U.S. Air Force airmen and aircrew personnel offload a presidential limousine from a C-17 GLobemaster at Kotoka International Airport in Accra, Ghana, July 8, 2009, as part of the U.S. military support for U.S. President Barack Obama's visit to Ghana July 10-11.
U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Jerry Fleshman

:: Comments left behind ::

That's some major carbon foot print savings there, Matt.

Watcha know, Michelle was right. Obama would make us work.

Reminds me of an anecdote I heard on the radio recently, when Clinton visited Chequers (our "Western White House") he arrived with multiple state of the art helicopters and a small private army. After leaving with this show of force our PM got on one of the old workhorses of the RAF, door open, for a windy and cheap ride back to Downing Street.

A Marine who fought in 3 wars and was a true legend has passed away.

Reusser was awarded 59 medals during his career, including two Navy Crosses, four Purple Hearts and two Legions of Merit. He retired from the service a colonel, The Associated Press and Oregon media reported.

He was shot down five times during 259 combat missions in World War II, the Korean War and Vietnam — at least once in each conflict.

Amazingly, they still make Marines like this.

Semper Fi Col. Reusser and God speed.

:: Comments left behind ::

Just a small thought that signifies his truely selfless attitude -- he switched aircraft platforms..FROM fixed-wing ("fast, cool, etc..") ..TO...rotary-wing...and after the advent of the jet-age of the Korean War. He certainly didn't have to do that and then fly in his 3rd war. The man chose the switch becuase -to him-- the "mission" of supporting Marines on the ground first via close and direct manner was MOSt important and not what looked "cool". Not that flyin fixed-wing in Vietnam wasn't without danger, but rotary-wing brought danger for a pilot to a new level in Vietnam. The man had brass balls to spare.

Jody,

Your advice has been requested:

Jerry joined the Navy soon after our wedding. He met "Hank" in boot camp, and they became good friends and hung out together until Jerry was deployed to Japan. Hank remained here and comes over from time to time to play with our son.

For the most part, I am content in my marriage, but lately I've had strong feelings for Hank. Hank has told me he has feelings for me, too. Now I'm mixed up about everything. I don't know if I could ever leave my marriage, but more and more I can picture myself with Hank.

:: Comments left behind ::

Dear Stupid, Slutty and Confused:
This is a very easy problem you can solve in four easy steps.

1. Ask Hank the name and contact info for his chief.

2. Call the chief and read this letter to him.

3. The chief will know just what to do with Hank to preserve the good order and discipline required to keep the Navy going. Anticipate this will involve a lot of haze gray paint and all of Hank's time until he's underway himself.

4. Take your little boy and join a Mommy and Me group. Tell him Hank died.

You're a disgusting slut. That's the most awful thing I've ever read. Why don't you go on Jerry Spriner and ask for his advice?

dear dazed and confused: STOP RIGHT NOW. RUN -- do not walk -- away from hank. he is no friend to you, your husband or your child. and lastly -- what the Hell are you thinking?? For heaven's sake GROW A SPINE, get rid of Hank and get some WOMEN friends.

-- Navy Wife

PS The "feeling" he has for you is LUST and the feeling you have for him is lonliness. He can come around again when your HUSBAND is home.

Stop hanging out with this other guy and, like an above poster said, get some friends of your own damn gender. Problem solved. Lord almighty, how do some people manage to remember to breathe?

"CONFUSED" is probably not the best adjective for this woman.

Hope she ditches the Lothario but methinks she is made of weaker stuff.

Dear Confused: If you're "hank"ering for something to fill your hole (so to speak) there's a nice shop down the street that sells adult toys. Kick Jody to the curb, pop the wedding video into the VCR/DVD player and remember the vows that you made before G*d and however many witnesses. If you don't really love your husband, then do him the honor of giving him a divorce and asking for nothing.

Dear (Insert improper adjective here)
Follow the advice of ANY of the above posters.

Dear CONFUSED NAVY WIFE IN CALIFORNIA,

Thank you for asking about this problem. As luck would have it I happen to have some experience with this very same type of situation. In particular experience from the viewpoint of Jerry so I think you will find my observations especially insightful. Although what little thought I have ever given to what happens to guys in the Navy has been tempered with mild bouts of soft chuckling I do see the seriousness of this situation.

I think you should cast off your inhibitions and do what you feel is right. After all, that's what it's all about isn't it? Doing whatever one feels is right? Undoubtably you have been waiting for this very advice and it is certainly easier then showing any sort of caution, restraint or wisdom. Instead of just imagining yourself intimately involved with Hank, go on and give in. Do it with wild abandon and thoroughly debase yourself in a moment of hot, sweaty, sticky debauchery. Do those things you find yourself imagining late at night and do them with gusto.

Then later, as you feel those slight remnants of remorse go on and call Jerry and confess. You will find this wonderfully cathartic and cleansing. Be sure and 'fess up to every sinful detail so that Jerry understands how much you want him to forgive you. Of course you will have every right to feel resentful when Jerry fails to appreciate how difficult it was for you to unburden yourself and be completely open with him. He may actually demand that you make some sort of choice between him and Hank. How unfair is that? After all, you all are friends aren't you and you were honest with him. You will easily see that in the end, this whole sordid business is more the fault of Jerry then yourself. If he really loved you he would be able to forgive you of anything.

Besides, Hank will be there to comfort you. Won't he?

Pulitzer for documentary journalism that.

This is another fairly simple puzzle. I love Mixed Martial Arts, there is a great event this Saturday with many epic battles. I am in Memphis, the event will be broadcast at Hooters, I will be watching here.

Join for a beer if you wish.

:: Comments left behind ::

Wishing I could be there, have a great time. When are you going to keep up with Friday Freely? ;0

Ill be watching it at Buffalo Wild Wings in Oklahoma City

There are Pacifist contenders in MMA? Amazing, Jimbo.

Yeah Buddy! I knew Brock Lesnar would win, looong time!!!

Mr Sparkle-
I sooo ruv'd looong time when that POS from the UK named Michael Bisping got his ass kicked ROYALLY by the AMERICAN Van Henderson!!!
USA! USA! USA!

Ruv you not-so looong time,

Great Reader KIM Jong IL
Norf Korea! Norf Korea! Norf Korea!

The knock out punch by Henderson was tremendous. The full body weight punch to the knocked out Bisping was brutal. I loved it, best fight of the night.

I can't help myself---there's a perfect shirt for this at snorg tees:
http://www.snorgtees.com/mixedmartialartsandcrafts-p-541.html

Apparently the Pentagon's "Health Experts" think it would be keen to ban the military from using tobacco.

The last physical pleasure permitted by General Order #1 -- banning alcohol, banning sex of any kind, banning service members of the opposite sex from visiting in private for any purpose -- is a good cigar.  Though not a smoker normally, I had a few such in very fine company, though we smoked in spite of the worst of dust and sand in the deserts of Iraq.

Even that is too much to ask, apparently, for the one percent of Americans who give themselves to the service of their nation. 

:: Comments left behind ::

"One in three servicemembers use tobacco, the report says, compared with one in five adult Americans. The heaviest smokers are soldiers and Marines, who have done most of the fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, the study says. About 37% of soldiers use tobacco and 36% of Marines. Combat veterans are 50% more likely to use tobacco than troops who haven't seen combat."

First off, I'd like to see the statistics comparing tobacco use by age within the US population. Do soldiers really smoke more than civilian Americans of the same age? Second, from this article, I can't tell if the study identifies the difference between users of cigarettes and smokeless tobacco. I think it's safe to say that there are probably more dippers in the military, per capita, than the rest of the population.

With Americans consenting to government takeover of the auto industry, international finance, and soon the healthcare industry - people don't mind the government stepping in and telling them, or their soldiers, what's best for them. Hell, they got rid of tobacco at Ranger School a long time ago.

And Uberpig- I think the infantry was well represented in this study.

A buddy's wife, who is pretty much apolitical (which is why I was surprised), remarked the other day on the occasion of finding out that Obama is a smoker and has been trying with no success for some time to quit. She said something along the lines of "Well, that makes sense. His party wants to ban smoking, and part of the reason they want to take over health care is the 'waste' of money on smokers who have health problems. No wonder: they think he's the smartest and best person on Earth, and if HE can't quit smoking, it must certainly be pure evil." It was pretty funny.

And by the way, when my soldiers found out about this, earlier today, I almost had an insurrection on my hands.

WE DID NOT CONSENT!!!

Rosemary
Tea Party Coordinator
Long Beach, CA.
http://rosemarysthoughts.blogspot.com/

We did NOT consent! Rosemary Welch, Tea Party Partriot and Organizer, Long Beach, CA.

Allbochi, WE DID NOT CONSENT. Rosemary Welch, Tea Party Patriot and Coordinator, Long Beach, CA.

This is just one more thing that the Lefties want to push onto something they never did (and never will) 'get'. Military pride, military people, military sacrifice, military greatness. He can go straight to ****.

Hitler banned his own SS division 1.SS Leibstandarte-SS Adolf Hilter from smoking too.

And look how that turned out.

;)

I do think that tobacco-related health concerns are important for military personnel, but I also know how great of a stress reliever it can be and I'm not sure which of the two makes for a more effective fighting force considering our current engagements...

As a nation of voters, we (Me either Rosemary!) have consistently voted for nanny state supporting ninnies who promise to take care of us and make life better and safer. We continue to vote more and more of them into office.

We will turn this nation into one giant day care center. Sad to see really. George Orwell's 1984 won't happen in my lifetime, but I can actually see it on the horizon now. Incredible.

This is clearly a red light situation, hand off government nobody said you could do that. I'm getting a lawyer, and heck all I use is Snus, that's european the Dem's should love it.

It doesn't really matter what a commander tells his troops to do. Sure, this matters to the general conflict, but the standard has always been, 'don't ask your people to do what you won't or can't do'.

So Obama wants to tell the troops they have to follow the laws, not smoke, and all that gig.

When the fauk will Obama start doing any of that, eh?

I can't imagine going through nicotine withdrawal while in combat. That would be cruel to put our men and women through that, like they don't have enough already.

Maggie, the health Nazis don't give a frak about the troops, combat, terrorists or anything. One of the eggheads, I think from the Nat'l Institute of Health, said yesterday that he thought it was a great idea. That the rest of the populace could learn from the example of the military outlawing tobacco.

Hey, maybe the commander-in-chief could "lead from the front" and kick the habit, and have third parties verify that it's been kicked, as a role model for his troops? How many times have you heard officers say, "I would never tell my soldiers to do anything I wouldn't do myself." Well, here's a golden chance for Obama to show some commander-in-chiefness.

Oh boy. Have just gone through the posts below, I'm reminded that bumping along on an MRAP in a war zone is kind of, you know, dangerous. Just showing up in Afghanistan or Iraq could be hazardous to your health. Could even end up causing, oh, I don't know. lifelong and costly medical support. Could even affect your future ability to earn a living, walk or stand on your own. I'm pretty sure the Surgeon General doesn't recommend it.

Leading a convoy to Basra or patrolling the Hindu Kush could also be hazardous to your medical well-being. Even working as an advisor/trainer can even get you nearly dead. Not to mention responding to a firefight or accepting additional risks to your own safety to avoid hitting civilians hidden among the enemy. You could lose all your appendages, or end up paralyzed, but your lungs would be clean! See? It's good for you! We're taking care of you!

Being a soldier, and going to war really can be bad for your health, huh? Don't mean to be too sarcastic, but these people are so overreaching it would be funny if it weren't so pathetic. More clear evidence that this is a group of people living inside their ownl ideological la-la-land without a clue as to priorities, threats, and what it takes to deal with them.

Fast-rope out of this helicopter into the middle of that firefight, will ya, but remember, don't smoke!

You know, I work at the VA. I see far too many of our veterans dying from tobacco related illnesses.....we ban other things that are not healthy---point in fact, we don't hand out speed, marijuana, prohibit drinking under age 21---and many of our veterans blame the military culture where everyone smoked for initiating them into a habit that is seriously difficult to stop.

Why not ban smoking? It is far from needful. It causes many many problems. It takes lives. Far be it for me to suggest that if the SNCO's weren't smoking in front of the seriously impressionable nuggets, the nuggets might not smoke. The kids already go thru boot smoke free.....and just possibly Pres. Obama, knowing the difficulty of kicking the habit, would like to see our young soldiers not have to go thru that?

Y'all sometimes remind me of my kids at about age 2. If someone links Obama's name and an idea, your automatic response is no.

"If someone links Obama's name and an idea, your automatic response is no". For many good reasons, Lisa. Just one, the proposal to make vets have their PRIVATE insurance pay for combat-related injuries. Which, according to the Smoker-in-Chief, was "non-negotiable". And if you think he gives a fig about the military in general, you're at least naive, if not delusional.

"If someone links Obama's name and an idea, your automatic response is no."

Considering that he recently released Quds Force commanders from Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps who killed American soldiers, his idea that vets use private insurance for service injuries and countless other incidents of how clueless he is about the military (in all aspects), I'd say that Obama doesn't give a damn about the military except when he needs them for a photo op. So yes, the automatic response is no.

The real reason for this is the bottom line. I think I read that smoking related causes cost the DoD and the VA something like $486 million a year. Well, I say if you want an all volunteer force, you've got to pay for it. Get over it. If you don't want to pay those bills, institute a draft and exempt all tobacco users and see how that works out.

we don't hand out speed

are you sure about that?

How do you separate smoking related health consequences incurred during service from those incurred before or after service?

Should the VA and DoD healthcare stop providing care for smoking related issues, what about Tricare?

$400M is a nit; resolve it at the unit level -- the NCO solution -- If you want to smoke, fine, it just means you get to run more.

Unreal - the soldiers are the only ones willing to go out there and risk their lives for us and we want to ban another guilty pleasure.

If anything this makes me want to send more chew, cigars and cigarettes to them than I already have.

It's not about opposing Obama, it's about doing the right thing. Just like when I worked at the bars; if guys came with military ID, they got served regardless of their age.

" More clear evidence that this is a group of people living inside their own ideological la-la-land without a clue as to priorities, threats, and what it takes to deal with them. "

Yep.

point in fact, we don't hand out speed, marijuana, ....

I believe drugs should all be legal. What would you rather have, an addict who is going to be an addict anyway getting drugs in a controlled fashion - ala Amsterdam, or that same addict hitting your mom over the head on the way to the store to get the 10 bucks out of her purse. Over and Over and Over. I say screw the addicts, if they want to commit suicide and if that's what it amounts to - screw em. I could care less.

Portugal decriminalized All drugs 7 years ago. There are far few addicts because people are now willing to get help when before they'd be concerned about the consequences of the criminality.

We need to seriously grow up over here.

And if people want to smoke it's their business. Ditto Helmets, Seat Belts, etc.
We're creating a giant day care center. Is that what you want ? A lot of people do, since this was basically Obama's entire campaign platform.

Hey honey (Lisa), Just because you work at the VA doesn't make you an authority for making personal life decisions for the entire nation. Great - you witness self-destructive behavior, thus your conclusions is to ban all such behavior. ??? Are you being realstic here?? Please live in reality. If life were that simple....then high risk behavior wouldn't exist and our Commander in Chief would be able to practice what his poltically correct party preaches! Everything is "agenda driven" with the Democrats, but no common sense or reality-based.
The Dem's tried this bulshit uner Clinton...with the "be the Ultimate Warrior" program in the USMC. FAILED. By the way Lisa, I am a non-smoker....but i live in reality. Try demanding ALL of your fellow nurses and physician's who smoke to quit....NOW. I'll bet they tell you to take your self-righteous, great idea, politically correct, agenda and shove it up your ass.

Lisa, y'all really believe that Barack HUSSEIN Obama really gives a rip about the health of US TROOPS?? To him , they are simply gov't employees that he can feel free to experiment on.
If Barry O and Lisa think that dont ask, dont tell is toxic, just wait until you 2 see what banning smoking will do to the Military.
The Services are going to have 3 1/2 years of this BS to deal with, not to mention defending and holding what we've fought so hard for.
God bless our TROOPS, theyre gonna need it!!

Never issue an order you can not enforce. In that way lies erosion of discipline and good order among the troops. This effort to ban smoking to promote some sort of utopian health standards can only serve to add another nail to the coffin of respect of the rule of law and reduce desire to comply with necessary authority within the military.

An idiots' game to play.

In the nation as a whole, the ongoing attempts to legislate "good health" by attacking tobacco is only serving to increase black market and organized crime activities associated with tobacco distribution.

Again, an idiots' game to play.

To the utopian retards, keep pushing without thinking. Keep on keeping on in assuming that y'all know what's best for every citizen. Keep piling up the nanny state bullcrap. You can, as a group, only hasten the lash back that is building up against you as persons and your idiocies.

Our country is heading for a rage break. It ain't gonna be pretty.

Lisa- You said "Far be it for me to suggest that if the SNCO's weren't smoking in front of the seriously impressionable nuggets, the nuggets might not smoke...."

Excuse me? I was an "impressionable nugget" when I was growing up- and I don't smoke. If you're going to smoke- you're going to smoke, regardless of what others around you do. There are nonsmoking parents who have kids that smoke. Your reasoning is totally asinine!

I would much rather have a troop member smoke, then commit suicide (like someone else said). They are fighting for our country's freedom, so give them theirs to smoke. You can go enlist and convert all the nonsmokers. I hear they take older people now.

I think that they should do another survey comparing the military to the nonmilitary. Which has the highest level of alcoholics- active duty military or non-military. Maybe a survey of which has the highest percentage of being shot or killed on a daily basis- military or nonmilitary? Which group has higher stress levels? etc.

I'm in total agreement with those who say this country is being run into the ground by the current administration! Between the state and federal regulations being made to "protect us", I'm waiting for the day that they'll legislate when to take a crap.

Before people start saying that I lean this way or that, let me tell you what I am. I am an AMERICAN who believes in the Constitution and the FREEDOMS it provides. Aren't we the United States of America now because we didn't like it when England regulated us to this extent? Look what happened back then.. and the freedoms won out, not the chains and restrictions the King wanted.

Let freedom- and some friggin' common sense!- reign!!

Our country is heading for a rage break. It ain't gonna be pretty.

It sure seems that way. Hard working citizens paying for decades of mistakes by unions. Read 'A Savage Factory'. A book by an Auto Insider who saw how the unions destroyed the auto industry. And yea, government helped.

How long are people in California the USA going to be willing to pay pensions for Calif state workers who retire at 50, with 95% pay or some such to go on a 30 year vacation?

58% ! of California's budget is not funded! 58% ! What!

Lots of pain coming. The Fed will probably print them money if it has to, but at some point in the future, that shit has to be paid for by GDP growth. How's that gonna happen?

And the Stimulus money isn't being spent by the states for Stimulus. The states are inhaling that money to keep them on their daily fix of absurd social programs that they refuse to cut.

The hard working American will be asked to pick up more and more of the burden imposed by the lazy and stupid.

It ain't gonna be pretty and it shouldn't take too long to see it.

I hope this non-smoking rule doesn't come down

If someone links Obama's name and an idea, your automatic response is no.

Hate to break the news to you but even had this come from EvilBusHitler, I'd think it was an asinine idea. Hell, if Reagan himself were to rise up from the gave and propose this idea, I'd still think it was asinine.

Smoking has an immediate detrimental impact on endurance, stamina and blood pressure so it is reasonable that, in a combat situation where your colleagues depend on you, you should be in the best shape possible. Nicotine patches may be a viable substitute, but I think it should still be a choice for each soldier to make what he believes is the right decision.

The kids already go thru boot smoke free.....and just possibly Pres. Obama, knowing the difficulty of kicking the habit, would like to see our young soldiers not have to go thru that?

Just possibly the Obama megalomaniac can't stop his own smoking habit so he has to displace his problems by trying to control the Lives of Others.

The Stasi understood how that worked quite well.

"$400M is a nit; resolve it at the unit level -- the NCO solution -- If you want to smoke, fine, it just means you get to run more."

LOL! Yeah, that's classic NCO ...(grin)

There are several reasons why this is an extremely bad idea. First and foremost, smoking is entirely legal for anyone over 18 years old. How can you ban something that is legal to do? Next, I don't believe the figures on how much the DOD spends each year on smoking related illness. The vast majority of our armed forces are under 25 years old with most careers ending shortly after the 40 mark. Although guard and reserve people serve longer, most do not. Also, the vast majority do not stay for 20 years. How many people have chronic problems related to smoking in this age group? Very few. To smoke or not is an individual choice. There are times in the military when smoking is hazardous to your health but that is because it may set you up for a bullet or an explosion. GI's know this and act accordingly. The rest is bullsh.t! PC run amok.Read this on another blog, but I'm gonna steal it: Their about to let the pole smokers in and throw out the cigarette smokers, what is this country coming to?

I suppose, if it is an issue for the VA and the older prior service men and women that create such angst and concern by their smoking related diseases there, we could make the ban on smoking effective and legally binding for life on any and all who serve.

Otherwise, anyone who serves their contract, be that contract a 2, 3 or 4 year hitch, and then takes up smoking may cause some poor worker in the VA to feel bad for having to work around older folk suffering from smoking related illnesses.

How'd that look in the recruitment adverts! Join now! Serve your country! and if you ever pick up a cigarette again for the rest of your life, to jail with you!

Now, a cup of clue for our useful idiots to the social engineering sect of the utopian "kill em all what don't fit our very narrow spectrum of acceptable" crowd.

Prohibition only serves to create organized crime around the item being prohibited. No exceptions.
So, in reality, you're not really pushing for all and everyone to be the mold fitters of your utopian bullcrap, you're pushing for the creation of yet another violent crime wave.

Yet another looney idea from the lefties!

Yes, we all know smoking is not good for your health but as was pointed out above neither is going into a war zone. If someone going to war wants to smoke, let them have a dammed cigarette.

If smoking is such a bad idea and it should be outlawed for our troops then I think Obama needs to stop cold turkey and be monitored 24 hours a day as we all know we can't trust the man. How about Senator Patrick Kennedy, the alcoholic coccaine (and other substances) addict who just got out of yet another clinic for "treatment"? The one who a former Attorney General of RI just called a "hero" on a news program the other day for him going to a treatment facility. Why doesn't HE have to stop what he is smoking, drinking or however he is doing those things?

I wish these lefties would leave our troops alone and let them do their jobs!

I've never written one of these, so bear with me.  It came to my attention today that the brother-in-law of a close family friend is currently at Walter Reed fighting for his life.

“Karcher was on his 3rd deployment to Iraq… [D]espite a gunshot wound to his shoulder that ripped out much of his deltoid muscle, he fought hard to get back to the point where he could return to his soldiers. He said he felt guilty if they were in the fight and he was not.”

LTC Karcher was riding in an MRAP just before noon on Sunday, June 28th. The MRAP is considered the Army’s heaviest and safest personnel carrier.  But the multiple and powerful EFPs (explosively formed penetrator), those Iranian made shaped charge that penetrate metal, struck the door near where Karcher was seated.  His legs were gone.  Normally a medevac helicopter would be called, but the soldiers were socked in by a dust storm, and nothing was flying.  Karcher would have to be driven to Baghdad’s combat support hospital, or CSH as it is known.  Tourniquets were quickly applied in the field, but when he arrived at the CSH Karcher was in shock and losing blood.  Doctors at the CSH were finally able to stabilize him Monday morning when he was transferred to Balad air base for further medical care and then transferd to Landstuhl. When Karcher was loaded onto the plane for Landstuhl, those with him say he looked “strong and stable.”

:: Comments left behind ::

Fred,

Thanks for getting this up.

/Jaeger

Thanks for posting this.

Prayer warriors on the alert!

Prayers to the LTC and his family. One of my Cav brothers......1st Team Sir!!!

Thank you so much for posting the caringbridge site. The family has been in my prayers for several days now.

Got it.

Spiritual warfare on the way to this family who we all owe so much to.

A U.S. Marine signals members of his squad toward several CH-46 Sea Knights, CH-53 Super Stallions and other aircraft that participated in the training extraction of his platoon from their position during a long-range helicopter raid on Camp Pendleton, Twentynine Palms, Calif., July 8, 2009. The Marines are assigned to Echo Company, 2nd Battalion, 4th Marine Regiment, 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit. Marine and Navy teams are testing interoperability before a deployment certification exercise.
U.S. Marine Corps photo by Cpl. Jeffrey Belovarac

:: Comments left behind ::

OK everyone. We have put together a quick 12 question demographic survey that we would really appreciate you taking the time to do. It is designed to give us information about our audience for advertisers. It will be very helpful as we try to improve the site and provide more original reporting. No personal info is required and you will not get any emails or anything as a result of taking it. Just click 12 little questions and you are done. Thanks in advance.

The survey is here.

:: Comments left behind ::

After your finished the survey post the results I like to see the demographics.

Me too.

Roger Rogers.

Cordially,

Uncle J

I exist to skew demographics. ;-)

Done, looking forward to the results.

Why wasn't one of the questions - Do you think Obama and his Administration are a bunch of cowardly, incompetent, ignorant, arrogant, losers ?

Because, C_Bob, that would be like asking ''Can you read this question?''

And AHSP hasn't been around for a while...

Wolf

Nolo Contendere

But yes, most of the libs are gone. I
wonder if they are happy or feel their positions
indefensible..

Elise Cooper who has contributed several pieces here at BLACKFIVE, has a post up at the New Majority about a meeting between members of the Justice Department and families of those killed on 9/11.

While it was a kind gesture to hold such a meeting, some of the elements showed a lack of tact, such as having a former counter-terrorism counsel for Human Rights Watch participate. This woman, Jennifer Daskal, who is now a member of the Justice Department Detainee Review Task Force has written that military commissions were “illegitimate, dysfunctional, and a kangaroo court.”. The families feel that the meetings with them were simply to provide political cover as the administration moves forward granting more rights to the detainees at Gitmo. While that point can be argued the comments at NM are inarguably offensive. I find it incomprehensible that someone can find more common ground with terrorists than with those who lost family members to terrorism. Here is the first comment.

New Majority purports to offer a way back from the wilderness for Republicans or a third way between left and right. I have to say it has not impressed me and if these clowns represent the audience, I'll decline the offer to follow them.

:: Comments left behind ::

I subscribed to that new site after hearing the founder of the site, David Frum, give a radio interview on the blog Pundit Review. And also since I've been a "fan" of his ever since I read a book he coauthored in 2002 and because I'm a neoconservative like he is. I haven't always agreed with everything he's said and I think he's spent too much time trying to fit into the elitist left. Something I can relate to since I live in the Washington D.C. area which is full of snobby liberals. But after reading through his site for the last few days I finally banished it from my bookmarks due to the sensationist lefty blog type content and ditzy writers. It seems once again he's tried to copy the success of the left by making his own site look and read much like The Huffington Post or Daily Kos. The straw that broke the camels back for me is one some blonde mid 20s female writer wrote "Ok, can we like get over the fact that our current president is black everybody? I've noticed a lot of racism from my fellow conservatives. Yeesh." What the hell is she talking about? I don't any conservatives who have attacked his race whether privately or publicly. I wouldn't be surprised if she was a lefty pretending to be a conservative in order to push a false narrative. It's been hard to proudly proclaim myself as a neocon since we seem to be hated by everybody both left and right. I've remained stubboningly loyal to my personal beliefs despite all the mud that gets flung at me. But now I'm starting to agree with some of the criticism being thrown at them. Especially from conservative who claim they're destroying the Republican's chances of winning future elections by shifting the party to the left. Atleast David Frum and his new site is.

Also it's insanely ironic for David Frum's site to criticize removing Saddam since he was a major supporter of doing so. As were virtually all neoconservatives. But that's the thing I've noticed about my fellow neocons. We're just as snobby and elitist as the most elitist liberal you'll ever find. We tend to think we're the "enlightened ones" within the conservative movement and the real brains behind the operation... We're conservatives 2.0 who have all the solutions. I hate to admit it but it's true. Neocons tend to be all over the place ideologically and politically so don't be surprised if you see some of them acting like you're typical liberal America-blaming college professor moonbats. And for all we know those commenters could be leftist trolls.

"This woman, Jennifer Daskal, who is now a member of the Justice Department Detainee Review Task Force has written that military commissions were “illegitimate, dysfunctional, and a kangaroo court.”."

As I recall, there are quite a few JAG attorney's that agree with that statement. And the commissions didn't have to be that way. They could have had regular military trials under established procedures. But that would have involved giving the detainees POW status and recognizing their rights under the Geneva conventions. Or given them to the US court system. If we could charge try, and execute Timothy McVeigh in our regular court system, then we certainly can deal with terrorists in it. And even if there are national security issues involved, we already have a framework or can make one.

That was the other really stupid thing about this mess. By deciding to do this all on their own, the Executive branch let Congress off the hook for any responsibility for the outcome. If there were legal hurdles to overcome, then it is the responsibility of the dudes that make the laws to deal with them. Its not just about Congressional Oversight, it about Congressional responsibility, or the lack therof. If there ever is any prosecution of past misdeeds in this affair, then Pelosi and some other members of Congress should right fairly be facing the same music along with past members of the Executive Branch. But thanks to the go it-alone-approach of the past administration, in many respects they now are alone, whether unfairly or not.

And lastly, If I hear one more damn politician, Right or Left, try to work up a crowd and some campaign dollars about the "threat" of holding terrorists in prisons on American soil, I will spit green. I'm not afraid to have a terrorist in the prison down the street. And if by some chance they ever were to get out, I think the terrorists would have a lot more to fear from the American public than the other way around. If some fellow inmate doesn't shiv them first. These namby-pamby, effete mama's boy sissified metrosexual politicians are basically calling Americans cowards. And that don't sit well with me at all. So send them to Pelican Bay here in California. It would be a lot less cushy of a setup than they have got now in Guantanamo.

hmmm... when I go off-topic, I REALLY go off-topic.

And when you have a complete lack of facts to back up your opinions you really have a complete lack of facts to back up your opinions as well.

Do some research, Gryph, on how you designate someone who fights for no nation, wears no uniform, and slips across transnational borders to attack civilians and represents no government a "prisoner of war."

Timothy McVeigh was tried in our country because he was a U.S. citizen (even one who wore the uniform) who broke the laws of this country in this country. And there were no bleeding heart lawyers visiting him in prison who were then meeting and contacting terrorists overseas to spread information. How you think that problem can be overcome is beyond me. Not to mention the jeopardy one would face as your "terrorist suspect victims" would have the right to face their accusers in court according to our system. Our soldiers on the battlefield deserve not to have their names and their families' names put in jeopardy of retaliation for that.

The Bush administration was attempting to try the Gitmo detainees for years. Unfortunately for your little explanation, we also have the JUDICIARY branch of government. And it threw more than a few monkey wrenches into the works and negated pretrial actions and changed venues for trials... and redesignated the status of the detainees, which delayed trials.

And then you have a problem of "jury of your peers." Where you're going to find a jury of peers for a bunch of al-Qaeda scum in this country is beyond me. Not to mention where do you hold the trial?

We ran into lots of problems that set legal precedent when we tried Moussaoui. You want to have rules of evidence that will hold up in court. No can do when you "collect" that evidence on a battlefield. Who is going to maintain "chain of custody?" An ACLU lawyer will get a lot of those people off on technicalities. Even though they're caught in the act and guilty as hell.

Is this the legal monstrosity you wish to unleash on the USA, Gryph?

Do your research before you vent.

Oh, and what do you think would happen to any American citizen who "took matters into his own hands" with some terrorist? Yes, we all know how that would end. The terrorist would get millions in compensatory damages and the American citizen he is supposed to fear would be the guy sitting in prison.

For starters, the Geneva Conventions don't really apply to terrorists. Some Algerian caught on the streets in Diyala Province in an al-Qaeda sponsored insurgency against the Government of Iraq is not in the same realm as a German POW who surrenders to U.S. troops in France. Why you think the Constitution of the United States or the Geneva Conventions applies to him is beyond me. Especially considering when they capture our troops, they behead them and hide their bodies so we never find them.

George Washington executed a British spy, after informing the British that they could have him back if they turned Benedict Arnold over to us. The British refused. The British spy, a military officer that wasn't in uniform due to working with Arnold as his contact, was hanged.

Look to America's Founding Fathers for the moral foundation to resist corruption and new degenerations. Because you certainly won't find any strength from the ACLU or Gryph here.

UJ...Your perception of Frum's site is pretty good, but not fully developed (most likely because you havn't spent much time there).

Frum, in his supposed quest to reform the Republican party into a majority party, uses his site for his own self promotion and deletes any comments that call him to account or question his motives. The posts almost always criticize traditional conservative ideals. They also usually demand that the Republican party adopt liberal views on all social and national defense issues or else it's not their party anymore.

Whenever anyone questions that line of thought they are attacked by mobs of liberals posing as conservatives. All day long you can read comments like "I voted for Reagan twice, but this Bush guy ruined...." or "The religious right ruined my party....so I voted for Obama because he reflects my values..."

Conservative sites that allow comments always have trolls (like Gryph) who add nothing to the discussion and are only there to stir up trouble. But at frums site most of the trolls are posing as conservatives. Frum and the other posters at New Majority cater to that group, apparantly unconcerned that liberals are guiding their views.

PS....I have been banned from the site for questioning why Frum (and some idiotic woman named Moira) wrote post after post about Sarah Palin's clothes. I suggested they name their source in the Republican party so the motives for the "leak" could be examined. Needless to say they never revealed who told them that Sarah Palin's clothing was sitting in bags in the Republican party HQ offices. I called them cowards for not telling the truth about the story, so they banned me.

NOTE...Powerline's forums were ruined by the same sort of trolls, so PL now only allows comments that have the full name of the poster. I post as Geoff Milke

I don't consider Gryph a troll in any way. He may disagree, but his arguments are substantive and on point.

Cordially,

Uncle J

UJ...true on Gryph.....wrong on my part. In my attempt to make the point Gryphs name popped into my head, but he is not a traditional troll in any way.

Good call...thanks

Stars and Stripes published a story originating with the Southern Poverty Law Center, which states that SPLC found dozens of members of a hate-group website who claimed to be members of the military. 

The Raw Story asks "Gays not welcome; White Supremacists 'OK'"?  The truth is the opposite of that, though the Stripes article is written in a way that may be confusing.

[M]ilitary officials gave conflicting answers this week when asked how policies governing racist behavior are being enforced.

A spokesman for the Department of the Army said the service takes seriously any allegations of membership in racist, extremist or hate groups. But he said such allegations are dealt with on a case-by-case basis at the unit disciplinary level or in the military justice system, and are not being addressed as an Army-wide problem.

The Army spokesman then referred Stripes to the Army’s Criminal Investigation Command for more information. But that office refused to comment on Army policy on hate groups, saying that the issue of extremists infiltrating the ranks was “an Army-wide issue” that should be addressed at the service command level.

“If a sergeant is assigned to Fort Bragg,” said Army spokesman Wayne Hall, “the Fort Bragg office of Criminal Investigation Command is going to investigate that individual, not the Department of the Army at this level.”

If, for example, a soldier is found to have participated in a neo-Nazi rally, “Then it comes down to the unit commander,” Hall said. “It’s a violation of good order and discipline.”

I don't share Stripes' view that this is conflicting information; I suspect, rather, that the people they interviewed thought they were answering different questions. 

If a particular servicemember is suspected of active membership in an extremist group, his commander has authority to punish him.  The base or unit investigative services can be brought to bear to help uncover the truth about the matter.  This is the opposite of the situation with homosexuals:  under "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," the commander is only supposed to react to open claims or unavoidable demonstrations of homosexuality, not to investigate suspicions.

The unit is the normal place for most disciplinary actions to be located, so there is nothing surprising in this.  It's just what you'd expect to be true.

The Army's Criminal Investigation Command appears to have thought that it was answering a different question from the one everyone else thought they were answering.  It is speaking not to the question of "What should be done if an individual servicemember is thought to be a member of a racist organization?", but "What should be done if there is a plot by racist organizations to infiltrate the military?"  Such a plot would be -- as the spokesman said -- a service-wide issue. 

Indeed, if the Army thought it was being targeted for organized infiltration, it might well look even to the interagency level, asking the FBI or others to help them disrupt the plot.  The FBI would have authority over the non-military members of the racist organization, which the Army would not. 

This is, however, not a military problem, but a civilian problem.  The military has clear rules prohibiting active membership in an extremist group by soldiers.  Does the civilian world have similarly clear laws banning extremist groups from organizing efforts to join the military?  I am no lawyer, but I would think that would be very hard to prosecute.  (E.g.:  Perhaps you could do something if you could prove they were suggesting their members commit fraud, by instructing them to lie when asked about membership in racist groups.  Certainly you could do something if you were able to prove an actual plot to overthrow the government or something similar.  However, mere advocacy that 'people who feel as we do' might want to 'join the military' would be protected free speech.) 

Regardless of the difficulties, though, it's civilian law and civilian agencies that would need to be brought to bear.

To recap:  if a particular servicemember is thought to be a member of a racist organization, that is a question for his unit, just as disciplinary measures normally are.  If it is suspected that a racist organization has a plot to infiltrate the ranks, that is a service-wide issue that needs to be handled at higher levels, because both military and civilian law may need to be brought to bear. 

:: Comments left behind ::

This article is similar to many published in the passed 20 years.
The media love to show that the services are full of Far Right fanatics or gang members (Crips & Bloods, etc.).

Your comments are completely correct. The individual has to do or say something before he/she can be investigated.

The SPLC has always been quite radical, and they're great are tooting their own horn.

The trouble is that much of the public believes these reports because they have little or no contact with service personnel.

The SPLC lost any credibility it had a couple of decades ago when it began picking targets on an ideological basis.

Who wants to guess that if someone joins the KKK they'll be punished but if they join La Raza or the Black Panthers nobody will care... I really wish the double standards for racism and hate groups was ended in this country. One of my best friends was killed by a racist hispanic hate group (who were also all illegal aliens...) simply because he was white and his girlfriend was hispanic. Yet we never hear anyone say so much as a peep of outrage about racism within non-white groups aimed at whites or other ethnic groups. I'm all for cracking down on members of extremist groups. But make sure you crack down on ALL extremist groups. But like that's ever going to happen... A former member of La Raza is about to to put on the Supreme Court afterall...

"A former member of La Raza is about to to put on the Supreme Court afterall..".
And, I have the feeling she's just a trial balloon(no pun intended) for the 0. I'm sure his next appointee will be far more radical than Sotomayor.
But, I totally agree, Blackwater. Let's spend as much going after MS-13, the Crips, La Raza and all of the loons on the left, as we do getting all in a huff about those who claim to be members of the military.

It's just a continuation of attempts to link "military" with "hate groups" and "extremists". Even if it's wrong, even if it's later retracted, the message sticks. It's an influencing message, not an effort to strengthen or clean out the military. (How about we work on the general public first, where nobody has to be screened, evaluated and checked out to join.) Grey psyops, or soft psyops, whatever you want to call it.

This should be kindergarten level. If anyone wants to play, I will be here through the weekend.

:: Comments left behind ::

Well, since my Jimbo left... I found a new place to dwell... It's down at the end of Lonely Street at Heartbreak Hotel...

Have fun, and enjoy some BBQ for me!

I bet Jimbo never got there. He's probably down on Beale Street hitting the pubs and trying to decide who has the best pork barbecue. (Yeah, Memphis pit barbecue might even make me think cows aren't the only thing you should put on the grill....)

Do not defile my smoker and please wash the sheets!

Dammit! Been in town all week visiting the folks, and the missus and I are headed out tomorrow a.m. At least we'll be comforted to know that we're leaving the oppressive humidity behind. If you do make it to Graceland, try and find time for lunch at Uncle Lou's. It's about 1.5 miles north of the estate in a run-down little strip mall. Best wings on the planet!

AH welcome to my town Jimbo , just remember to be safe , Graceland is not in the best part of town. Memphis has some great eateries so enjoy the food. If your looking for some good BBQ go downtown to Rendezvous across from the peabody hotel , awesome Ribs. Beale Street is also a hot spot for booze and great blues. Enjoy the town but be safe.

Neverland! Sweet!

You are a magnificent bastard, nice slice. But no chimps, no Jesus juice, no Macaulay Culkin.

Just Blues, BBQ and Booze. Heaven to me.

Cordially,

Uncle J

Too easy. Have fun in the Jungle Room.

Beale Street has already been suggested but close by is the National Civil Rights Museum which has preserved the Lorraine Motel where Martin Luther King was shot. It's well worth seeing.

You can race through the main part of the museum to get to the place where he was shot. They've put a glass wall on the side of his room so you can see in. However, the best artifacts are across the street in the minor part of the museum, built in the flophouse where James Earl Ray fired the fatal shot. They display all the evidence with the FBI tags still on them: the rifle, the bullet, and other of Ray's possessions.

I'd tell you to go see the Memphis Belle on Mud Island, but they sent it to the Air Force Museum years ago. They had it covered but exposed. The birds were crapping on it and their droppings were eating their way through the metal skin.

Can't believe you left Texas. The cold front is over and it beginning to warm up nicely. See ya next time.
Pops

UJ:

My dad was from Memphis and I used to spend every summer there with my grandparents.

If you haven't already seen it, go to the Peabody Hotel at 5:00 pm to watch the march of the ducks, when they get on the elevator and ride up to the roof where they live. Take a video camera. They aren't the silent drill team, but it's a hoot.

If the place looks familiar, you might recognize it from the Ton Cruise movie, The Firm.

Great variety single malt scotch, but I know you would never partake.

Have fun, Jimbo, but if I see one picture of you in a studded white jumpsuit with an oversized collar; I'll never be able to read blackfive, again, since my retina's will have burned out.

On a serious note: Please give us an AAR on your quest for BBQ and beer, as some of us might be inclined to stop by a few of those joints when passing through.

Isn't that Michael Jackson's father-in-law's house?

ooohhhh... somebody's gonna play with the TankerBabe this weekend....

Sounds like fun!

Tankerbabe's in New Hampshire with many of the survivors of Wanat. No Uncle J playtime this weekend

Bummer!

But... I'm glad you're with the Wanat guys. That should be a pretty interesting weekend.

A Blackfive reader (and Aussie)  sent me this request:
 

War Office, 6th September, 1945.

The KING has been graciously pleased to approve the award of the VICTORIA CROSS to:-

No. VX. 102142 Private Edward KENNA, 2/4 Australian Infantry Battalion, Australian Military Forces.

In the South West Pacific at Wewak on 15th May, 1945, during the attack on the Wirui Mission features, Private Kenna's company had the task of capturing certain enemy positions. The only position from which observation for supporting fire could be obtained was continuously swept by enemy heavy machine gun fire and it was not possible to bring Artillery or Mortars into action.

Private Kenna's platoon was ordered forward to deal with the enemy machine gun post, so that the company operation could proceed. His section moved as close as possible to the bunker in order to harass any enemy seen, so that the remainder of the platoon could attack from the flank. When the attacking sections came into view of the enemy they were immediately engaged at very close range by heavy automatic fire from a position not previously disclosed. Casualties were suffered and the attackers could not move further forward.

Private Kenna endeavoured to put his Bren gun into a position where he could engage the bunker, but was unable to do so because of the nature of the ground. On his own initiative and without orders Private Kenna immediately stood up in full view of the enemy less than fifty yards away and engaged the bunker, firing his Bren gun from the hip. The enemy machine gun immediately returned Private Kenna's fire and with such accuracy that bullets actually passed between his arms and his body, piercing his clothing. Undeterred, he remained completely exposed and continued to fire at the enemy until his magazine was exhausted. Still making a target of himself, Private Kenna discarded his Bren gun and called for a rifle. Despite the intense machine gun fire, he seized the rifle and, with amazing coolness, killed the gunner with his first round.

A second automatic opened fire on Private Kenna from a different position and another of the enemy immediately tried to move into position behind the first machine gun, but Private Kenna remained standing and killed him with his next round.

The result of Private Kenna's magnificent bravery in the face of concentrated fire, was that the bunker was captured without further loss, and the company attack proceeded to a successful conclusion, many enemy being killed and numerous automatic weapons captured.

There is no doubt that the success of the company attack would have been seriously endangered and many casualties sustained but for Private Kenna's magnificent courage and complete disregard for his own safety. His action was an outstanding example of the highest degree of bravery.

Godspeed, Ted Kenna.

Aussie, Aussie, Aussie!!!

:: Comments left behind ::

Thank You, Lord, that such men live. See you in a while, Mr. Kenna.

Thank you for posting this. A true hero.
May he rest in peace.

Pigs!

RIP mate.

(You might need to amend the title for Mark Donaldson VC)

Thanks to Matt for getting this online and for the beautiful portrait and the links, great work! The bonds between our two Countries has never been stronger than they are now.

Australia now has only two living recipients of the Victoria Cross, Keith Payne Vietnam and Mark Donaldson Afghanistan.

Australia has a sad history when it comes to awarding Medals. No doubt a a legacy of our British COs and the usual rear echelon Johnnies.

Ted was the most humble of Men. When it came to talking about his V.C., he always said that he wore it "for his mates, because without them you are nothing". When Donaldson was awarded his V.C. Ted was too crook to attend, but Donaldson and Payne arranged to sneak in to see Ted and have a beer with him.

To have been in the same room as those three great men and fine soldiers would have been incredible. Publicly Kenna and Payne were delighted to have someone else on board, privately I know they were glad to have some of the weight lifted from their shoulders.

Kenna will receive a State Funeral with full Military Honours. Family wishes notwithstanding, it should be a fitting send off. Gun carriage, Honour, Guard etc. Its a shame so many of our front line troops are on active service. Had this been peace time, every available man and woman would have attended. I am sure it will be televised live.

In the old days, the coffins of Victoria Cross recipients would be borne by other Victoria Cross holders. I strongly suspect Donaldson will be a pall bearer, and Im sure Payne will insist he is up for the task. The remainder if not family will by tradition be the most senior NCOs in the serving Army.

Im so sad, but 90 is a good age for what he went through. Those of the Greatest Generation who are still with us have survived natures and mans natural selection processes. They are all made of Iron and I salute every one of them.

http://i31.tinypic.com/33wkrww.jpg

Thanks for posting this, Matt, and a very special thank you to Mr. Kenna for his bravery and sacrifice. Prayers to his friends and family.

Thanks to you, also, Mickk, for sharing more information.

Another inspirational story from the greatest generation. Humility is the hallmark of true action heroes who rise to the occasion risking all for a their comrades.

Prayers of thanks to Mr. Kenna and his family.

Like Vet66 said and our prayers of thanks.

New Guinea was a hella place to fight. Nasty terrain, nasty enemy, bad logistics, rampant disease.

The Aussies showed themselves to be amazingly tenacious in their defensive efforts along the Kokoda Track earlier in the war.

Glad we're on the same side. Oh, and maybe someday, y'all can forgive us for foisting that prima dona MacArthur off on you.

Fiddler's Green will welcome Mr. Kenna in grand style.

Halfway down the trail to Hell,

In a shady meadow green

Are the Souls of all dead troopers camped,

Near a good old-time canteen.

And this eternal resting place

Is known as Fiddlers' Green.

Marching past, straight through to Hell

The Infantry are seen.

Accompanied by the Engineers,

Artillery and Marines,

For none but the shades of Cavalrymen

Dismount at Fiddlers' Green.

Though some go curving down the trail

To seek a warmer scene.

No trooper ever gets to Hell

Ere he's emptied his canteen.

And so rides back to drink again

With friends at Fiddlers' Green.

And so when man and horse go down

Beneath a saber keen,

Or in a roaring charge of fierce melee

You stop a bullet clean,

And the hostiles come to get your scalp,

Just empty your canteen,

And go to Fiddlers' Green.

Sabre's Ready! 1/4 cav, bro, I'll see you at the end of the trail

Fuckin' stud. Thank you Lord, and Australia, for giving us such a man.

OI! OI! OI!

Godspeed PVT Kenna. Your mates are waiting for you in formation on Fiddler's Green.

Greyhawk points out how a new policy "protects" our troops who are renters from forced moves when their landlords are foreclosed on. Turns out this simply saves the gubmint a few bucks by screwing our junior enlisted folks. How 'bout that quality of life eh?

In May of this year, however, President Obama signed the Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act of 2009 - part of the larger Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009. Under the terms of this law, tenants are "protected" in case of such a foreclosure in that they can not be evicted prior to expiration of an existing lease. (An exception - if the "new" landlord sells the property to a buyer to use as their principal residence the current tenant is allowed 90 days to vacate.)

As a result, military families now won't be forced to vacate until their lease expires, therefore their move may be delayed a bit - but they will no longer be reimbursed for the expenses of that move because it's due to a normal lease expiration - not a foreclosure action. They'll still have to move - maybe with a bit more advance notice but no reduction in hassles - only once again they'll be the ones writing the checks.

Bravo, well done.

:: Comments left behind ::

So its screwing the troops to by forcing the landlord to satisfy their contractual obligation to then tenant? When you sign a lease, you assume you are living there for the duration of that lease. It might be easier to renew the lease then to have to move at the end of it, but a lease gives you and the landlord options to change the terms at its completion (You can move without penalty, they can raise the rates, stop renting, etc.). The recent economic downturn and housing adjustment means more rental properties are going into foreclosure and potentially more soldiers and their families being kicked to the curb. In the old way, that only started last year mind you, they had to move but were reimbursed for the move and in the new way they get to stay until the end of their lease. I'm sure some people were hassled that they had to move, especially if it happened at the beginning of their lease.If their place forecloses, I'm sure there are some who would rather move right away while others would rather stay in the place they signed a lease as they obviously chose to love there. Just two years ago, they would have to have moved right away and gotten nothing.
It seems like a mostly positive adjustment to me and protects the rights of both tenant and property owner. I'm thinking you are outraged because Greyhawk got outraged because Instapundit got outraged and because you need to be outraged over something that can be blamed on this administration. I'm sure we will read about the next outrage tomorrow or the next.

Which part of they no longer get paid for their moving expenses don't you understand? While it may be helpful to some to be able to wait until a lease expires to move, if they have to then assume all of the costs of the move v. being paid for the cost of the move, it is obviously less advantageous.

A positive move would have been allowing them to stay until the end of the lease and also paying the cost of the move. This is a step backwards.

Cordially,

Uncle J

"I'm sure we will read about the next outrage tomorrow or the next". Well, at least you got one thing right out of this whole cluster. We WILL read about another outrage, probably not tomorrow. But then, it's Friday, that seems to be the day that the 0 and his lackeys seem to dump something on the SRM. Of course, with the state of media today, it doesn't really matter what day they decide to unveil their latest screw-up.

The enlisted troops are only one party who's getting hosed by this. It seems to apply to all tenants, not just soldiers. So if an investor buys a property that has been foreclosed on and that no servicemembers live in and wants to rehab it, they have to wait until leases expire to do any work. That seems like a disincentive for investors to buy these properties - I'm sure a lot of them are in foreclosure because they aren't in the best shape - and I remember living places in my "junior enlisted/BAQ" days that weren't the most savory. This looks like another policy that is good for no one.

They leave no stone unturned in the search for ways to screw the troops it seems ... alas.

"I'm thinking you are outraged because Greyhawk got outraged because Instapundit got outraged"

Didn't know Glenn already had this story. Since it's an original story I got from the source that includes audio of our Q&A session (there's been no coverage anywhere else) can you post the link to the Instapundit coverage?

Hey, at least more money will be saved for social justice and Michelle's personal trip fund.

Replying to myself? Oh well, Fox News reported today that the Obama Apology Tour continues. Now he's apologized to everyone for our "failure" in not doing more to combat global warming/climate change. Or whatever Algore decides the new catch phrase is.
So, we didn't even have to wait a day for the "next outrage".

Something tells me this post is gonna go over like a lead balloon, but here goes.

What's not mentioned anywhere is that the issue above is by no means a done deal at the DoD or in Congress.
Having been a reporter myself years ago during plenty a slow news week, I think the bulldog investigative journalist at the Mudville Gazette clearly is reaching for a story and the one he gets he twists. The interviewee on the podcast also seems to share my perspective.
So much for responsibility to a reader base that deserves far more for reasons that should be obvious. So much for the Mudville author's betting on the fact that busy readers will trust that due diligence has been done and won't investigate further, when in actuality his jaded cynicism might be a thin cover for self-aggrandizement and a political agenda, especially during a slow news week.

People like me who know from inside experience how the reporting business often works will dig. Sorry fellas, but this is the fourth time in a couple months that I've found a lack of due diligence here on my favorite website (Blackfive).
If you want to learn the full story about what's happening with expense reimbursement for the troops as well as the nuances of this issue, take the time to listen to both Greyhawk's excerpted version and the full podcast.

But the bigger issue for me and others who send loved ones off to theatre is this. Time and time again, one of the messages that gets hammered both subliminally and overtly by a few here at Blackfive to the young people who serve this country is that they are and will be victims, coming and going and in between. Sure it's our ancient military tradition to bitch, but when the message gets rammed home repetitively by virtue of manipulative journalistic tactics, a little introspection is in order.

For eight years this victim message came from the left, and now we on the right continue to whine and perseverate like drunks in a bar at closing time because we lost an election. Never mind that there might be some balance happening after all - like the right guys have been put in the right places recently to offer a good chance of success in the Long War, or that Congressional funding for veteran support services has been increased this spring, or that mistakes get made but decisions at least get reconsidered in the Oval Office.
It's time for us to get over being victims of a leftist conspiracy, and go a step further to "support the troops".

Organizations like the Warrior Legacy Foundation with the message they promote are a huge step in the right direction. Thanks to Uncle J and others who have the vision.
And yes, Blackfive certainly should publish stories like the above. But make an attempt, or at least find some intern who has time to do the work, to do some fact-checking and provide some balance. Think about how that indirectly might help some young soldier who's getting prepared to deploy in a month to some remote FOB in Afghanistan.

But hey. In the long run, thanks for all you do here at Blackfive. I do love you guys.

"Having been a reporter myself years ago during plenty a slow news week, I think the bulldog investigative journalist at the Mudville Gazette clearly is reaching for a story and the one he gets he twists. The interviewee on the podcast also seems to share my perspective.
"So much for responsibility to a reader base that deserves far more for reasons that should be obvious. So much for the Mudville author's betting on the fact that busy readers will trust that due diligence has been done and won't investigate further, when in actuality his jaded cynicism might be a thin cover for self-aggrandizement and a political agenda, especially during a slow news week."

A fine start, but you forgot to explain the actual reality you've accused me of twisting. (Extra irony points for declaring I failed at "Due dilligence".) As for political motives, am I to be excoriated as a Republican, Democrat, or something else this week? Please clarify that so I might respond.

You've also implied the audio I posted for anyone to hear (and I really do wish folks would listen to the Colonel tap dance around the real and obvious issue, veterans especially will recognize the technique for what it is) will reveal the mysterious truth I want kept hidden. Could you end the suspense and reveal that truth?

You know he wasn't paid to do that.

Sorry - who wasn't paid to do what? And what's the implication?

ldsoldiersdaughter. Paid to tell the truth.

Conflict of interests. Cannot reveal the truth when one has interests to do the opposite.

I'm still reading your comment as cryptic. Do you to mean Oldsoldiersdaughter is credible because (he?) is not paid for participating in this discussion?

There are signs that our military leaders have learned lessons from both our 7 years of operations in Afghanistan and our successes in Iraq. They have begun a major shift in strategy and tactics to reflect that. We have discussed some aspects of it here including the decision announced to limit bombing of residential dwellings even if we are receiving fire from them. While this decision may seem counter-intuitive at first. when examined in the framework of a larger shift toward safeguarding populations v. killing bad guys it becomes very understandable.

This same change in Iraq, to take territory and then stay there alongside the populace, was instrumental in shifting public opinion in Iraq. In conjunction with increased security from local forces it led to our ability to let the Iraqis take care of themselves. A similar strategy is now being employed in Afghanistan, but faces many more challenges. The Afghan security forces are near useless as currently constituted. Tribal issues make it almost impossible for any national forces to be used in an area where they are not native. Our training efforts have focused on attempting to put together Afghan police and military units but the problem is that other than perhaps Hamid Karzai there are no Afghans. There are a patchwork of tribes and villages and cliques that speak different languages, hold centuries long beefs and don't see themselves as part of this larger, artificial thing we call Afghanistan.

When the Anbar Awakening happened in response to al Qaeda brutality, local sheiks said "enough" to the outsiders who were wreaking so much havoc in their areas. They formed their own security forces to combat them and safeguard their people. US forces midwived these actions and supported the efforts of what became the "Sons of Iraq". local folks protecting their neighborhoods and villages. To do the same in Afghanistan is a much more challenging puzzle as the same model must be adapted and constructed dozens of times for different tribes and we must be willing to stay and share the danger as they stand up against the Taliban and al Qaeda. Instead of kicking on doors and confiscating weapons, we have to prepare to arm villagers and stand with them when the militants come to pressure them.Complicating things further is the sheer number of separate places we must do this in some of the most hellacious terrain on the planet.

Our ability to place troops on the ground and support them in the case of concerted attacks against them is limited. We must be very judicious in how we expand our footprint and attempt to deny the enemy the ability to mass forces to attack these new outposts. This will be slow and difficult and requires a long war mentality. Alliances with tribal leaders must be formed and fostered, and then we must empower them to secure their own people. We must help them increase quality of life, hovel by hovel. They must begin to see that working with us causes less killing and strife and then they can be expected to work with us.

Call it oil spots or whatever you want, but we have to strategically spread security and prosperity out in a de-centralized fashion. The national government and security forces have almost zero credibility and it will take much greater efforts to change that. Commanders at the local level have the ability and expertise now to build personal relationships and to show concrete results. They are the building blocks for this strategy, they and the strategic corporals can show both physical, moral and ethical courage that can win the tribal leaders over. We don't want them on our side as much as we need to convince them we are on their side. This will take concepts like returning the same units to the same locations in rotation, leaving cadres of officers and NCOs in the same AOs for extended periods to build a continuity that lasts beyond one unit's deployment. And most of all it takes a commitment from our government to support these efforts over a time fram longer than the next election cycle. That is one of the biggest dangers to this new strategy.

:: Comments left behind ::

"This will take concepts like returning the same units to the same locations in rotation, leaving cadres of officers and NCOs in the same AOs for extended periods to build a continuity that lasts beyond one unit's deployment."

Completely concur, but this may be a real problem. I don't know about the other branches, but the Army has been dominated with the "up or out" and the general lack of Command continuity in units since I was in almost forty years ago. Just when you were really getting to know the strengths/weaknesses of your platoon leader/company commander, and they knowing yours, BANG they're gone and you got this new guy that's a blank piece of paper.

So how is an organizational culture of an institution like that going to overcome an all-American hurry, hurry, instant gratification mindset so as to take the LONG view?

I think the grunts are game, but this is gonna take REAL leadership, who are going to be fighting a two front campaign; the hirabi and the Pentagon/Washington.

This "new war" is as much a strategy for A-stan as it is for Washington.

Elise Cooper for BLACKFIVE

New York Times Number one bestselling author Brad Thor has written a new book, “The Apostle.” This fictional book is centered on rescuing a hostage, Dr. Julia Gallo, who is held by the Taliban in Afghanistan.  To head the rescue team, the American President enlists Scot Harvath, a special forces’ operative.   The book’s sub-plot involves a secret service agent, Elise Campbell, who overhears the possibility of the President’s involvement in the death of one his aides.   Blackfive.net had the opportunity to interview Mr. Thor about his new book.

Mr. Thor stated to Blackfive that “as a political thriller writer my job is to be as current as tomorrow’s headlines and to speak with as much firsthand knowledge as possible.” When reading fiction do the readers wonder where fantasy becomes reality? A good fictional political thriller must have plots, sub-plots, and themes that are believable.  There were a few themes in “The Apostle” which could have been based on a realistic situation. 

First, there is the Secret Services’ quandary of overhearing a delicate, personal matter.  In reading this, one reverts back to the Clinton years when there were numerous reports of the President’s infidelity.  How many of Thor’s readers remember the secret service agents being compelled to testimony about President Clinton’s contemporaneous activities?   Thor commented about the secret service agent, Elise Campbell that he wanted her character to have her “own mystery to unravel with and wrestle with her own points.”

The next theme involves the CIA’s bureaucratic mistakes, including wasting time and money for mandatory sensitivity training and the failure over 9-11.  Thor states in his book that “management was more concerned with getting promoted and pushing their paperwork than making sure the operatives got the resources they needed.”  Both CIA sources interviewed agreed with this statement during the years John Deutch and James Woosley Jr. served as directors.  One former operative stated that both “Deutch and Woosley were risk averse.  They cut some of our resources because there was not enough money in the payroll.  A lot of people who did take risks were asked to retire.”  However, he goes on to state that during the George Tenet and Michael Hayden years, “everyone was gung-ho and had the full backing of the Bush administration.”   Besides the two former operatives, a high ranking official told Blackfive that “the guys in the field are viewed as heroes…the people at the headquarters are seemingly idiots.  The problem with this is that many of the senior people at HQ came from the field…remember that someone has to evaluate them to make sure in light of the bigger picture that their plan makes sense.” 

Mr. Thor writes in the book, “What puzzled him (Scot Harvath) more was that not a single management head had rolled at the CIA over the attacks.”  Many at the CIA admit that they should have connected the dots more, but the other agencies should also share in the blame.  As one former CIA official explained, “It was an American failure.  It was a State Department failure because the terrorists should never have been given visas, a law enforcement failure because the FBI should have been on them once they entered this country and an intelligence failure because the CIA should have disrupted the attacks.”

Realizing that today’s world is a dangerous place, Mr. Thor was asked about his main character, Scot Harvath.  He is hopeful that there are Harvaths in the world who will keep Americans safe.  He wanted to write a book set in Afghanistan because he saw it as a place that would be back in the headlines.  He stated that “as a political thriller writer my job is to be as current as tomorrow’s headlines.”

He explained that he writes the books for entertainment; yet, wants to give a voice to those that keep Americans safe.  Thor stated that “I stand in awe of the men and women in law enforcement, in intelligence, and in the military.  Every freedom I enjoy is because of the service and sacrifice of others.”

This is a very good political thriller because of its suspenseful and believable plots.  Luckily for Scot Harvath fans Brad Thor is going to write a book with him as the main character every single year.  The CIA parts should probably not have been put in the book since they did not add anything to the plot.  If you want a book that has a likeable main character, a good sub-plot, and is fast moving, this is a great summer book to read.  As Mr. Thor stated, “First and foremost I am an entertainer so I want to give people the best white knuckle job I am capable of based on believability.”

:: Comments left behind ::

The thriller, Prayers for the Assassin, is still pretty good. Perhaps especially with the rise of Obama? Nonetheless, it is rather old, in terms of current political thrillers.

Manufactured Crisis. Study it. Seems a popular method now a days.

I have read all his books. They are exciting, and well-written. I will purchase this new book soon!

Elise, that was terrific review! I just finished The Apostle and loved how Mr. Thor emphasizes the need for lower level (village) intervention in Afghanistan before true success can be realized.