Category Archives: stupid

Syria Chemical Weapons in the Hands of ISIS?

SCW

Stop me if you’ve heard this one…

From US News and World Report:

U.S. officials are concerned that secret stockpiles of chemical weapons remain within Bashar Assad’s arsenal despite international efforts to destroy them, and that they may have fallen into the hands of the Islamic State.

You don’t say.  Well, you shouldn’t be concerned in the least.  I mean, Bashir Assad is at least as trustworthy as Saddam Hussein.  And then there are the Russians supervising.  What could go wrong?  And besides, there is “no proof” that Assad would do such an underhanded thing.  And as of yet, no remaining stockpiles have been located.

The issue first caught international attention in early September when Samantha Power, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., suggested there may be gaps in the Assad regime’s accounting for its chemical weapons.

Some can be explained by the haste with which the Syrian government had to declare its stockpiles, said Holgate. But international observers must also consider “less benign” moves by the historically evasive Assad regime as well, she said, including purposefully hiding chemical agents and weapons.

This is all a ruse so that Obama can go to war in Syria.  Right?  I mean, there is NO EVIDENCE.  None.  Whatever intelligence there is regarding these weapons has likely been “cherry-picked” to justify Obama’s reckless “cowboy” foreign policy.  Sure.  See how utterly stupid such tripe sounds now?

At least old friend Ben Connable adds some common sense and perspective to the discussion.

Those who study the region agree that the Islamic State’s potential access to chemical weapons would achieve one of the fundamental goals of a terrorist group.

“The strength of chemical and biological weapons is the fear factor,” says Ben Connable, an intelligence analyst with the RAND Corporation and a retired Marine Corps intelligence officer. “That’s what really separates them apart from other munitions: There’s something inherently terrifying about chemical and biological and radiological weapons.”

“I’m not terrifically concerned about it,” he says, “except for the use in terror attacks.”

So NOW chemical weapons in the hands of Islamic terrorists, taken from hidden stockpiles of a brutal dictator, are a problem.  Unlike 2003, when another brutal dictator was looking to peddle them for hard currency.  Tsk.  Trusting the Russians?  Just icing on the cake.  Darned good thing we have secure borders.

Shame on those who shrieked, and continue to shriek, that Saddam didn’t have any chemical weapons.  And that some in Syria don’t have Iraqi origin.  More shame on those who willfully ignore the stockpiles since captured in Iraq by ISIS.  To what should be the surprise of nobody, a nearly identical scenario is now playing out in Syria, as the childish and naive stupidity of John Kerry and the Obama Administration has evaporated like the morning dew.

The Bush-hating far left began and perpetuated a pack of lies regarding Saddam Hussein’s chemical stockpile that didn’t pass the first blush of the test of common sense.  It was perpetuated incessantly by the beholden media and the liberal elite like a North Korean propaganda effort.  The litany was so pervasive that the unthinking masses began to parrot it back en masse.  Well, it was all a contrived lie, promulgated by any and every left-leaning entity whose hatred of George W. Bush trumped objective truth.  Those of you out there who continue to cling to such abject foolishness need to re-examine everything you have been told, and everything you have come to believe about the origins of the Iraq War.

As for the hypocrites who so virulently trumpeted the “Bush lied!” meme and now sound the alarm over ISIS, you are as intellectually dishonest as it gets.  And are not to be trusted with a thing you say.

Perhaps we can find the hidden Syrian chemical weapons.  I nominate John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Samantha Power, Susan Rice, Fareed Zakaria, Ed Schultz, Keith Olbermann, Barbara Boxer, Harry Reid, Dick Durbin, Al Franken, and Sean Penn to go look for them.  Don’t come back until you find them.  And if ISIS finds you, perhaps we can send a rescue mission to save you from beheading.  Or not.

About these ads

5 Comments

Filed under Around the web, Defense, guns, history, iraq, islam, marines, obama, Politics, stupid, Uncategorized, war, weapons

Django Unchained and the Terry Stop

You may have seen the news where Daniele Watts, an actress from the movie Django Unchained, claims she was unjustly place in handcuffs and mistaken for a prostitute, just because she was black.

As usual, it’s not quite that simple.

Ms. Watts admits she was with her boyfriend, Brian Lucas, and that the two were kissing in the car.

Apparently, witnesses in the Directors Guild building thought the two were having sex in the car. Whether they were or were not is irrelevant.

Someone, likely someone in the DG building, called the police to report what they thought was indecent exposure.

And the police responded.

When the police encounter you in such a circumstance, or more often, when they pull you over for a traffic violation, that’s known as a Terry stop, from the 1968 case, Terry v. Ohio, the decision which laid down the constitutional guidelines for such an encounter.

Basically, the police may briefly detain you so long as they reasonably suspect that someone may be engaged in criminal activity. And “reasonably suspect” is further described as “specific and articulable facts”  that a crime has been committed, or is being, or will be.  Note, this is a far, far lower bar than probable cause for arrest. Basically, the reasonable suspicion of a crime is the hurdle that must be cleared to begin an investigation, not to effect an arrest.

The police, having received a call that someone matching the descriptions of Ms. Watts and Mr. Jones, and finding persons matching that description at the reported location, can articulate specific facts that led them to suspect a crime had been committed, at least enough to investigate.

Approaching Ms. Watts, the officers demanded identification. Now, there are conflicting court decisions regarding the validity of a stop and identify status in California. But at this point, for the purposes of Terry, this encounter became a detention.  And it is generally held that you must identify yourself to police during a detention. Whether that must be via written, state issued ID, or simply a telling of a full true name, or other biographical information, what you may not do is simply walk away and disregard the officer. And apparently, that’s what Ms. Watts did.

In a police audio of the incident obtained by TMZ, Daniele Watts is heard accusing the police of racism when Sgt. Jim Parker asks her for ID. She then tells cops that they don’t who she is before storming off, refusing to show her ID.

Witnesses from the nearby Directors Guild office building allegedly told the police they were watching her and her boyfriend have sex in the passenger seat with the door open.

One eyewitness said the man was sitting in the seat while she was straddling him, in plain sight of everyone around them.

After storming off, Watts was apprehended by a police officer a short distance away and brought back where she continued her rant.

First, having authority to detain you, they also have the authority to use reasonable force to effect the detention.  Having left the scene, the escalation to handcuffs is a reasonable one for the police to take. Mind you, at this time, the police still have not ascertained Ms. Watts identification.

Further, in many jurisdictions, storming off would constitute interfering with an investigation or some similar offense. That is, while the Terry stop is a brief detention for purposes of investigation, the interfering with investigation is a crime itself, outside the original suspicion that prompted the stop, and the police, having seen the violation with his own eyes, would have more than cleared the bar for probable cause not just to investigate, but to actually arrest and charge.

We’re reasonably quick to condemn the heavy handed actions of the police. And we’re appalled at the numbers of officers who seem to not understand the laws of their jurisdictions. But virtually every officer in America is extremely well versed in the rules and limits of Terry, even if Sgt. Parker conflated the reasonable suspicion of a Terry stop and Probable Cause. That they chose to complete their investigation into the original complaint of indecent exposure, and not to pursue charges against Ms. Watts for interference is to her good fortune.

We’ll not also a common police tactic that every Army recruiter is familiar with.

We have a strong suspicion that part of why Ms. Watts reacted the way she did was the police were not terribly forthcoming with what they were doing, and what Ms. Watts legal status was. Rather forthrightly explaining why the police were detaining her, and why they could demand she identify herself, Sgt. Parker prefers to ask open ended, fact finding questions.

Sgt. Parker (to Watts): What’s your first name? Why do you think you’re in handcuffs? Do you think we put you in handcuffs or you did?

Watts: I put myself in handcuffs?

Sgt. Parker: Who do you think put yourself in handcuffs? Who do you think put you in handcuffs?

Watts: I think that this officer right here put me handcuffs because…

Sgt. Parker No, I think you did the minute you left the scene.

While at first, it seems Sgt. Parker is going of a little self justifying rant, what he’s really attempting to do is get Ms. Watts talking. And the first rule of staying out of jail is, DON’T TALK TO THE POLICE.

Sgt. Parker likely doesn’t have any great particular expectation that Ms. Watts will say something terribly incriminating. It’s just that officers virtually always talk to citizens and suspects this way, in an attempt to get people talking. You never know. Maybe she will suddenly say something terribly self incriminating.

Army recruiters use open ended fact finding questions both as a means of establishing rapport with prospects, and as a tool to help better determine the possible motivations and goals of applicants.

3 Comments

Filed under stupid

A Timely Laugh or Two in Time for the World Cup

You all know how I feel about soccer.  It’s frigging communist.  And played by guys that fall down in agony if you invade their personal space.  Yeah, I know a goodly chunk of the rest of the world plays it.  But a goodly chunk of the rest of the world doesn’t use toilets, either.  It doesn’t make it a good idea.

Anyway, witness Jason Sudeikis, American football coach, hired by Tottenham of the English Premiere League.   Pretty well done.  But I am still not watching soccer on NBC.  It makes golf look like nonstop action.

BIG H/T to Delta Bravo!!!

6 Comments

Filed under Around the web, girls, Humor, Personal, stupid, Uncategorized

President Takes Decisive Action in Iraq

In a stunning reversal of his previous equivocation regarding US involvement in the worsening security situation in Iraq, President Obama stated that the US is prepared to act with strength and decisiveness to help defeat the ISIS radical jihadist forces that have engulfed several major cities and killed many thousands of Iraqis.

MIchelle hashtag iraq

There.  That’ll show ‘em.  Worked like a charm with Boko Haram in Nigeria, too.   They certainly have mended their ways.    Administration officials speculate that the Islamic Extremist fighters that have invaded Iraq have little chance of resisting the pressure of tweets and re-tweets that show support for the Iraqi people, and will be forced to withdraw.  On the outside chance that somehow ISIS can withstand such an onslaught of social media, the President is prepared to conjure his best “I’m not kidding” expression and talk about “consequences”, possibly even “dire consequences”.   No word yet on whether or not Secretary of State Kerry will scold ISIS for “behaving in a 7th Century fashion”.   New White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest was quoted as saying, “The President is making the best of a situation left him by the previous Administration, which is responsible for declaring the war over and abandoning Iraq to its fate.  Wait, ….what?  That was us?  You sure?  No more questions!”

Gawd, we are so screwed.

7 Comments

Filed under Afghanistan, Defense, girls, guns, history, Humor, Iran, iraq, islam, Libya, obama, Politics, stupid, Uncategorized, veterans, war, weapons

Women can be Marine Infantry Officers. All You Have to do is Change the Standards.

Feminist advocate Ellen Haring, a Reserve Army Colonel, wrote a piece over at War on the Rocks about how to fix why females cannot pass the US Marine Corps Infantry Officers’ Course.   Not surprisingly, Haring’s assertions ring hollow and partisan to any Marine ground combat Officer, especially one with the Infantry MOS.

…why are the physical standards different for officers and enlisted infantry Marines?…
Officers and enlisted infantrymen perform the same physical tasks in their units and during combat operations.  The discriminator between officer and enlisted has always been education, not physical differences.

What Haring writes is utter nonsense.  The answer, which should be glaringly evident to someone with the rank of Colonel, is that Marine Officers must not just “perform the same physical tasks”, but to LEAD, and lead by physical example.  A great deal of a young Officer’s credibility with his Marines comes from the display of physical courage and personal fitness, which includes strength, stamina, and endurance.  A Marine Infantry Officer must be prepared to lead despite extreme physical fatigue, and retain the ability to make alert and sound decisions.  The lives of his platoon or company depend upon it.  That Haring ignores such a fundamental of leadership in a combat MOS is not surprising, and I don’t think for a minute it is unintentional.

Haring also cites the op-ed by 2nd Lt Santangelo, in which the Lieutenant asserts that expectations, and not physical limitations, are the reasons for failure among the female Officers.  Nowhere does Haring mention the viewpoint of Captain Kate Petronio, whose extensive experience serving beside Marine Infantry units would seem to have a bit more validity than to be ignored.

Haring’s focus is, of course, the Combat Endurance Test, a grueling physical event that has been a part of the Infantry Officers’ Course for decades.  This is where 13 of the 14 female Officers have failed, and it is administered on the first day of training.  (The 14th female was dropped with a stress fracture in the first few days of training.)  Haring calls the Combat Endurance Test an “initiation”, rather than an occupational qualification, and to an extent that is correct.  In order to lead Infantry Marines, an Officer must successfully complete that test.  So, of course, since it is a stumbling block for 93% (at least) of the female Officers, Haring takes aim at that event.  And here is the crux of her argument:

Do initiation rites have a place in our military?  There will be those who argue that they absolutely have a place in developing the esprit de corps that is vital to the Marine Corps and those arguments have merit.  Certainly the Marines have built their reputation on being tough, trained professionals whose motto Semper Fidelis (always faithful) embodies their total dedication to this country and to the Corps. But does an initiation rite that effectively filters out half the American population (all women) do the Marine Corps justice?

It is that last line which says it all.  Haring apparently has issue with how the Marine Corps trains its Infantry Officers, as such training doesn’t do the Corps “justice”.   Huh.  Here I was thinking the Corps had a rather successful training program for what it rightly considers the backbone of the service, the Marine Infantry Officer.  Haring parenthetically mentions that such training “filters out” women, as if that part of her argument is an afterthought.  In reality, her entire effort centers around that very premise.  While she goes on to say that she is not advocating elimination of the Combat Endurance Test, she does advocate advancing female Officers through IOC without passing the test, as she claims male officers have done, and allow females to repeat the test (one assumes, indefinitely), until they pass.  (I question the accuracy of her assertions that males have been given unlimited chances to pass the Combat Endurance Test, and know of several males who have washed from IOC because they could not do so.)

This will have the effect of making passing of the Combat Endurance Test a graduation requirement rather than an entry requirement.  Of course, once a female Officer has had all that time and money invested in her training, the argument will then be to waive passing of the Combat Endurance Test altogether.  Because it would be foolish and wasteful to put a female Officer through all that training and not have her graduate.  Which will be precisely the goal of feminist activists like Haring.  Female Marine Infantry Officers, no matter how unqualified or ill-equipped to be such.  Because, well, the cause is more important.

So, despite her assertions that she does not advocate changing the standards in order to have female Marine Officers become Infantry Officers, she is advocating just that, and she knows it.  Like so many in the “girl power” feminism ranks, she simply lacks the integrity to say so.

h/t to Info Dissem

11 Comments

Filed under army, ARMY TRAINING, Around the web, Defense, girls, history, infantry, marines, Politics, recruiting, stupid, Uncategorized, veterans, war, weapons

Michelle Obama’s Trite and Meaningless Gesture

flotus_mugshot_four_by_three_s640x480

By now most of us have seen the above image of First Lady Michelle Obama holding a “hashtag” sign in reference to the kidnapping of nearly 300 Nigerian Christian girls by Islamic extremist terror group Boko Haram. Maddening as it is, the image is appropriately symbolic of the Obama Presidency. This silly idea that “Twitter” hashtags being circulated amongst empathetic bystanders somehow equates to actually DOING SOMETHING is right in line with the abysmally weak and ineffective foreign policy of her husband’s administration. Which is to say bold and serious talk of “red lines” and “changing calculus” is accompanied by stern warnings and finger wagging, talk of “consequences”, “sanctions”, and “pivots”, all amounting, like this hashtag nonsense, to nothing at all of any value or consequence.

hc

Worse, Michelle Obama’s meaningless little stunt comes after her husband’s State Department assiduously avoided labeling Boko Haram as a terrorist organization for more than four years. The burning of churches, the murder and torture of thousands of Nigerian Christians, elicited not a peep from Michelle Obama. She seems only now to care in the slightest because Boko Haram’s campaign of terror and murder can be seen as a “women’s issue”.   And Lord knows she needs to be at the front lines in the “War on Women”. Just like Hillary Clinton, who now sees Boko Haram as “abominable” and “criminal”, committing “terrorist acts”. For the four years in which the State Department dithered in labeling Boko Haram as terrorists, however, the Secretary of State was that very same Hillary Clinton.

Also, Michelle, the abducted girls are not “yours”. Even though you think some idiotic picture of you with a “hashtag” showing “support” makes them so. They are the children of parents who have lived in fear of violence and death at the hands of these Islamic extremists for half a decade. Those extremists are armed partially by the very same weapons, and trained by the very same fighters, that your husband’s administration provided when it shipped arms to in Libya to overthrow a docile Khaddafi, all the while “leading from behind”.  Those Islamic extremists have now metastasized across Africa, into Mali, and the CAR, Algeria, and northern Nigeria. Boko Haram is, in no small part, what it is because of the wildly misguided and irresponsible policies of Barack Hussein Obama.

Men such as those that comprise Boko Haram and the other malignant Islamist terrorists that are soaking Africa’s sand with blood, Christian and Muslim?  They cannot be reasoned with. They are not open to “negotiation” or “beer summits”. Your pathetic display is fodder for their humor, as it shows how intellectually and morally weak you are. Such men as Boko Haram are not men with whom one can live peacefully, ever.  No, those men need to be killed. When it comes to that, other men, good men, far better men than your husband, leave their loved ones to face the danger and the fear, to risk everything to keep the wolves at bay.   They go because their country calls them to go. And because they know that the safety of those they love depends on their willingness to put their lives on the line to kill those with whom peaceful coexistence is impossible.

74f01f8951855bad9375886f5430c420

And when some of those good, brave men die keeping us safe, we honor them and remember them. Men like Ty Woods and Glen Doherty, Sean Smith, and Chris Stevens.  Part of that ceremony involves the respectful handling of the symbol of the nation they fought and died for.   That’s right, Michelle. All that for a flag. Because their sacrifice is what stands between our children and Boko Haram. And they gave their last full measure of devotion. While you tweeted. Which is why you will never understand about the flag. Much to your lasting shame. Such men have always been proud of their country, even if you aren’t.  Because you haven’t the wherewithal to understand why you should be.

12 Comments

Filed under Air Force, army, Defense, girls, guns, history, islam, Libya, marines, navy, obama, Politics, stolen valor, stupid, Uncategorized, veterans, war

Lazarus Calls for Executing Plan URR with Tico Reduced Commission Proposal

Information Dissemination contributor (and Salamander Front Porch regular) Lazarus lays out a good plan which should ring slightly familiar.  Laz’s post contains far more practical information than my conceptual musings, and I am very pleased to see the ideas be floated in such a widely-read forum as ID.

A Ticonderoga class cruiser shorn of most of its combat systems, operations, and supply departments would qualify for nucleus crew status. A U.S. nucleus crew might spend a week to 10 days per quarter underway with these opportunities spread out rather than concentrated in one at sea event. Underway periods need be no greater than 24 hours in duration in order to provide elements of basic crew training. Crews could eat pre-prepared meals for short underway periods, and a shore-based centralized supply office could support individual ship’s logistics and maintenance support needs. All CGs selected for such a program would be assigned to geographic areas relatively free from foul weather sortie requirements. The program would need to be flexible in order to be resilient through periods of fluctuating budget support.

Lazarus points to the wear and tear that the Ticos have endured, and is far more diplomatic than I have been about the cause of their “rapid aging”.

Shortfalls in training and maintenance in the decade of the 2000’s as highlighted in the Balisle report further indicate the class has been proverbially “put away wet” without necessary attention as well.

In short, a bunch of senior Naval Officers, including a number of Admirals, decided that skimping on maintenance and manpower was a good way to save money.  For all of their MBAs and other service experience, that cabal of Officers cost this country and its Navy BILLIONS of dollars in premature retirement of fully capitalized assets, by formulating a stupid and short-sighted plan that ignored the very fundamentals of equipment operation that any Vocational High School Equipment Maintenance and Repair teacher could have taught them in ten minutes.

I do hope someone is listening at Big Navy.  Otherwise more valuable assets and taxpayer treasure go down the drain for the stubborn stupidity of our Navy’s leadership.

Comments Off

Filed under Around the web, budget, China, Defense, guns, history, logistics, navy, obama, Politics, stupid, Uncategorized, veterans, war, weapons