We lost Vietnam, we can lose this one too!

Is there a large portion of America thinking that we can simply lose the GWOT?

I am starting to think that the thought process goes as follows:

We lost in Vietnam; we can lose in the Middle East!!!

This thinking can only be understood in terms of ignorance, racism, and anti-Americanism.

Ignorance, because it implies that the war is either not a war or that the war is won. Splitting hairs on where we fight is a sign of ignorance. We do not always define the battlefield - the enemy has a role in that decision. Our major battle now is in the region we call Iraq. I use that term because the most deadly enemy action is not of Iraqis for Iraqis. They are jihadists from foreign lands. In addition, simply because the casualties occur ‘over there’ – much like those on the USS Cole, the African Embassies, the Khobar Towers, the Beirut Marine Barracks, etc… - does not imply that we are not at wa,r nor that we have won. Folks, those casualties imply that we are at war. It’s just that we are fighting it now.

Racist because it implies that the enemy is incapable of causing us harm. This portion of the American citizenry fundamentally believes that these folks are too backward, too savage, and too barbaric to be a viable enemy. They do not respect the enemy, thus they inherently do not respect the people. At its most base, that is racism.

Anti-American because it implies that if the enemy is lucky enough to harm America it will be the ‘other’ that they harm. These people no longer assimilate in the American culture because they do not believe in the fundamentals of modern America. Post-Shock, while they morn the deaths of individuals, they do not morn the destruction of the World Trade Center and Pentagon. They do not morn the aggregate of those whose livelihood placed them in these structures – because as an aggregate, those people are the ‘Little Eichmans’ who oppress us.

They do not think that losing the GWOT will affect them negatively. Actually, losing this conflict will force us to rethink our corupt fundamentals. And, the enemy is not sophisticated enough to harm us while we make these cultural changes.

Unlike the Vietnamese, the Islamofascists have declared war on America. Unlike the Vietnamese, the Islamofascists have routinely murdered Americans for decades. Unlike the Vietnamese, the Islamofascists have attacked our homeland. And, unlike the Vietnamese, Islamic terrorist will view winning this single battle in the Middle East as winning a single battle in the Middle East. If this battle is lost, the war will continue – but it will follow an alternate history similar to one defined by a decisive loss at the Battle of Midway.

Unimpeachable Sources - I

I think I could have reasonably given this post a higher numeric postfix – remembering Rather, Al-Quaquaa, GTMO, Korans, CNN, Foley, Blair, etc… Actually, I think I might be in trouble since my knowledge of Roman Numerals is a bit on the slight side - how do you mark the 23 post? However, since this is the first actual post – but certainly the first of many – I feel compelled to initiate the series at I.

So here goes…

Regarding the Valerie Plame story:

It is apparent that Novak’s unimpeachable sources – remember, it is important to get confirmation of anonymously sourced information – were the journalists Judith Miller of the vaunted New York Times and Matthew Cooper of Time Magazine. A brave journalist sourcing stories from unidentified (anonymous) sources who were journalists. It is important to protect Journalist/Journalist privilege. Such Constitutionally protected privilege is at least as important as that which protects communication between clients and attorneys.

Now, it would be interesting to determine what the media considers unimpeachable sources - outside of other media mavens, of course. Who was the deep throat source for Miller and Cooper?

I'm chillin'.

Journalists are chillin'.

Everybodies a'chillin' now.

The Military Listens to Ted the Swimmer...

Re(1): 'The Fat, Alcoholic Slob That Cried Wolf', Froggy Ruminations, Matthew Heidt

Senator Kennedy, take this to heart:

Kennedy himself and his liberal colleagues in Congress are waging an ill advised war against the United States that is most certainly a quagmire. The DNC is dying. Ted Kennedy is a deadender. He is a suicide bomber but his munitions are low order detonations that destroy the bearer and leave only a mess for bystanders to gawk at.

Uuummmm, in the right way...

Remember, Kennedy supports the troops...
As does Durbin
As does Kerry
As does MoveOn.org
As does International ANSWER
As do all the Congress Critters that funded our military at 2.5% of GDP

The China Syndrome

Re(1): 'China Draws a Line in the Sand...', Tigerhawk, Tigerhawk
Re(2): 'Three Conjectures', The Belmont Club, TC Wretchard

A blog I have seen referenced, but never reviewed, had an interesting post on the Foreign Minister of China stating:

"China will never permit the Islamic Republic of Iran to gain access to nuclear weapons"

"Though China does have certain relations with the Islamic Republic of Iran, it will never agree to permit such a regime to equipped with nuclear weapons."

Tigerhawk effectively asks the question of why it would be in China's interest to strongly make such a declaration. Wouldn't it be in China's interest to poke the US and Russia in the eye. Isn't directly challenging your most important source of oil economically dangerous to say the least.

I think part of the answer can be found in

1. Wrechard's 'Three Conjectures'. and
2. Barnett's 'The Pentagons New Map' and
3. ‘The Clash of Civilizations’

Basically, for all its faults China lives within the civilized core of nations. One can deal with them in reciprocity. Like the Soviet Union, Trust But Verify. Deterrence functions. There is recognized leadership. Measured response can be made.

Once stateless Islamofascist use, or attempt to use, WMD the game is up and the starting gun is fired. There is no point in measured escalation. There is no command element, there is no deterrent effect, the movement is not limited to any state, and there is no confidence in any agreements.

I postulate that if an Islamofascist terrorist group, let’s say al Qaeda, nukes Paris the retribution will not be limited to coming from France, Europe, and/or even America. Even if the west proves soft and pliable, it is at least somewhat likely that China and Russia will become involved to the extreme. Actually, more than likely.

For Whom the Bell Tolls

Re(1): 'Did Lucy Ramerez Find the Downing Street Memos', CaptainsQuartersBlog, Captain Ed
Re(2): 'Memos Show Brittish Concern Over Iraq Plans', AP, Thomas Wagner

To the Democrat/Media Party,

The bell tolls for thee...

The 'Times of London' reporter Mike Smith skillfully (honestly??? yuk, yuk) retyped the smoking gun documents those legions of the Left call 'THE DOWNING STREET MEMOS' onto plain paper to protect his anonymous source. He then destroys the originals.

Brilliant

With the American public showing a whopping 19% confidence level in your field of expertise you destroy your evidence.

Maybe you should have notified the Randi Rhodent (Err America ranter) and Congressman Conyers of this little problem before they jumped into their Birkenstocks and Burlap Sacks for their little march on Washington - with tens of other people.

That impeachment ‘hearing’ is funnier by the second. No real smoking gun. Potentially phony documents. anti-Semitic rants. Form Letters of Condemnation. Almost tens of people on the march. And some of the Left’s most qualified luminaries as witnesses.

Careers are made when you accuse based on retyped copies of reasonable facsimiles of fairly clear copies of fourth party interpretations of 'secret' meetings. Smith's career just shifted into overdrive - clunk, clank, drag, drip...

Mr. Wagner (AP Reporter in linked source story). I think the retyping of the memos show concern over the accuracy of the memos. I think I am concerned that you did not pick this up. I think I am concerned about my unimpeachable sources. I think I will put your byline on my Spam News Service filter. Stupid. Very Stupid.

The Left asks how we lost, we have another question

Re(1): 'By Other Means 3', The Belmont Club, T.C. Wretchard
Re(2): 'Walking the Line', Michael Yon: Online Magazine, Michael Yon

The Left asks how we could have possibly lost the War on Terror - knowing intrinsically that we have lost. See, we are still fighting!!!

But another question, one far more important, and one far less infantile presents itself:

How do we know when we have won???

This is also an important question.

Is the answer going to be we will know victory when we see it??? I can accept that – I guess.

UPDATE:

Michael Yon:

It's important to talk with Generals: they are all very smart or they wouldn't
be Generals, but a General says what he wants people to hear, and sometimes they
do lay it on pretty thick. I wanted to meet soldiers. Combat soldiers in
particular. And combat soldiers before, during and after combat operations.
That's the only place to figure out who is winning and losing this war. "Winning"
meaning the Iraqis embrace and protect their freedom and most
of our folks come home. Losing meaning something other
than this, up to and including to any dreaded stasis.

Faster, Please...

re(1): 'By Other Men 2', The Belmont Club, TC Wretchard

Geographically, spiritually, financially, and logistically the axis of terror has been split on the bisect of Iraq and Afghanistan. Aggressive terrorists and clans must now reside in regions that once exported terror – not incorporated it.

Our current conflict is similar to those fought by the Roman Republic against border barbarians. Rome would divide and conqueror – often without overt military action. Similarly, our ‘counsels’ can travel the world and make things happen as a result of ‘saying what I mean, and meaning what I say’ diplomacy.

Faster, Please…
Syria is on the ropes. Its regime based on a strong man that is no longer such a strong man. Iraqi action could push the issue - and I mean Iraqi action.

Iran is militarily, diplomatically, and culturally vulnerable. If Europe and Japan could be coerced into purchasing oil from a resurgent Iraq (whose production is increasing) than Iran is in a world of sh*t. This coercion could take the form of an overt or nuisance blockade. The UN will soon back this – and Iran is not in a position to break the blockade. We have to get Iraqi oil production up to compensate Europe and Japan for the loss of Iranian production. Let China try to break the UN sanctions that are to come.

Saudi Arabia is the biggest danger long term. They can collapse, but have no structure to sustain order. They are not necessarily a direct enemy, but they are a weak and unbalanced player in our rear. They have also spent decades supporting terror – when it was possible to direct it outwards. It is now directed inwards.

Egypt can recover. It did not have the oil resources to isolate itself.

In all cases, excepting Iran, we want the people in the region making the first move. Iran must be dealt with directly through diplomacy and trade (blockade).

And let us not forget that (somehow, just somehow) Hussein will be in court in July/September. Ahhhh, the joy of watching a dictator (much like their own) get convicted of ‘crimes against humanity’ – and by Iraqis. It might also bump up Coalition moral.

Faster Please… But right now we have to wait…

Media: You are a business too!!!

re(1): 'The MSM isn’t screwing soldiers, but future subscribers', MediaSlander, June 11,2005

I think the hope was that the embeds would come back and fight an internal struggle with the 60’s and 70’s era ‘reporters’ trolling about for bad news. Young reporters embedded into military units had to get a feel for what we were doing and why we were doing it. If their voice is heard, how can it be said that we were not expecting WMD.

The problem is that these reporters are not embedded into units while fighting the terrorist led insurgency – it is too difficult to secure them from danger. Thus, the established ‘Watergate’ reporters with the big names are taking up residence in the Green Zone and reporting on noises in the night.

I still think there is hope for an insurgency in the halls of the media. However, like the GWOT, it will be a long and protracted war.

Helping their hand will be the:

1. Ineffectiveness of the insurgency
2. Expansion of consensual governance in the region
3. and the economic factors noted in your post and validated by the election
   

I, for one, dumped many of my subscriptions based on concepts provided in the post. I reiterate those reasons at least quarterly when solicited for subscriptions. Soon, business interests will demand that our Watergate media listen to their customers. We demand news and opinion – not just opinion. And I want my news based on named sources. And I want documents released in context of all the other documents and discussions occurring at the time.

Sod Off, Coalition of the Un-Willing

re(1): Piss and Wind, The Spectator,

Mark Steyn

But sure, go ahead, close Gitmo and wait for the torrent of rave reviews — right after the complaints that it is culturally insensitive to rebuild the World Trade Center when it’s the burial site of ten devout Muslim flying enthusiasts.

and

As I’ve said before, the jihad’s pretty much a busted flush. I was asked the other day what I thought about the rumours of al-Zarkawi’s death, and I shrugged. If he’s still alive, the media will say: ah-ha, the mastermind has eluded Bush and lives to fight again. If he’s dead, the media will say: now he’s a legendary martyr whose death will rally thousands of young men to the cause. But the truth is that thousands aren’t being rallied to the cause, and the title of Zarkawi’s latest pep talk — ‘Killing of Muslims is justified’ — sums up why. Four years ago, signing on with al-Qa’eda offered the prospect of taking out the Pentagon. Now all they do is kill fellow Muslims in the Middle East. Not the same appeal. As I’ve said before, the jihad’s pretty much a busted flush. I was asked the other day what I thought about the rumours of al-Zarkawi’s death, and I shrugged. If he’s still alive, the media will say: ah-ha, the mastermind has eluded Bush and lives to fight again. If he’s dead, the media will say: now he’s a legendary martyr whose death will rally thousands of young men to the cause. But the truth is that thousands aren’t being rallied to the cause, and the title of Zarkawi’s latest pep talk — ‘Killing of Muslims is justified’ — sums up why. Four years ago, signing on with al-Qa’eda offered the prospect of taking out the Pentagon. Now all they do is kill fellow Muslims in the Middle East. Not the same appeal.

Read the whole article - well worth the registration

By the way, who do you think is winning.

Those Head Choppin, Suicide Murderin, Runnin and Rantin Islamofascists

or

The Coalition of the Un-Willing

or

America and the Coalition of the Willing

News Flash: Greenspan wants educated workforce...

Nothing Better…

Ever spend an hour watching Alan Greenspan teach Libs a free-market economics class…

Enjoyable, thoroughly enjoyable…

So calm. So patient. Answering the same Lib questions over and over again… Remember folks:
There are no stupid questions…
There are no stupid questions…
There are no stupid questions…

I forgot just how wonderful the Soviet 5-year plans were. Just how successful. And he even dropped the Russian term for them – sorry, already forgotten.

Well, howdy doody, Mr. Greenspan just wants our kids lernin… I don’t think he be talkin about lernin eubonics, gender studies, Marxist Economics, conflict resolution, gay studies… Me thinks he might want me to read and write a might better, and add and subtract them number thangies…

I get the impression he is not overly impressed with our current education programs…

Arianna, the web never lies...

re(1): 'Making $87M, Paying Same Percent Income, Medicare, Soc. Sec. Taxes as Those Making $50,000', NYT via HuffingtonPost, David Kay Johnston

For those that may want to see the excised post:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/thenewswire/archive/2005/06/making-87m-paying-same-pe.html

Please note the comments (especially the last one) by Thomas Phillips.

Nice, very nice...

I’m proud of myself today…

re(1): 'Making $87M, Paying Same Percent Income, Medicare, Soc. Sec. Taxes as Those Making $50,000', NYT via HuffingtonPost, David Kay Johnston

I looked at the HuffingtonPost today - actually a very attractive and well laid out site. I was going to lob a scud here and tell the world that most of her conservative guest writers don’t seem to be writing much when I came across the NYT slop about the poor paying the same income tax at the super wealthy…

Only a Lib would actually link to this article… Yuk, yuk…

Here are the flaws:
It used Year 2000 (Y2K) data to prove its point
It blames the BusHitler tax cuts for increasing the income gap
The headline implies that a chump like me pays the same tax as a chump like Bill Gates.

Uuuuummmmm, Arrreaaaaannnnnnna - and the mensas at the NYT:
Year 2000 taxes were still using President Clinton’s regulations.
The first BusHitler tax cut (a whopping $300 per dependent) occurred in 2001.
The major tax cuts were enacted for the 2003 tax year…
And the super rich got a massive 1.2% reduction in the upper income tax bracket.

Why am I proud.

I wrote two well reasoned posts on her site and another a bit smarmier. I guess reminding the author of ‘Pigs at the Trough’ that she partaked in some rather aggressive tax avoidance in the recent past was a bit over the top. Arianna, you paid NO federal income tax in 2002 and only $700 in California State income tax. Arianna, don’t run for public office on a populist message when you pay your tax attorneys more than most pay in taxes. Instead, consider picking up a few pounds and pay into the Democratic Machine…

Err America advertises Jerry Springer as…

The Voice of Reason…

Uuuummmm, yeah. That’s right. The first thought that popped in my head. I shall not pick the low hanging fruit – spending my time finding web videos of him at his most reasonable. My guess is that there are some out there – out there – out there…

Actually, to his credit he is a much better host than the ‘Randy Rhodent’. He allows his conservative callers to eat his lunch. Often. Very Often. Very, very often. Then he concedes… When your subject revolves around Bush unilaterally, and uniquely, bombing sites in Iraq prior to Iraqi Freedom than you are going to get spanked. Uuuummm, Jerry, do you remember the 'No Fly Zones', the multiple Tomahawk missile strikes, and the arming of the Kurds?

My guess is that Mr. Springer will find himself to be a ‘9/11 Democrat’ before the year is up. He listens enough to know his arguments – forged in titanic battles against other daytime television stars and those mensa guests of his – are weak, and getting weaker. I just heard two callers destroy him on the Err. He is smart enough, and probably strong enough, to make the transition from Birkenstocks and burlap sacks to getting mugged onstage at college campuses.

Here’s to hoping that his audience remains small before the transition. It will be better for his long term career!

The Conservative Saeculum - Avoiding Flameout

re(1): 'The Conservative Saeculum', Roger Bogh, BoghieOnYourSix
re(2): 'The Conservative Saeculum - Future Flameout', Roger Bogh, BoghieOnYourSix

Uuuuuummmmm, yeah :-(

I included the nomination of John Bolton in my list pointing toward a Conservative saeculum (a long life trend crossing generations). That turned out to be more problematic than expected - due to the admitted ignorance of Senator Voinavich.

I did not include floor votes on President Bush's nominees. Just look at this herd of cats:

• McCain
• Chaffee
• Collins
• Snowe

And some odd ones:

• Warner
• Graham
• DeWine

I have no confidence that the top list of grandees will ever lean center right or vote with the Party on Party votes. To them, President Bush has a responsibility to meet individually, discuss all 220 nominations, and come to a consensus that satisfies 101 individuals – or at least themselves. The bottom list is just Senators being cranky. You can count on at least three wobblies on any vote.

As the centrist Chris Matthews opines: 'Again, the Maveric Wins...' (McCain)
As the centrist Chris Matthews opines: 'The Master of the Compromise...' (McCain)

John McCain predicts fewer filibusters. Gee, what a deal. And the institution of the Senate won. He unknowingly kills any future for Frist.

Yea, Susan Collins is very happy. She can get back to doing the business of the country. Like getting some milk subsidy through... Extrodinary Circumstances is a very high bar - yup, but they crossed it before. Anybody tell you that a path taken is a path known. Susan, did anyone inform you that the business of the country might, just might, be to figure out how to deal with judicial nominations? Did your short term 'solution' resolve the 20 year problem?

Lincoln, this is not yours fathers Senate. I hope you do not mind me donating to anyone who runs against you. I'll make a compromise: I will not send money to any terrorist on the watch list that may run against you. Anyone else gets my cash. I think the stress of high office is affecting the time spent with your family. You will thank me later.

Golly, I’m sure glad the seven illuminati listed above got together with Robert Byrd to get the business of the country going again. Couldn't wait...

By The Way Northeast. Bye Bye... We don't need your trash in the Senate or House.

UPDATE: Does anybody else feel like McCain just attempted a coup in the Senate? If the center holds than he is the power broker. There is no hammer in the Senate leadership.

UPDATE: If the center holds, we will replace conservative Supreme Court justices with milquetoast Supreme Court justices. Not a good thing. How silly will it look to create an unwritten aggreement to replace justices purely via ideology.

Media: Corroborate or Collaborate

Now that the media slime have dredged up three year old stories (about human turds that are being prosecuted no less) I think a ribald cheer should go out to tell the media to be responsible:

Corroborate or Collaborate

Media slugs, validate and justify your trash or accept that you are collaborating with the enemy. Your unthinking, reactionary antics do not make you 'unpatriotic', rather they are informing your customer base that you are either stupid or painfully biased.

NEWSWEEK!!!

While everyone is ranting about the report, the reporter, and the editors – rightfully so – I want the source outed…

Why?

I no longer trust the media

I will never trusted anonymous sources.

I want to know if the trusted source is an operative.

I want to know what an unimpeachable source means to the MSM.

I am tired of major media using unnamed sources as their only backing for articles.


If the trusted, anonymous, qualified, senior source turns out to be some ignorant, ideological, brain dead, junior operative - or vaunted senior Senator from somewhere - I think I have the right to know. NOW. Since I cannot trust the media to vet their sources and their stories, I must be able to do it.

The Ultimate Desecration of the Quran

Re(1); 'Iraqi leader's Koran 'written in blood'', BBC News Online

Saddam had a Quran written in his own blood…

"My life has been full of dangers in which I should have lost a lot of
blood...but since I have bled only a little, I asked somebody to write God's
words with my blood in gratitude," President Saddam Hussein said in a letter
published in the official media.

Hhhhhmmmm

Hhhhhhhhhhhhhmmmm…

Iraq Civilian Casualties of War...

Civilian Casualties in Iraq

Re(1): ‘Iraq’s Dead Counted’, Tim Blair, www.TimBlair.net
Re(2): ‘Iraq Living Conditions Survey 2004’, UN Report
Re(3): ‘Mortality before and after the 2003 invasion of Iraq: cluster sample survey’, The Lancet, Les Roberts, Riyadh Lafta, Richard Garfield, Jamal Khudhairi, Gilbert Burnham
Re(4): http://www.iraqbodycount.net/

Please Review and make your own decision (hat tip: Tim Blair):

Lancet Study Findings Summary:

Findings: The risk of death was estimated to be 2·5-fold (95% CI 1·6–4·2) higher after the invasion when compared with the preinvasion period. Two-thirds of all violent deaths were reported in one cluster in the city of Falluja. If we exclude the Falluja data, the risk of death is 1·5-fold (1·1–2·3) higher after the invasion. We estimate that 98 000 more deaths than expected (8000–194 000) happened after the invasion outside of Falluja and far more if the outlier Falluja cluster is included. The major causes of death before the invasion were myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular accidents, and other chronic disorders whereas after the invasion violence was the primary cause of death. Violent deaths were widespread, reported in 15 of 33 clusters, and were mainly attributed to coalition forces. Most individuals reportedly killed by coalition forces were women and children. The risk of death from violence in the period after the invasion was 58 times higher (95% CI 8·1–419) than in the period before the war.

Interpretation: Making conservative assumptions, we think that about 100 000 excess deaths or more have happened since the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Violence accounted for most of the excess deaths and air strikes from coalition forces accounted for most violent deaths. We have shown that collection of public-health information is possible even during periods of extreme violence. Our results need further verification and should lead to changes to reduce noncombatant deaths from air strikes.

Iraq Living Conditions Survey 2004, War-related deaths – between 18,000 and 29,000
The number of deaths of civilians and military personnel in Iraq in the aftermath of the 2003 invasion is another set of figures that have raised controversy. The ILCS data indicates 24,000 deaths, with a 95 percent confidence interval from 18,000 to 29,000 deaths. The confidence interval was estimated using a linearisation technique (using SPSS Complex Samples, version 12).


IraqBodyCount
The website “Iraq Body Count” (http://www.iraqbodycount.net/) estimates that between 14,619 and 16,804 deaths have occurred between the beginning of 2003 and 7 December 2004 (IBC 2004).

Science Sucks:
For those of you who wasted lots of ink defending the Lancet Study in Matthew Yglesias’ and other left and left of center sites – Who do you want to believe?

1. The Lancet Study which estimates a civilian casualty rate in Iraq of between 8,000 and 194,000 with a 95% certainty. Naturally, you assumed the bell curve would demonstrate that the most likely estimate was about 98,000.
   
2. The UN study which estimates a civilian casualty rate in Iraq of between 18,000 and 29,000 with the same 95% certainty. The UN estimate implies a most likely estimate of 24,000 civilian casualties.
   
3. The IraqBodyCount website which documents a casualty rate in Iraq of between 14,619 and 16,804 deaths for the same approximate timeline.

Please note, both the UN and IraqBodyCount casualty count estimates fit within the Lancet Study with a 95% certainty. Yuk, yuk…

By The Way, Saddam Hussein’s finely oiled murder machine would have killed about 30,000 civilians within the same approximate timeline. And that killing would never have ceased or been reduced. And that killing was sanctioned by the state and implicitly accepted by the isolationists, the burlap sack and Birkenstock crowd, and the real politic elites.

By now an additional 70,000 folks would have been euthanized and carefully placed in ditches and under mosque sidewalks for a proper Islamic burial!!!

Maybe, after the honorable French, Germans, and Russians removed the sanctions that were killing all the children in Iraq, Saddam Hussein would have used his enormous oil wealth for the benefit of mankind. Or maybe he would have reconstituted his other petrochemical and nuclear programs…

Base Realignment...

Re(1): BRAC 2005 Closure and Realignment Impacts by State

While everyone is looking at the Congressional and Senatorial winners and losers, I think a more comprehensive review illustrates some other (and potentially more) important patterns:

132 Reserve Centers are CLOSED

• 3,650 jobs were lost in closed (132) Reserve Centers
• 1,327 jobs were lost in realigned (9) Reserve Centers
• 676 jobs were created in gained (9) Reserve Centers

So the DOD Reserve Force lost 4,301 jobs of the 14,684 total lost positions (30%).

Question: How confident is the DOD and the administration in our Reserve Force?

My guess is that we will see a comparable increase in the active duty force structure.

Scud Alert:
And yes, I do have a problem with folks being recruited directly into the reserves. The Army is the biggest culprit in recruiting folks who want to join the job corps and go on camping trips every other month or so – and don’t forget the extra pay check. Surprise, Army recruiting is being clobbered – the campers want the paycheck, but not the work. Now the Army wants to recruit folks for 15 month stints – probably as direct recruit reserves. This is not a good idea.

Hey Army, smell the roses!!!
Shoomaker
Pace
Force Reductions

Tomorrows Brilliant Err America Analysis of the speech...

Just a preview...

Let us carefully look at the following quote from President Bush's long speech about appeasement, the march of freedom, and why we fight:

Successful democracies will be defined by a broader ideal of citizenship -- based on shared principles, shared responsibilities, and respect for all. For my own country, the process of becoming a mature, multi-ethnic democracy was lengthy and violent. Our journey from national independence to equal injustice [sic] included the enslavement of millions, and a four-year civil war. Even after slavery ended, a century passed before an oppressed minority was guaranteed equal rights.

For you libs and Err America listeners: sic means a typographical or verbal error that might be construed as ignorance of/or in contradiction to the context. If you harp on the use of 'injustice' when the context definitely implies the word 'justice' than you will further erode your already miniscule credibility. Err America listeners: You can start the long recovery from your adiction by reading and/or listening to the speech - and speak highly of it!!!