This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here

Author: Hondo

  • Hell and High Water

    Gettysburg.

    To any American with even a rudimentary knowledge of military history, that word speaks volumes.  The battle itself, its historical impact, the heroism, the second-guessing . . . .  all of these are legendary.   Literally hundreds of books have been written concerning various aspects of the battle and its aftermath.

    Yet certain parts of the battle remain under-appreciated today. That’s true even of some that are well-known.

    In fact, that’s true for one of the great acts of heroism which occurred at Gettysburg.  IMO, it’s one of the greatest acts of collective heroism in military history – ranking with Gideon’s Band, the Spartans at Themopylae, and the Charge of the Light Brigade.  Yet it is an action for which none of the participants received any substantial personal recognition other than after-the-fact praise.  The human cost was extreme.  And it remains controversial even today.

    But that’s to be expected.  Any military operation involving 52+% casualties should be expected to have both heroic and controversial aspects.  That’s especially true when it involves roughly 12,500 men.

    I’m referring to Pickett’s Charge.

    (more…)

  • Unintended Consequences

    Well, it looks like there might well be some additional fallout from our support for those “Arab Spring” uprisings.  As in a resurgence of al Qaeda in North Africa – complete with the establishment of safe havens and training grounds.

    As reported here,  it appears that al Qaeda is making deliberate attempts to set up shop in Libya.  It also appears they’re well along the way to succeeding.

    The article lists 3 factors that, taken together, show strong evidence of an overall plan by al Qaeda to set up shop in Libya.  Those factors are

    • the dispatch of two leaders (Abu Anas al Libi and Abd al Baset Azzouz) who report to al Qaeda leadership in Pakistan;
    • the presence of affilaited groups, in particular al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM); and
    • close support by sympathetic local militias, in particular those led by ex-Guantanamo inmate Abu Sufian Ben Qumu.

    The article goes on to provide evidence indicating al Qaeda is likely moving to set up safe haven and training areas in southern Libya.

    I think we’ve seen this movie before – a bit over a decade ago.  As well as around 20 years before that.  And it sucked the first two times around.

    The thesis gets support from the USAFRICOM commander, GEN Carter Ham.  GEN Ham has indicated his concern over “a growing linkage, growing network and collaboration and synchronization amongst various extremist organizations which I think pose the greatest threat to regional stability more broadly across Africa, certainly into Europe, United States as well.”

    Gee, the Arab Spring being organized or (more likely) exploited by al Qaeda for their own benefit.  Yeah, I know – that’s so obvious Stevie Wonder could have seen it coming.

    You’ll have to ask the current Administration why they didn’t, and chose to provide support to the Arab Spring uprisings anyway.

  • Why Am I Not Surprised?

    Remember when we were supporting the Libyan opposition to Qadaffi behind the scenes?  You know, during that “Arab Spring” that was supposed to bring democracy to the Arab world?

    Well, it turns out that we were apparently unwittingly supporting some other folks too.

    Like jihadists.

    According to the NYT, a fair amount of the weaponry the US funneled to the Libyan opposition through Qatar ended up in the hands of jihadist groups.  You know, those same folks who run around forcing women to wear burqas/chadoors, chanting “death to America”, and want to impose Shaira worldwide.

    No evidence has turned up linking any of these arms to the attack on the US consulate in Benghazi.

    Yet.

    As I’ve asked before:  tell me again why we’re supporting these “Arab Spring” uprisings?

  • Junior

    Sons of famous fathers have many advantages in life – particularly if dad’s fame is due to or has lead to wealth.  Yet having a famous father is not completely without its disadvantages.

    What disadvantages?  Try living up to expectations, for one.  Many sons of famous fathers simply can’t.

    Everybody knows the story of Teddy Roosevelt – who later became the 26th US President – and his heroism at San Juan Hill in the Spanish-American War.  Many even know that he was belatedly awarded the Medal of Honor for that act over 80 years after his death.  And he’s considered one of the more successful Presidents in US history.

    Imagine trying to live up to that legacy.  Imagine trying to do that when you’re a slender bantam-rooster kinda guy vice a strapping fellow like your dad.  (The other individual in this photo was  about 6 ft 1 in tall and around 200 lbs.)

    Now imagine doing exactly that – living up to such a legacy.  And imagine that almost no one remembers.

    You’re talking about Theodore Roosevelt Jr’s life.

    (more…)

  • Continuing “Good News” from the “Arab Spring”

    Decrees invoking authority the current ruler doesn’t lawfully have.  Attempts to demonize “old regime” holdovers.  Removing old-guard generals from power.  Pushback from advocates of democracy that are ignored by the rulers – and marginalization of democracy advocates.  Efforts to produce a new constitution so that there’s little or no chance of actual debate concerning its contents.

    Think that sounds like Iran, early 1979, when they were laying the groundwork for setting up the Khomeini Shia theocracy?  You’re right.

    And it also sounds one helluva lot of a lot like Egypt in late 2012.

    The Muslim Brotherhood-backed President of Egypt has done all of that.  Without authority, he has dismissed the nation’s chief prosecutor and placed many of his decrees “off limits” to judicial review – by issuing a decree, of course.  He’s dismissed or marginalized many in the former Egyptian military leadership.  He’s insinuated that no judicial review or input will be appropriate for the planned new Egyptian constitution planned for next year.  And he’s doing all he can to marginalize El Baradi and other advocates of actual democracy.

    In short, as far as I can tell he’s following Khomeini’s playbook to a T – with the exception that he’s putting a Sunni spin on things.  And he’s cagy enough to have done some of the most visible of these abuses of power over a long holiday weekend in the US, and immediately after playing “peacemaker” between Israel and Gaza.

    Tell me again why we supported this movement – and this budding theocratic dictator – in the first place?  Didn’t we get our nose “rubbed in it” thoroughly enough 33 years ago to learn our lesson?

  • Even More Obamacare Fallout

    Another predictable outcome of government-run healthcare is that of shortages.

    The reason is simple.  Excessive regulation, pressure to keep prices artificially low, and reimbursement limitations all drive manufacturers and providers towards other businesses.

    That’s simply due to human nature.  If a given craft or business doesn’t provide a decent profit for the level-of-effort required, sooner or later people involved will simply become fed-up and will do something else.

    What’s that you say?  It won’t happen here with US healthcare?

    Think again.  It’s already happening.

    Remember that prescription drug shortage that began a couple of year ago?  Well, now it’s looking to be a persistent if not permanent part of US healthcare.

    Yes, the issue has many causes.  But among those causes is manufacturers leaving the market.

    Temporary shortages are a reaction to a temporary market imbalance.  They’re generally controlled by temporary price rises, followed by increased production.

    But chronic shortages show a structural problem.  And I’m willing to bet that here it’s largely a self-inflicted issue due to excessive regulation and/or government control.

    Get used to such things.  Under AHCA, I’m guessing you’ll be seeing shortages like this in all healthcare fields in a few years, not just prescription drugs.

    ‘Cause when there’s only so much money to go around and an unlimited demand for free stuff, well . . . .

  • Katie’s Song

    Author’s Note:  some indicate that this article brings back memories that aren’t necessarily good ones.  If you’re having a bad day along those lines, perhaps you might want to read this article another time.

     

    Humans have five senses.  But I’m personally convinced that two of these – smell and hearing – are more deeply embedded in the psyche, and are much harder to ignore.

    Or to forget.

    While experiences associated with touch may be the most intense, their memories – both pleasant and painful – fade with time.  One can remember pleasure and pain vividly; but the memories aren’t anywhere as intense as the original experiences.  The memories don’t seem to produce the same visceral reaction.

    My guess is that’s a psychological self-defense mechanism we humans have developed over time.  But I’m not a shrink; I could be wrong.

    Ditto for taste, and for sight.  Memories associated with these senses seem to fade too; the memories simply aren’t anywhere near as intense as original experiences.  At least that’s the case for me.

    But hearing and smell seem . . . different.

    There are some sounds in life you never forget; hearing them again grabs your attention with near-original intensity.  You may not immediately recognize someone’s face after several years – but once they speak, most of us have absolutely no doubt as to who they are.  There any number of other sounds each of us could name that are, for us personally, absolutely unforgettable and which hit home like few others.  The voice of a close friend or a loved one; the sound of a crashing car; certain music . . . the list goes on.  And the list is unique for each of us.

    Smells are similar.  Some are similarly unforgettable and immediate.  I suspect that is due to a different reason than for sound – my guess is that the tie-in for sound is more emotional and psychological, while that for smell is biological and evolutionary.  But I could be wrong about this, too.

    While deployed, I discovered a few such sounds and smells.  The sharp “crack” of small arms fire, and the lower “thump-thump-thump” of a heavy machine gun.  The low, sharp report of an explosion.  The smell of small-arms fire. The simultaneous “whop-whop-whop” combined with turbine-whine of rotary-wing aircraft.  The “click-clack” of a weapon chambering a round.  The unmistakable “burned-but-not-quite-completely” petrochemical scent of jet or turbine exhaust.

    To that list, add a couple of sounds.  And another smell.

    (more…)

  • Curioser and Curioser . . . .

    By now, you’ve all heard (or read in Jonn’s excellent prior article) that the former CIA Director, David Petraeus, testified to Congress that the original CIA assessment of the Benghazi consulate attack indicated the attack appeared to have “al Qaeda involvement”.   Maybe it’s just me 0 but now things starting to get a bit confusing.

    Because I could swear that’s not what we were told originally.  And no one seems to know when the change occurred.

    Here’s what’s been reported so far.  Petraeus apparently testified yesterday that the CIA’s original assessment indicated that the Benghazi attack included participation by “al Qaeda-affiliated individuals”.  This language was contained in the original CIA assessment prepared the day after the consulate attack.  That assessment appears to have been sent to various agencies – including State, the National Security Counsel, Justice, and the White House

    However, the assessment was later changed to read “extremist organizations”.  Obviously, that does not convey the same message as the original.  Al Qaeda is specific; “extremist organizations” could be anyone.

    It also seems that no one can say, precisely, when the assessment was changed.  Nor can they say who made the change.

    Indeed, the current Acting CIA Director, Mike Morell, reportedly doesn’t know who made that change or when it was made.  Ditto for the Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper.

    UN Ambassador Susan Rice had access to both classified and unclassified sources of information about the Benghazi attack before she made her now-famous public remarks on Benghazi.  So she damn well should have consulted the CIA’s assessment on what caused it.

    But the change must have been made before Ambassador Rice ever saw the document.  Because in her famous public remarks on Benghazi, Ambassador Rice blamed the attack on an unreleased film made by a felon.  A film that was at the time unknown to exist by most of the world.

    Either that, or Ambassador Rice . . . simply wasn’t truthful.

    Petraeus still has some explaining to do.  His testimony yesterday doesn’t seem to jibe very well with at least one previous briefing to Congress on the subject.

    But a second source has confirmed that the original language of the CIA assessment was changed as noted above.  Further, both Clapper and Morrell have indirectly done so via failing to challenge Petraeus’ claim that the original assessment was watered down.  So I think we can trust that part of his testimony today.

    And it’s really curious that no one so far seems to know just who made the change – or when.

    I thought this might get interesting.  Looks like it’s beginning to do exactly that.

    And an old question keeps tugging at the back of my mind:  “What did the President know, and when . . . . “