[Guns America Digest] Teddy Roosevelt, America’s 26th President, ascended to the job when his boss, William McKinley, succumbed to an assassin’s bullet in September of 1901.
#3
I dont know about the manliest, he was a no nonsense tough character but George Washington was a Man. real honor and character combined with courage and action.
#1
I chat with strangers if the opportunity presents itself — I’ve met some of the most interesting people that way. Kudos to this woman for finding an easy way to meet a basic need that is not being met where it ought to have been.
[Zero] Unfortunately... I suppose I should comment about the B word. I shall start by admitting ‐ like everyone else - I really don’t have a clue where we’re go from here. The political maths doesn’t work. There are no apparent solutions. There are multiple scenarios to game ‐ but none of them seem to lead anywhere positive.. The only thing I’m completely sure of: tomorrow, as MPs finally vote on the UK/EU divorce bill, we will hear lots of UK politicians spouting pointless blustering pompous nonsense moving us forward not a jot.
But, I also sniff great market opportunity. If you could afford to magically remove all UK chips from the table, you probably would... But you can’t. Where else would you invest? If you think British politics is crazy... tell me where isn’t? Yep, better to spread your bets across a globe of dysfunctional politics ‐ for that is the reality of the new Trumpist populist age.
The second issue for UK Inc is more fundamental. Alongside our bafflement at the amateur blundering ineptitude of the UK political system leading us to this place of befuddlement, I can’t help but wonder if we’re missing some fundamental positives about UK Inc, that the pros and cons of Brexit have been massively overexaggerated, and this is the time to buying? What if things are NOT really so fundamentally hopeless and bad as the hyped-up political rhetoric and verbiage suggests? What if Brexit isn’t so bad, or a good compromise can be found?
In the next few days I think I can confidently predict a complete and utter clusterf**k in parliament, the absolute disintegration of political common sense, unprecedented journalistic hyperbole, and profound disbelief across the economy. Confidence will collapse, the tinned goods shelves at the supermarkets will be empty. End of the world.. again.
#2
Brexit is Y2K v2, node-eel is a MSM spin, the UK is a WTO member and will trade as that.
Once 97% of the British economy isn't mangled for the sake of the 3% of UK GDP that's gained exporting to the EUSSR vassal states, you can see there's plenty of room to grow.
Use the Tariffs to cut the Euro income tax called VAT massively, the economic boost to the economy will be 'UGE.
[HotAir] Shortly after the year began we looked at a report out of China where one of their very anti-American admirals had said that China might need to sink a couple of our aircraft carriers just to put us in our place. The guy is known for his hawkish hyperbole, so it didn’t seem that our government was taking him too seriously. But at the same time, the Chinese government didn’t exactly move to disavow his comments either. They’re referring to it as a "bloody nose" strategy, suggesting that if they hit us hard enough on the first shot we’ll turn tail and run. No credible experts seem to expect it to happen, but it was a situation worth monitoring at least.
We weren’t the only ones who noticed the admiral’s remarks. Some other experts in military affairs have begun weighing in on the subject. The majority of observers thus far appear to agree that a massive missile strike on an American carrier group in the South China Sea actually might be able to sink (or at least severely damage) one of our bird farms. But that hypothetical exchange has an end result that the Chinese won’t like at all. (Business Insider)
"The decision to go after an aircraft carrier, short of the deployment of nuclear weapons, is the decision that a foreign power would take with the most reticence," Bryan McGrath, founding managing director of The FerryBridge Group LLC, a naval consultancy, told Business Insider. "The other guy knows that if that is their target, the wrath of god will come down on them."
McGrath emphasized that threats to US carriers are old news, but that the ships, despite struggling to address the threat from China’s new missiles, still had merit.
"I would have been more surprised if we had seen former Chinese rear admiral say, ’The fact that we’re building aircraft carriers is one of the dumbest moves of the 21st century given the Americans will wax them in the first three days of combat,'" said McGrath, dismissing Luo’s comments as bogus scare tactics.
The short version of this tale is that if the Chinese actually did decide to open fire on one of our carriers, they might succeed in a surprise attack. But we would be able to decimate all of the useful and powerful elements of their navy in short order. We could also put quite a pounding to Beijing if we were so inclined. And by sinking one of our ships, the Chinese would have committed an act of war anyway so there would be nothing stopping us. Short of going to tactical weapons and given the massive logistical hurdles involved in shipping any significant number of their soldiers anywhere near our mainland, we could probably handle them.
#1
The big problem with this reasoning is the 9/11 precedent.
Comparatively weak Taliban ruled Afghanistan could afford to stage a mass fatality attack on the CONUS that was both an act of war and a war crime.
It is true that present day Afghanistan is a nothing more than sh*thole country. But this is in spite of Western efforts to improve conditions. This is not the effect of Western retaliation.
Western consensus policy since at least 9/11 has dramatically eroded Western deterrence, Chicom rhetoric and action is one of the consequences.
#2
Attacking a US carrier would merit nothing less than full scale war with China. It's kind of like killing a cop. You might get lucky, but the rest of them will be down on you like flies on sh*t.
#5
You can only attack a US carrier if you can get your attack past the airgroup above, the subs beneath, and the ships surrounding that carrier and even then if you didn't take out that fleet it could probably eliminate the bulk of the Chinese navy without the carrier itself.
#6
Eventually the Chinese would have no maritime trade component left to their economy. I understand this is a large and critical portion of their economy.
I don't think they could adequately feed themselves after imports were terminated and the adjustment to reverting back to self sufficiency would take quite some time. Energy imports would be greatly reduced as would other imported materials which the current level of economic activity needs.
Posted by: Roger Smith ||
01/14/2019 15:56 Comments ||
Top||
#7
RS, I made that point several months ago but one of the locals got a burr under his saddle and popped off. You are correct that the Chinese are dependent on the sea lanes to prosper, without them they are just another third world country. That is why control of the South China Sea is so important to them.
Satire Warning
[Babylon Bee] t’s 2018, and inequality is still a HUGE problem, even in a progressive utopia like Hollywood.
Case in point: this woman’s name is Xayley Briers. She spends forty-five minutes a day running her Etsy storefront selling pet rocks. Do you know how much she makes? About $13 a day.
Pretty sad, right?
Well, it gets worse. While Briers works her butt off selling and shipping pet rocks all over the country for almost an hour each day, Hollywood A-lister and cisgendered white male Robert Downey Jr. has made hundreds of millions of dollars for playing Iron Man in the Marvel Cinematic Universe.
And what did he do? Simply help the franchise make billions worldwide. Both people are working hard, and one is making a LOT more money than the other. Why do you think that is? Oh, that’s right. It’s because she’s a WOMAN and he’s a MAN and our country apparently still doesn’t recognize women as human beings.
#4
Given that Robert Downey Jr is carbon-based while Ms Briers' rocks are mainly silicon, what we have here is yet another egregious example of systemic chemical sexism. Abolish the Periodic Table now!
#7
Yeah, well, like, Nobel Gases are inert supremacists man!
Slightly off topic, is it me or does the Captain Marvel story crib Green Lantern?
And if there isn't a scene in the next Avengers with America and Marvel doing a 'Captain, Captain, Captain' scene with someone in the background doing a Captain Morgan pose, I will know there is no more joy in Mudville.
#8
The same people bemoan the injustice of the "Big Business CEO's wage disparity with their employees" seem oblivious to the difference between an A-List Star's wages and that of the extras/film crew. Hypocrisy, much?
[DAILY WIRE] On Tuesday, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) released an op-ed titled, "Elected leaders who weaponize religion are playing a dangerous game."
The piece, published by The Hill, took aim at politicians who use religion as a cudgel against their political opponents, specially as it pertains to judicial nominees.
Gabbard wrote:
While I oppose the nomination of Brian Buescher to the U.S. District Court in Nebraska, I stand strongly against those who are fomenting religious bigotry, citing as disqualifiers Buescher’s Catholicism and his affiliation with the Knights of Columbus. If Buescher is "unqualified" because of his Catholicism and affiliation with the Knights of Columbus, then President John F. Kennedy, and the "liberal lion of the Senate" Ted Kennedy would have been "unqualified" for the same reasons.
Article 6 of the U.S. Constitution clearly states that there "shall be no religious test" for any seeking to serve in public office.
No American should be told that his or her public service is unwelcome because "the dogma lives loudly within you" as Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said to Amy Coney Barrett during her confirmation hearings in 2017 to serve as U.S. Circuit Court judge in the 7th Circuit.
Gabbard further wrote: "We must call this out for what it is ‐ religious bigotry. This is true not just when such prejudice is anti-Catholic, but also when it is anti-Semitic, anti-Muslim, anti-Hindu, or anti-Protestant, or any other religion."
While the representative singled out Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) regarding her comment to 7th Circuit Judge (then nominee) Amy Coney Barrett, Hawaii Senator Mazie Hirono (D) appears to have taken the op-ed personally, as she was one of the individuals who questioned nominee Brian Buescher regarding his faith and membership with the Knights of Columbus (KoC).
Through spokesman Will Dempster, Hirono’s office issued the following statement:
#1
Gabbard is an odd mix. Military career but very anti 2nd amendment. Blasts Hirono et al for religious bias, but voted for Bernie the Red. Too erratic to put much trust in.
#3
If I want to vote for someone who talks a good game but wants me disarmed and impoverished, there are plenty of RINOs to choose from...
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
01/14/2019 9:43 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Didn't take long for the Party of Slavery and Treason (TM) to strike back. A day after her comments about Hirono, Kamala, et al, there are stories out about how she was part of an anti-gay (or whatever the current acronym is) movement. No Presidential run for you, dear, you dissed your betters.
Posted by: Harry Sinatra5701 ||
01/14/2019 14:02 Comments ||
Top||
#5
I don't agree with her on everything, or most things, and I wouldn't say she's the brightest bulb in the lamp, but she has INTEGRITY.
#2
Just the first couple of minutes will give you the sense of her vision.
Barbara Charline Jordan was an American lawyer, educator and politician who was a leader of the Civil Rights Movement. A Democrat, she was the first African American elected to the Texas Senate after Reconstruction, the first Southern African-American woman elected to the United States House of Representatives. Wikipedia
However, this Thursday will make the 22nd anniversary of her passing. Too many people done got woke, since then.
Posted by: Bobby ||
01/14/2019 8:34 Comments ||
Top||
[American Thinker] No sooner had the Democrats taken back the majority in the House of Representatives than they proved their harshest critics correct ‐ the party no longer concerns itself with the interests of the American people. And by refusing to provide a dime for a physical barrier on our border, they did it in the starkest terms possible.
Led by far-left Nancy Pelosi, who held off a challenge to her leadership from the even farther left, the House Democrats promptly put themselves in the position of being seen taking the side of foreigners entering the country illegally over the security and economic prosperity of American citizens. They reduced themselves to the absurd position that "walls don't work."
I'm not one who necessarily believes that President Trump is a master negotiator or is playing 3D chess. But whether by design or because of pressure from his restive base, he now has the winning hand to build his wall and go on to re-election in 2020.
What's important now is that Trump plays his winning hand and resists the growing calls from the opposition media and cheap-labor Republicans to compromise with Nancy and Chuck. Doing so would just throw them a lifeline. Instead, Trump should use the power granted presidents by Congress, declare a national emergency, and begin construction of the wall.
#1
Naa.
Make them do their jobs in Congress by LAW. Many voted for this already so you have them by the scruff of the neck.
If you start declaring "National Emergencies" - well... you know. To democrats, everything is always a "national emergency" because they are ALWAYS on the ragahemaxetogrind.
So bathrooms, green new deals, ... you get the drift.
Very bad president in law to start over something that is blatantly already LAW.
#2
Trump does seem to have the authority to declare an emergency and secure the border. (Emergencies Act and Fence Act).
Congress does need to do its job. Hopefully, they will find to backbone to do this.
There needs to be a top-to-bottom reform of immigration laws and the means of enforcement. Sanctuary cities and states needs to stop. DACA/DAPA needs to go. Overstayed visas need to go. Illegal immigration needs to go.
The Dems are being exposed as asshats the longer this goes on.
Trump needs to stay strong despite some Pubs going wobbly. In the past the Dems have lied repeatedly about the immigration issue.
#4
They are useful idiots for the globalist rent-seekers.
Their politics is oikophobic socialism.
Going from National to Oikophobia is Akin to the way the left used to love Eugenics then decided it was bad and so decided on dysgenic fertility redistribution. The narcissism behind coercion of others attracts them.
#7
They passed some previous wall funding under a previous admin. I'd like to hear what happened with that money. If it was spent to create the bits of wall we have fine, but if it wasn't used for a wall I'd like to see where it went and why.
#9
#7-8. I thought $20 B was allocated/approved in 2006 but onlu a little over a billion was actually spent.
Si I guess they couldn't find $19 B for the 'worthy cause'.
Posted by: Bobby ||
01/14/2019 16:55 Comments ||
Top||
#10
And why didn't the pubs pass this while they controlled Congress?
Cause the Trunks invited the liberals who fled the old Democratic party into their ranks. Now its not a conservative party, but the last vestiges of the old center. As the socialists have shown in Mexifornia, there can be only one.
[The Hill] Democrats are struggling to come up with a way to provide back pay for low-wage contractors losing income because of the partial shutdown, a complicated process that hasn’t been tackled during previous government closures.
Contracted maintenance workers, cleaners, security guards and cafeteria staff at government buildings are among the hardest hit by the shutdown, which began Dec. 22.
Unlike the hundreds of thousands of affected federal employees who often receive back pay after a shutdown ends, low-wage contractors are not afforded compensation once the government reopens.
While President Trump is expected to sign legislation that would eventually give back pay to federal workers, even ensuring similar compensation after future shutdowns, contractors are not covered in that bill.
Senate Democrats say they are looking for a solution, but it’s proving to be a surprisingly tricky problem to fix.
"That’s putting it mildly. It’s not easy," said Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.), who represents a state with thousands of federal workers and contractors.
Government contractors can cover anything from outsourced services for agencies, such as cafeteria service at federal office buildings, to major off-site projects. Lawmakers say they want to help low-wage workers who are shut out of work while doing so in a way that doesn’t pad the pockets of higher-wage contractors who can more easily withstand the financial strain of a shutdown.
Figuring out exactly how to get the money to employees is no easy task, according to legislators.
#2
Wait. What's the minimum wage in the DC gravity well? Doesn't the law require that virtually ALL contractors paid with money taken from you and me federal dollars be unionized?
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
01/14/2019 10:02 Comments ||
Top||
#3
I wonder if the missed paychecks will amount to over $5B ....
BLUF:
[Breitbart] As Kirkpatrick wrote, "It is this belief which induces the Carter administration to participate actively in the toppling of non-Communist autocracies while remaining passive in the face of Communist expansion."
Kirkpatrick thus put her finger on a central and enduring aspect of liberalism: namely, the instinct to focus intensely on the small flaws of friends, while being blind to the larger flaws of foes. She derided this liberal impulse as a formula for "self-abasement and apology." And we might add that this mindset never seems to change‐hence, decades later, Barack Obama’s notorious "apology tours."
At its root, such thinking seems based on the idea that if a foreign government chooses to ally itself with the U.S., then that government can’t be much good. Why not? Because, as liberals like to believe, the U.S. isn’t so good, either. And this attitude, Kirkpatrick added, was a form of "masochism."
Indeed, when Kirkpatrick’s article appeared, the Carter administration was meekly watching as a string of allied governments were being overthrown, including those of Somalia, Afghanistan, Nicaragua, and Iran.
In each instance, we might add, the Soviets were active on the other side‐sometimes in a big way, sometimes in a lesser way. And just a few years earlier, Moscow had helped to engineer communist victories in Vietnam, Cambodia, Angola, and Mozambique. This was the reality of the Cold War‐the Russians were playing for keeps.
#2
Many years ago, a stranger noticed a frail, former UN Ambo Kirkpatrick sitting alone at Washington National airport. He approached and thanked her for her many contributions to our nation. Apparently shocked that someone would notice her, she smiled broadly and extended a hand graciously thanking him for his comment. The stranger wished her a pleasant journey and proceeded to his gate.
#3
a central and enduring aspect of liberalism: namely, the instinct to focus intensely on the small flaws of friends, while being blind to the larger flaws of foes
[SmallWarsJournal] Cyber resources available in abundance online, offline, locked in enterprise systems of record, or even in dusty hard copy libraries offer the Department of Defense (DoD) unique insight for use in all military operations. Enemies of the United States are currently operationalizing these libraries effectively, and with global reach, at little cost. As Steve Banach, former Ranger Battalion commander and 21st century warfare visionary states:
The entity that controls the Virtual Domain and masters Virtual War Campaigning first, will indirectly achieve social control, and will win every war they engage in, at pennies on the dollar. (Source: Small Wars Journal, Virtual War ‐ A Revolution in Human Affairs, Stefan J. Banach, URL: Link, accessed 13 December 2018.)
Adversaries of the United States rightly see the vast storehouses of seemingly innocuous data as key to understanding, undermining policy and goals, and potentially supporting kinetic, diplomatic, and economic victory over the United States. Operationalizing seemingly mundane data gives adversaries a powerful asymmetric weapon the DoD must recognize, plan for, counter, and themselves master.
Let us take a brief look at three examples of adversarial use of OSINT against the US. Recent examples of cyber operations run the gamut of counter-US strategy efforts at all echelons of command. The table below lists three recent events where competitors operationalized data against US interests:
Posted by: newc ||
01/14/2019 03:59 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[13 views]
Top|| File under: Islamic State
#4
From B's job link in #1: As an Open Source Collection Officer (OSCO) for the CIA, you will manage the systematic collection of publicly available information in a given region or a subject area to meet customer needs. The information is known as Open Source Intelligence (OSINT) and includes traditional mass media, the internet, specialized journals, studies, conference proceedings, geospatial information, and more.
Does that sound like Rantburg or what? Maybe with a little Three Days of the Condor thrown in. If there is a young Faye Dunaway involved, I'm totally in.
[Ynet] When the head of the army and the head of the government make clear claims of responsibility for attacking Iranian targets abroad, they are sending a clear message.
It was a weekend of revelations. Outgoing IDF Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot, in his farewell interviews, finally confirmed that the Israeli army has attacked thousands of targets in Syria. On Sunday, the prime minister revealed that Israel was responsible for the Friday night attack in Damascus. This is a calculated move. The Israeli decision to end the ambiguity of its attacks in Syria is based on events in Iran itself, where a lively debate has been going on for almost a year about the extent to which the Islamic Theocratic Republic should involve itself in conflicts outside its borders ‐ conflicts that also mean huge expenditure.
The supporters of Iranian interference throughout the Middle East ‐including assistance to Hezbollah, the Paleostinian Islamic Jihad
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: trailing wife ||
01/14/2019 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Iran
#1
Coffins, or Ziploc freezer bags
Posted by: Frank G ||
01/14/2019 7:03 Comments ||
Top||
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[Zero] Unfortunately... I suppose I should comment about the B word. I shall start by admitting ‐ like everyone else - I really don’t have a clue where we’re go from here. The political maths doesn’t work. There are no apparent solutions. There are multiple scenarios to game ‐ but none of them seem to lead anywhere positive.. The only thing I’m completely sure of: tomorrow, as MPs finally vote on the UK/EU divorce bill, we will hear lots of UK politicians spouting pointless blustering pompous nonsense moving us forward not a jot.
[HotAir] Shortly after the year began we looked at a report out of China where one of their very anti-American admirals had said that China might need to sink a couple of our aircraft carriers just to put us in our place. The guy is known for his hawkish hyperbole, so it didn’t seem that our government was taking him too seriously. But at the same time, the Chinese government didn’t exactly move to disavow his comments either. They’re referring to it as a "bloody nose" strategy, suggesting that if they hit us hard enough on the first shot we’ll turn tail and run. No credible experts seem to expect it to happen, but it was a situation worth monitoring at least.
[DAILY WIRE] On Tuesday, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) released an op-ed titled, "Elected leaders who weaponize religion are playing a dangerous game."
[The Hill] Democrats are struggling to come up with a way to provide back pay for low-wage contractors losing income because of the partial shutdown, a complicated process that hasn’t been tackled during previous government closures.
And Silycon Valley will be right there to help their insect overlords.
