Pity Samina Malik, the young woman who will live for the rest of her life with the consequences of a terrorism conviction simply for being a suburban shopgirl who committed her fantasies on the internet.
Scribbling doggerel in praise of al Qaeda on the back of WH Smith receipts will do no more to bring about the universal caliphate then a smartarse politics student with a Che Guevara poster in his bedroom does to further guerrilla struggle in South America. How could we even think that a Muslim would perform jihad obligations as imposed by the founder of his cult?
Malik is just one of many millions of kids in every country around the world wrapped up in a flirtation with any variety of anti-establishment symbolism that comes immediately to hand. Mostly it stops at posting message on online talk boards, as it did in her case. Yeah, M. Atta and the other 18 911 murderers, just acted out a fad.
Sometimes, tragically, it goes much, much further. Only yesterday, Pekka-Erik Auvinen fascinated with both Nazism and Stalinism, it now emerges went on a shotgun rampage through his high school in a small Finnish town, killing seven others and then himself in the name of social Darwinism. So terror thinking is acted out?
Auvinen styled himself Sturmgeist89 on the worldwide web. Malik, for her part, wished to be known as the Lyrical Terrorist. The reason? Because, as she explained to the jury, 'it sounded cool'. At that age, what better reason can there possibly be?
I remember being an anarchist for approximately six months in 1977, after the first Sex Pistols single came out. Had the internet existed then, I might well have written up my urge to 'destroy the passer-by'.
Back in the early 1980s, I used to hang around the polytechnic bar clad in a Brigate Rosse T-shirt. These days, that might constitute prima facie evidence of the offence of glorifying terrorism.
Lets keep a sense of proportion here. Yes, I am in favour of intelligence service surveillance against violent Jihadists. But what is needed is action against real terrorists, not lyrical ones.
Just imagine how counter-productive Maliks conviction is going to prove in the struggle for the hearts and minds of alienated Muslim youth.
The paranoid determination to bust crazy mixed up kids is the first step on the road that leads to gunning down innocent Brazilian electricians at Stockwell tube station.
#2
When they raided her home, they found folders on the computer called "Saminaz Stuff" and "Copy of Handbooks" as well as dozens of handwritten notes hidden in the pages of a book and a bracelet which carried the word jihad [holy war].
On a mirror were found the words "Lyrical Terrorist" and on one piece of paper she had written: "The desire within me increases every day to go for martyrdom, the need to go increases second by second."
In her poems she wrote about killing heathens, adding: "Kafirs your time will come soon, and no one will save you from your doom."
Police found a copy of Osama Bin Ladens Declaration of War and a passage in which she praised the al-Qaeda leader and added: "We will not let you have any peace. We will show no remorse, no mercy and no regrets"
In one poem, called "Raising Mujahideen [holy fighter] Children," she recommended indoctrinating children from the age of seven, adding: "Show the children videos and pictures of mujahideen and tell them to become strong like them."
Explain how the Mujahideen fear no man - they fear Allah alone, and for his sake they are able, willing and capable to do anything in defence of Islam." Malik joined an extremist organisation called Jihad Way set up to disseminate terrorist propaganda and support al-Qaeda.
On a website called Hi-5, similar to social networking sites such as Facebook or MySpace, Malik listed her interests as: "Helping the mujahideen [holy fighters] in any way which I can... I am well known as lyrical terrorist."
Under favourite TV shows, it said: "Watching videos by my Muslim brothers in Iraq, yep the beheading ones, watching video messages by Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahri [his deputy] and other videos which show massacres of the kaffirs."
Posted by: john frum ||
11/09/2007 5:47 Comments ||
Top||
#4
The pic is listed under Fred's classification, "Pollyanna". That word was much used before the 'seventies, to describe anyone who had an unrealisticly positive attitude.
#7
So if bin ladin gave his declaration to the tune of 'Rocket Man', everything would be 'cool'. After all, it is unlikely binny would actually board flight 11 himself.
"It's not as messy or as hard as some may think
It's all about the flow of the wrist
Sharpen the knife to its maximum
And before you begin to cut the flesh
Tilt the fools head to its left
Saw the knife back and forth"
"No doubt that the punk will twitch and scream
But ignore the donkey's ass
And continue to slice back and forth
You'll feel the knife hit the wind and food pipe
- But Don't Stop -
Continue with all your might
About now you should feel the knife vibrate
You can feel the warm heat being given off
But this is due to the friction being caused."
'The Living Martyrs' - extracts
"In did we sleep
While in our broken lands did mothers sleep
The chaos and the pain
Blood pouring everywhere like rain
Common for a sister became raep
By that stinking kuffar ape"
"The child born free of sin
Rewarded with gun rattle
Piercing through his father's head
Unaware he is now dead
Until girl is taken from her mother's hand
And she has now become sand
And this is from those claiming to be humane
Driving me insane
For the living martyrs are awakening
And Kuffars world soon to be shaking
We stand firm to our belief
Knowing with Allah is only relief"
Over the past few weeks thousands of Russian bloggers have united to combat a pharmaceutical scam that tried to persuade Russian pensioners to spend around half of their annual pension on a course of Gravikol 21 - anti-arthritis drugs that were actually little more than vitamin pills.
In the course of their campaign, Russias bloggers have not only publicised the scam nationwide, theyve forced the notoriously unresponsive Russian government to act.
In perhaps the most startling expression of their offline power, Russias bloggers made 21 million (!) phone calls to the offending companys switchboard, forcing it into meltdown.
The story has hardly been heard outside of Russia - try a Google News search for Gravikol, if you dont believe me - but it will fundamentally alter perceptions of how Russian bloggers can influence Russian public life...
#3
UM, thought about it too, but putting that genie back in the bottle may not be possible. Any crackdown attempt would be only temporary and ways around it would be found.
#4
This reminds me of the Minnesota spam-merchant who boasted of his career in a Minneapolis paper. He stated that he was building a multi-million dollar mansion in the suburbs. Unfortunately for him, only one house of that description was being built in the area, and he was easily identified.
So, a bunch of offended programmers signed hum up for every available newsletter, magazine, advertising campaign, and charity. He was getting truckloads of mail every day.
Posted by: Eric Jablow ||
11/09/2007 20:57 Comments ||
Top||
Not long ago, while visiting a friend at Oxford University, I found myself in a heated political discussion with a Scotsman. The subject of our dispute was the Iraq war, but the conversation turned toward the rise of latent anti-Semitism in once-respectable quarters of British opinion. Two years earlier, a story entitled A Kosher Conspiracy?, illustrated by a gold Star of David plunged into the heart of the Union Jack, graced the cover of Britains most prominent left-wing magazine, The New Statesman. Since then, the intellectual climate had only worsened. In response to my remark that many use the epithet neocon to describe Jews, my interlocutor replied, Id rather be an anti-Semite than a neocon.
Today, no other political label gets thrown around as frequently, or with as much reckless abandon, as neocon. The most popular liberal blogs name and shame neocons, real or imagined, on a daily basis. The term is used in a fashion similar to the way communist was during the 1950san all-encompassing indictmentthis time indicating an imperialistic and warmongering, even an insane, worldview. The anti-neocon fervor has reached truly McCarthyite proportions: just a few months ago, Steve Clemons of the left-wing New America Foundation argued in favor of Purging the Neocons from the American Soul. . . .
By now, neocon has mutated into a political curse word to discredit not just those who happily accept their status as neoconservatives, but also anyone who merely believes that the West should respond in muscular fashion to national security threats, such as those posed by the cooperation of Iran, Syria, and North Korea on nuclear weapons technology and the equipping of terrorist groups around the world. The chief purpose of this emergent rhetorical style is to cast aspersions on anyone who believes, say, that Iran must not attain nuclear weapons, even if it requires war. International Herald Tribune columnist Roger Cohen, for instance, notes that neocon has morphed into an all-purpose insult for anyone who still believes that American power is inextricable from global stability and still thinks the muscular anti-totalitarian U.S. interventionism that brought down Slobodan Milosevic has a place, and still argues, like Christopher Hitchens, that ousting Saddam Hussein put the United States on the right side of history.
Examples of this new, broader, definitional standard abound. In 2004, writing in The Nation, Michael Lind termed the National Endowment for Democracya nonpartisan institution that provides millions of dollars to democracy activists around the worldthe quintessential neocon institution. French intellectual Bernard Henri-Lévy deems Frances Foreign Minister, Bernard Kouchner, a neoconservative, a label that the socialist Kouchner would likely find surprising. But Kouchner, who founded Doctors Without Borders and was one of the very few left-wing supporters of NATO intervention in the Balkans, recently observed that it is necessary to prepare for the worst against Iran, adding, The worst, its warenough to range him in the neocon camp, it seems. When Joe Lieberman, whose positions on domestic policy are indistinguishable from those of the majority of his colleagues in the Senate Democratic caucus, makes mere mention of Iranian or Syrian support for armed elements in Iraq, Matthew Yglesiasone of the most popular leftist bloggers, writing from his perch at The Atlanticduly calls the senator a neocon, a psychotic rightwinger, and a warmongerer.
The long tradition of liberal anti-totalitarianism thus appears to have come to an end, at least in mainstream political rhetoric. What about human rights groups like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch? Largely staffed by leftists, these days they escape the neoconservative charge because they generally presume moral equivalence between democracies and anti-American thuggocracies. . . . Freedom House, on the other hand, which rates countries on a scale from 1 (most free) to 7 (least free), and explicitly ranks some nations (invariably Western democracies) as more free than others, has long been the bane of the leftist human rights community.
Welcome to the new political discourse.
Posted by: Mike ||
11/09/2007 06:40 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[9 views]
Top|| File under:
Liberals hated the Nazis because the Soviets said so. Since the Soviets never gave them new programming after the collapse they continue to refer to all of their enemies as Nazi's. It's sad.
#3
I grew up with the Blues. Many of my good friends are Blue. It seems to me to be shallow, confusing existance full of duality and superstition.
A few years ago someone I know made a trip back there to see his friends. He was 'Bushwacked' for his beliefs and treated him like it was an intervention. Having this intel, when I made a trip back I was ready for this tactic. Asking politely and genuinely interested in what a neocon is, since I had not heard phrase, nobody could give me the same answer. After this was brought up they continued onto the current events talking points they clued me in on what is going on according to them, assuming since I grew up with them that I automatically agreed with such position. When I disagreed with them on some topics I was started to call me a neocon even though none had given me a good description. "Have you read this book?" was a common question and when I asked what the book was about all I was told was, "Well, you are a damn idiot." Pointing out that all they were saying is that a neocon is anyone who disagreed with them and not something they could categorize me specifically broke their ambush by using their own words from minutes beforehand. Continuing to turn their words, such as the example above 'So you would rather hate a group of people than be what I am, what does that mean since you cannot even describe what I am. And what does that say about some of the social policies that I agree with you on?' Great fun, getting all three of them talking about the same time and all contradiction themselves - like they were ingredients in a smoothie with my finger choosing the blender speed. I lost some friends but they were the flakes..the ones who are trying to work out their beliefs we still talk politics but on a very shallow level unless they are in a group.
Just one person's briefed insight into the neohippie thinking process, still fighting the power their parents started I guess. For them it started as chic (for my friends cant speak for others), and who can be as clever as the writers for Daily Show, but ended up being an anchor into their whole self image. IMO it is a sympton of the, politely worded for our lady readers, the 'nannification of America'.
And for those lefties who are so powerless and sad as to try to cause a cold civil war in America you really do not want to do that. Get out of that trapped existance and practice what you preach, the acceptance of others' opinions. Start with your neighbors here before fully taking on the ways of complete strangers who more than likely giggle at the very irony of the leftists way of life, which they would not blink to destroy, helping their cause. Rather than going around calling Cheney the crazy uncle, call for action against the slaughters of real buddhists, you know the ones of which the leftist claim to be of similar beliefs.
Purge the neocons. Sounds like similar rhetoric used in times past to justify mass murder. Free thinking liberals, Clemons calls for the very destruction of life and civil liberties he lies about defending. Do not listen to that ass because as #1 says, bring it on. You threaten my family and I am shoulder to shoulder as is the rest of the silent majority.
#4
The term neo-con is a clever little term devised to use as a deceptive, derogatory label of traditional American thinking.
The first time I was called a neo-con was the first time I entered a blog and expressed my views. Views held by my father, my grandfather and many of the founding fathers of this nation.
However, by labeling traditional American thinking with the word "neo-con" is the lefts attempt to say in short that this thinking is new "neo" conservative "con" thinking and is dangerous for America.
Another left wing attempt of destroying traditional America.
#1
Sure they're obsolete. It's just there hasn't been a real shooting war for so long, the carriers have simply been unopposed. The next real war, carrier-using nations are going to find out real fast that guided missiles have gotten much much better since WWII.
#2
I agree more or less that they vulnerable unless they have a good escort with a working anti-missile capability. The problem is that a reliable anti-missile capability isnt proved yet.
#3
The main advantage of the CVN is its ability to project power (especially if any of our "allies" reneg on their basing agreements). No other ship comes close.
I would have to say the CVN is indispensible and worth the investment in escorts.
Al
Posted by: Frozen Al ||
11/09/2007 10:22 Comments ||
Top||
#4
I believe the manuver where the fishing boats, etc. were so effective included ROE where the Navy didn't sink the little turds on general principles. That kind of thinking is what got the Marines killed in Beirut.
Posted by: Richard Aubrey ||
11/09/2007 10:28 Comments ||
Top||
#5
The purpose of the CVN is to prevent little wars from becoming big wars. If a country, or a group of countries wish to kick things up a knotch with the United States of America, tackling a US carrier group will be the least of their problems.
#6
All of these "gloom and doom" analyses manage to forget that carriers, and all warships, have ALWAYS been vulnerable. One has only to look at the battles of Midway and Coral Sea to understand that.
Carrier battles are a case of "eggshells armed with hammers" going after each other.
Warships are "sent in harm's way." Some will be lost. It's the nature of the job.
Posted by: Ralph ||
11/09/2007 11:18 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Reminds me of a story I heard...
"Then there was a conference in France where a number of international engineers were taking part, including French and American. During a break one of the French engineers came back into the room saying, "Have you heard the latest dumb stunt Bush has done? He has sent an aircraft carrier to Indonesia to help the tsunami victims. What does he intend to do, bomb them?"
A Boeing engineer stood up and replied quietly: "Our carriers have three hospitals on board that can treat several hundred people; they are nuclear powered and can supply emergency electrical power to shore facilities; they have three cafeterias with the capacity to feed 5,000 people three meals a day, they can produce several thousand gallons of fresh water from sea water each day, and they carry half a dozen helicopters for use in transporting victims and injured to and from their flight deck.. We have eleven such ships; how many does France have?"
There was dead silence in the room."
Posted by: Mullah Richard ||
11/09/2007 11:23 Comments ||
Top||
#8
"The problem is that a reliable anti-missile capability isnt proved yet."
How reliable does it have to be? Id hate to be a sub commander assigned to fire missiles at a Carrier Battle Group (or whatever they call them these days) knowing that my missiles have to get through Aegis, etc, BEFORE Im found and sunk myself by aircraft.
Of course all depends on geography. If youre off the coast of China, where the carriers can be hit by land based missiles, thats different from a fight in the open sea.
#9
Couple months old - couple decades old. The 'concerned' faux scientists in public interest lobby has been hawking this since Ronnie's time. Bunch of small carriers [with - multiple cost of appropriate number of support ships] were argued to be better. Strange that every major event since, the big boys have carried a lot of load that the unlikely to be funded multiple tasks forces would have been needed to shoulder. Instead of having the real capability on hand, we would have had inadequate down sized keels like the Brits had at the Falklands, except it wouldn't be the Argies we'd deal with. This is just another unilateral disarmament argument.
#10
i dont know all the naval tech stuff, but I would question the following
"Chances are, the Shkval isn't the most advanced supercavitating torpedo they've got. Remember, they don't have as open a press or society there as we do (especially under Putin), so theoretically it should be easier for them to keep the latest advanced military weapons a secret. "
Russia isnt the USSR, not yet. Putin has taken over the TV networks, which are most important in influencing the voters, but the print press is still relatively lively, and in general the society is still alot more open that it was pre-Perestroika.
France has the small iarceft carrier Charles de Gaulle (who wasn't sent to Indonesia). Instead they sent French Navy's school ship "Jeanne D'arc". In peace time Jeanne d'Arc carries 6 (six) anti-subamarine (ie small) helicopters on board. In war time their number can reach 20 or 25 but they are still relatively small helicoptes with limited internal payload. I don't know in which configuration it was when she was sent to Indonesis. She arrived a month after the events.
In addition to the Roosevelt aircraft carrier the US sent the "Bonhomme Richard" assault ship carrying 48 troop transport (ie laaaarge) helicopters and half a dozen anti-submarine helicopets.
BTW, I am sure I have seen this story presnted as his own by ERic Svane in no-pasaran.blogspot.com
#12
The fact is a carrier group is awesome. With nuclear attack subs and frigates watching below and aegis and the air wing and the AWACs watching above they are nearly invincible. The only way really is luck or a first strike using civilian vessels to get close. That trick would only happen once and probably wouldn't get close enough to the carrier anyway.
#13
Furthermore, it is the battlegroup protecting the CVN that is missing when it comes to most other nations carriers, rendering them into the category of target.
#15
This ship, and eventually the rest of the BG will get directed energy defensive weapons to counteract any threat within the horizon. Clouds or not.
We are going to need a bigger Navy. Global Warming means more ocean.
#16
Many swabs have spent their entire careers pondering how to keep aircraft carriers from being sunk, for about 80 years now. It's kind of a personal thing with them.
Short of a MIRVed ICBM, nothing ... effing N.O.T.H.I.N.G. projects power like an American nuclear powered aircraft carrier and its escort. A single BG with nuclear submarine cohort has the ability to irreversibly cripple any other nation ON EARTH.
NOW THAT'S POWER.
We are going to need a bigger Navy. Global Warming means more ocean.
#20
The only vessel I can think of that has been lost to a supercavitating torpedo was the Kursk. It has yet to be seen if new ChiCom military tech is any better than the crash protection on their estate sedans or quality control on pet food or children's toys.
#21
Mr. Svane's first-person account indeed seems to be where the 'Indonesia Story' originated. Unfortunately, it was modified over the last two years before I heard it and I will notify the person who told me the story of this fact.
#23
What kills ships is fire. And a CVN has the fire fighting capacity of a small city. And the USN is very skilled in damage control. Oriskany, Forestal and Enterprise all suffered fires in the 1960s. None of them sunk. Does any one seriously think those lessons have been forgotten. But that said of course a CVN is sinkable. Its made of steel and floats. Poke enough holes in it and one will sink. I just wonder how many holes it would take.
#24
Couple of observations as one who spent a total of 11+ years on the flattops:
First if a conflict started heating up, small boats would not be able to get in close to explode and do any harm, the CWIS and or helos would take them out (an HH-60 with a 50 cal sticking out each side is a pretty awesome sight.)
Second, i do have concerns about distance: space is your friend, and if the bad guys launched missles at a CV, time is needed for defense. The loss of carrier-borne long range aircraft hinders that distance thingie. Relying on the USAF for in flight refueling requires a lot more hoses in the air than are available right now if the going gets really tough.
Third: the USN recently sank the USS America in order to test the defenses of the boat against various weapons. for obvious reasons, the results are under some serious wraps.
Fourth: there are no subs too quiet for our sensors to detect.
more concern is running into an unlit tanker in the Straits of Mallaca ( happened at least 2x that i know of)
#25
I al not sure that Mr Svane put it in first person. In fact I rember the detail of the Indian and it makes highly unlikely it would have been in a first person account from Mr Svane. He must have linked the story.
#26
I do have concerns about distance: space is your friend, and if the bad guys launched missles at a CV, time is needed for defense. The loss of carrier-borne long range aircraft hinders that distance thingie.
So do I. When the F14 was retired I warned that the Super-Hornet was no substitute for F14's crucial mission: down enemy airplanes before they come in striking range of the carrier. For several reasons (radar, poorest supersonic performance, range of missiles) the Hornets could fail to do the job in time...
It is a pity that no super-Tomcat has come to fill the gap until the next generation is ready.
#27
JFM, not only that, but the Navy's organic refuelers are the same Super Hornets you speak of. hanging drop tanks and buddy stores on them in order to carry gas takes away hard points for ordnance.
There was a move afoot during the Intruder retirement frenzy ( championed by the hornet mafia, IMO) to refit a few of the newly rewinged A-6s with the IFR package (from retired KA-6Ds)and assign them to the EA-6B squadrons. a dedicated tanker platform with more 'give' as well as longer legs would have been an asset. The Prowler and Intruder are airframe- and powerplant-wise virtual twins so it was not like there would be a huge training obstacle for the wrench twisters; in fact it was commonplace for these guys to go back and forth between platforms if they wanted to 'homestead' at NASWI.
NAVAIR planners, searching for the 'one size fits all' airframe are betting the boat on the Lawn Dart in all its substandard variants.
#28
Not too long ago a Chinese sub surfaced behind a US carrier BG. I don't remember if it was during some kind of war games or while they were moving from point A to point B. In any case, it begs the questions of how did this happen, could it happen during wartime, is it OK if it were to happen again or have changes been made to minimize the chance of a sneak attack along similar lines?
And how the heck did a carrier run into an unlit tanker? If the carrier didn't detect the tanker at night, what is to protect it from being attacked at night by a rowboat loaded with high explosives? Or an unlit tanker loaded with HE?
#29
"And how the heck did a carrier run into an unlit tanker"
I do not know, all I do know is the during that transit ( the Straits are very constricted, not a lot of room to manuver) we hit one. I think he was either just drifting or anchored but had no lights showing and the entire bridge crew missed it. we ended up with some dents and pieces of tanker mast on board....
regarding the chinese sub incident: funny how that story just fell off the table, huh? i have no answer for that.
#30
Lot of doom and gloom in that article, but I'm guessing the only real vulnerability are when the big ships get into brown water.
Also, I wonder how plausible the Sea Hog scenario is. Wouldn't you need a major redesign of the Hog for that, considering the larger wingspan?
Is there a solution for creating a naval version of the AC-130? Load up the C-2 with a gun or two. Heck, maybe you can make a UCAV with some sort of short-range terminal defense. I wonder how well a hellfire would work on a torpedo in transit?
#31
OT but just watched my son playing Call of Duty 4 on the XBOX 360. His mission was a C130 Spectre gunship mission and it looked just like the real Liveleak videos posted here and there - verrrrrry cool!
Posted by: Frank G ||
11/09/2007 18:29 Comments ||
Top||
#32
"Fourth: there are no subs too quiet for our sensors to detect."
I am sorry but there is. The navies are going back to active sonars because of that. There is a reason US have a rented Swedish sub and crew to train with. Of course a silent sub isnt much mobile but can make a TF get a bad day only with torpedos to not go into missiles.
F14 or 18 arent able to intercept Mach 3 ramjet missiles launched from 300km distance. The capacity of Standart/Aegis is dubious against a saturation attack. Tiny RAM missiles only with a direct hit. Vulcan is an old outdated system made for 0.9Mach Harpoon types and well it never worked everytime it needed( USS Stark, Israeli Corvette).
The procuration system in US is corrupted with too much rules and powerpoint types. I am afraid only a disaster will change that.
#33
The procuration system in US is corrupted with too much rules and powerpoint types. I am afraid only a disaster will change that.
That's been true before every war in American history. It's part of our heritage. So is finally winning after initially coming dangerously close to losing.
#34
NEW UN SEA TREATY CONTROVERSY + "1000-FLAG/NATION" OWG GLOBAL NAVY, SEA BASING/MOB, GLOBAL PROMPT STRIKE, SPACE STRIKE, etal. > prob more correct to argue that 20th Century/Cold War-era large-crewed throughdeck carriers wid manned aircraft NO LONGER HAVE A HIGH-PROFILE, STRATEGIC WARFIGHTING MISSION in the absence of war amongst the great powers. IMO, the next evolution would be as HYBRID, MULTI-PURPOSE/SYS "ARSENAL SHIPS" andor "BASE SHIPS/ SEA FORTS", but even the two latter are subject to the USA successfully dev HIGH ATMOSPHERE DIRIGIBLE + MAGLEV TECHS etc., i.e. AIRBORNE/LOW ORBITING + EXTRA-ORBITING ARSENAL-BASE SHIPS = BATTLE STATIONS???
For time being though, RUSSIA-CHINA > "War/Local Zone" defensive warfighting strategy > dependent on "SEIZE/TAKE-AND-HOLD", RAPID NUKE REINFORCEMENT, ACTIVE DEFENSE includ ASYMMETRIC WARFARE, + iff necessary IMMEDIATE REGIONAL-GLOBAL NUKE ESCALATION [defense to offense], wid warfare [ideally] limited to Conventional,
"jungle/brush wars"/ "police actions" + sectarian or local strifes, AT WORSE NOT BEYOND LIMITED NUKE WAR-EXCHANGE [at least among organz Great Powers]. * NK-TAIWAN > besides facing LR Commie IRBMS + ICBM + Strategic-Tac Air attacks, CHINA's strategy also includes using LR SUBMARINES for "PREEMPTIVE" STRIKES AGZ MAJOR OR SELECTED US BASES, e.g. PEARL HARBOR, GUAM, WEST COAST, to destroy US Carriers at anchor = destroy selected "nodal" vital bases before US Carriers even arrive. E.g. China long ago made it crystal clear that it is not above defensive PREEMPTION = offensive LIMITED/ALL-OUT STRATEGIC FIRST STRIKE to defeat the USA in war. IMO, GMD > the USN should add one or more "ARSENAL SHIP" to contempor Carrier task forces-groups in support of new multi-taskings.
*RUSSIA > total overhaul of its aircraft industries/programmes > desires to construct improved, larger FAST AMPHIBIAN/OCEAN-SKIMMING PLANES.
#35
One take away from this, which I believe is applicable to our super carriers, is for us not to get too cocky.
The same types of things were said of the battleships before the era of carriers. They are the supreme power, nothing can stop them, etc.
We should not be too arrogant to think it can't happen to the carrier.
That being said, yes they are awesome for projecting power, but we should consider the possibility that just as the era of the battleships of yore came to end, so likley will the era of the carrier - and we, the US, should not be the ones caught off guard by this inflection point - when it comes.
Posted by: Red Dawg ||
11/09/2007 21:12 Comments ||
Top||
#37
I think the point is not that they are invicible and nothing can stop them, but that they are very tough to take out and we've got eleven or so. Nobody an take down all of them in a single surprise and they allow us incredible flexibility of action that would take decades for any other nation to equal at this point.
#38
Just a quibble really : we have more than 11 carriers, but only 11 super carriers. Counting all of our aircraft-capable Gators, we {the US} have 27 carriers. Just look at the specs of the WASP class Gators if you think they are not true carriers - not super carriers but what used to be called light or fleet carriers.
#39
Several anti-US Navy Carrier articles today - See INFORMATION CLEARING HOUSE [ICH.com] > THE NEW PEARL HARBOR: THE NEWCONSERVATIVE AGENDA TO SINK THE US FIFTH FLEET. Fifth Fleet left vulnerable by so-called US "Neocons" to Iranian Yakhonts + Sunburns in Gulf; + BLOOMBERG [older] > US NAVY [still] LACKS PLAN TO DEFEAT "SIZZLER" MISSLE [UPDATE 1]; + IRAN:THE DEATH OF AMERICA'S CARRIERS.
#40
and we do more active exercises than all teh rest combined, I'd bet. My (current - I'm moving, dammit) office window looks out on the Carrier berths at North Island and south along the bay. I can see ship movements, constantly. There are three CVN's assigned to Coronado, but rarely is more than one there. There are constant LH movements out to sea. That kind of at-sea activity makes a difference in readiness, I believe
Posted by: Frank G ||
11/09/2007 22:01 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Some thing similar has been going on the last few days. Climate Audit was nominated in the Best Science Blog category of the Weblog Awards.
Climate Audit is an outstanding blog and studiously non-political. Yet there was an explosion of slurs and attacks (from the Left) on the blog by people who clearly had never read it. One of the other leading contenders a blog called pharangula went into an astonishing hate filled meltdown when Climate Audit pulled ahead of them in the poll.
...Hollywood! AFP wrings its hands. Fortunately the commentors are having none of it.
The wave of recent films set against the backdrop of war in Iraq and post-9/11 security has failed to win over film-goers keen to escape grim news headlines when they go to the movies, analysts say. In a break with past convention, when films based on real conflicts were made only years after the last shots were fired, several politically-charged films have gone on release while America remains embroiled in Iraq. Almost without exception, however, the crop of movies have struggled to turn a profit at the box-office and in many cases have received a mauling from unimpressed critics as well.
#2
Veteran television producer Steven Bochco, whose 2005 television series "Over There" about a platoon of soldiers fighting in Iraq ended after just one season, said it was hard to engage audiences in a "hugely unpopular war."
"TV is fully saturated with this war and I don't know if you can do a serious drama about this war and locate any angle that would overcome the negativity about it," he told the New York daily Newsday.
Bullshit. I watched it. He had a track record of shows I liked, "Hill Street Blues", "NYPD Blue", I was hoping it would be great. But it wasn't. I stopped watching it was a lefty cliched piece of shit.
Posted by: Frank G ||
11/09/2007 21:00 Comments ||
Top||
#12
My thought exactly, ed, about The Unit.
And, lest we forget the brew-ha-ha over Jack Bauer at 24. Obviously realizing that it's fictional drama, it does cover a LOT of the so-called "torture" issues. And, it's got a HUGE following.
Posted by: BA ||
11/09/2007 21:52 Comments ||
Top||
. . . Margaret Thatcher would no more have identified herself as a woman, or claimed special pleading that she was a mere frail girl, or asked you to sympathize with her because of her sex, than she would have called up the Kremlin and asked how quickly she could surrender.
She represented a movement. She was its head. She was great figure, a person in history, and she was a woman. She was in it for serious reasons, not to advance the claims of a gender but to reclaim for England its economic freedom, and return its political culture to common sense. Her rise wasn't symbolic but actual.
In fact, she wasn't so much a woman as a lady. I remember a gentleman who worked with her speaking of her allure, how she'd relax after a late-night meeting and you'd walk by and catch just the faintest whiff of perfume, smoke and scotch. She worked hard and was tough. One always imagined her lightly smacking some incompetent on the head with her purse, for she carried a purse, as a lady would. She is still tough. A Reagan aide told me that after she was incapacitated by a stroke she flew to Reagan's funeral in Washington, went through the ceremony, flew with Mrs. Reagan to California for the burial, and never once on the plane removed her heels. That is tough.
The point is the big ones, the real ones, the Thatchers and Indira Gandhis and Golda Meirs and Angela Merkels, never play the boo-hoo game. They are what they are, but they don't use what they are. They don't hold up their sex as a feint: Why, he's not criticizing me, he's criticizing all women! Let us rise and fight the sexist cur.
When Hillary Clinton suggested that debate criticism of her came under the heading of men bullying a defenseless lass, an interesting thing happened. First Kate Michelman, the former head of NARAL and an Edwards supporter, hit her hard. "When unchallenged, in a comfortable, controlled situation, Sen. Clinton embraces her elevation into the 'boys club.' " But when "legitimate questions" are asked, "she is quick to raise the white flag and look for a change in the rules."
Then Mrs. Clinton changed tack a little and told a group of women in West Burlington, Iowa, that they were going to clean up Washington together: "Bring your vacuum cleaners, bring your brushes, bring your brooms, bring your mops." It was all so incongruous--can anyone imagine the 20th century New Class professional Hillary Clinton picking up a vacuum cleaner? Isn't that what downtrodden pink collar workers abused by the patriarchy are for?
But even better, and more startling, people began to giggle. At Mrs. Clinton, a woman who has never inspired much mirth. Suddenly they were remembering the different accents she has spoken with when in different parts of the country, and the weird laugh she has used on talk shows. A few days ago new poll numbers came out--neck and neck with Barack Obama in Iowa, her lead slipping in New Hampshire. There is a sense that Sen. Obama is rising, a sense for the first time in this election cycle that Mrs. Clinton just may be in a fight, a real one, one she could actually lose.
It's all kind of wonderful, isn't it? Someone indulged in special pleading and America didn't buy it. It's as if the country this week made it official: We now formally declare that the woman who uses the fact of her sex to manipulate circumstances is a jerk. . . .
Posted by: Mike ||
11/09/2007 06:31 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
In fact, she wasn't so much a woman as a lady. I remember a gentleman who worked with her speaking of her allure, how she'd relax after a late-night meeting and you'd walk by and catch just the faintest whiff of perfume, smoke and scotch.
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.
