Aircraft Carrier Vs. Cruise Missile #23

From Martin Sieff at the UPI:

The Russian-built and designed Sunburn -- known by the Chinese
as the Hai Ying or Sea Eagle HY2 -- in particular is designed to be a U.S.
carrier killer. It can fly at Mach 2.5, or two and half times the speed of sound
-- around 1,700 miles per hour carrying an almost 500-pound warhead. And it can
deliver a tactical nuclear weapon.

Writing in Defense Review on Nov. 20, 2006, respected defense
analyst David Crane also noted a report in Aviation Week that China was also
"developing a new high-speed cruise missile called Anjian -- 'Dark Sword.'"
"From the picture we've seen of it, Anjian also looks very stealthy, i.e., it
looks like it utilizes stealth technology. If China's already perfected this
item, it would be another weapon that our Navy can't combat," Crane
warned.Crane's warnings appear justified. U.S. nuclear aircraft carriers, for
all their size, resemble battlecruisers more than battleships in their high
speed, great offensive armaments and most of all lack of armor plate protection.
Armor plate went out of fashion after World War II among naval designers around
the world, and it has never come back into fashion. However, the nuclear
reactors that power U.S. super carriers would be the modern equivalent of the
Hood's inadequately protected ammunition, or powder magazines. And the new
Russian-designed supersonic anti-ship missiles would be the equivalent of the
Bismarck's 15-inch naval guns.

Who Needed the Arrow?

The Canadians are a might touchy over their beloved but ultimately doomed Avro Arrow jet interceptor, likely the best and most costly warplane of the 1950's. Here's another view that declares the demise of the $12 million fighter a plus for the country's armed forces:

By astute bargaining, Pearkes obtained almost new supersonic
interceptors, with triple the Arrow's range, for $750,000 each, plus the
takeover of all Canadian DEW line radar sites built and operated by the U.S. The
supersonic Voodoo covered both continental defence and the surveillance of
Soviet long-range aircraft.
The displaced Avro workers were soon rehired by
Canadair to produce new CF-104 Starfighters at a savings of nine Starfighters
for each Arrow. These Starfighters countered the threat of a Soviet nuclear and
land attack in Europe.
Each of the eight Arrows cancelled paid for one new
gas-turbine destroyer to counter the Soviet submarines.
A new Canadian specialty, submarine hunting, formed around the
light carrier Bonaventure and the new high-speed destroyers. During the Cuban
missile crisis in October 1962, a renewed
Canadian fleet secured the North
Atlantic convoy routes.

Still, it would have been pretty cool, and America might have bought a few as well. Perish the thought!

Two Views of the Defense Budget

Here's Elizabeth Dole writing in the Washington Times:

What nation's Air Force is flying aircraft more than 50 years old?
What nation's Navy has the smallest fleet since before World War II? And what
nation's military transports are banned from the airspace of a South American
country because they are notoriously unreliable? Most Americans would be shocked
to learn the answer is none other than the United States.

While Philip Carter plus Fred Kaplan think they know How to fix the US military:

...the Air Force's No. 1 priority today is to build as many F-22 fighter planes as it can, at a cost of
hundreds of billions of dollars—even though they would play no role in any
foreseeable war over the next two decades. One way to wean them off such weapons
is to build up (and put more money into) other Air Force missions—for example,
cargo-transport planes (to carry ground forces and their gear),
close-air-support planes (to fire shells or drop bombs in support of troops on
the ground), or to provide security for bases (many Air Force personnel have
been reassigned to do just that). The defense secretary could announce that the
service's continued share of the budget depends on boosting the importance of
those missions.

Liberals often enjoy cutting the military's budget with little thought of its effect on our National Security. Likewise do conservatives call for more defense dollars, with little regard whether the money is spent wisely. This is Mrs. Dole's attitude with her call for up to 4% of our GNP spent on the defense budget. Yet we see too often with the rising cost of new weapons, however much money we throw at this burgeoning colossus, we seem to get fewer weapons for our money, in other words, far less bang for our bucks!

Taking Money From Hollywood

Tinsel Town anti-war firms, which average about $5 million to make, are tanking at the box office. Inexpensive documentaries made by filmmakers actually in the warzone are far cheaper and praise the sacrifices of our troops. Here's what we all can do to help:

Are you willing to take on Hollywood and do something about the
ongoing flood of anti-war propaganda films?If you are, here is what you can
do:
If you can afford to, buy a DVD .
If you are a blogger, blog about the movie.
If you are a radio show
host, talk about the movie.
If you listen to local talk shows, call up and
tell the screener/producer about the movie. (I already do a lot of shows,
but there is no such thing as too many shows.)
If you are a blog reader,
email your favorite bloggers about the movie. Or, email your favorite
columnist/reporter about the movie.
My advertising budget is $0. We've
already ran out of money twice while making the movie.I depend on the kindness of others to help promote the movie .I am
asking for your help. I can make a movie, but it takes people like you to
spread the word so people know it exists.

Some of these DVDs look pretty good!

Fleet Size Matters

The US Navy is struggling to maintain an adequate size fleet, while fighting a War on Terror and keeping guard on the world's sealanes against future threats. This article from the US Navy League sums up this dire need:

Little more than 13 years ago, with the public release of the
U.S. Maritime Strategy, then-Secretary of the Navy John F. Lehman Jr.
effectively argued that a 600-ship Navy was necessary to meet a U.S.
national-security requirement for maritime superiority. Remarkably, the Navy
today is on the threshold of falling be-low 300 ships--the smallest fleet since
1931. If increased ship-construction funding does not become part of the current
Future-Years Defense Plan, the Navy's force structure inevitably will decline
below the level specified in the 1997 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) issued by the
Department of Defense (DOD)...
There is a real risk under this scenario that
the burden of extended deployments and inadequate resources will fall on the
backs of individual Sailors and Marines--repeating the debacle of the U.S. military's hollow force of
the 1970s. Worrisome world events continue apace to present new and disturbing
national-security risks--from the Korean peninsula to the Taiwan Strait and
beyond to the Indian subcontinent, Southwest Asia, and the Balkans. On average,
roughly 50 percent of the U.S. Navy's active fleet is underway on any given day,
and more than a third is forward-deployed.

I agree with the threat and the need for an increased shipbuilding. How we get there is a different matter:

The U.S. Navy's operations of the past several years demonstrate
that a fleet of approximately 330 ships--including at least 12 carrier battle
groups, 12 amphibious ready groups, 107 surface combatants, and 65 attack
submarines--would be the valid baseline for a Navy able to accomplish its
present engagement and warfighting missions.

One of the few issues my friend Galrahn and I agree, is that the USN places too much emphasis on battle force ships, not enough on the essential littoral mission which we find ourselves contending with. In the Middle Eastern conflict, the Navy's principle role has been interdicting terrorist pirates on the high seas, and occasionally providing close air support for the ground troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. Only the Navy can do the former mission, while the Air Force, Marines, and even Army aircraft can contend with the latter mission well enough.

The fleet composition mentioned above looks pretty good on paper, in a strictly Mahanian, Cold War view. The writers contend only about 50 new ships will solve the world-wide strain on our sea services, while my own idea is that a bare minimum of 450 will do. I've mentioned before that an All Submarine Navy could carry out all the battle force and sea control duties currently performed by vulnerable and too costly surface battleships, or in other words, the entire force structure of 330 ships from the article.

About 150 submarines of various composition such as SSGNs, attack subs, and even small conventional littoral subs would maintain our sea dominance for decades. Meanwhile, the show the flag, amphibious missions, and anti-piracy duties can be carried out by small, inexpensive, and expendable littoral ships. Not the too costly, too big, and too complicated Littoral Combat Ship currently facing constant delays, but warships bought off the shelf, like the Austal ferries used successfully in Operation Iraqi Freedom, and even European designed stealth boats.

Until the Navy leadership and its supporters get over their obsession with fighting hi-tech Industrial Age warfare, however, we may pretty soon pine for the days when we had even a 280 ship Navy!

Thanks to Phelps Hobart of Sea Power Ambassador for the article!

Sen. Graham on the Hollow Air Force

I've been pestering Senator Lindsey Graham, a USAF reservist and member of the Senate Armed Services and Veterans Affairs Committee, on the block aging of almost the entire complement of USAF aircraft. Below is his response via snail mail to yours truly:

"As the Air Force increases the duration and number of combat
missions, it is important we ensure that we can quickly replace worn out
materiel and spare parts. The 2009 Department of Defense (DoD) budget request by
the President includes $35.9 billion for the Air Force for Operation and
Maintenance. I am pleased the budget request includes $12.68 billion in
additional funding for procurement of new aircraft. For example, the request
includes $3.61 billion for 20 F-22A aircraft and $1.67 billion for 8 F-35
aircraft. Although I am pleased by this funding increase, I understand your
concerns as to the type of aircraft we are purchasing..."

Recently, you may recall, the USAF grounded over 400 of its frontline and over-worked F-15 fighters because of advanced aging. A total of 28 new fighters, however their advanced new stealth and abilities to combat future air defense threats, hardly begins to replace so many tried and true warplanes, not to mention the 1000+ F-16s which themselves are at an advanced stage of wear and tear. His last statement "I understand your concerns as to the type of aircraft we are purchasing" appears to me that even the Senator realizes his arguments for a handful of superfighters to supersede our mighty and tested aerial armada, are rather weak.

Is it McCain/Romney?

I sure hope so. What a ticket! From the AP:

In a show of Republican unity, one-time bitter foes John McCain and
Mitt Romney raised money and campaigned together Thursday for a single goal -
getting McCain elected president.
"We are united. Now our job is to energize
our party," the Arizona senator said in an airport hangar, flanked by Romney and
Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr., an early McCain supporter. Both have been mentioned
as potential vice presidential picks, and McCain praised each.
Romney lauded
McCain and promised to do all he can to help, saying: "He is a man who is proven
and tested" and without question the right man to be president.

Reading the article, it seems all the old campaign animosities are set aside for the good of the Party. Also, McCain's lastest video is totally awesome!!!

Iraqis for McCain

If they can't have Petraeus as President, that is! Kathleen Parker interviews a native journalist Mayada al-Askari:

By April 2007, Mayada was critical of the Democrats and their
promises to bring the troops home. Should that happen, she wrote, America "will
leave Iraq in its current devastated state, and who knows what will happen in
the area, and everything inside this red-hot region."
Her contradictory
responses to my continuous questions echoed the debate that has divided this
country the past five years. A clear answer has never been easy to find.
That
is no longer the case, in Mayada's view. She gives credit to Petraeus, whom she
describes as "intelligent and calm, set on winning hearts and souls."
Today
she insists that Iraqis who are not Baathist hope that McCain wins the election
for one simple reason: "The man knows the job that has to be done in Iraq. If
the U.S. pulls out of Iraq now or anytime soon, then that will mean one thing:
al-Qaeda won the war."

It's interesting that as many Americans wish to withdraw from the affairs of the world, or at least turn over much of our responsibilities to UN "Peacekeepers", overseas nations are very interested in the outcome of our Presidential elections. Though they may often resent the US big brother, as yet there seems to be no alternative other than anarchy.

Further Thoughts on the 2008 Race

John McCain is sitting pretty, while the Democrat candidates Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton continue their war of words. Meanwhile, the Maverick is visiting foreign dignitaries, making major speeches on top issues, garnering welcome endorsements, all the while looking very presidential these days.

"Democrat Civil War" was the headline on MSNBC yesterday morning. It's what we are all thinking but better when the Left considers itself in such straits. Perhaps they should also consider pulling out of another tough fight and leave the hard work to the adults on the Right.

Barack Hussein Obama lectures us all on race relations, while refusing to disavow his 20 year relationship with his hate-spouting pastor, Jeremiah Wright. His attitude seems to be "Racism is OK for me, but not for thee."



"Impossible for Hillary to win" considering the delegate count, is the new mantra for the Press. Aren't they tired of always being wrong, since we've heard the same talking point with each new Democrat Primary, as they continue to prop up their chosen nominee Obama. Maybe the media considers a falsehood told long enough by them will eventually become the truth.

In spite of her politics and lineage, Chelsea Clinton is my new hero with her derogatory attitude towards the Press. "None of your business" was a recent response to a prying questioner concerning her mother and the Monica Lewinsky scandal of the past decade. The Media claim they speak for the people when they berate and defame our elected officials and private citizens, but it is clear they have long ago abandoned public service for their own agenda.

Should the Press Pick the President?

Concerning the recent Obama/Wright controversy, the Mainsteam Media's knee-jerk reaction in defense of their chosen candidate for the 2008 White House is another sign the Press has already made up the public's mind on the nominee.

To this worry we can add a recent poll that reveals only 6% of nationwide journalists consider themselves conservative, while 36% of the public contend themselves so. What his all means is a huge proportion of America's populace is grossly unrepresented by a liberal worldview on television, radio, motion pictures, and the printed news. How then can freedom and the diversity of ideas survive in such an unbalanced environment of Media tyranny?

I am against any type of government imposed "Fairness Doctrine", whose effect seems to enforce even more Left-wind dogma on an unwilling public. It may be essential however, for Congress to enforce a breakup of these Media conglomerates, much as they so often do with such glee to past business corporations, like AT&T and Microsoft.

A "balkanization" of the news , much like what is ongoing on the Internet, would go beyond the Fairness Doctrine, allowing a greater understanding of the world, and perhaps enforce a more helpful debate to the problems our nation faces. While it appears the Market may be taking care of this anyway, as ratings for the old MSM seems to be steadily tanking, there is the possibility that a grateful President Obama might come to their rescue with speech stifling legislation, if the Press' goal is attained.

Tanks, But No Tanks pt. 3

There seems to be a consensus in the Pentagon that once the Iraq Insurgency is over and the street by street fighting concluded, the massive influx of wheeled armored fighting vehicles will no longer be needed. My own view is that the new Strykers, MRAPs, and uparmored Humvees will come into their own in the post-war, post tank era.

To a great extent the tank has always been dependent on infantry for its celebrated succeses. Only against a very timid and untrained foe should armor ever operate without a defensive shield of foot soldiers to screen it from anti-tank weapons in the form of guided rockets or artillery. Such reckless actions have been common in history though, as with the British versus the Italians in winter of 1940/1941 and the Israelis versus the the Arabs in several conflicts.

When a determined infantry force decides to make a stand however, the results can often be devastating against unescorted armor. Proof of this can be gleamed from the cavalry-like charges in the Western Desert by the British 8th Army against the firesome German "88" cannon in World War 2, and later as General Montgomery attempted to break the Normandy stalemate and preserve his scarce ranks of foot soldiers. In such encounters, hundreds of English armor was lost, often in a single battle.

During the 1973 Yom Kippur War between Egypt and Israel, a similar fate befell the latter's armor when faced with the new antitank missiles supplied by the Soviets. Jewish over-confidence saw large groups of its previously invicnible chariots massacred by the much maligned Arab forces, without waiting for the essential infantry. More cautious tactics were restored barely in time, and not before the once unbeatable Israeli Army received a rude awakening.

The new wheeled tanks currently in action on the Iraqi and Afghanistan Fronts are the best of both worlds. They come with a minimum of armor protection, and make up for this perceived loss with high speeds and stealthy quietness. Best of all, they come with their own infantry, especially geared for vehicle protection but also with the ability to seize and hold territory. Unshackled from the excessive blast protection required in urban warfare, such vehicles might also utilize their enhanced performance and maneuverability to displace most roles currently performed by the increasingly heavier, vulnerable, and unaffordable Main Battle Tank. Still the blitzkrieg, only different.

These infantry fighting vehicles might be likened to the aircraft carrier which displaced the dreadnought battleship in the last world war. Though the parent vessel may appear flimsy and vulnerable to almost any attacker, her real worth was in the naval aircraft she carried , which created a new dawn in war at sea. So too are these new battle taxis whose infantry are its "fighters", which can defend their base while operating as the enforcer, hammer, and breakthrough weapon on the battlefield, armed as he is with his own portable precision weapons, wearing his own armor, and able to call down "fire from the sky" in the guise of unmanned or manned aircraft.

Compromising Defense

Military leaders often justify the cost of new ultra-sophisticated weapons with the notion that "American soldiers should never have to fight fair". Thus they silence all debate on the astonishing cost of these whiz bang and overly complicated arms, and the ever aging, ever shrinking numbers available to the troops.

We are left then with equipment too costly to risk in the lo-tech insurgency conflicts we always end up fighting, and too few for the large scale conventional wars the military plans for. When they are used in the unconventional environment of the Third World, the results are often embarrassing:

• Giant supercarriers built to carry million dollar jets are called on as troops transports to invade the tiny island of Haiti.
• The super destroyer USS Cole, designed to fight Russian or Chinese nuclear submarines on the high seas is attacked by a terrorist speed boat armed with dynamite and forced out of commission for a year.
• Stealthy and marvelously engineered B-2 bombers, specially geared to penetrate the world's toughest air defenses are used to bomb Taliban targets in Afghanistan that often include mud huts.

Obviously a compromise must be found between the irregular and the conventional military. One way out might be our increasing use of robots weapons on the battlefield, like unmanned air, sea, and land vehicles. These hi-tech but still affordable equipment have evolved from the remote controlled toys of civilian amateurs to become life saving assets for the troops. In the Middle East conflict, they are often substituted and will increasingly be the norm for old style traditional arms, like the tank, manned fighters, and even warships at sea.

The Stagnation of Warfare

After the foundation of the Roman Empire under Caesar Augustus, the art of war advanced very little for centuries. The dominant Legion that carved a Latin domain out of the entire Mediterranean World and much of Western Europe was little altered until the Fall of Rome in 476 AD, save for becoming increasingly lighter and far more mobile, the type of troops needed to defend such a far-flung empire.

At the turn of the 21st Century, the US Military finds itself in a similar position. Weighed down by heavy tank armies, giant carrier based battle fleets, and a huge but aging aerial armada, it is forced to defend it's Post Cold War interests on an ever tighter budget each year. Plus, it's wish list of new stealth fighters and bombers, robots for air-sea-and land, laser weapons, anti-missile missiles, and stealthy warships designs seem increasingly out of reach.

For most of the world militaries, updated versions of last century armaments are the norm. Even the world last remaining superpower is feeling the crunch, as the US Navy is unlikely to achieve its stated goal of a 313 ship fleet due to the astonishing cost of new warships. Likewise is the USAF unable to field the number of $300 million Raptor fighters it wants, while the Army struggles to build a tank replacement for the 25 year old M-1 Abrams.

Most in the Pentagon leadership are fearful to make the required sacrifice and cease production of ever more difficult to construct and risky when deployed weapons system, for the tried and true weapons mass produced by nations such as Russia and China. There is little to fear, however, for such good and plenty arms are already forming the backbone of our forces fighting the War on Terror. Warplanes designed in the 1950's, armored cars based on 1980's technology, destroyers first deployed in the 1990's currently are holding the line against America's enemies for the present and likely far into the future.

With the new century, the West is continuing its slow decline began in the early 1900s. There is no reason to admit defeat though, while ignoring our essential role in world affairs. There is reason to admit that the astonishing technical advances of the past may finally be over for our Civilisation, with the need to hold on and defend what remains now upon us.

Branchville Businesses face condemnations

If last Saturday's F-3 tornado wasn't enough to defeat the small town's merchants, county officials are now taking aim on damaged buildings. From the T & D newspaper:

The first dark cloud came Saturday night, bringing with it a
tornado that unleashed winds estimated between 150 and 165 mph.The second cloud
arrived late Wednesday when county officials partially or completely condemned
at least five downtown businesses due to structural stress cracks."The buildings
here have suffered a whole lot of pressure," says Harold Young, Orangeburg
County's deputy administrator for community development. "We understand that
this is a long portion of the town, and we're sympathetic. But we have to make
sure it's safe."

Local resident, and my former neighbor Clifton Ott isn't taking this lying down:

Ott says his business is safe, that very little damage was done
when the Category 3 tornado barrelled through the town between 7 and 7:30 p.m.
Saturday, knocking down entire buildings like bowling pins."The only thing it
did to my building is ripped the awning off and the sign was hanging down," Ott
said. "I still can't believe it. They're going to condemn us. I'll take you out
there and show you the cracks. They ain't nothing."

One of my first jobs as a teenager was at a department store in Newberry, which was struck by a tornado in the 1980's. You could see the cracks in the walls where the foundation shifted, but for several years at least, the business was still standing and operating as before.

Iraq Made America Safer

Celebrating 5 years of taking down the murderous regime of Saddam Hussein, and exporting democracy to the Arabs, here is part of a newsletter from Melanie Morgan at Move America Forward:

Many people in the news media and among the political
elite
have made the mistake of critizing the missions of our troops and
lamenting
about the costs of the war effort, instead of realizing that
the heroic and
commendable efforts of our troops have helped deal a
striking blow to
Islamic terrorists worldwide.

Rather than sitting back on the defensive,
waiting to be struck again,
our nation struck back against the network of
Islamic terrorists who
had launched attack after attack against the U.S. and
our allies for over
25 years - culminating in the horrific attacks on
September 11, 2001.

It is not by accident that the United States has not
been struck here
at home by Islamic terrorists since that time. It is
precisely because
the brave men and women of the United States Armed Forces,
in
conjunction with efforts by the FBI and CIA and various law enforcement
agencies, have waged a full-frontal assault on those who seek to bring our
nation harm.

Thank God for the troops and groups like MAF, who continue to support the War on Terror, and protect Freedom here at home.

Waiting for the Trans-racial Candidate

Michael Myers of the NY Civil Rights Coalition says Obama "blew it". From the LA Times:

I waited in vain for our hybrid presidential candidate to
speak the simple truth that there is no such thing as "race," that we all belong
to the same race -- the human race. I waited for him to mesmerize us with a
singular and focused appeal to hold all candidates to the same standards no
matter their race or their sex or their age. But instead Obama gave us a full
measure of racial rhetoric about how some of us with an "untrained ear" --
meaning whites and Asians and Latinos -- don't understand and can't relate to
the so-called black experience.

Well, I am black, and I can't relate to a "black experience"
that shields and explains old-style black ministers who rant and rave about
supposed racial differences and about how America ought to be damned. I long ago
broke away from all associations and churches that preached the gospel of hate
and ethnic divisiveness -- including canceling my membership in 100 Black Men of
America Inc., when they refused my motion to admit women and
whites.

Please read the rest.

Who Patton Would Vote For

Jeff Jacoby at the Boston Globe has an idea which candidate the venerable US Warrior wouldn't cast his ballot for in the upcoming US Election:

Nowadays, the thought of losing a war isn't as hateful to some
Americans as the thought of losing an election. Recall MoveOn.org's infamous "General Betray Us" ad last fall, which was intended to
undercut the commander of US forces in Iraq. Think of Senate majority leader
Harry Reid's insistence that "this war is lost and the surge is not
accomplishing anything," or Barack Obama's unbudging claim that the "strategy is
failed" and we must "get our troops out," or Hillary Clinton's vow that
"starting on day one of my presidency, we will begin . . . to withdraw our
troops within 60 days."
Were Patton alive today, his opinion of such
defeatism would assuredly be unflattering - and unprintable. But his conviction
that Americans have no patience for losers would be reinforced by the public's
mounting confidence that the war in Iraq will be won.

I imagine he would have a few choice words for Jack Murtha as well! The "lose at any cost" mentality emanating from the 60's generation, many of which now are involved in US politics, would be abhorrent to Patton's generation, who realized there was such a thing as a "just war", and that nothing was worth losing our precious freedoms, not even death.

H/T to Murdoc.

Former Skeptics Say Army Not Broken

Some good news from the ongoing War on Terror via Fox News:

A year ago, some military experts were comparing the Army of 2007
with the army of a generation ago, at the end of the Vietnam War, when it was
considered "broken" due to morale problems and an exodus of the "best and the
brightest" soldiers from service.
(Army Maj. Gen. Bob) Scales said he didn’t
take into account that, unlike Vietnam, this Army is sending soldiers to fight
as a unit — not as individuals. He also neglected the "Band of Brothers"
phenomenon — the feeling of responsibility to fellow soldiers that prompts
members of service to re-enlist.
"The soldiers go back to the theater of war
as units," Scales said. "They are bonded together, they know each other, they
don't have to fight as an army of strangers.
"I was wrong a year ago when I
forecast the imminent collapse of the Army. I relied a little bit too much on
the data and not enough on the intangibles."

This is something I've noticed all along-that the Army is not broken but becoming battle hardened. The Liberal dominated Media would much prefer we look on the troops as victims of an "unjust war", rather than the true heroes they are.

Navy Shipbuilding Plan "Pure Fantasy"

The hi-tech military is wrecking havoc on the Navy's modernisation plans. Recently Congress hit nearly every new ship program as too costly and the 313 ship Navy totally unrealistic under the present budget cycle. Via Defense Industry Daily, here's Congressman Roscoe Bartlett:

“From Fiscal Years 2008 to 2009, the Navy has reduced the number of
ships to be procured by approximately 25 percent – one quarter of the ships the
Navy planned to build last year are gone. The long term shipbuilding plan still
speaks to a 313-ship Navy, as does the Chief of Naval Operations, but it’s time
we started facing facts. The Navy will never get there without either top line
relief or a significant change in the mix of platforms. The Navy’s shipbuilding
plan is based on the assumption that over the next thirty years the shipbuilding
account will nearly triple in size. Do our witnesses really think this is
realistic? How can you? If it’s not – and I tell you it’s not – then the only
other alternative is to look at the mix of platforms.”

The article goes on to deal with specific future ship classes, including the Zumwalt DDG-1000, with costs up to $3-5 billion each, a huge chunk considering the shipbuilding funds are only about $12 billion annually. Even the Navy's holy grail, the new CVN-78 Gerald Ford class comes under fiire, as does the LCS program and the T-AKE replenishment ships.

The problem is course, is not that we are currently buying too few ships, or that the budget isn't big enough, but last century procurement practises are clashing with new century warfare. All the services are suffering, from the USAF's tanker, bomber, and fighter plans, to the Army's future tank designs. Lightweight and easy to build platforms, kept in continuous production could ensure steady jobs and experience for shipyards suffering from too few orders, as well as maintaining a continuous supply of new weapons for our frontlines forces, without having to rely on ancient and worn out arms from the previous century.

Galrahn at Information Dissemination is all over this story.

Barack Seeks to Have it Both Ways

Can you denounce rascism and embrace it in the same speech? Astoundingly, in a speech seeking to promote unity among the races, Barack Obama compared the bias of the grandmother who raised him, to the angry and crazed rantings of Jeremiah Wright:

"I can no more disown [Jeremiah Wright] than I can my white
grandmother – a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and
again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world,
but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the
street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic
stereotypes that made me cringe."

Obviously, he is unable to distinguish between what is hate speech seeking to shock and cause division and what is not. Jeremiah Wright had an audience of thousands, while the grandmother's only confident was her close relations. Obama has lost a great opportunity to finally unite a majority of whites and blacks to win the presidency. He promised us his campaign would transcend racial issues, but when it comes to the wire, he just can't let go. I was never a supporter, but deep down, even I was hoping there was real sincerity in a black candidate this time.

Sen. Jim DeMint wants to "Complete the Fence Now"

A new website dedicated to protecting our borders:

“Complete the Fence Act” that will require the completion of 700
miles of reinforced pedestrian fencing along the nation’s southern border by
December 31, 2010. The bill also requires the U.S. Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) to report to Congress by June 2009 on fence construction progress
and how it plans to complete the full fence by the 2010 deadline.
In
September 2006, Congress overwhelmingly passed and the President signed a bill
that required 700 miles of reinforced fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border. The
“Complete the Fence Act” will require DHS to complete the 700 miles fence by
December 31, 2010, using only reinforced pedestrian fencing, not vehicle
barriers or “virtual” fencing.

Go there.

More Branchville Tornado News

Branchville Wood Products, apart of Cox Wood Preserving out of Orangeburg took a direct hit from Saturday night's F-3 Tornado.

Several articles appeared on the frontpage of the T & D newspaper yesterday:


Branchville severely damaged by storm

Unchurned

Twister can't keep town's spirit down

And Governor Mark Sanford visited yesterday, but refused to declare us a disaster area:

Sanford: Storm not a statewide disaster

Battered Branchville 'hoping and praying' for state aid

Libertas on the New Media

The Liberty Film Festival Blog praises the democratization of the Press:

...it’s only now that we have a multitude of news sources of
every political stripe that liberals complain about “corporate ownership,”
“monopolies,” and “fairness.” Fifteen years-ago the media was wholly owned by
just a few networks, newspapers, and wire services — fifteen years-ago liberal
opinion and worldview dominated these news sources — and liberals said nothing.
Today, the media’s finally been democratized by blogs, cable news, and talk
radio — and listen to the left howl.

Well, I just do it for the fun and to have my views served. After the State newspaper skewered an oped I wrote until it sounded something totally different than what I intended, I was constantly searching for something better to express myself beyond the tyranny of the Old Media. Thank you Google and Blogspot!

What Obama Knew, and When Did He Know It?

Concerning the Reverend Jeremiah Wright controversy, Victor Davis Hanson weighs in:

Almost everything Barack Obama has said about his relationship
with Wright is untrue. He is hardly ‘not particularly controversial’. No one
needs to “cherry-pick” his sermons to find in them hatred; in some speeches that
venom is the entire theme. Obama mentions Wright’s AIDs work—never that Wright
blamed America for the AIDs epidemic. Obama mentions Wright’s positive work on
apartheid, not that Wright claimed the U.S. put Mandela in jail. And on and
on.

Obama knew of his extremisms as evidenced by past
interviews in which he mentioned Wright’s flair (cf. especially his encomium on
6/5/07), by his church attendance for more than twenty years, by his mention in
his memoirs of Wright’s take on Hiroshima and other controversies, and by his
admission he took Wright’s tapes to Harvard for inspiration.

First there was Obama's refusal to wear an American pendant, then Michelle Obama's admitted shame for her country. Now this. I think our vision of what we want Barack Obama to be, a healer and uniter, and his actual persona are world's apart.

Branchville Tornado Updates

Car wash destroyed.
Another view of the Churn rubble.

A massive tree struck at the old school. Notice the Flag, bent but not broken!

Only one person was injured, despite some 20 businesses damaged or destroyed.

The twister was rated an "EF-3".

Some Branchville articles found online:

Branchville twister confirmed (The T&D)

Small Orangeburg Town Hit Hardest in Storm (WLTX)

Branchville devastated by storms (WCBD)

Storms pummel South Carolina (WIS)

Branchville Devastation

What's left of the old Churn, a town icon.

The Branch Junction, sight of many mock gunfights during Raylrode Daze Festival.

A side view of the crumbling town hall.

Another view of what's left of Branchville Town Hall and Police Station.

The old High School Gym.

As far as I know, there were no casualties. The twister passed through about 7:25 PM Saturday, which was when our clocks stopped. A friend who works in the Neal Ott Grocery said she ducked down behind some racks, while other workers took shelter in the meat coolers.

The damage was confined to a narrow strip, as there was little destruction on either side of town. My parents had almost no limbs down in their yard, though there was wind and rain. Power stayed out until about 4:00 AM Sunday, and blinked off an on until 9:30, until it remained on.

Police aren't allowing anyone near the damage area, though HWYs 21 and 78 are open to traffic. Most of the pictures I took were taken from the car. My own opinion of the storm and the aftermath:

It was the darkest night Branchville ever saw.

Branchville Tornado

Downtown is devastated, and shut down. Businesses and homes wiped out, trees obstructing traffic. The Old High School Gym has collapsed. We are fine but power has been on and off. Hope to have photos later.

Obama Apologizes for Ranting Pastor

Some are wondering what took him so long! From Yahoo/AP:

As video of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright has widely aired on
television and the Internet, Obama responded by posting a blog about his
relationship with Wright and his church, Chicago's Trinity United Church of
Christ, on the Huffington Post...

"I categorically denounce any statement that disparages
our great country or serves to divide us from our allies," Obama said. "I also
believe that words that degrade individuals have no place in our public
dialogue, whether it's on the campaign stump or in the pulpit. In sum, I reject
outright the statements by Reverend Wright that are at issue."
In a sermon on
the Sunday after the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, Wright suggested the
United States brought on the attacks.

What puzzles me, is how could the Senator sit listening to these type sermons denouncing America's culture for 20 years without being affected by these ravings. The question is, how much of Obama's worldview has been formed by his close association with this man?

Here, then, is the shocking video (Warning, Racist Statements):

Attacks on Recruiting Centers Escalate

This is via the Gathering of Eagles website:

Antiwar activists in Pittsburgh are planning an “anniversary”
protest on March 19th outside the military recruiting office. What makes
this one even more heinous is that they are actually bringing a
“movable cage” that they plan to confine the recruiters
in.

"On Wednesday, March 19, POG will be holding a torch-lit
march to a modern day castle of abominations—our local military recruiting
station. If the station remains open, we intend to evict it and everything
inside of it, occupy the location, and transform it into something useful for
the community. We’ll also be bringing a movable cage in which to confine
military recruiters until they no longer pose a danger to our friends and
neighbors."

Never mind that this is all highly illegal.

This is getting a little scary. Let's not forget these recruiting stations are representative to the Federal Government. The so-called dictator Bush has been very easy on the antiwar protesters, despite the fact that these Leftist organizations are helping to sustain the terrorists oppression of the Middle East and continued bombing threats against the West. As Stalin once likened liberals, Code Pinkers are the "Useful Idiots" of Radical Islam.

Daily Show Vs. Code Pink

I'm not a fan, but this is great!

Comments

Any comments are appreciated. Sorry if I am currently unable to respond. My 79 yr old mother who I've been caring for the past few years fell last week and we are currently in the process of admitting her to a hospital. Your thoughts and prayers are appreciated.

Also, please excuse any lack of posting on my part and I hope to get back on schedule soon, but family comes first.

Fallon Channels Patton, McClellan

One thing a serving officer should always remember: even if he disagrees with his Commander in Chief's military policy, he should keep his mouth shut to reporters. Admiral William Fallon, now former head of Central Command, didn't get the memo. From David Ignatius:

The first thing that many of Adm. William Fallon's colleagues note
about him is that he's a Navy officer. By that, they mean he has the stubborn
self-confidence, some would say arrogance, that is part of command at sea. He
knows how to wear his dress whites and receive a snappy salute -- and he likes
telling people off when he thinks they're wrong.
Those headstrong qualities
were part of why Fallon was chosen to run Central Command, arguably the most
important senior post in the U.S. military today.
And they explain why
Fallon finally crashed and burned Tuesday, tendering his resignation after his
blunt comments to an Esquire magazine writer had gotten him into one too many
conflicts with the White House and the military brass.

The 2 famed Generals I mentioned in the title both saw their careers cut short (or at least was far less than they could have been) because they failed to observe the rule I mentioned. After the war, though, these warriors went on to even greater fame, and for his dissent of the administration, look for Fallon to become a poster boy for the antiwar Democrats.

Tanks, But No Tanks Pt. 2

Remember the lone pro-democracy student who stood down Chinese tanks in Tiananmen Square, a defiant image that was beamed around the world in 1989? Now imagine this fearless but tragic figure possessed with GPS and a cell phone, able to call down the destructive power of satellite guided, precision weapons from bombers and missiles, as US infantrymen can do on any given day. Such astonishingly accurate 21st Century weapons are able to rain destructive fire onto these last century vehicles of war, as America has consistently and dramatically proven in the Gulf Wars.

Despite this profound shift in the balance of power on land, Martin Sieff has written a seemingly endless series of articles for the UPI promoting the Main Battle Tank and the old tactics. In his repetitive arguments, he contends:

“The commitment of the Russian, Indian and Chinese militaries to
acquiring and maintaining very large tank forces in the 21st century bears
testament to the fact that they recognize this continuing truth. So does the
U.S. military. And for that matter, so do the Israeli, Syrian and Egyptian
armies -- all of which also continue to maintain large armored forces.”

The attitude is suspiciously like that of the old battleship advocates in the 1930’s, who continued to promote the construction of these vulnerable and budget-busting warships, even as newer and less costlier threats were multiplying to defeat them. For years after the US battle fleet lay at the bottom of Pearl Harbor in 1941, the arguments for the obsolete but much loved battlewagons held sway. The US didn’t cancel her plans for 17 new fast battleships until 1943 (10 were actually built) including the building of the largest ever, the 60,000 ton Montana! In 1944, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill was forced to veto a Royal Navy post-war plan that still considered such discredited weapons of war as the core of the fleet, even as airpower was clearly the dominate force in every battle on land and sea.

Getting back to the tanks, what armor advocates like Sieff fail to take in account, is that Western armies have totally ceased production of new battle tanks, save for updating older models, or producing them for their allies. Only Russia and China continue to manufacture these armored behemoths in any numbers, but these too are only slightly improved versions of their Cold War ancestors. With ever heavier armor protection and costlier and more complicated engines required to move these overweight monsters, completely new tanks are now priced beyond the range of the superpowers.

In stark and revealing contrast, travel on any major highway or interstate on the east coast, and you’re likely to see a new Mine Resistant, Armor Protected Vehicle (MRAP)on a trailer or train, decked out in desert colors and headed to the Middle East. Such wheeled armored cars have gone from concept to the battlefield in just a couple years, while the tankers are forced to make due with 25-30 year old tracked vehicles.

Major orders for MRAP vehicles for the US Military began in early 2007, and one year later some 1500 is expected in Iraq and Afghanistan. A total of 20,000 are on order by the Army and Marines, all of which are expected in service by 2009! Such weapons are based on proven South African designs who used armored cars in their various wars against communist rebels in the last century. Their unique “V” shaped hulls are an ideal counter to the IED infested Iraq Theater, proving themselves extremely survivable.

The first of the wheeled combat cars for the new century was the Stryker, based on a similar design already in service with the US Marine Corps since the 1980s. They were first ordered by the maverick General Eric Shinseki in 2000, a brigade of which was in the Iraq theater by 2003, just as the conflict was entering into its insurgency stage. Much maligned for their lack of armor, their speed and inherent toughness proved them well suited for the urban battlefield.

Out of the $160 billion Future Combat System, America hopes to field its new Main Battle Tank. Plans are for a futuristic armored hull with lightweight composite armor which can reduce the size of the vehicle, allowing it to deploy on USAF C-130 transport planes. With looming military cuts in the aftermath of the Iraq War (as happens in all our wars), however, budget cuts for all services can be expected, especially if a Democrat is elected to the White House. Armor advocates like Martin Sieff might continue to pine for the good ole days when armor reigned supreme, but economic and military reality is starting to intervene.

Also read-from Popular Mechanics "Stryker Crews in Iraq Rally to Defend Their Rides: Field Report".

Why They Fight

Here is the real story of Iraq, and what the protesters war against when they slander our troops:

A two-year-old Iraqi girl returned to Haditha March 7 after
undergoing open-heart surgery at the Monroe Carell Jr. Children’s Hospital at
Vanderbilt University.
Ala Thabit Fattah, the girl’s father, and several
family members traveled with Marines to Baghdad International Airport to meet
Amenah, who departed Iraq Jan. 22 with his wife.
“I am very happy. I was very
worried that my daughter would not come home alive,” Fattah said. “I am very
grateful for the great treatment the American people gave to my family.”
The
family then flew to Al Asad Airbase in Al Anbar Province, where they boarded an
MV-22 Osprey for the final leg of the voyage to Haditha.
Back home, the
family served a dinner in her honor.
“I’ve got four children, two boys and
two girls myself; I was very happy to see a father, mother and child reunite,”
said Maj. Kevin Jarrard, Company L’s commanding officer and the architect behind
the medical effort.

Here is what the Code Pinkers and others attack when they defame our recruiting centers: the only hope many poor countries have, that the US Military will step in and save them from dictators, and give freedom a fighting chance.

Thanks to Blogs for Victory for this story.

The Berkeley Insurrection

Here is part of an email sent to my by Move America Forward's Melanie Morgan:

As investigators continue their efforts to find out who bombed
the Times Square military recruiting center, we have come across more evidence
of the sheer hubris of anti-military radicals in the United States.

In
Berkeley, California, activists posted an update on their efforts to harass the
U.S. Marine Corps until they close up their recruiting office and leave town.

In an absolutely disgusting maneuver, Berkeley City Council members
Linda Maio and Max Anderson joined the harassment campaign and urged protesters
to keep up their efforts to "impede" the work of our troops. Here you have
American elected officials encouraging insurrection against our military men and
women here in America.

The word "insurrection" stood out to me since the US Marine center, a representative arm of the federal government, is being constantly harassed by a liberal lynch mob. This seems little different to me than the Whiskey Rebellion during George Washington's administration, when the Father of Our Country was forced to take the field against those who refused to obey the law of the land. How long must we see our God given rights flaunted like this before our government acts against these self-styled protesters, who seek to discredit those who defends and protect the freedoms they take advantage of?

The Lizard Man Saga Continues

I don't want to post about Lizard Man. I have to, via WISTV:

We have been following a renewed investigation into the "Lizard
Man."
Thursday we have learned that two dead animals were found in a field
near the home of Dixie and Bob Rawson. The Lee County Sheriff's Department says
it could be linked to some pretty serious damage to the Rawson's van.
Last
week, the Rawsons showed us how the van's front grill was chewed up, and how the
wheel wells on both sides were bent. When some of the Rawson's cats went missing
too, neighbors said the "Lizard Man" might be responsible.
Lee County
Sheriff E.J. Melvin is out to inspect the field near the Rawsons on his
four-wheeler. "Just going to ride the field, see if there are anymore animals
laying out dead."
Already, they've found a cow and a coyote. It's
significant in that they were both found only yards away from the Rawsons' car.
"This is out of a book," says Dixie Rawson. And now, Rawson doesn't know
what's fiction and what's real.

This is a follow up to last week's post. LOCK YOUR DOORS...

Tanks But No Tanks

An iconic photo from the early Afghan campaign shows a group of US Army Rangers calling down precision air strikes against the Taliban while astride horses. Don’t expect a return of the four-footed cavalry just yet, but this a prime example of how modern technology has changed the nature of 21st Century warfare. GPS satellites, smart bombs, robot weapons, and cruise missiles added to such basic platforms are leaving our ancient and worn out Industrial Age weapons in the dust.

Yet, Martin Sieff, in an expansive series of article for UPI recently argued for the relevancy of 20th Century arms, specifically the Main Battle Tank:

“U.S. military planners have been increasingly criticized in the
specialist media for their continued commitment to maintaining a large -- and
expensive --- force of Abrams M1A2 Main Battle Tanks. But they are by no means
alone in this commitment. The military planners of India, China and Russia -- as
we have previously noted in these columns -- remain committed to the strategic
doctrine that their armies may have to fight large-scale land wars in the
foreseeable future. And in each case they are still trusting in tanks to be the
backbone of their main land forces.”

Like many such armor advocates, Sieff uses history as his guide in his well thought out articles, but fails to grasp the significant change brought on by 21st century digital weapons. Specifically, the threats against the Main Battle Tank has become greater than their usefulness in combat. Over the decades the tank has grown enormously in cost and size, while increasing only marginally in fighting power. The types of ammunition carried has changed dramatically, but such advanced arms need no longer be housed in an expensive and highly visible platform, while its old-style cannon armament is out-ranged by modern rockets and missiles.

Proponents of such hi tech behemoths claim these legacy weapons must be maintained for some future Great Power conflict, as we fought in World War 2, yet the opposite should be the case. Third World guerillas have already used inexpensive anti tank rockets and mines, plus cruise missiles and UAVs against the world’s greatest land powers: Israel in Lebanon and the US in Iraq. Why then can’t the same hit and run, swarming tactics be studied to fight America’s peer enemies?

Wheeled vehicles have also proved their utility and survivability on the modern battlefield. Light armored vehicles like the Stryker and MRAPs generally cost a few hundred thousand up to $3 million each. Such weapons, especially geared for the urban battlefield, have gone from concept to construction in just a few years. Contrast this to the 20 or so years required to finally field an M-60 MBT replacement, the M-1 Abrams tank.

Where an MBT relies on its heavy and expensive armor to defeat modern anti-tank weapons, easier to build and afford light armored vehicles are forced to use speed, stealth, maneuverability and special tactics to defeat such threats. Removable slat or cage armor is carried on the Stryker to defeat rocket propelled grenades. MRAP vehicles rely on its “V” shaped hull design to deflect much of the explosion from a roadside mine.

Satellites, unmanned aerial vehicles, aircraft missiles, smart sub munitions, and primitive land mines are all combining to end the reign of the tank in land warfare. Add to this advanced sensors now being carried on aircraft, which leave the tank dangerously exposed on the modern battle field. While the 90 year old tracked warrior might still be popular with the major land powers, the less affluent Third World is taking notice of cheaper and more effective means to circumvent our Industrial Age superiority, as we continue to see with each new battle against the insurgents in the Middle East.

Sea Links

The amphibious assault ship USS Nassau (LHA 4) crosses the Atlantic Ocean during a scheduled deployment as part of the Nassau Expeditionary Strike Group. Note the two V-22 Osprey's on deck. US Navy photo

Amphibious Carrier Nassau carrying Ospreys to Iraq.

Lawmaker to Navy: Cut new destroyers, build cruisers faster.

Brahmos Missile Successfully Tested at Sea.

Marines make case for more amphibs.

U.S. Navy Mulls New F/A-18E/F Buy.

U.S.S. Ohio among Navy's most feared subs.

Naval Missile Strike Hits Terrorist Base in Somalia.

New ship designs promising, but untested.

Ship built with WTC steel christened.

China's nuke expansion at sea.

Canada to send three ships to the Gulf.

Steps Towards Warship Invisibility.

USN Plans More Super Hornets

Information Dissemination reports:

In the testimony before the Senate last week Roughead's prepared statement (PDF) had some
interesting comments under the section labeled "Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)". The
comments actually are intended to float an idea to buy 69 more F/A-18E/F Super
Hornet fighters.

And I love this comment by the admiral, which sums up the dire need:

The increased operational tempo...of our legacy aircraft is
consuming service life at an accelerated rate. The recent groundings of high
demand P-3 aircraft highlight the need to bring the next generation of aircraft
in service and retire our aging aircraft.

This is a good idea. Between the First Gulf War and Gulf War 2, the US Military deployed 10 new UAV platforms, but only a single new jet fighter, the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet. The Super Hornet went from concept to prototype; from trials to frontline service in a remarkably short time for a military jet (1992-2002). Since the plane was not a totally new design, but based on the proven F/A-18 Hornet, it was allowed to skip some Congressional mandated flyoff trials, thus cutting years off its entry into service.

The F/A-18E/F is a so-so fighter when compared to the futuristic F-22 Raptor. As a bomber, the plane cannot match the stealth of even the first generation F-117 Night Hawk. Where the new plane does excel is its low cost compared to modern super fighters, but especially because IT IS A NEW PLANE, compared to the archaic jets the USAF is forced to make due with in Iraq and Afghanistan. The power of modern weapons such as precision bombs, cruise missiles, and AMRAAM air to air missiles don't necessarily need a super fighter or stealth bomber for its effect to be felt upon the enemy. They just need a ride!

Platforms then, have become near irrelevant in the new warfare, since an unmanned aerial vehicle little different than the model airplanes flown by amateur civilian enthusiasts have become the future of airpower. Skipping a generation like the off-delayed, $100 million F-35 Lightning II and purchasing more $60 million Super Hornets would bridge the gap until the new robot fighters reach their peak capability.

Military Recruiting Post Bombed

Could this be the next level in the Left-wing attacks on our troops, as we've recently seen occurring in Berkeley California? From Yahoo/AP:

An explosive device caused minor damage to an empty military
recruiting station in Times Square early Thursday, shaking guests in hotel rooms
high above "the crossroads of the world."...

Witnesses staying at a
Marriott hotel four blocks away said they could feel the building shake with the
blast. "I was up on the 44th floor and I could feel it. It was a big bang," said
Darla Peck, 25, of Portland, Oregon. "It shook the building. I thought it could
have been thunder, but I looked down and there was a massive plume of smoke so I
knew it was an explosion," said Terry Leighton, 48, of London, who was staying
on the 21st floor of the Marriott.

And the Leftist connection:

In October 2005, a group of activists who call themselves the
Granny Peace Brigade rallied there against the Iraq war. Eighteen activists,
most of them grandmothers with several in their 80s and 90s, were later
acquitted of disorderly conduct.

Of course, we can't discount Islamic terrorist action, especially considering NY's recent history with this problem. As we have seen so often in the Middle East, Al Qaeda excels in spreading confusion and discord among nations. The evidence, due to recent events however, is damning against the Left. Funny, how there are so against America fighting her enemies overseas, but have no such revulsion in attacking our troops here.

When prominent Democratic politicians, like Howard Dean and John Kerry in the last election, plus current presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, repeat unfounded rumors that "Bush lied to get us into war", it is only natural that their more radicals followers seek to take matters in their own hands. Meanwhile, to further their own political means, the liberal politicians excuse their own complicity in getting us in the war, as it was Democrats who first sounded the clarion against Saddam's WMD programs in the 1990's.

More from John at Powerline "Given the increasing virulence of attacks on the military and on military recruiting facilities by antiwar groups like Code Pink, most notably the repeated confrontations in Berkeley, one could speculate that a liberal group is the most likely culprit."

Even more-Gateway Pundit has photos.

Super Tuesday #2!

John McCain and Hillary Clinton win big! A clean sweep for McCain in all states as Huckabee drops out.

In spite of myself, I can't help but get excited for the future over the GOP's Vietnam War Vet, fighter pilot, POW, porkbusting, straight-talking nominee! Besides his years of experience in the Senate, I expect the Maverick will sail to the presidency with not a little boost from clumsy attempts at scandal-mongering by the Mainstream Media.

I'm also continually amazed at the continued resilience of the Clinton attack machine. The more Hillary's beaten up on by the press, and perceived down for the count, the stronger she becomes. Truly, she has cast off Bill's coattails(who has been as much a burden as an asset) and "finally found her voice".

So, why can't the current Democrat frontrunner, Barack Obama, trounce Hillary once and for all? It's very simple: though "daddy" Obama makes us happy and feel good about ourselves, whenever we're in real trouble, its "momma" Hillary many will expect to make things right. The Red Phone ad brought this fact home Tuesday.

While the so-called "Naftagate" gaffe with Canada may not be enough to sink Obama's campaign, it did bring the junior Senator down to earth with the rest of us for a brief crucial moment, and prove he was human after all.

Rush Limbaugh, who encouraged his Texas listeners to "vote Hillary" Tuesday, to keep the civil war alive amongst the Dems, might just claim credit for her big win.

March Roars like a Lion

Tall, young pine is blown down in my parents yard in Branchville.

Iraq Grandstanding Won't Save Iran Dictator

After President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's recent media circus to Iraq, Strategypage points to the anarchy that is internal Iran:

In poor neighborhoods, drug addiction and unemployment supply a
growing number of gangs with ruthless and brutal recruits. The police respond
with public whippings and up to ten executions a day. So far this year, 48 have
been executed, compared to 298 for all of last year. Opium and heroin continues
to come in from Afghanistan, feeding millions of addicts. The war against the
drug smugglers on the Afghan border leaves hundreds dead and wounded each year,
as it has for a decade. The Afghan gangs have found it easier to bribe the
border police, forcing the government to send more of its "Revolutionary Guards"
(Islamic radicals forming a palace guard for the clerics running the country) to
deal with the corrupt police as well as the well armed smugglers.

Meanwhile, police continue to expend a lot of effort on terrorizing the
middle and upper class neighborhoods in the cities. Merchants, professionals and
corrupt government officials still live pretty well, and their kids like to
dress up. The Islamic lifestyle police are running into public resistance while
enforcing conservative dress codes. Women, in particular, are getting more vocal
in protesting the chador clad female police trying to haul them away for some
clothing infraction [VIDEO] [PHOTO].

I was disgusted at an AP report that compared the relatively peaceful visit of Ahmadinejad's visit, to the intense security required when President Bush arrives in country. Of course an Iranian would have little to fear from another terrorist, like the proverb says "Satan can't cast out Satan".

Obama Dodges Questions on NAFTA Gaffe

Is there a chink his his supposedly invincible armor? From the Washington Post:

The day before primaries in Ohio and Texas that could effectively seal
the Democratic presidential nomination for him, a smiling Obama strode out to a
news conference at a veterans facility here. But the grin was quickly replaced
by the surprised look of a man bitten by his own dog.

Reporters from the Associated Press and Reuters went after him for his
false denial that a campaign aide had held a secret meeting with Canadian
officials over Obama's trade policy. A trio of Chicago reporters pummeled him
with questions about the corruption trial this week of a friend and supporter. The New York Post piled on with a
question about him losing the Jewish vote.
Obama responded with the classic
phrases of a politician in trouble. "That was the information that I had at the
time. . . . Those charges are completely unrelated to me. . . . I have said that
that was a mistake. . . . The fact pattern remains unchanged."

When those failed, Obama tried another approach. "We're
running late," the candidate said, and then he disappeared behind a
curtain.

Doesn't look good, but at least reporters are finally acting like reporters against the Democrat media star. But it may be too little too late to help Hillary, which might have been the MSM's intent.

Aircraft Carrier Vs. Cruise Missile #22

From Wash Park Prophet:

A reader has noted that about two
years ago:


The U.S. Navy, after nearly six years of warnings
from Pentagon testers, still lacks a plan for defending aircraft carriers
against a supersonic Russian-built missile . . . known in the West as the
``Sizzler,'' . . . ``This is a carrier-destroying weapon,'' said Orville Hanson,
who evaluated weapons systems for 38 years with the Navy" . . . . China bought
the missiles in 2002 along with eight diesel submarines designed to fire it,
according to Office of Naval Intelligence spokesman Robert Althage. A Pentagon
official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Russia also offered the
missile to Iran, although there's no evidence a sale has gone through. . . .

The Navy's ship-borne Aegis system, deployed on cruisers and destroyers
starting in the early 1980s, is designed to protect aircraft-carrier battle
groups from missile attacks. But current and former officials say the Navy has
no assurance Aegis, built by Lockheed Martin Corp., is capable of detecting,
tracking and intercepting the Sizzler....

[The] Sizzler, which is also called the SS-N-27B, starts out flying at
subsonic speeds. Within 10 nautical miles of its target, a rocket-propelled
warhead separates and accelerates to three times the speed of sound, flying no
more than 10 meters (33 feet) above sea level.

On final approach, the
missile ``has the potential to perform very high defensive maneuvers,''
including sharp-angled dodges, the Office of Naval Intelligence said in a manual
on worldwide maritime threats. . . . Most anti-ship cruise missiles fly below
the speed of sound and on a straight path, making them easier to track and
target.

Lessons From the British Right

American conservatives take heed, pleads Andrew Ian Dodge:

The reason the various ilks of the right lost their foothold in
the Conservative Party is that they didn’t stick around enough to fight their
corner and keep their ideas in the mix. They allowed their frustration and angst
to get the better of them. They flirted with the various minor fringe parties of
the right like the Referendum Party and UKIP; in some case losing the
Conservatives seats that were held by similar minded Members of
Parliament...
Before they make the same mistake, the social and fiscal
conservatives in the Republican Party should ask themselves if they really want
to relinquish their party apparatus to RINOS/centrists for the foreseeable
future? Do they really think it would be a good idea to have Clinton or worse,
the socialist Obama in power for four or maybe even eight years?

I keep hearing Rush Limbaugh and other conservatives discuss why we need a "movement", but aren't we, the Children of Reagan, already a movement? McCain is just another part of the Revolution who we should monitor closely as we did with Bush (recalling Harriet Miers and border security) to ensure our views are still heard.