[Gateway Pundit] Secretary of State Hillary Clinton knew that the US was sending arms from Libya to Syria back in 2011, a year before the Benghazi consulate attacks.
Hillary Clinton denied she knew about the weapons shipments during public testimony (under oath) in early 2013 after the Benghazi terrorist attack.
Senator Rand Paul questioned Hillary Clinton about this gun running program back in January 2013 during her testimony on the Benghazi terrorist attack.
#3
hrc already a serial offender in giving false testimony under oath -- one more time - "what difference does it make at this time"
Posted by: lord garth ||
08/12/2016 8:07 Comments ||
Top||
#4
HRC is a serial liar but it is the political season and both House and some Senate members are running for re-election. Nothing is going to happen at this time. As long as the Donks have control of the executive branch, DOJ's Lynch is going to block anything to do with Hillary getting 5 years. Throw in a complicit, wastrel MSM and you've got them blocking any truth about Hillary. However, I'm not sure the Pubs would do anything if they had a super majority and the executive branch--something about cojones and not wanting to rock the boat of their cozy beltway arrangement.
#5
However, I'm not sure the Pubs would do anything if they had a super majority and the executive branch--
Having had years, no decades to map it all out, why would you have not included a few pubs in the sharing of the spoils and benefits? Sort of an insurance policy.
Could the sudden appearance of 50 GOP national security experts coming out against Trump be of any possible assistance ?
#6
As an aside, as Trump appears to be viable against the worst Dem candidate in history, what increasingly is revealed are the hidden centers of power and collusion that have sunk our government into true Roman levels of corruption. (Hat tip to P2K). If, a giant unknown, all the effects of the ruling classes in all their guises fail, they have created the candidates for surgery of the body politic. If we the people have the courage to throw off the mind shackles of the media and yearn again for the Reganesque city on a hill that is the promise of American exceptionalism.
[Fred on Everything] Don't look for a walk-over. The T14 Armata, Russia's latest tank. You don't want to fight this monster if you can think of a better idea, such as not fighting it. Russia once made large numbers of second-rate tanks. That worm has turned. This thing is way advanced and outguns the American M1A2, having a 125mm smoothbore firing APFSDS long-rods to the Abrams 120mm. (As Hillary would know, that's Armor-piercing, fin-stabilized, discarding-sabot. You did know, didn't you, Hill?) This isn't the place for a disquisition on armor, but the above beast is an ver advanced design with unmanned turret and, well, a T34 it isn't.
A good reason to vote for Trump, a very good reason whatever his other intentions, is that he does not want a war with Russia. Hillary and her elite ventriloquists threaten just that. Note the anti-Russian hysteria coming from her and her remoras.
Such a war would be yet another example of the utter control of America by rich insiders. No normal American has anything at all to gain by such a war. And no normal American has the slightest influence over whether such a war takes place, except by voting for Trump. The military has become entirely the plaything of unaccountable elites.
A martial principle of great wisdom says that military stupidity comes in three grades: Ordinarily stupid; really, really, really stupid; and fighting Russia. Think Charles XII at Poltava, Napoleon after Borodino, Adolf and Kursk.
Letting dilettantes, grifters, con men, pasty Neocons, bottle-blonde ruins, and corporations decide on war is insane. We have pseudo-masculine dwarves playing with things they do not understand. So far as I am aware, none of these fern-bar Clausewitzes has worn boots, been in a war, seen a war, or faces any chance of being in a war started by themselves. They brought us Iraq, Afghanistan, and Isis, and can’t win wars against goatherds with AKs. They are going to fight...Russia?
A point that the tofu ferocities of New York might bear in mind is that wars seldom turn out as expected, usually with godawful results. We do not know what would happen in a war with Russia. Permit me a tedious catalog to make this point. It is very worth making.
When Washington pushed the South into the Civil War, it expected a conflict that might be over in twenty-four hours, not four years with as least 650,000 dead. When Germany began WWI, it expected a swift lunge into Paris, not four years of hideously bloody static war followed by unconditional surrender. When the Japanese Army pushed for attacking Pearl, it did not foresee GIs marching in Tokyo and a couple of cities glowing at night. When Hitler invaded Poland, utter defeat and occupation of Germany was not among his war aims. When the US invaded Vietnam, it did not expect to be outfought and outsmarted by a bush-world country. When Russia invaded Afghanistan it did not expect...nor when America invaded Afghanistan, nor when it attacked Iraq, nor....
#3
When Washington pushed the South into the Civil War,
Now there's revisionist history. Lincoln had no political or military plans in dealing with the southern states voting to succeed. Everyone was groping in the dark about the next step. Something about Southerners firing on a federal fort kicked it off. The Japanese would make the same mistake about 80 years later. Similar results.
#4
Some good thoughts about the controlling desires of the oligarchy, but, there is a fair amount of ahistorical reasoning and no understanding of the complexity of the world diplomatic environment.
Sounds like he'd have been a fan of Neville Chamberlin's reasoning.
#5
I'm sorry but that's a posting I simply don't understand.
You don't remember what happened the last time you had a war with Russia?
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
08/12/2016 11:15 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Normally I would be against appeasement, but to EC, I would have to say, y'all have done as much to fund the Armata (which I think is overblown) as anyone.
It's y'all's modern day Molotov Ribbentrop pact. Gazprom.
#7
Face it, folks, we haven't won a war since WWII and then we had the Russians on our side.
Korea was a draw at best, Vietnam was a bitter humiliation, Kuwait led to 911, Iraq is a mess, Afghanistan is a mess.
OK, there was Granada.
We keep poking our noses into the business of other people all over the planet and we keep getting our nose bloodied. The results are always tragic. War should always be the absolute last resort. You'd think we'd learn.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
08/12/2016 11:22 Comments ||
Top||
#8
I'm 150 pages into Churchill's The Second World War, and see some similarities to the current world events. My take-away so far is that it would've a lot easier to stop Hitler in 1935 than 1943 (Duh!) but that everyone kept hoping to avoid another catastrophe, like WW I.
I knew that in a grand sense, but Winnie makes a compelling case in some detail in the book.
Posted by: Bobby ||
08/12/2016 14:06 Comments ||
Top||
#9
It's a good read, Bobby. Hitler was probing the allies to see how they would react and it was appeasement, big time. It was one of the most expensive lost moments in history.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
08/12/2016 14:54 Comments ||
Top||
#10
I don't see anyone advocating a war with Russia, but the argument that you can't face a Russian aggression, so we have to make up nice, is Munich all over again.
If the Russians build such great tanks, we need to build better ones.
The Baltic countries are NATO members. If they are attacked, will NATO defend them? If not, let's forget the whole thing.
I don't like Hillary. But Trump is incompetent.
It's a real shame that America can't do better in politics.
In sports America obviously can.
Posted by: European Conservative ||
08/12/2016 15:47 Comments ||
Top||
#11
I don't see anyone advocating a war with Russia,
Not exactly advocating, but over here (US) we are getting a pretty steady drumbeat about the danger from Russian expansionism. Frankly, I don't see it but we keep getting stories on how long it would take the Russians to steamroll their way thru the Baltic states, or the latest ruskii super-weapon. Got to keep NATO relevant, I guess.
Rather amusing since in the last Presidential debates, Obama slapped Romney down for bringing up the Russians. Anyone for a scenic drive thru the Fulda Gap?
#17
I've been saying for a while, military confrontation and the risk of war with Russia is madness. Russia isn't our enemy. Ukraine has never been a real country in anything like it's current borders.
You want a real enemy, try China. They will keep pushing in the North and South China Sea until a shooting war starts.
Fortunately, I see indications Putin knows China isn't his friend.
"The United States Air Force would maintain an "asymmetric" advantage over potential adversaries in the Western Pacific even after the Chinese People's Liberation Army Air Force inducts the Chengdu J-20 stealth fighter into operational service. That's the contention of the service's top uniformed officer--who was asked about the potential geopolitical implications of the introduction of the new Chinese warplane.
"When we apply fifth-generation technology, it's no longer about a platform, it's about a family of systems," Air Force chief of staff Gen. David Goldfein told reporters at the Pentagon on Aug. 10. "It's about a network and that's what gives us an asymmetrical advantage, so that why when I hear about an F-35 versus a J-20, it’s almost an irrelevant question.
While Goldfein used the Nighthawk as a comparison--he probably did not intend to suggest that the J-20's systems are quite as basic as the 1980s-era F-117. While accurate information about the J-20 is scarce, there are indications that the Chinese aircraft is equipped with a phased array radar, a robust electronic warfare systems and an electro-optical/infrared sensor that is similar in concept to the F-35's systems. However, while it is possible that the Chinese aircraft might have decent sensors--Air Force officials have suggested that the J-20 lacks the "sensor fusion" and networking to be as effective as the F-22 or F-35.
One area that the Chinese are almost certainly lacking is what Air Combat Command commander Gen. Herbert "Hawk" Carlisle once described to me as "spike management." Fifth-generation aircraft such as the F-22 and F-35 have cockpit displays that indicate to the pilot the various angles and ranges from which their aircraft can be detected and tracked by various enemy radars. The pilots use that information to evade the enemy by making sure to avoid zones where they could be detected and engaged. It is a technology that took decades for the United States to master--through a lot of trial and error."
Posted by: Vast Right Wing Conspiracy ||
08/12/2016 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11129 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
all the technical capabilities in the world don't matter if your decision maker is either a gutless risk adverse beta male, or is a drugged up zombie that is functionally brain dead.
#9
"It's about a network and that's what gives us an asymmetrical advantage, so that why when I hear about an F-35 versus a J-20, it’s almost an irrelevant question.
All this says to me is multiple points of failure. How long will it take to find the weak link in the chain and exploit it?
#12
Best plane in the world generally requires a pretty good pilot with lots of training and practice. Do Chinese pilots get lots of training and practice?
#14
"It's about a network and that's what gives us an asymmetrical advantage, so that why when I hear about an F-35 versus a J-20, it’s almost an irrelevant question.
Our computer wizards will beat their computer wizards, right? Why do we even need pilots then? (/sarc)
#16
Best plane in the world generally requires a pretty good pilot with lots of training and practice. Do Chinese pilots get lots of training and practice?
Everything I have come across suggests a built culture, something akin to whether a soldier can parade or fight.
104 pilot said something like, It isn't whether a pilot can fight, but whether a fighter can pilot.
Maybe a Rantburger can correct or expand on this.
I watched a documentary, the name slips me at the moment, about the Israeli air force during their war of independence, and it credited their success to being combat vets of WWII.
I am of the school that there is no substitute for real experience. Training will help with the real, but only when it is real do you see what does and does not work. Example, just joined the VFD, been on some runs, went to a training where I was grouped with some fresh from the academy FFs. I am sure they could tie every knot blindfolded but in a paper attack on a Christmas Tree fire, they parked me under power lines and sent me through the garage. No way I said, but I was an Indian, they were Chiefs, and the Instructor was mad.
Knowing the results of the latest Red Flag is not the same as knowing why it was set up so. So unless Maverick and 宮廷弄臣 are going to joust in a box away from all other assets it is all talk.
*sorry if a ramble, children started spongebobbing every time I started a thought.
Because unmanned combat aerial vehicles are not quite ready to compete with the more skilled pilots, and most importantly the law of warfare is a big uncertainty WRT lethal use of an autonomous robotic system.
#19
And remind me where the chips (to include knockoffs that somehow find their way into the DoD procurement system) are made and get into the aircraft system?
#20
The pilots use that information to evade the enemy by making sure to avoid zones where they could be detected and engaged.
When do they stop evading and start fighting? Once they start fighting will we have enough fighters to get the job done? When does the battlespace becomes so cluttered with evading ninja planes that they interfere with each other? Who will be doing the CAS after the A-10 follows all of the other A-series planes into retirement? The General seems ... unpersuasive.
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.
[Gateway Pundit] Secretary of State Hillary Clinton knew that the US was sending arms from Libya to Syria back in 2011, a year before the Benghazi consulate attacks.
