Posts Tagged ‘military’

h1

Israelis Baffled by News of Defenseless US Soldiers

January 13, 2010

Israelis Baffled by News of Defenseless US Soldiers


Many Israelis want to know: why didn’t the soldiers attacked by a U.S. Army major-turned-terrorist return fire?

When a Muslim goes, well, Muslim in Israel he is typically shot to death by someone, like a reserve soldier, within seconds of screaming “Allah Akbar.”

In contrast with the Israeli experience, it took 10 minutes before a civilian police officer at  Fort Hood was able to shoot and stop Muslim fanatic Nidal Malik Hasan.

How could that happen?  How could so many people trained in the strategies and tactics of modern warfare be so defenseless?

The answer – and this may astonish many Americans – is that the victims were unarmed. U.S. soldiers are not allowed to carry guns for personal protection, even on a 340-acre base quartering more than 50,000 troops.

So it goes in brain-dead, liberal America .

Fort Hood is a “gun free” zone, thanks to regulations adopted in one of the very first acts signed into law by anti-gun President Bill Clinton in March, 1993. Click here for the file.

Contrary to President Obama’s crocodile tears, his administration is bent on further disarming the U.S. military, and all Americans. Obama and his people will not rest until every American is a sitting duck…

postscript: Israeli teachers, from kindergarten on up, are also armed; so, a Virginia Tech-type slaughter is highly unlikely at an Israeli university.

Israelis, who have had to combat terrorism all their lives, are not afraid of guns.  They are an armed people, ready, willing, and able to defend themselves and their country.

Unlike Liberally indoctrinated Americans, paralyzed by fear and political correctness, Israelis understand that people, not guns, kill people.

h1

CRITICAL: Suicide By PC

November 10, 2009

Suicide By PC

IBD: 10 Nov 2009

For Gen. Casey, loss of diversity would be an
For Gen. Casey, loss of diversity would be an “even greater tragedy.” AP (????????)

 

War On Terror: The No. 1 lesson of the Fort Hood massacre is that political correctness kills. But instead of learning this lesson, the Pentagon is repeating the mistake, putting more soldiers at risk.

Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey warns that making the connection between Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan’s terrorist act and his Islamic faith could “cause a backlash against some of our Muslim soldiers.”

Yet ignoring that connection, despite one red flag after another, is what allowed Hasan allegedly to carry out his own violent backlash against non-Muslim soldiers.

Just a few months ago, Hasan was promoted to major. He passed a security clearance despite evidence he openly engaged in anti-American rants, and even discussed cutting the throats of infidels during a PowerPoint presentation. Now there are reports that U.S. intelligence intercepted contacts between Hasan and al-Qaida.

But shhh! This isn’t about Islam. Close your eyes. Look the other way. Do not make the connection.

“It would be an even greater tragedy if our diversity becomes a casualty here,” Casey said on Sunday’s morning shows. Really? Tell that to the victims of the Muslim terrorist who shouted “Allahu Akbar!” before pumping fellow soldiers full of bullets at close range. Tell it to their grieving families.

Diversity is a good thing only if Muslims embrace the military’s mission. Of course many do, but a growing number object to fighting Muslims abroad. By our count, at least a dozen Muslims in uniform have been charged or convicted of terror or spying since 9/11, including Hasan. That’s a sectarian pattern, not a random act by a lone gunman, as the media have portrayed it.

The prize for digging up the most imaginative excuse for Hasan’s actions goes to ABC News. The network speculated he may have suffered from “second-hand trauma” — “like second-hand smoke” — from counseling soldiers with post traumatic stress disorder.

You see, Hasan had never actually been deployed, never seen combat, as first assumed. So the initial spin that he suffered PTSD no longer worked. Unless he suffered combat stress by proxy. So now it’s “second-hand trauma.” Anything but jihad.

But let’s be fair. At least ABC reported that Hasan was Muslim. Over at Fox News, host Shephard Smith refused to even mention Hasan’s name. And he’s still waiting on a motive. “As journalists,” the anchor said Monday, “we can’t report what the motive was, because at this point, we don’t know what his motive was.”

Seems Fox has caught the PC virus.

Meanwhile, our commander in chief refuses to call the attack terrorism. And he seemed to take news of the military massacre glibly. Briefed on the shooting before an appearance at a Democrat event, he walked up to the podium grinning. Then, in a bizarre non-sequitur, he gave a “shout out” to a Democrat supporter, infuriating soldiers across the country, and rightfully so.

Surely the Homeland Security secretary would tell it like it is. No such luck. Janet Napolitano issued a warning to Americans from the UAE against any anti-Muslim backlash. She said she’d work with Muslim groups, such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations, to deflect any bigotry. To hear her, Islam was the real victim of the Islam-inspired terrorism.

Democrats aren’t the only ones in denial. “It’s certainly not about his religion,” intoned GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham.

Passing out Qurans the morning of the shooting. Nope, no religion here! Proselytizing fellow soldiers to Islam. Not religion.

Close your eyes. Look the other way.

This PC insanity is literally killing us now. We are committing politically correct suicide. If the military is now too PC to protect its own troops from Islamic fanatics on its own soil, how can we be sure it can protect the rest of us?

h1

Cartoon: 68,000 Reasons Obama Should Listen to His Generals

November 5, 2009

h1

Cartoon: Obama Making Decision (Send More Troops)

September 22, 2009

Obama Making Decision (Send More Troops) in Afghanistan

h1

North Platte Nebraska

August 25, 2009

We recently drove through North Platte Nebraska – stopped and had dinner.

h1

IMPORTANT: Saving The F-22 Raptor

June 23, 2009

WHERE ARE AMERICANS IN CONGRESS?

WHERE ARE THE PATRIOTS?

IS EVERYONE IN CONGRESS BLIND?

DON

———————————————-

Saving The Raptor

By INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY | 23 June 2009

Defense: By a narrow margin, a House subcommittee has voted to keep open the F-22 Raptor production line. The future of American air dominance and the fate of the world’s most capable fighter hang in the balance.


Read More: Military & Defense


On May 30, with North Korea huffing and puffing about nuclear war, the first of 12 high-tech U.S. F-22 Raptor fighter jets landed at Kadena Air Base on the southern Japanese island of Okinawa. It was just days after North Korea unnerved the region by detonating a nuclear device.

There were reasons the F-22 was deployed to Japan. The stealthy, radar-evading fighter jet is quite simply the best aircraft of its kind in the world. It can slice through enemy air defenses and clear the skies of enemy planes virtually undetected. So why aren’t we building more than we have?

That was the question asked last week when the House Armed Services Air and Land Forces Subcommittee voted 31-30 to add $369 million for the production of an additional 12 F-22s to keep assembly lines open while a debate over the need for the jet reopens.

Subcommittee Chairman Neil Abercrombie, a Democrat from Hawaii, which might be the target of a North Korean Taepodong-2 missile on or about July 4, thinks we should buy at least 20 more.

The Japanese wanted to buy 200 F-22s to counter the North Korean and Chinese threats. The Air Force’s original plans were for 750 F-22 Raptors to replace an aging F-15 Eagle fleet that was recently grounded after one disintegrated from old age in flight. Now the Japanese will get none, and we will get no more.

Production of the Raptor was capped at 187 in the defense cuts slated for the 2010 budget, with the last aircraft to be delivered in late 2011 or early 2012 from the Lockheed Martin plant in Marietta, Ga.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates argues we can’t afford to build the F-22 and the F-35 Joint Strike fighter and that we have all the F-22s we need. So he’s dumping the F-22 in favor of the cheaper F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter, although it’s vastly inferior in air-to-air combat and ground defense penetration.

Gates and F-22 critics have acted as if the planes are interchangeable. They are not. The Raptor is designed as an air superiority fighter. The F-35, as its description implies, is designed for ground attack. It does not have Mach 1.5 supercruise capability or high-altitude vectored maneuvering.

During exercises in Alaska in 2006, 12 Raptors “downed” 108 adversaries without losing a single F-22. In a test of its ground-attack capabilities, a Raptor dropped a 1,000-pound JDAM precision guided bomb and struck a moving target 24 miles away.

Gates argues that wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have shown the need for such high-tech weapons are over. But not every potential enemy is armed only with an AK-47 and a copy of the Quran. Some are trying to shoot ballistic missiles at us.

The F-22 is perhaps the only plane that could evade the sophisticated S-300 surface-to-air missile-defense system Russia has contracted to sell Iran. The S-300 is “one of the most lethal, if not the most lethal, all-altitude area defense” systems, says the International Strategy and Assessment Service, a Virginia-based think tank.

Policy analyst Michael Fumento notes “the newer S-400 system, already deployed, is far better able to detect low-signature targets at far greater distances” than the S-300. “Only the F-22 can survive in airspace defended by increasingly capable surface-to-air missiles,” declared Air Force Association President Mike Dunn in December.

“In my opinion, a fleet of (only) 187 F-22s puts execution of our current national military strategy at high risk in the near to midterm,” Gen. John Crowley, head of Air Combat Command, wrote in a June 9 letter to Sen. Saxby Chambliss, Republican from Georgia, where the plane undergoes final assembly.

Building the F-22 aids our economic as well as national security. Remember all those jobs President Obama wanted to create or save? At stake are America’s continued air dominance and 95,000 highly paid and highly skilled jobs in 44 states.

Defending America should be job one.



h1

Nothing to be Apologizing For

February 3, 2009


* MY COMMENTS IN GREEN

Fighting For And Freeing Muslims Is Nothing To Be Apologizing For

CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER | 2 February 2009 | I.B.D

Every new president flatters himself that he, kinder and gentler, is beginning the world anew. Yet, when Barack Obama in his inaugural address reached out to Muslims with “to the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect,” his formulation was needlessly defensive and apologetic.

* Americans are quickly learning that Obama has a different loyalty.

Is it “new” to acknowledge Muslim interests and show respect to the Muslim world? Obama doesn’t just think so, he said so again to millions in his al-Arabiya interview, (His first interview – His FIRST PRIORITY?!) insisting on the need to “restore” the “same respect and partnership that America had with the Muslim world as recently as 20 or 30 years ago.”

Astonishing!! In these most recent 20 years — the alleged winter of our disrespect of the Islamic world — America did not just respect Muslims, it bled for them. It engaged in five military campaigns, every one of which involved — and resulted in — the liberation of a Muslim people: Bosnia, Kosovo, Kuwait, Afghanistan and Iraq.

* Has any American ever heard one thank you or compliment for our effort?

The two Balkan interventions — as well as the failed 1992-93 Somali intervention to feed starving African Muslims (43 Americans were killed) — were humanitarian exercises of the highest order, there being no significant U.S. strategic interest at stake.

In these 20 years, this nation has done more for suffering and oppressed Muslims than any nation, Muslim or non-Muslim, anywhere on earth. Why are we apologizing?  [???] * Has any Muslim shown any appreciation?  I don’t think so.

And what of that happy U.S.-Muslim relationship that Obama imagines existed “as recently as 20 or 30 years ago” that he has now come to restore? Thirty years ago, 1979, saw the greatest U.S.-Muslim rupture in our 233-year history: Iran’s radical Islamic revolution, the seizure of the U.S. embassy, the 14 months of America held hostage.

* Don’t forget that America’s FIRST THIRTY YEARS of our existence required our founders and leaders to fight radical Islam, to learn about the Qur’an and it’s plan for world conquest.  That’s why President Jefferson had to read the Qur’an.  Those Barbary Pirates were the radical Muslims – that’s where our “leathernecks” come from – to fight sword wielding Muslims of that day.

Which came just a few years after the Arab oil embargo that sent the United States into a long and punishing recession. Which, in turn, was preceded by the kidnapping and cold-blooded execution by Arab terrorists of the U.S. ambassador in Sudan and his charge d’affaires.

This is to say nothing of the Marine barracks massacre of 1983, and the innumerable attacks on U.S. embassies and installations around the world during what Obama now characterizes as the halcyon days of U.S.-Islamic relations. [!!]

Look. If Barack Obama wants to say, as he said to al-Arabiya, “I have Muslim roots, Muslim family members, have lived in a Muslim country” — implying a special affinity that uniquely positions him to establish good relations — that’s fine. * He’s telling this to his supporters – who are (many of them) hearing it for the first time.

But it is both false and deeply injurious to this country to draw a historical line dividing America under Obama from a benighted past when Islam was supposedly disrespected and demonized.

As in Obama’s grand admonition: “We cannot paint with a broad brush a faith as a consequence of the violence that is done in that faith’s name.” Have “we” been doing that, smearing Islam due to a small minority? * Has any of us heard a Muslim criticizing Islamic attacks on American interests?  You will never hear that.

George Bush went to the Islamic Center in Washington six days after 9/11, when the fires of Ground Zero were still smoldering, to declare “Islam is peace,” * (that was naïve and the Hadiths clearly tell us that for Islam – the only peace that we can expect is when they control the whole world) to extend fellowship and friendship to Muslims, to insist that Americans treat them with respect and generosity of spirit.

And America listened. In these seven years since 9/11 — seven years during which thousands of Muslims rioted all over the world (resulting in the death of more than 100) to avenge a bunch of cartoons — there’s not been a single anti-Muslim riot in the United States to avenge the greatest massacre in U.S. history.

On the contrary. In its aftermath, we elected our first Muslim member of Congress and our first president of Muslim parentage.

“My job,” says Obama, “is to communicate to the American people that the Muslim world is filled with extraordinary people who simply want to live their lives and see their children live better lives.”

* Has anyone read or heard any such statements(?) that the Muslim world is filled with – “extraordinary people who simply want to live their lives and see their children live better lives”-  The only Muslim I know who says that is Dr. Zuhdi Jasser – a Muslim American and former physician to the U.S. Congress.    He is the only person I know who is not afraid to tell you the truth about Islam – Interested? Write for ‘THE THIRD JIHAD’ – Radical Islam’s Vision For America DVD.   Rudy Giuliani: called the DVD “A wake-up call for America” – Jim Woolsey, CIA Director; Senator Joe Lieberman, Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge – all appear in the production.

That’s his job? [?]

* His job is to do all that he can to protect America from an attack by an enemy.  Let’s pray that he will get his act together and do this.

Do Americans think otherwise? Does he think he is bravely breaking new ground? George Bush, Condoleezza Rice and countless other leaders offered myriad expressions of that same universalist sentiment.

Every president has the right to portray himself as ushering in a new era of this or that. Obama wants to pursue new ties with Muslim nations, drawing on his own identity and associations. Good.

But when his self-inflation as redeemer of U.S.-Muslim relations leads him to suggest that pre-Obama America was disrespectful or insensitive or uncaring of Muslims, he is engaging not just in fiction but in gratuitous disparagement of the country he is now privileged to lead.

* We know Obama is no Messiah – far from that – He does deal in fiction – just read his book (that he didn’t write.)