Archive for October, 2006
Just posting a quick link to Eaglespeak; he notes a Popular Science article on the DDG1000 (one of my two favorite magazines, along with Air & Space). He points out that the ship may be running into some development issues with its cloak generator…
— Posted by Nicholas.
Apparently hoping readers are morons:
After a few months of hearing about how inflation was likely to be up (mostly due to increased energy costs) we suddenly learn that it’s not up too much…and that it’s bad news.
The cost-of-living adjustments to Social Security are exactly meant to, well, adjust for changes in the cost of living. If the cost of living (as calculated using the CPI) only goes up a little, there is only a little adjustment to Social Security payments. That is HOW IT IS DESIGNED. To try to spin this as some sort of pity party story takes some real balls.
It’s almost like there’s an election coming, or something.
I can’t wait for a quarter where the CPI is through the roof and we see “GREAT NEWS! Inflation skyrockets but so do Social Security payments!” headlines.
Meanwhile, the DOW continues to climb, which is also bad news, I’ve been assured.
UPDATE: Incidentally, I believe that failing to spend a lot of time highlighting the economy is a boneheaded move by the GOP. The current economic situation is light-years from where we were told we’d be by the Democrats and most Lefty pundits when tax cuts and other moves were made. Why the Republicans are letting stupid media reports (or media’s failure to cover stories) dictate awareness of economic conditions is simply beyond Murdoc.
060928-N-6363M-003 Pacific Ocean (Sept. 28, 2006) – An EA-6B Prowler assigned to the “Yellowjackets” of Electronic Attack Squadron One Three Eight (VAQ-138) makes an arrested landing aboard the nuclear-powered aircraft carrier USS John C. Stennis (CVN 74).
You know, I hate to start out all negative and everything, but its the middle of the week, its been raining the last 2 days, work bites and I have this problem with professionals and a lack of attention to detail.
Viewing the above image (full image can be found at http://www.news.navy.mil/view_single.asp?id=39572 ) and then reading the accompanying caption (from Navy News) should set off the aforementioned “lack of attention to detail” alarms I spoke of before.
Like most aviators, and naval aviators in particular, you hate to see screw-ups in popular media that pertain to your chosen field. I remember watching the film adaptation of Clancy’s book, “Hunt for Red October” when there was a ramp strike on the carrier they were on. They showed 3 different aircraft in the whole mishap evolution, one aircraft on approach, a different, second aircraft as it nears the ramp and yet a different, third type from archived footage of an actual ramp strike. The collective groan that came out during that sequence from the crowd I was watching it with (naval aviators all) was highlighted by rather spectacular and colorful curses towards whomever was the military consultant on that film who apparently didn’t think “attention to detail” was a big deal.
Getting back to the above mentioned EA-6B photo, and it may be small, but glaring in its buffoonery nonetheless, when an aircraft makes an arrested landing on an aircraft carrier, ITS TAILHOOK NEEDS TO BE DOWN.
The words of Gunnery Sergeant Washington, USMC, my drill instructor at Aviation Officer Candidate School, still echo in the vast emptiness of my brain…”Attention to detail, girls!”
–Posted by Pinch
I’m afraid I haven’t been doing a very good job of covering for Murdoc while he is on vacation, but I have enjoyed the discussions on the meagre posts I have managed so far. In this spirit of that, as well as the news of the day, I would like to hear what others are thinking about the plans for partitioning Iraq which have been floating around for a while now, but seem to be reaching critical mass. Please make sure to remember that these are my opinions, although Murdoc may want to chime in later with his own thoughts.
From everything I have read so far, it sounds like partition is going to cause worse problems than it solves (if any). Turkey has gone on record as saying that an independent Kurdistan would make them very unhappy, and they are not alone in that sentiment. While I like the Kurds, especially because of their spirit despite all they have been through, I’m not sure it makes any sense even from their perspective. The worries about the Shia-dominated areas teaming up with Iran need little elaboration. Finally, the Sunnis may just get what they’ve been asking for all along—their own private area of desert with little of value contained within it. Somehow I doubt that’s going to reduce the supply of ‘splodeydopes to the region.
A lot of support for the partioning seems to be coming from mass media/mass hysteria reports about the “growing violence” in Iraq. I suspect it’s more an artefact of US elections than any evidence from Iraq. The Brookings Institute Iraq Index, among other sources of data, does not seem to support such a conclusion very strongly, if at all. But since when have media reports required any kind of evidence? The evidence is somewhat open to interpretation, I would be happy to read comments discussing what the statistics reveal about the situation.
I’d also like to hear what readers think about the wisdom of the partition concept. I can’t pretend I’ve done a very deep analysis. However, in the interests of humanity, I think we should probably stick around for another year or so and give their government a chance at getting the idiots to stop killing each other. It’s also important to finish building the Iraqi armed forces and police numbers, to give them a fighting chance at stability. But ultimately, it will be up to the Iraqis themselves to stabilize their own country. I don’t think the source of the violence is so simple that redrawing the borders will prevent it, nor do I think it will go away if the coalition troops leave. What are your thoughts?
— Posted by Nicholas.
Update: An additional thought. Based upon the writings of some Iraqis, I suspect the Sunni/Shi’a/Kurd divide between Iraqis is exaggerated. One reason partition could be a bad idea is that it would be likely to widen the divide due to an “us vs. them” mentality. If it’s the hardliners who are responsible for the sectarian violence, surely the best plan is to find a way for them to form a common bond, rather than exaggerating their differences?
Click for bigger version
U.S. Army Soldiers from the 549th Military Police Company, 3rd Military Police Battalion, 3rd Infantry Division use the winch from their armored security vehicle to open a steel door while conducting a cordon and search in Mosul, Iraq, Oct. 4, 2006. (U.S. Army photo by Spc. Christa Martin) (Released)
Note the use of an M-1117 Armored Security Vehicle, a 4×4 that is used heavily by the Military Police. It has several advantages over the Humvee, but it seems clear that a capable replacement for the relatively vulnerable Humvee is not a terribly high priority.
I recently read “Is It Treason?” by Eugene Volokh in the LA Times (registration required; if you can’t be bothered try bugmenot.com). It’s an interesting article in its own right and you may like to read it. However, this passage prompted me to have some additional thoughts:
|
About a week ago I was having a debate with somebody in a comments thread (may have been on MO) about the difference between an Authorization for Use of Military Force and a Declaration of War. My argument was, essentially, that while an AUMF is clearly distinct from a Declaration of War, it still counts as a declaration of war. Thus, any principles of “international law” which apply to a declared war, apply to a war initiated by an AUMF. In fact, I personally believe this is true for any shooting war regardless of how it’s started—even if it was an act of warfare not preceded or followed by any formal declaration.
Hands up anyone who belives that the First Korean War was actually a “police action”. Now hands up anyone who thinks that’s basically just a euphemism. While I understand the rationale and political reality behind such euphemisms, it’s still just semantics. When the US Congress, or any analogous group, publically votes to use military force on another state and it’s broadcast throughout the world in a matter of hours, I don’t think anybody can deny that a state of war has been declared, regardless of what they call the actual agreement that they sign.
It only matters inasmuch as any of us believe that there are laws that bind parties in an international sense. I tend to believe that “international law” is more of an agreement between gentlemen (and ladies) than anything else. When two parties decide to adhere to it (such as, for example, the Geneva and Hague conventions between parties at war) it’s great and all. However, as soon as one or both parties realize that nobody’s going to make them do so it’s just some good sentiments that aren’t worth the paper they’re written on. I believe in all the principles behind those conventions and like to see parties adhere to them, but one has to be pragmatic and accept that people only adhere to them when it’s beneficial. And let’s face it, there are unfortunately few consequences for most countries today in totally ignoring such things, as the fighting in Lebanon so convincingly demonstrated.
However, if one is arguing about the legality of an action, rather than the morality or practicality, definitions are important. I’d be curious to hear what MO readers think about this aspect of the legality and diplomacy of war in the comments section.
—posted by Nicholas.
I was going through pictures from the Australian Army Operation Catalyst in Iraq and found some pictures of interesting weapons as well as just plain interesting pictures. Here are some of the better ones:
|
Friday the 13th Edition!
|
With tactical laser cannons, can photon torpedos be far behind?
Northrop Grumman are working on strategic lasers. Will the test bed be the Enterprise?
Update: I thought I had read an article about a tactical laser before, but I couldn’t recall where. Saywhatnow pointed it out to me: a DefenseTech article about ZEUS.
ZEUS does sound similar to THOR, but is not made by an Israeli company, so I guess they are competitors. It seems THOR’s claim of being the first such system in use is probably an exaggeration.
—posted by Nicholas.
It’s Pinch and Nicholas!
Murdoc is headed to Texas for some serious vacationing, including stops at the USS Texas and the USS Lexington, and will be out of the office until next weekend. Though he’ll have internet most of the time and will do a bit of light posting here and there as the mood strikes, the MO dreadnought will be capably helmed by Instapinch and Nicholas for a week or so.
Pinch, formerly an F-14 backseater, regularly blogs at Instapinch and buzzes the tower at Blackfive once in a while, as well. Good stuff.
Nicholas, meanwhile, sometimes runs the Smell of Freedom site, but he’s generally too busy in the comments section here on MO and elsewhere to bother with it. Plus, he hails from Down Under, and since their clocks are all #!+%@$ up down there he’s online at odd hours of the night and everything.
Both of these fine gentlemen filled in admirably this past summer while I was on the road, and I’m thrilled (thrilled, I tell you!) that they’ve agreed to lend a hand once again. So give them both a big warm MO welcome, and if either of them is dumb enough to blog about battleships let ‘im have with both barrels.
