Comments on: Yes we can

By: Jay

Jay — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 20:39:13 +0000

I agree with Fred but I take a stronger position. The Obama people do not see the military as an important part of our strategic and tactical environment. I bet most view the military with contempt, fools who would spend their lives not maximizing their income. Sure officers seek power and prestige in their own world but they are middle class (Patton was an exception since he was wealthy).
So they will bring the troops back and leave the weapons either in working order or destroyed. I bet that they would be unconcerned about the possibility that the Iranians will seize the weapons and conquer Iraq. Forcing college students to do “community service” is more important while enriching the big contributors such as ADM and Soros.
But the reality of our financial problems and the foolish personal concerns of many of our young people will be the making of a new type of civil war. Bankrupting pension plans and stealing public monies are not a way to govern UNLESS the rulers have a dedicated armed youth organization that will kill for the rulers under some ideology.
But perhaps the American people are defeatist the way the Israeli left is.

By: andrewdb

andrewdb — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 19:48:12 +0000

Wretchard –

excellent discussion here of the problems in India/Pakistan when the Brits left.

http://www.capitalreach.com/rt/aei9475?du=/a/aei/mp3.jsp

By: Stones Cry Out - If they keep silent… » Things Heard: e27v1

Stones Cry Out - If they keep silent… » Things Heard: e27v1 — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 13:17:58 +0000

[...] On Mr Obama’s plan to withdraw 2 brigades each month from Iraq for 16 months after taking office. [...]

By: patterns

patterns — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 00:37:15 +0000

Sometimes I see patterns. Cedarford enemy == jew whiskey enemy == yuppie.

Are these the same people having fun? They’re starting to come off as algorithmic.

By: Ammo Guy

Ammo Guy — Sun, 13 Jul 2008 22:28:21 +0000

Though a bit off topic, Robohobo, an interesting scenario. OTOH, I always wondered what would have happened if AQ had been able to strike a year earlier during the aftermath of the 2000 election brouhaha. Of course, with the planning lead times and the inability to predict US election outcomes, it would have been an accident in timing for Osama, but can you imagine the situation on 7 Dec 2000 with two possible President-elects and the resident egomaniac on the job vying to respond to that attack? Watching the aftermath in NYC with the cancellation of the 9/11/00 mayoral election and some serious discussion of Mayor Giuliani continuing in office as the only person who could deal with the city’s tragedy, can any of us not imagine President Clinton trying to pull the same stunt? I can just hear him now. And, this scenario is why I always argue that SCOTUS did the right thing by ending the election controversy because America needs a President at all times and can’t afford endless legal appeals that do nothing but titillate lawyers and encourage our enemies. I still believe that the lost month of planning (from election day to 12 Dec 00) contributed in some way to the Bush’s administration inability to be leaning forward in the foxhole on 9/11/01. I could be wrong, but I doubt it )

By: Robohobo

Robohobo — Sun, 13 Jul 2008 17:38:31 +0000

Just move the dates from this out a few years and you can get the idea. This piece IS grounded in reality and quite possible.

http://www.therant.us/staff/kraft/10242006.htm

By: Teresita

Teresita — Sun, 13 Jul 2008 15:08:27 +0000

Eggplant: It’s very doubtful that B. Hussein has the ability to pick up the pieces after Israel turns everything upside down.

But Barack can and will cut Israel loose with no financial aid if they make a move against Iran without prior approval from the USA. With gas at $10 a gallon, there would be nary a peep from the electorate.

By: CPT. Charles

CPT. Charles — Sun, 13 Jul 2008 10:19:49 +0000

NahnCee—apples and oranges. With State your talking about a ‘handful’ [compared 1mil+ for the Armed Forces...] of individuals, WITH civil service regs shielding them.

No disrespect to you, but you haven’t the faintest idea how bad things were when Dubya took office in 2001. The number of AF squadrons with non-operational aircraft [hanger-queens], the number of Army manuver battalions at CAT-3/-4 readiness levels, etc. I won’t print the numbers here, my OPSEC reflexes won’t let me. I’ll give one hint: everybody babbles on about the troop levels for OIF…there was NO plan B force structure. We went with what was capable of fighting, 2+ years into Dubya’s 1st term. The rest were either still rebuilding, or reserves [in case something else happened...]. You don’t advertise the fact that your army is a shattered mess.

No NahnCee, for the military, money is air and water. No ammo, no POL, no training=no readiness. Want an example? Korea—Task Force Smith. Yeah, you can send them out against the Bad Guys, just don’t expect that many of them are coming back.

The same under Carter. I know. I was there.

By: Doug

Doug — Sun, 13 Jul 2008 07:04:48 +0000

Fred,
I was thinking of you after I heard Obambi’s laundry list of military don’ts.
My favorite for absurdity was “untested missile defense.”
I would hope if he still lived in Hawaii, he might have heard of a few successes, but in the bubble of Marxist anti-Americanism that he chooses to exist in, even that probably would remain a mystery to the man who never wrote squat for the Harvard Review, and mangles grammar and logic as though he never attended college
Haven’t read Horowitz in some time, he must be pulling his hair out, having listened to and deconstructed all this scat thousands of times over the years in left field.

By: Eggplant

Eggplant — Sun, 13 Jul 2008 05:53:53 +0000

NahnCee said:

“Seems to me that if the State Department can thwart Dubya for 8 years, Defense and Pentagon (or any bureaucrats worth their salt) should be able to tap dance B. Hussein for a mere 4.”

Chances are good that in the next 4 years the Iranians will become a full blown national security problem (assuming the Israelis don’t nuke em first). My guess is the Israelis would see no option but to pre-emptively attack Iran if the Messiah ended up as our next President. It’s very doubtful that B. Hussein has the ability to pick up the pieces after Israel turns everything upside down. Why would Israel or any nation trust a two-bit demagogue like B. Hussein?