Possibly IS a ruse, but it may sell among the bystander nations, further complicating the problems/decisions for the Obummster...
As a propaganda tool, the Russ offer rates an A-.
Putin would have gotten a top mark if the Russ had offered to have "UN Monitors" along, but he only said "International Control", presumably meaning Russia alone...
Earth to Obama: you need some propaganda help now. Putin is making a fool out of you, and he hasn't had his second drink of the day yet...
...the situation is "fluid"...meaning that Val Jarrett is having a fight with someone else in the Obama Administration...
...this in earlier, the ChiComs are reportedly sending a People's Liberation Navy assault ship of some size to Tartus...looks like the Other Side will have more littoral Navy there than we will, hmmmm...wonder if it's going to be a coastal fight if/when the balloon goes up?
The one sure thing is that the Joint Chiefs of Staff are probably even now working on their 62d war plan...
...when the Congress signs on to it with the open-ended Authorization for Use of Military Force.
It will be the USA's war, in Syria, and probably Iran. Russia will be involved too, maybe shooting, maybe not. They can REALLY put the screws to Europe by cutting off most of their natural gas, all in the face of what is predicted to be a very cold Winter.
The bugler sounds the ancient call, and once again, the cavalry company assembles on the parade ground at Fort Constitution. After the usual formation, yelled reports and replies, the Captain orders, "Company, at Ease."
The men take their semi-relaxed pose, knowing that this is not a prelude to the mortal battle they are called to so frequently, but an instructional session from their leader.
Captain: "Men, this Company is the Best of the Best, but the times are a'changin. We defeated and then pacified the Indians, well, maybe except for Two Dogs (the men chuckle at the mention of their current adversary's shortened name), but now it's the Settlers who threaten us. The Edicts from Washington have them in a nasty mood. Back in Washington, our Government believes that we may have to pacify them as we did the Indians."
The Captain pauses. A Corporal comes to attention and yells, "Sir!".
Captain: "Yes, Corporal?"
Corporal: "Sir, we can't fight the Settlers. They're us, sir."
There it is, Readers.135 years have passed since the little vignette I just outlined might have occurred, but the Captain's forethought is just as valid today as I depicted it being then.
We can no longer speculate "when" and "if" the US military might be ordered to engage the civil population, we now MUST consider when and how that engagement will take place.
This Blog now calls on it's readers to begin that consideration, in MY belief that we have passed the point of no return in this Nation, and a civil conflict with the Government is not avoidable, but guaranteed.
This blog does not expect readers to reply with "actionable" suggestions of tactics or materiel planning, but this blog DOES ask you to think about such conflict, because you will be forced to anyway.
The first step to victory is preparation for victory, not just battle.
You don't ever stop a bully by giving the bully a default win.
That's what Secretary of Defense "I hate war" Chuckie Hagel just did. The USAF had been scheduled to test a Minuteman 3 ICBM in a launch from Vandenburg AFB, CA, but the peacenik SecDef just kowtowed to the Nork bully and put off the test.
Technically, the test is probably unnecessary, since the Minuteman 3 is a very reliable missile and we can do non-firing computer simulations with it's component parts that will have better than 90% validity. Maybe this exercise was to have tested the MIRTB, a new multiple warhead that showers the enemy with teddy bears instead of nukes. Who knows. All the Crazy 'Un knows is that we kowtowed to him.
OTOH, maybe we acted upon the suggestion of the nepotistic Park family, which just turned South Korea over to the wife of the former President. This isn't the first time nepotism has happened in So. Korea, either. They are into their Sixth Republic.
So now the bully-boy Kim-'Un gets a notch on his gunstock without firing a shot. Boy, we showed him with those B-2 flybys, didn't we?
I'm having a hard time deciding on Maroon of the Month, since both Chuckie Hagel and Kim Jong-Un are both nominated. Sorry, you pair of idiots, neither of you gets the 15 seconds of fame as Maroon. The office will remain vacant.
...and I'm one-eighth blarney-slinger, raise yourself a toast of Bushmill's (none of that pisswilly Jameson's in THIS house).
I'll have to double back, though, and raise another toast, it will be Beam and Coke, for on this date, 46 years ago, I raised my right hand, took the Oath of Enlistment, and began my USAF career, as an enlisted man, Officer Trainee (OT) in Officer Training School. I got on a plane and flew off to San Antonio, TX to Lackland AFB's Medina Annex, where that school was located, and worked my butt off for the next 89 days, becoming one of the last "90-Day Wonders" on 30 May, 1967. Shortly after my class graduated, the course was lengthened a month, 30 more days to earn those butter-bar insignia of a Second Lieutenant (Ensign for you squids).
So, even though I was to become a commissioned officer, for those 89 days in OTS, I was an enlisted guy. Had I failed the program, I would have been an Airman Basic (E-1) at the point of failure, sent across the road to Boot Camp at Lackland AFB. I passed though, graduating in the bottom third of my class, but I graduated, becoming an O-1. I eventually made O-4 (Major).
Yep, I will celebrate today. Life's a bit bleak around here with the gudwife in DNIMOA status (Duty Not Involving Much of Anything), but I'll have a couple shots anyway, after the Visiting Nurse leaves this afternoon.
Since the Oregon Ducks won the PAC-12 Championship last night in Men's Roundball, I might even watch some "bracketology" to see where they get placed with their automatic berth in the Big Dance. I will have to count the shekels to see if there might be enough to make some modest wagers...
In Part One of this post, we noted why military veterans are feared by "liberal" politicians: fear that their positions of comfort and leadership would evaporate if those pols were to over-reach in the further strengthening of an overly-ambitious Federal Government, and the Veterans were to tell them, "No, that's far enough, you can't go any farther towards erasing the individual rights of liberty our forefathers gave us." Some of us have said that, individually, and in small organizations, but we are ignored or shouted down by the momentum of the movement which exists to make all citizens wards of the Government instead of stewards of their own Liberty. That momentum is mighty, and approaches or may have already exceeded 50% of the citizens of this great Nation. The progenitors of the wardship movement, sometimes known as Socialists, after the model of Government which says that the society has more rights collectively than the individual has, have become well-organized at their task, and ending individual Liberty is within their grasp if they act together in a final push.
That final push may be coming, and it will certainly be preceded by as much citizen disarmament as the Socialists can manage, for the obvious reason.
We aren't afraid to state the obvious here.
The reason the Socialists want us disarmed is that they are somewhat afraid that a revolt against Socialism might develop during the final push to implement the destruction of individual liberties, and they are VERY afraid that if those carrying the revolt have credible arms, their revolt might succeed in restoring all the individual liberties our forefathers intended us to have, and that would mean the end of their trying to convert the very-NOT-Socialist USA into a de-facto Socialist nation.
The disarmament of Veterans has already begun.
For some, it began with the end of their enlistments during this current war against terror in South West Asia (Iraq & Afghanistan). When those Veterans mustered out, or in some cases are still enlisted or serving with Commissions, the military began to make an assumption that they had likely been affected by Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Don't get me wrong, PTSD is a real affliction, and it's definitely job-related to the military (and other stressful occupations), and in one respect, it's good that the military has finally recognized that. Generations of soldiers, sailors and airmen have served, some have been afflicted with PTSD, and had their afflictions ignored by the military. PTSD is not ignored now, and that much is good.
There's a dark side to the initiative within the DOD to handle PTSD though, and that dark side is expressed by the DOD assuming that all veterans who have been in enemy contact (and a few who haven't been) are afflicted until they have demonstrated that they haven't been afflicted. Is the Department of Defense merely trying to leave no PTSD-afflicted veteran behind, or is another purpose at work here?
I maintain it's the latter. The dark side here is that the assumption of PTSD affliction as a normal or usual outcome of having been in contact with the enemy allows the DOD to attach a label to the combat veteran.
That label is "Crazy". No, they don't come out and say the word, "crazy", but they imply it. PTSD in it's moderate-or-worse form is considered a personality disorder, and those with recognized personality disorders may not possess arms in this Nation. Thus does the wannabe-Socialist government try to disarm it's greatest and most-likely potential foe, by calling them "crazy", and requiring them to prove that they're not. Of course, that's a perversion of our legal system, which REQUIRES the assumption of innocence until complete proof of guilt is obtained, but ever since the Virginia Tech University massacre, perpetrated by a deranged person who obtained arms by lying about his mental disease, and the mistaken acquiescence of the NRA in the "solution" to that "problem", persons in treatment for any sort of personality disorders are supposed to have their Second Amendment rights removed until they are certified as sane and responsible and have gone through (a yet-undeveloped) process to certify that. Coupled with the fact that the Forefathers didn't recognize the then-nascent industry of Psychology, under the auspices of which everyone must be labeled as to their deviancy from a norm, Military veterans with PTSD were swept into that net. The forefathers had "insane asylums" in their day, but they could never have imagined the extent of labeling people "crazy" that we do today. The DOD's assumptive diagnosis of PTSD in separating/separated Veterans (their "screening system" for Veterans amounts to that) sweeps far too many Veterans into the "crazy" net.
Lest you forget, the idea of labeling people "crazy" so as to minimize their opposition to Government is not new, and both of the major Communist dictatorships of the past century, namely the former USSR and the People's Republic of China, make or made strong use of the "crazy" label, except they don't do it to disarm the populace (those people are already disarmed), it is used to deny basic liberty. I refer you to the acclaimed docu-novel "The Gulag Archipelago" by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.
Summary: So far, in Part One, we have identified FEAR as being the motivator for the current attempt to at least weaken and probably remove, the Second Amendment and it's Civil Right of self-defense with firearms, and we looked at the application of FEAR as the primary tool to do so.
In this Part Two, we have identified the target of that "fear-and-smear" campaign. That target is we Veterans, who pose the greatest threat to the implementation of Socialism and the further reduction of individual liberties in this Nation. We have examined just how this fear-and-smear tactic is going to go, and it's likely strategic objective, the disarmament of Veterans by claiming that we are all too crazy to possess firearms.
How do we fight this structured campaign of fear, which appears to be working at it's inception? What steps must we take to solidify the Second Amendment and anchor it properly against the tide of disarmament hysteria which is sweeping the Nation after Newtown? Who could best lead this fight? What tactics will work and what tactics won't work? All these questions will be tied up in Part Three, the final Part of this series.
In the past few weeks since the recent mass shootings, and the "dancing in the blood" which inevitably followed those tragic but unstoppable events, this blog has consistently transmitted a singular message, that the Bill of Rights, in all it's ten Amendments, is inviolate.
"Inviolate" means it is a set of standards, rules to govern the behavior of citizens and governments, and, in the case of the Second Amendment (2A) the rule SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED (changed). It is so written as the Law of the Land, and we are, after all, a Nation of Laws. So we have been told, at various times, by all of our Government leaders, including President Barack Hussein Obama.
Why then, since the Right to Keep and Bear arms is so obviously a foundational part of our Law, do so many of our governors attempt to evade it?
There is one human trait which explains this deviancy from our basic Rule of Law. That trait is the emotion of FEAR.
Fear. That emotion which we as humans find most difficult to overcome with logic, reason and sanity.
Fear. That emotion that leaders of evil intent most utilize to gain our compliance to their wills, even if that compliance violates all law and/or logic.
Fear. The one thing that can be relied on to force control of the citizenry even as that control is inadvisable, inappropriate, illogical or illegal.
To defeat the application of fear, we must understand how it starts.
Fear most often begins when accustomed human comforts are threatened. Food aplenty is a comfort, as is shelter from the elements, and above all, some way of securing the money to make these comforts possible within our system of commerce. So, we workfor our "living", another way of saying we offer our talents in exchange for a wage to enable our comforts.
Some of that talent is in the form of leadership, and some of that leadership is in the form of governance, so it happens that some become givers of laws and makers of rules. These govenors are people like us, though, so they strive for comforts like we do. If their access to their accustomed level of comfort is threatened, they become fearful. These governors have been granted or have assumed the power to use fear to govern, so, when their comforts are threatened, they use fear projection against us, so as to end their own personal fears.
Are you still with me? I know this background information in human psychology is difficult, but understanding it is vital to gaining insight into the "gun control issue".
Okay, let's move on then.
Ever since human society has existed, it's members have fought for control of those societies, the fighting mostly being against other, exterior societies. To better fight, professional soldiers are used. These are men (mostly) who have learned the harsh disciplines of war and have learned to personally control how fear affects them. This advanced level of fear-control makes these soldiers relatively immune to the fear-projection antics of the governors who exert control in the non-soldierly, or civilian, part of their societies. This immunity to fear of persons trained and experienced in warfare is a major problem for those governors, because their primary method of control in the making and giving of laws, projection of fear, is apt to be rejected by those trained as soldiers.
The Founders recognized this potential rejection of control by the soldiers, and insisted that the citizens control the military profession in this society. The Founders' wisdom was appropriate and has been followed, so we have not had any excursion of the military outside their civilian-generated orders of performance of duty, in the entire history of this Republic.
Now it all changes.
The present set of governors of this society appears to have decided to change the entire societal model, the model that worked so long and got this society to the place of planetary ascendancy it has achieved, and the model that the Founders put into place with our Constitution. This blog-post will not attempt to discribe that catalog of change that our present governors seek, it will simply say that it exists, and is being put into place as we speak. It appears that these changes are such radical departures from the original intent of the Founders that some resistance to their imposition on the society might be expected.
In the vernacular, the fecal matter is hitting the rotating blades of the wind-machine. We abbreviate this to "SHTF" in this blog.
The condition of SHTF is as perfectly normal to the professional soldier as it is horrifying to the civilian. It is part of the situation that soldiers have been trained to NOT fear. Soldiers function well at their tasks of war in SHTF conditions, unlike the general citizenry, or, for that matter, the governors who started flinging the poo to begin with (the Force of Irony is strong with them).
Were the trained soldiers (we call them "Veterans") to decide, either within the military structure or outside of it, that the governors had gone too far with their departures from the normal modes of society, the soldiers could easily change out the set of governors to one more to their desires. That change is generally known as a "revolution", because it involves inviting the present governors to rotate their sorry asses out of leadership and perhaps out of existance as well.
There are no present signs that the society of military professionals intends to perform such a rotation on the governance, but the governors worry about it anyway, as well they might. Were rotation to begin, there is NOTHING that they could do to stop it. The governors seem to have begun to REALLY worry about rotation, though, because they have just come up with a plan to disable that function of the military veterans within the greater society of civilians: they want to disarm the veterans.
Soldiers fight with weapons, and the most common weapon used to fight with is the individual soldier's rifle. For the past 38 years, that rifle has been the M-16 and variants, now the M-4. There is a civilian counterpart available, known as the AR-15 (a Colt Patent Firearms designation, but universally accepted for copies of the Colt rifle). Many veterans acquire AR-15s either while they're in the military or upon separation from the military. These veterans keep their soldierly skill sharp with rifle practice.
The governors now want to end possession of AR-15s by veterans, and anyone else who might possess them and thereby enable veterans to be armed with them, or perhaps even form "Well-Regulated Militias" as the Second Amendment allows AND directs, under the leadership of some of these professional soldiers. The Well-Regulated Militias, of course, would be immiediately able to replace the fear projection of the present governors and thereby end their changes to the societal order.
To summarize Part One of this discussion, the current problem that our governors have with citizens' possession of soldierly firearms is all about fear, with most of that fear being on the part of the governors, and most of the governors' fears being caused by fear of their loss of control of forcing their objectives. Such loss of control leads to loss of comforts by the governors, and when they are uncomfortable, they want us to be uncomfortable as well, sort of a "spread the wealth" thing.
In Part Two, we'll discuss how our governors have lied to us, have generated fear in the population to aid in their departures from the normal model of society, and how they can be defeated easily without resort to the discomfort of being rotated out of office, even though they may richly deserve such rotation.