by Fred Pruitt
Before returning to the Health Care Program® with a literal vengeance the Obama administration paused briefly to tout its Jobs Program® before reaching for a nuclear option. Not particularly surprisingly, this looked a lot like the Stimulus® looked. It involved taking large amounts of money and giving it to lots of people: donors, potential donors, or people who are powers behind the throne, which is to say those same donors and potential donors.
All government programs translate into either bureaucracies -- government employees, many of them unionized, answering to political appointees who administer budgets that include at the very least seven signicant digits -- or contracts, which are similar, except that the employees don't get their checks from the government and the people in charge are castigated as "fat cats" when not being solicited for donations or awarded contracts or given cabinet positions within the administration. We have reached a point in our decline where that process constitutes the measure of government activity. The Democrats can't conceive of any other way of doing things; it's the extension of Chicago or New York or Massachussetts politics, to whit, government by ward heeler, the Big Dig on a national scale. The Republicans aren't much better than the Dems at coming up with ideas that don't involve controlling the flow of cash. Every time they achieve significant power they're admonished to "govern from the center," which means letting the Dems control that flood of cash and increasingly credit. They're dumb enough to do it, too.
#2
Even though nobody wants to pay much, everybody's leveraged to the hilt so lessors can't cut their own prices.
While we are continually told by the real estate industry and all the other special interests that costs determine prices, they don't, except to the extent costs influence supply, which is mostly over the medium to long term.
Otherwise goverments can't create jobs. What they can do is drag future jobs into the present by borrowing and printing money. This is Keynsian counter-cyclical 'stimulus' spending, which is blowing up in our collective faces in the form of the sovereign debt crisis.
#3
People in government, who have never been truly productive in the private sector, who do not understand that a good and decent society has a public sector which serves rather than rules, telling the truly productive how to do their thing.
OKA insanity.
Posted by: no mo uro ||
03/15/2010 6:27 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Excellent Fred!
While we're re-inventing, could we illiminate "consolitated school districts" sell some of the busses, and go back to small neighborhood schools?
Could we give Walmart, Lowes, and Home Depot some tax incentives for stocking and selling AMERICAN MADE merchandize?
Could we encourage with tax incentives, Exxon, Shell, Marathon, or BP to build a couple of new oil refineries and begin drilling off our own shores?
Could we work with the Mexican government and smart contractors to establish prisons in Mexico for illegals sentenced for crimes in this country?
Could we encourage more companies like Toyota to come here and set up manufacturing facilities by making ALL states RIGHT TO WORK states?
Since we are supposed to be a capitalistic system, could we insist that politicians be US Citizens who have participated in the free market system by working or owning US businesses or medical practices, as opposed to law firms?
Could we bill governments for medical services performed on folks from foreign countries who wander on over the border for a hospital visit?
Could we actually go BACK to "government cheese" and peanut butter, and put a 26 week cap on unemployment benefits and food stamps?
Could we pull out of foreign adventures in the Middle East and Africa and destroy Tripoli and Tehran with fire bombing the next time one of them so much as utters a threat against the United States.
#5
Fred, it's very mean of you to propose putting all those nice government regulators out of work. Plus all of the 'tail' which supports the regulatory 'tooth.'
#6
Excellent analysis Fred of what's wrong with business today--too much government meddling and lack of incentives. It can still be done however the model has to be changed somewhat. My father-in-law came to this country at the end of WWII. He started a small watch repair business in the corner of a dry cleaners. As he worked hard (very hard), he was able to move out and start his own business. He did quite well eventually. He had the equivalent of a 6th grade education and didn't know about management by objectives and all the other terms MBAs love to throw around.
I started a consulting business. I started modestly in my home. The business grew, income-wise every year but never left the status of a home office. I never hired anyone--just the wife and me and an occasional contract worker (but not often). Man it took a lot of hard work--sometimes day and night. My wife and I did everything, advertising (modest), billing and follow-up, the technical work, and taxes.
Using the furniture manufacturing model. One could start at the hobby or cottage industry level with power tools you have or buy at Home Depot. Sell the stuff at craft fairs. Try to put enough away to of the proceeds away to expand the business and move out of the house. At that point I think the business would then start to follow the more complex model you outline and all the attendant problems.
#7
Another example of the model is a woman who started making botique soap in her home. She started modestly at the hobby level. She gave the soap as gifts to her friends. They really liked the product and asked for more. She then started showing up at craft fairs and selling her stuff. Her business started growing and then really took off. She had to work very hard to make it work. A lot of young college graduates headed to Wall Street as financial planners because they thought they could start at the top and make a lot of easy money. Look where we are today.
Norfolk and Western did not go out of business. It merged with Southern and the combined corp has done reasonably well lately.
Similarly the b&o merged with the Chessie system to become CSX. It also has done reasonably well.
The Pennsylvania RR has a more complex history but parts of it are no owned by CSX and parts by NWSouthern
Posted by: lord garth ||
03/15/2010 13:06 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Small scale businesses are, as Fred notes, likely to provide a family living and not much else.
Mid-scale businesses are hard to grow from small scale businesses today in part due to government regulations but also due to changes in manufacturing technology. For many industries, the cost per unit of manufacturing has dropped dramatically, but only after one acquires the necessary capital equipment as well as the site etc. Those mid-sized companies that have prospered in such industries have a special niche - Pompanoosec Mills makes outstanding hardwood furniture, for but charges a lot more for it than the stuff you can buy in boxes for self assembly.
Or they are services companies, and guess who the main clients of IT services are? Yup, governments.
For some industries there are no substitutes for a fully-capitalized startup. A new semiconductor fab now costs between $10 and $15 billion to create. When an industry's entry costs are that high, you need the skills of an MBA because what's at stake isn't the product or the craftsmanship, it's the ability to attract financing, manage cash flow and return on investment, negotiate strategic partnerships etc. At that point the product is a secondary concern.
Which is indeed a problem because it leads to unacknowledged tradeoffs, like emptying out this country's manufacturing capability in order to compete when the profit per chip is less than 1-3% of price.
Under Reagan we understood that some advanced industrial capability should be protected because it was tied to national security. Bush the elder never got it - he went to Japan and talked about cars rather than electronics and software. Clinton outsourced the whole damned thing, and got campaign contributions in return because in essence he was transferring all of the leading technologies we'd built over 20 years in a short time to a rising competitor. And Bush was too busy fighting two wars to even begin to figure out how to roll the Dems on this without locking in the old school, deadhand unions.
What we need - in addition to Fred's excellent suggestions - is an equivalent of the old space and defense programs that jumpstarted risky, high-investment, bleeding edge science and technology. For the last 30 years we've been living off those investments in the 60s and 70s, but we're down to the last bits of seed corn husks in the last sack. And while Americans have been insisting on our right to party till we puke and Europeans have been spending their 6 week vacations at health spas China and India and others have been turning out engineers and scientists who in some critical areas now objectively are more advanced than we are in key research areas.
The above opinions are shaped by nearly 3 decades in startups and small-mid sized companies (including one I started and others I held leadership roles in), a number of years in higher education as faculty where I got to see firsthand how our students stacked up against the grad students coming in from overseas, and now in defense R&D.
#11
We can contrast this with the COMMUNISTS China model: Step 1: Open for business, there is no step two except make or break on your business model. Yes I know they have some Quality Control issues but so did America at one time. We are regulating ourselves out of business.
"And while Americans have been insisting on our right to party till we puke and Europeans have been spending their 6 week vacations at health spas. . . "
Everything that comes after that in the sentence is less important than this part. Absent the entitlement mentality the threat from China and India and anywhere else, really, would be nonexistent.
When the boomers and x-ers and whichever letter you want to apply-ers grew up imbued with the notion that certain material standards of living and income-stream security were the birthright of all Americians regardless of whether or not they were productive or hard-working or how the rest of the world was productivity wise, the die was cast. The distance from "Everyone my age should have a house and a car and bulletproof job security no matter what" to where we are now is a tenth of a hundredth of a baby step.
We can and should decry the blunders of MBA's and CEO's and politicians, but none of this would have been possible wihout a public who thinks that the postwar level of job security and labor compensation vs the rest of the world are a forever birthright.
Posted by: no mo uro ||
03/15/2010 16:11 Comments ||
Top||
#13
A thorough and sad analysis, Fred. But your truck drivers just went out on strike and your newly unionized employees are doing a sympathy walkout.
Perhaps you would be interested in my new arson-for-hire business? We can get some of your insurance money back. We also provide quick relief for underwater mortgages. Have match. Will travel.
#1
"China has succumbed to hubris. It has mistaken the soft diplomacy of Barack Obama for weakness, mistaken the US credit crisis for decline, and mistaken its own mercantilist bubble for ascendancy."
And China is right. Obama is a weakling, the US is in deep trouble because of overspending, and mercantilism is a potent tool for ascendancy.
The comments for the article in the Telegraph just tear this opinion piece to shreds. Well worth a read.
#2
While Karl Popper was undoubtably right (The Poverty of Historicism), I can't get over how everything seems a rerun of the 1930s. Although in this case China replaces Japan.
Remember Japan attacked Britain and then the USA because it feared Russia more. Japan lost WWII not because of America's military might or because of America's industrial capacity. They lost because their economy was too trade dependant.
#1
"Two Americas" have existed for some time. The real concern should be the overtaking of 'paying America' by burgeoning 'recipient America.' Obamacare will hasten this unhappy process.
#2
It will cause a revolution. The middle class will bear the brunt of the Obama Health care plan. The taxes for this health care will be $500 to $600 per month on the working family. That is at the start. In other words, after the tax brackets are changed to where you are paying 30% to 40% of your income to Obama and his unions, you will then pay an additional 10% + to cover Obama's health care. That is AT LEAST 50% of your income goes to Obama.
Posted by: Bob Gleanter3083 ||
03/15/2010 13:00 Comments ||
Top||
#3
The numbers above came from a story that was on the front page of www.yahoo.com but was quickly yanked. This is going to be a colossal cost on each middle class family.
Posted by: Bob Gleanter3083 ||
03/15/2010 13:13 Comments ||
Top||
#4
That is AT LEAST 50% of your income goes to Obama.
Most of these people and their peers across the country have 'jobs' but usually are not on the 'books' except in the costs in the existing public health care system.
#7
The unemployed and underemployed will not be the giant drain on our system. We have a tidal wave of aging boomers rolling at us. They will live longer than any other generation and will demand health care that we will have to provide. All of that, screw them bravado aside, America will not sit idle and watch the largest group of aging America go without care. When they reach the age where they need managed care, nursing homes etc, it will bankrupt this once great nation. The boomers wont destroy this country through their communist ideals of the 60s or the corrupt leadership and business practices. They will destroy this country by just getting old.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
03/15/2010 18:48 Comments ||
Top||
#8
The GOP should be hammering the air waves this week on Bambi's campaign promises (there's plenty on youtube) wherein...
a) ALL negotiations will be on C-Span
b) If you LIKE your current plan, you can keep it
c) HCR will NOT raise taxes on the middle class
d) Excise taxes on cadillac plans are BAD, BAD, BAD
Plus, please call, call, call the fence-sitters this week. Let them know the consequences (politely, of course) should they vote yes on this bill.
#9
"They will destroy this country by just getting old."
Just wait till they all start getting Alzheimers and need round the clock care.
I'm not joking, here. This is something that few outside the health care industry are even talking about. The cost just to build the buildings to house them in basic living standards of food, lavatories, and a cot will be a giant expense.
If they want more than that, they're going to have to fork over a substantial portion of their assets. Could it be that Washington is merely positioning itself for this massive wealth transfer?
Posted by: no mo uro ||
03/15/2010 20:20 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Bob - Consider the tax burden already levied on a single childless entrepreneur. Assume for the sake of this discussion a post-expense net income of $100k & a home owned outright sans mortgage (no deductions). Taxes are roughly as follows:
Federal Income Tax: ~$20k
State Income Tax (my state): ~$7k
FICA (both halves): ~$12k
Property / Auto / Misc taxes: ~$2k
Assume that I spend every dollar of the $59k that remains. Of that I lose the following to taxes:
Embedded taxes levied on businesses who provide the goods & services I purchase: 20-30%
Embedded cost of regulatory compliance by businesses who provide the goods & services I purchase: 20-30%
Sales tax (my locality): 7%
Best case: I lose nearly 50% of my purchaing power.
Worst case: I lose nearly 70% of my purchasing power.
Thus the purchasing power of my $59k is actually no more than ~$30k and perhaps as little as ~18k. Thus of my original $100k I've lost at least $70k and perhaps as much as $82k to the government.
#11
no mo uro, what Obamistas (just a kabuki ensemble) are doing is irrational and seems hodge podge. Of course one may presume spades of incompetence.
But one thing would make sense. The main thrust is to create instability. Not as much inside the border like outside. This should result in a war. Whatever form it takes, the hope is that it would chainsaw through the ranks of boomers, even war footing may be good enough. The transfer of wealth has the same purpose, to take away means, so there is no or a little fallback.
The war (not this joystick remote control stuff skirmishes) is prolly coming within 4 years. Chinese have 24 million extra young men to burn through.
Iran is the fuse, but in all likelihood, it would start with something unexpected.
#13
Lets hope the Chinese go after the Russians over the gas lines. We could all get popcorn and watch the glow.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
03/15/2010 21:10 Comments ||
Top||
#14
But one thing would make sense. The main thrust is to create instability.
Correct premise but flawed analysis IMHO. The instability is designed to stampede the American people over a statist cliff from which there is no return. Rahm "never let a crisis go to waste" Emanuel has already told us as much. It's a "flood the system" play straight from Saul Alinsky's playbook. Very transparent but probably too late to be stopped.
#15
AzCat, that was a given, just that in the scope of things, it would seem a small change (coin-wise).
Anyway, there would be a problem with herdin' Merkin Cats. Those with a red hue won't go quietly into the night. At all.
In recent weeks, the Obama Administration has endorsed "healthy relations" between Iran and Syria, mildly rebuked Syrian President Bashar Assad for accusing the U.S. of "colonialism," and publicly apologized to Moammar Gadhafi for treating him with less than appropriate deference after the Libyan called for "a jihad" against Switzerland.
When it comes to Israel, however, the Administration has no trouble rising to a high pitch of public indignation. On a visit to Israel last week, Vice President Joe Biden condemned an announcement by a mid-level Israeli official that the government had approved a planning stagethe fourth out of seven requiredfor the construction of 1,600 housing units in north Jerusalem. Assuming final approval, no ground will be broken on the project for at least three years.
But neither that nor repeated apologies from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu prevented Secretary of State Hillary Clintonat what White House sources ostentatiously said was the personal direction of President Obamafrom calling the announcement "an insult to the United States." White House political chief David Axelrod got in his licks on NBC's Meet the Press yesterday, lambasting Israel for what he described as "an affront."
Since nobody is defending the Israeli announcement, least of all an obviously embarrassed Israeli government, it's difficult to see why the Administration has chosen this occasion to spark a full-blown diplomatic crisis with its most reliable Middle Eastern ally. Mr. Biden's visit was intended to reassure Israelis that the Administration remained fully committed to Israeli security and legitimacy. In a speech at Tel Aviv University two days after the Israeli announcement, Mr. Biden publicly thanked Mr. Netanyahu for "putting in place a process to prevent the recurrence" of similar incidents.
The subsequent escalation by Mrs. Clinton was clearly intended as a highly public rebuke to the Israelis, but its political and strategic logic is puzzling. The U.S. needs Israel's acquiescence in the Obama Administration's increasingly drawn-out efforts to halt Iran's nuclear bid through diplomacy or sanctions. But Israel's restraint is measured in direct proportion to its sense that U.S. security guarantees are good. If Israel senses that the Administration is looking for any pretext to blow up relations, it will care much less how the U.S. might react to a military strike on Iran.
As for the West Bank settlements, it is increasingly difficult to argue that their existence is the key obstacle to a peace deal with the Palestinians. Israel withdrew all of its settlements from Gaza in 2005, only to see the Strip transform itself into a Hamas statelet and a base for continuous rocket fire against Israeli civilians.
Israeli anxieties about America's role as an honest broker in any diplomacy won't be assuaged by the Administration's neuralgia over this particular housing project, which falls within Jerusalem's municipal boundaries and can only be described as a "settlement" in the maximalist terms defined by the Palestinians. Any realistic peace deal will have to include a readjustment of the 1967 borders and an exchange of territory, a point formally recognized by the Bush Administration prior to Israel's withdrawal from Gaza. If the Obama Administration opts to transform itself, as the Europeans have, into another set of lawyers for the Palestinians, it will find Israeli concessions increasingly hard to come by.
That may be the preferred outcome for Israel's enemies, both in the Arab world and the West, since it allows them to paint Israel as the intransigent party standing in the way of "peace." Why an Administration that repeatedly avers its friendship with Israel would want that is another question.
Then again, this episode does fit Mr. Obama's foreign policy pattern to date: Our enemies get courted; our friends get the squeeze. It has happened to Poland, the Czech Republic, Honduras and Colombia. Now it's Israel's turn.
#1
Follow the money. The Arabs thoroughly enjoy the anti-Israeli and pro-Muslim rhetoric. Keeping them laughing, driving their MB's, and whipping their womynfolk ensures cheap Arab oil without which this fragile economy and the Obama administration would completely topple. Barry's Muslim heritage and hatred of all things western is an added low cost facilitator.
#4
I would love to see Obambi try to "return" Texas to Mexico : the resulting Texan campaign to take Mexico City would be swift and final. Take a look at the Texas National Guard and Reserve stats - Texas has a bigger and better equipped military by itself than does Mexico.
#7
I would love to see Obambi try to "return" Texas to Mexico : the resulting Texan campaign to take Mexico City would be swift and final. Take a look at the Texas National Guard and Reserve stats - Texas has a bigger and better equipped military by itself than does Mexico.
Not to mention the campaign to take D.C.!
Posted by: Secret Asian Man ||
03/15/2010 20:21 Comments ||
Top||
Business writer Carly Harrington, Knoxville News Sentinel
Hospitals would have to reassess the services they offer patients. Small rural hospitals would be at risk of closing. Some physicians likely would just walk away from seeing TennCare recipients.
The governor's proposal to reduce overall spending to the state's expanded Medicaid program in fiscal 2011 by $860 million has presented hospitals with one of the toughest situations they have ever faced, health care officials say.
Continued on Page 49
#1
ION DER SPEIGEL > HOW AL-QAEDA & CO. ARE RESPONDING TO DRONE WARFARE?
NUTSHELL > The MILTERRS AREN'T, at least for time being. They are afraid of US DRONES being able to see them day + nite, and intercepting thier phone cell calls, etc.
HMMMMM, HMMMMM, IIUC this Artic indir is making the argument that RADIC ISLAM = ANTI-US CHINA BLOGS-NETTERS + MUST TRY TO DEFEAT THE US IN AFPAK BY WAGING JIHAD + TERROPS, ETC. OUTSIDE OF AFPAK.
SUB-IIUC > More succintly, TERROPS AGZ = WIDIN CONUS PER SE, AKA "NEW 9-11's" + RELATED DOMESTIC US ATTACKS.
#2
The Belmont Article is excellent, as they all are. read it.
There is never going to be "peace" in the Middle East until one side Wins and the other side Loses.
There is never NEVER going to be a Compromise. There is never going to be a Consensus. There is NEVER going to be
"sharing" and "common ground".
One side or the other is going to have to kill the other. Like in blow its stinking little brains out the back of its skull and make a big stain on the far wall.
I know that isnt what you want to hear. I know its not what you find PC. But its the TRUTH. One side or the other is going to have to Lethally settle the other side...terminally and completely.
All of the Palestinians and a whole LOT of the Arab and Moslem world...maybe a few unfortunate Persians too. Nada. Zipp. Ding ding. Bye-bye.
Sure we can...and forget about them too. In a decade after its done no one will even know they were ever there. Footnotes. Turn the page. Have a do-nut.
One or the other. Whole entire cities FULL of Germans. Japs too. The entire Divisional Garrison of the island...after island after island.... until we get to Tokyo. And then they either sign on the line or we do it to Hirohito and his mother. Goering got buried in an ash can after he sucked his phony tooth too hard.
Do you miss him? No one will miss the Mullahs either. There is a stretch of road out in the Desert between Kuwait City and Basra....and every once in a while the wind uncovers things sticking their bony hands up out of the oil soaked sand. Look, Mommy.
there isnt going to be "peace", quit lying to yourself. There is going to be another war until we finally kill all the little bastids who stick their heads up. Get organized for THAT. because you ARENT going to get out of it.AND YOU EITHER WIN OR they will bugger your meat and get your kids.
Its either them or its your kids. The Mullahs arent your friends.
#3
What Black Bart said! And it applies to our internal problems as well. Right vs. Left. One side or the other is going to have to finish their business. Most of you know the Left won't be squeamish if they get the opportunity.
Off now to rotate my magazines. :) IYKWIMAITYD
Posted by: Secret Asian Man ||
03/15/2010 20:07 Comments ||
Top||
As predicted, the bishops of the Church of Man-Made Climate Change have directed their flock to begin attacking The Great Satan -- newspapers that have the hardihood to report and/or editorialize on the hardy har har that is "global warming."
Whence it originated is yet to be divined. But this correspondent received four different versions of what's basically an e-mail form letter -- astroturf, as it's known in this cyber age. Three contained the very same subject line ("news judgment") while the fourth's subject line read "Climate Change is Happening, the Attacks on Scientists Should Stop."
The names and telephone numbers of all four supposed "letter writers" were in the exact same format. And all shared much the same verbiage if not the exact same sentences. And the theme was as expected.
"The science is overwhelming and clear," goes one line. "Our planet is warming and we are responsible," goes another. "(N)ewspapers across the country have been repeating the same, tired attacks against (global warming)," goes a third.
And lordy, lordy, those poor scientists, so many of whom appear to be engaged not in "science" but in something resembling a theology in pursuit of continuing government-delivered taxpayer grants, "are starting to pay the price" for all those newspaper-generated attacks, "dealing with harassment and threats, just for doing their job," goes a fourth line.
By golly, "This is wrong, and it needs to stop," goes the fifth similar line in all four e-mails.
"I urge your paper to report on the facts, use sound news judgment, and stop repeating the baseless attacks on scientists who are simply doing their best to help us understand the world," goes yet another.
Three of the "writers" did not respond to e-mails and telephone calls. But a fourth, who also did not respond to an e-mail, did pick up her telephone at the University of Pittsburgh on Thursday. She probably wishes she hadn't.
The longest of the e-mailed "letters" came from Maria Teresa Saenz-Robles, a Ph.D. scientist engaged in, according to her Pitt bio, research in "mechanisms controlling cell growth and cellular differentiation during animal development."
Long story short, she studies mice intestines "to analyze the properties of actively growing and differentiating cells" and "the mechanisms governing tumor induction."
One can only imagine the precise scientific protocols required for such an important field of study. How odd, then, that such a learned and disciplined mind would attach her name to such an attack-the-messenger, shibboleth-filled form letter.
Where did she find the form letter? I asked.
"I honestly don't remember," she said.
And she had no problem affixing her name to such spam? I inquired.
"No, because I did write the letter and I changed some of the language in the letter," she said. "(But) I thought (the original) was better written than what I could write."
Yikes.
Continued Dr. Saenz-Robles, after I again questioned the prudence of doing such a thing (especially, I add here, given that she's a scientist with, supposedly, a fealty to original discovery and discourse):
"I don't have a problem reading something and taking it as my own," she said.
THUD! That loud sound you just read was the jaws of readers hitting their kitchen tables.
Sirens! Alarm bells! Buzzers! Somebody didn't take the security tag off that pair of slacks at Kohl's.
In a word, Whoa!
Given the damning self-indictment and pointing that out to her, I asked if she'd like to restate her answer and, recognizing the unintended implications of her first response, she did. Saenz-Robles said she accepted the sentiment of the form letter as being in agreement with hers and, thus, defensible for passing on under her name, albeit with some rewording.
"But ... ," I began to press again. She begged off, obviously not liking how the conversation was going, said she was in the middle of something, and ended the call.
That said, I'll give the mouse intestine scientist high marks for answering her own phone.
In the spirit of the subject matter, I'll close this Sunday with this line, thoroughly conscripted from the gang e-mailers but altered to fit my sentiment:
I urge those tempted to attach their names to a piece of propaganda written by someone with an obvious political and social re-engineering agenda to employ the facts, use sound judgment and stop repeating the baseless attacks against those courageous enough in the media who are simply doing their best to help us understand the world.
Posted by: Fred ||
03/15/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
What does the study of mouse intestines have to do with Global Warming? Is the good Doctor claiming that GW is causing Tumors now?
#3
Ow...ow...ow! The sound that you hear is the collapse of this "scientists" credibility. When even a journalist is so amazed at your gaffe that they ask if you might be mistaken, you are in deep kimchee.
#4
She, like a large portion of the scientific community believe in good faith, like doctors and other professionals do, that their peer perform the same scientific methods as they themselves do. Thus they fall into the fools trap. Miss Maria apears to be one of the fools.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
03/15/2010 20:30 Comments ||
Top||
Hundreds of powerful US "bunker-buster" bombs are being shipped from California to the British island of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean in preparation for a possible attack on Iran. The Sunday Herald can reveal that the US government signed a contract in January to transport 10 ammunition containers to the island. According to a cargo manifest from the US navy, this included 387 "Blu" bombs used for blasting hardened or underground structures.
Experts say that they are being put in place for an assault on Iran's controversial nuclear facilities. There has long been speculation that the US military is preparing for such an attack, should diplomacy fail to persuade Iran not to make nuclear weapons.
Although Diego Garcia is part of the British Indian Ocean Territory, it is used by the US as a military base under an agreement made in 1971. The agreement led to 2,000 native islanders being forcibly evicted to the Seychelles and Mauritius.
The Sunday Herald reported in 2007 that stealth bomber hangers on the island were being equipped to take bunker-buster bombs. Although the story was not confirmed at the time, the new evidence suggests that it was accurate.
Contract details for the shipment to Diego Garcia were posted on an international tenders' website by the US navy. A shipping company based in Florida, Superior Maritime Services, will be paid $699,500 to carry many thousands of military items from Concord, California, to Diego Garcia.
Crucially, the cargo includes 195 smart, guided, Blu-110 bombs and 192 massive 2000lb Blu-117 bombs.
"They are gearing up totally for the destruction of Iran," said Dan Plesch, director of the Centre for International Studies and Diplomacy at the University of London, co-author of a recent study on US preparations for an attack on Iran. "US bombers are ready today to destroy 10,000 targets in Iran in a few hours," he added.
The preparations were being made by the US military, but it would be up to President Obama to make the final decision. He may decide that it would be better for the US to act instead of Israel, Plesch argued.
"The US is not publicising the scale of these preparations to deter Iran, tending to make confrontation more likely," he added. "The US ... is using its forces as part of an overall strategy of shaping Iran's actions."
According to Ian Davis, director of the new independent thinktank, Nato Watch, the shipment to Diego Garcia is a major concern. "We would urge the US to clarify its intentions for these weapons, and the Foreign Office to clarify its attitude to the use of Diego Garcia for an attack on Iran," he said.
For Alan Mackinnon, chair of Scottish CND, the revelation was "extremely worrying". He stated: "It is clear that the US government continues to beat the drums of war over Iran, most recently in the statements of Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton.
"It is depressingly similar to the rhetoric we heard prior to the war in Iraq in 2003."
The British Ministry of Defence has said in the past that the US government would need permission to use Diego Garcia for offensive action. It has already been used for strikes against Iraq during the 1991 and 2003 Gulf wars.
About 50 British military staff are stationed on the island, with more than 3,200 US personnel. Part of the Chagos Archipelago, it lies about 1,000 miles from the southern coasts of India and Sri Lanka, well placed for missions to Iran.
The US Department of Defence did not respond to a request for a comment.
#2
Does the Navy not have its own cargo ships? If secrecy were a concern, why wouldn't these bombs be transported via Navy ship or air transport? Why was this leaked unless U.S. wants Iran to know the next step would be taking out their nuclear facilities--say a ratcheting up of pressure?
#5
It is clear that the US government continues to beat the drums of war over Iran
Don't forget who is in control here. With one sentence, Iran could stop the whole train. Unfortunately, Iran thinks it is a superpower. Lord help us if they ever do put together a significant number of bombs.
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.
As predicted, the bishops of the Church of Man-Made Climate Change have directed their flock to begin attacking The Great Satan -- newspapers that have the hardihood to report and/or editorialize on the hardy har har that is "global warming."
