiquites and invaluable treasures are now effectively abandoned and unowned. They should all be captured by US soldiers, or private Western mercinaries, and then brought to the West. Then they should be sold, as is, to the highest bidder for a juicy profit. If people today were wise the precious historical heritage of mankind could be competently protected and a healthy profit made.

You appear to have a serious deficiency in understanding the military parameters that are posed by ISIS.

Someone's son, husband, father or friend will be in those "few hundred."

This is not a movie or television show.

A...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Selene -- The muzzies seek to nuke us. They want millions of relative-innocents to die. They have hundreds of nukes in Pakistan. This is an objective threat which needs to be eliminated. Letting ISIS and the other Islamic monsters live, prosper, slaughter, destroy, and make videos glorifying their unprecedented savagery, is morally outrageous and a horrific menace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They have hundreds of nukes in Pakistan.

This statement is false.

Nuclear Arsenal

The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) estimates that Pakistan has built 24-48 HEU-based nuclear warheads, and Carnegie reports that they have produced 585-800 kg of HEU, enough for 30-55 weapons. Pakistan's nuclear warheads are based on an implosion design that uses a solid core of highly enriched uranium and requires an estimated 15-20 kg of material per warhead. According to Carnegie, Pakistan has also produced a small but unknown quantity of weapons grade plutonium, which is sufficient for an estimated 3-5 nuclear weapons.

Pakistani authorities claim that their nuclear weapons are not assembled. They maintain that the fissile cores are stored separately from the non-nuclear explosives packages, and that the warheads are stored separately from the delivery systems. In a 2001 report, the Defense Department contends that "Islamabad's nuclear weapons are probably stored in component form" and that "Pakistan probably could assemble the weapons fairly quickly." However, no one has been able to ascertain the validity of Pakistan's assurances about their nuclear weapons security.

Pakistan's reliance primarily on HEU makes its fissile materials particularly vulnerable to diversion. HEU can be used in a relatively simple gun-barrel-type design, which could be within the means of non-state actors that intend to assemble a crude nuclear weapon.

The terrorist attacks on September 11th raised concerns about the security of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal. According to press reports, within two days of the attacks, Pakistan's military began relocating nuclear weapons components to six new secret locations. Shortly thereafter, Gen. Pervez Musharraf fired his intelligence chief and other officers and detained several suspected retired nuclear weapons scientists, in an attempt to root out extremist elements that posed a potential threat to Pakistan's nuclear arsenal.

Concerns have also been raised about Pakistan as a proliferant of nuclear materials and expertise. In November, 2002, shortly after North Korea admitted to pursuing a nuclear weapons program, the press reported allegations that Pakistan had provided assistance in the development of its uranium enrichment program in exchange for North Korean missile technologies.

http://fas.org/nuke/guide/pakistan/nuke/

If you are making it out of ignorance, you are excused.

If not, well there is a word for that intentional use of a known falsehood.

A...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a relative few would do. Maybe a few hundred paratroopers with strong air support (and rational rules of engagement). Those archeological antiquites and invaluable treasures are now effectively abandoned and unowned. They should all be captured by US soldiers, or private Western mercinaries, and then brought to the West. Then they should be sold, as is, to the highest bidder for a juicy profit. If people today were wise the precious historical heritage of mankind could be competently protected and a healthy profit made.

You exhibit the same military brilliance as did our former secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld. He attempt to fight the second Gulf War on the cheap. Now look at what we have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is another "authority" and he even lists a phone number for you to call...

Non-NPT Nuclear Weapons Possessors:

Three states—India, Israel, and Pakistan—never joined the NPT and are known to possess nuclear weapons. Claiming its nuclear program was for peaceful purposes, India first tested a nuclear explosive device in 1974. That test spurred Pakistan to ramp up work on its secret nuclear weapons program. India and Pakistan both publicly demonstrated their nuclear weapon capabilities with a round of tit-for-tat nuclear tests in May 1998. Israel has not publicly conducted a nuclear test, does not admit to or deny having nuclear weapons, and states that it will not be the first to introduce nuclear weapons in the Middle East. Nevertheless, Israel is universally believed to possess nuclear arms, although it is unclear how many weapons Israel possesses. The following arsenal estimates are based on the amount of fissile material—highly enriched uranium and plutonium—that each of the states is estimated to have produced. Fissile material is the key element for making nuclear weapons. India and Israel are believed to use plutonium in their weapons, while Pakistan is thought to use highly enriched uranium.

India: Between 90-110 nuclear warheads.
Israel: Between 80-100 nuclear warheads, with fissile material for up to 200.
Pakistan: Between 100 to 120 nuclear warheads.

http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/Nuclearweaponswhohaswhat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you ever run a search before you post something that would require a source?

We estimate that Pakistan has a nuclear weapons stockpile of 90 ”110 nuclear warheads, an increase from the estimated 70-90 warheads in 2009 (Norris and Kristensen, 2009). The US Defense Intelligence Agency projected in 1999 that by 2020 Pakistan would have 60 ” 80 warheads (Defense Intelligence Agency, 1999); Pakistan appears to have reached that level in 2006 or 2007 (Norris and Kristensen,
2007), more than a decade ahead of pre-dictions. In January 2011, our estimate (DeYoung, 2011) of PakistanÕs stockpile was confirmed in the
New York Times by Òofficials and outsiders familiar with the American assessment,Ó who said that
the official US estimate for Òdeployed weaponsÓ ranged from the mid-90s to more than 110 (Sanger and Schmitt, 2011).

1 With four new delivery systems and two plutonium production reactors under development, however, the rate of PakistanÕs stockpile growth may even increase over the next 10 years. The Pakistani government has not defined the number and type of nuclear weapons that its minimum deterrent requires. But PakistanÕs pace of nuclear modernization and its development of several short-range delivery systems indicates that its nuclear posture has entered an important new phase and that a public explanation is overdue. http://bos.sagepub.com/content/67/4/91.full.pdf

http://www.ploughshares.org/world-nuclear-stockpile-report

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even a handful of nukes in the hands of Islamic activists is an unspeakable menace for the West and America. Even one in the hands of ISIS is a nightmare to contemplate. This horrific objective threat needs to be eliminated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even a handful of nukes in the hands of Islamic activists is an unspeakable menace for the West and America. Even one in the hands of ISIS is a nightmare to contemplate. This horrific objective threat needs to be eliminated.

Go ahead. Eliminate it.

--Brant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even a handful of nukes in the hands of Islamic activists is an unspeakable menace for the West and America. Even one in the hands of ISIS is a nightmare to contemplate. This horrific objective threat needs to be eliminated.

Can you admit that you were wrong to post that Pakistan has "hundreds of nukes?"

Yes or no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A scientific guess within an order of magnitude is considered valid. 100's for 100 is valid. 1000's for 100 would be invalid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A scientific guess within an order of magnitude is considered valid. 100's for 100 is valid. 1000's for 100 would be invalid.

This is not a place or issue to "guess" because it inflames a precarious situation.

I understand your point though.

A...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A scientific guess within an order of magnitude is considered valid. 100's for 100 is valid. 1000's for 100 would be invalid.

This is not a place or issue to "guess" because it inflames a precarious situation.

I understand your point though.

A...

It's a little beyond me. I don't know if it's a brain deficiency or a deficiency in education, but I'll be thinking about it.

--Brant

as for Pakistan, it's not whether there are 20 or 100 or more nukes anymore, but delivery capability. What most protects Israel is for Pakistan to use them means to lose them and they're a geo-political counter to India, which has its own nukes: geo-political situations always out weigh the religious and philosophical which is why ISIS wants its Caliphate and Iran is trying to grow its own nuclear balls

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dislike breathing life into a thread started by Krel the Kowardly Lion, however, it was on point.

Let's see, where have I seen this scenario before...

The White House said that the number of Special Forces troops who would deploy to northern Syria would be “fewer than 50” and that their mission would be to help coordinate local ground forces and coalition efforts to counter the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL.

Also, why does this "Commander of Cliches" feel better disclosing numbers of troops being deployed?

In addition, Mr. Obama has authorized deploying A-10 Warthog planes and F-15 fighter jets to Incirlik Air Base in Turkey, and has instructed his advisers to consult with the Iraqi government about establishing a Special Operations task force to further efforts to target Islamic State leaders there. He also ordered more military assistance to Jordan and Lebanon.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/31/world/obama-will-send-forces-to-syria-to-help-fight-the-islamic-state.html?emc=edit_na_20151030&nlid=53564225&ref=cta&_r=0

I guess that these 50 will be only issued sandals because the "Commander of Cliches" swore that there would be NO BOOTS ON THE GROUND...

Yep he would never lie to the American people.

A...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never tell the truth is closer to the truth.

SF on the ground is not to conduct combat operations, but to gather information which may involve coordinating air strikes.

Their most hazardous duty in the Vietnam War was to avoid enemy contact except to capture a prisoner. I knew an SFC named Ronald James Dexter who was inserted into Laos in June 1967 with a crew and immediately engaged the North Vietnamese and that's the last anyone saw of them after an incomplete extraction. He was MIA for decades and is nowApparently he died in captivity in July 1967. That's two men I knew of who were so right for "living on earth" who were killed in the Vietnam War. The other was Robert A. Johnson, KIA in May 1967 after his legs were blown off near the DMZ by a 175 round.

--Brant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My "avatar" was at the panel where two (2) wonderful guy's names that I knew very well were listed.

I have no idea how long that I was in that position. My lady, a very patient person, said it was longer than 30 minutes.

I could not tell you who saw death there personally could ever deal with the waste and anger.

All I can say is I had avoided how angry I was for at least 3 decades and it all came crawling out screaming as I crouched in front of that beautiful stone slab where unfulfilled lives would never be written...

This is sublime to me:

http://bp1.blogger.com/_mBXDt99tlpQ/RidkKZ1vVMI/AAAAAAAAAAU/XyKihRzzleA/s320/reflections.jpe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even a handful of nukes in the hands of Islamic activists is an unspeakable menace for the West and America. Even one in the hands of ISIS is a nightmare to contemplate. This horrific objective threat needs to be eliminated.

Go ahead. Eliminate it.

--Brant

If we had the balls we could do it in a week. Fall out being what it is however, would kill everyone in Israel.

No balls. So we have the problem, don't we?

Ba'al Chatzaf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...