tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post5328328430927379234..comments2024-03-28T16:22:14.888-07:00Comments on Steve Sailer: iSteve: VietnamUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger59125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-15439381504376714352007-08-28T15:05:00.000-07:002007-08-28T15:05:00.000-07:00I have been to both North and South Vietnam and no...I have been to both North and South Vietnam and notice a large climactic difference and skin tone disparity between the two. Is there a possibility of an IQ-gap between North and South Vietnamese that can shed light on the inability of the South to defend itself?TabooTruthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09020654652967272753noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-84663345327688985172007-08-28T00:46:00.000-07:002007-08-28T00:46:00.000-07:00anon 11:38:"I'm sorry, Jews have plenty of influen...anon 11:38:<BR/>"I'm sorry, Jews have plenty of influence in this country but if they were running things as you say, there would be minimal immigration from Muslim countries."<BR/><BR/>No - most of the Jewish elite in the USA has a profound commitment to non-discriminatory immigration *including Muslim immigation*. It's a big mistake to think that people always act in their own rationally perceived self interest.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-21230821555387234042007-08-27T21:25:00.000-07:002007-08-27T21:25:00.000-07:00Anon 12:15* Morocco invading Spain like the LA rio...<B>Anon 12:15</B><BR/><BR/>* Morocco invading Spain like the LA riots? (speaks for itself)<BR/><BR/>* Poor young Muslims wilding on elderly European men and women despite the vast BELGIAN COASTGUARD? (larger than a combined UK and Spanish Armada?)<BR/><BR/>* Rommel relied on moral authority in war? (forced suicide by Nazi’s for alleged treason)<BR/><BR/>* Bet on the side with the most guns and better commanders…”Soft Power” was tried and found wanting? (American Revolution, Algeria, Vietnam, Colonial British Afghanistan, Soviet Afghanistan, Kashmir, US Afghanistan)<BR/><BR/>* A “deal” with Ahmadinejad or Saddam is what you give them now before they kill you? (Saddam was/Ahmadinejad is about to kill us?) <BR/><BR/>* Ahmadinejad is a ruthless and rapacious absolute monarch (Iran is the most democratic country in ME unlike most of our allies there)?<BR/><BR/>I guess to neocon ideologues everything can be made to look like a nail when you wield America’s military hammer without cost or consequence.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-51236096995506074962007-08-27T21:05:00.000-07:002007-08-27T21:05:00.000-07:00Anonymous 8/25/2007 3:09 PM, you said:Blah blah wa...Anonymous 8/25/2007 3:09 PM, you said:<BR/><BR/>Blah blah war, blah blah bomb, blah blah kill.<BR/><BR/>Sir, they that live by the sword die by the sword. Defend yourself; but to go looking for monsters to destroy is only to raise hell. Starting trouble in other people's backyards on the fevered theory "I'd better do it to them, before they do it to me!" is a major source of conflict and war.<BR/><BR/>What is this apparent compulsion of yours to meddle, meddle, meddle in all the world? Ever heard of leaving people alone?<BR/><BR/>Or are you unable to help it, believing yourself "called" to be "a light unto the nations"?<BR/><BR/>Look out - there's a Nazi behind that tree! Ha. Just kidding.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-46370798563280253962007-08-27T15:08:00.000-07:002007-08-27T15:08:00.000-07:00Because it's so much fun to talk about the Jews.-A...<I>Because it's so much fun to talk about the Jews.<BR/><BR/>-Anon</I><BR/><BR/>Speak for yourself. <BR/><BR/>I usually avoid writing about Jews, because, to be quite honest, I'm sick of the subject. There is no middle ground, honesty is rewarded by partisans on both sides with condemnation, and one is guaranteed to be called names. This comment thread is a case in point.<BR/><BR/>But the US strategic focus on the Middle East began precisely during the era Sailer wrote about in this post. The events of the 1973 Yom Kippur War set a standard that remains in place: massive US assistance to (and unconditional support of) Israel. I have posted evidence that not only a chairman of the JCS, but two presidents during this time period considered Israel a burden. <BR/><BR/>How could one argue that the overwhelming logistical, political, and financial support Israel received at the time could have done anything other than cause Vietnam to be neglected? <BR/><BR/>Vietnamese generals <I>were</I> running out of ammo in 1974. Meanwhile, we were airlifting thousands of TOW missiles to Israel (many of these were later sold to Iran during Iran Contra), missiles that would have slaughtered PARVN's tank columns during the offensive of 1975. <BR/><BR/>The US spent $2.2 billion resupplying Israel for Nickel Grass alone. Meanwhile, Vietnam was receiving $700 million per year. <BR/><BR/>Could it possibly be that America's choice of priorities might have influenced the course of events, or would that be "dubious"?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-59456112614858142292007-08-27T11:52:00.000-07:002007-08-27T11:52:00.000-07:00There is nothing quite as darkly amusing as a quot...<I>There is nothing quite as darkly amusing as a quote from a devout Marxist employed to deny the existence of Jewish power.</I><BR/><BR/>I wasn't denying the existence of Jewish power, I was making an observation about the anti-semites on this site, who can bend any thread into a discussion about the Jews.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-43036139009809592482007-08-27T11:38:00.000-07:002007-08-27T11:38:00.000-07:00Israel/Diaspora controls the US Congress outright....Israel/Diaspora controls the US Congress outright. <BR/><BR/>Israel/Diaspora controls the fundraising of both the Democrats and Republicans national and local operations.<BR/><BR/>Israel/Diaspora controls at least 80% of the US media. <BR/><BR/>Israel/Diaspora controls the software architecture of the US phone system. <BR/><BR/><BR/>If this is true, then why are we adding untold numbers of Muslim immigrants (many being counted as "white" by the census) to our population. I've gotten in a minor argument by encouraging a Jewish guy to be an immigration restrictionist because the logical outcome of Muslim immigrants gaining political power is cessation of our tacit approval for everything Israel does.<BR/><BR/>I'm sorry, Jews have plenty of influence in this country but if they were running things as you say, there would be minimal immigration from Muslim countries.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-34207023386059758212007-08-27T09:01:00.000-07:002007-08-27T09:01:00.000-07:00"As Sartre once observed..."There is nothing quite...<I>"As Sartre once observed..."</I><BR/><BR/>There is nothing quite as darkly amusing as a quote from a devout Marxist employed to deny the existence of Jewish power.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-69522782885207804512007-08-27T08:11:00.000-07:002007-08-27T08:11:00.000-07:00Hey, Steve, yes how about an "update" post on the ...Hey, Steve, yes how about an "update" post on the Israeli ownership of the US telephone software system and the trapdoor software line-tapping capabilities. <BR/><BR/>I put the word update in scarequotes because there likely won't be any actual news updates on the issue. But how about a reminder for readers that, yes, Virginia, there is a massive memory hole in the USA, and indeed the most critical pieces of information are flushed down it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-79920797446202810692007-08-27T01:20:00.000-07:002007-08-27T01:20:00.000-07:00How did a discussion of the dreaded Vietnam war tu...<I>How did a discussion of the dreaded Vietnam war turn to Israel and neocons?</I><BR/><BR/>Because it's so much fun to talk about the Jews. As Sartre once observed, anti-semites are what they are because they enjoy it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-48023395982200962762007-08-27T00:15:00.000-07:002007-08-27T00:15:00.000-07:00MQ --Funny, I find your comments evidence of insan...MQ --<BR/><BR/>Funny, I find your comments evidence of insanity. Morocco has a population of 33 million, most crammed into impoverished cities on the coast. Median Age: 24 years. Population growth 1.53% annually. Fertility rate 2.62 children. Population below the poverty line: 19%. The lowest 10% of household income consumes 2.6% of resources, the highest 10% consumes 30.9%. GDP per capita is $4,600.<BR/><BR/>Spain's figures: Population 40 million. Median age: 40 years. Population growth: 0.11%. Fertility 1.29 children per woman. Population below the poverty line: 19% (though this may be skewed by African/Moroccan immigrants). Lowest 10% consumes 2.8% of resources, Highest 10% 25.2%. GDP per capita is $27,400.<BR/><BR/>Now, I don't know about you but that paints a picture of really, really poor people dominated by a Carlos Slim-like elite right across the Straights of Gibraltar from really, really rich and OLDER people who can't fight back. Easy pickings.<BR/><BR/>Absent the US "police force" there is nothing to keep Morocco from simply raiding into Spain as they've always done. Just like what happened in LA during the riots when the police sat around out of PC fears. I don't see any Korean shopkeepers among the Spanish.<BR/><BR/>Spain and the EU may outspend Morocco on military spending (most of which is disguised social welfare not money for an effective military) but so what? Spain and the EU are made up of old men and women. Who lack the will or manpower to defeat coastal raiders using civilian vessels and speed boats. If the US vanished tomorrow into some time warp, Spain would be conquered shortly thereafter. They have a minor navy that's less than Britain's. Which is less than the BELGIAN COASTGUARD. NATO can't and couldn't even deal with Serbia and the Balkans. US Airpower had to bail them out. Dutch "peacekeepers" were afraid of the Serbs and surrendered their guns and sold out the inhabitants of Srebenica who they swore to protect as a sanctuary / refugee city. Even Ratko Miladec's rag-tag militia can make the Euros run or surrender.<BR/><BR/>You are right about the EU and Spain having the wealth to build a military to defend themselves. Eventually. If they have enough time. And the will. To stop spending on social welfare programs. None of which are in any evidence.<BR/><BR/>There is no moral authority. Napoleon, Yamamoto, and Rommel all bet on "fighting spirit" backed by "moral authority." And came a cropper. Bet on the side with the most guns and better commanders. "Soft Power" was tried and found wanting in: the Balkans, Rwanda, Lebanon, the Congo, Darfur, Europe circa 1936-38, and many other places. A total failure always.<BR/><BR/>This is where you fall down (completely) and show your lack of experience with the world beyond your cubicle. Making a deal with say, a man like Zapatero who has led a comfortable middle class existence his entire life is a far different affair to making a "deal" with say, Ahmadinejad or Saddam. The latter rose to political power by killing people. Lots of them. Up close and personal. Ahmadinejad also is alleged to have done so. A "deal" with them is what you give them now before they kill you later and take everything. You are not making a deal with another nation's duly elected representative, rather a ruthless and rapacious absolute monarch. This betrays a basic lack of understanding of human nature.<BR/><BR/>Liberals are of course clueless about military force. It almost always works against weak and unprepared opponents. Military force is why Israel, despite massive manpower, material, and territorial disadvantages still exists. Military force ended the Muslim raiders on the Med. Military force got India only one border with Pakistan, not two. Military force ended the ICU/Somalian assaults on Ethiopia. Military force won Eritrea it's independence.<BR/><BR/>"If the West had been wiser and more peaceful in 1914, Hitler and Stalin would both likely have stayed minor street thugs."<BR/><BR/>This is more Liberal clap-trap. A fantasy of human nature "re-engineered" not to have basic conflicts over power. The War was inevitable based on the mobilization systems and alliances. The carnage completely avoidable if generals had studied Cold Harbor and the Wilderness, and also Sherman's war of maneuver and war-fighting resource destruction (which killed almost no one but left the South's armies without food or anything else).<BR/><BR/>Liberals make the mistake of not understanding basic human nature. They certainly don't BELIEVE anything they say. They live in gated communities, far from poor black men who they view (rightly) as a violent threat to their existence.<BR/><BR/>The Japanese certainly don't believe in Liberal clap-trap. Seeing the US defense umbrella erode and North Korean/Chinese threats they are rearming like crazy.<BR/><BR/>Israel? Steyn noted that Hafez Assad predicted that like Vietnam, the US would abandon Israel and it was just a matter of waiting out the "weak" and easily beaten US. As Putin said after Beslan, the weak get beaten and "we were weak." Israel's destruction would certainly confirm beyond doubt that Lewis's assessment of the US is correct: a weak and unreliable ally, an inconsequential enemy.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-82707191812188820882007-08-26T23:42:00.000-07:002007-08-26T23:42:00.000-07:00How did a discussion of the dreaded Vietnam war tu...How did a discussion of the dreaded Vietnam war turn to Israel and neocons?<BR/><BR/>Isn't it possible to reject misguided Israeli policies without giving up Israel? I'm surprised to see such all or nothing thinking in the group of high IQ men that post on iSteve. Think of the neocons as annoying, demanding women who will do anything to get their way. Stop feeling inferior cause they got Ivy League degrees and you didn't. I mean come on, the neocons are easy targets for demoralizing jokes about nerds, geeks etc. Break them down! Bend them to your will! <BR/><BR/>(Also, was glad to see that Steve isn't sampling me quite as much as usual. I feel like a Matt Groening style muse for Steve. And let me say I did not ask for the job nor do I get paid anything for being the source of constant derision and mockery that fuels what passes for creative genius in Steve. Steve, you reek. )<BR/><BR/>As for the rest of you wimps. Go stand up to the neocons and stop this gloom and doom about the death of Israel there being no other solution, blah, blah, blah...<BR/><BR/>Meanwhile, I'm desperately searching for a nice poet to inspire that way Steve will be blocked from sampling me. It's a cosmic law. Beware Steve Sailer. You will be struck by lightning if you continue to annoy me!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-55193967424771148122007-08-26T22:28:00.000-07:002007-08-26T22:28:00.000-07:00Bill,You are engaging in sophistry. You claim to h...<I>Bill,<BR/><BR/>You are engaging in sophistry. You claim to have demonstrated something when you clearly haven't. You haven't demonstrated that the brief airlift to Israel in October of 1973 led to the fall of South Vietnam in the Spring of 1975.<BR/><BR/>-anon</I><BR/><BR/>OK, now you've made your claims. I've backed mine up with citations detailing historical facts. Where are yours?<BR/><BR/>And you say I'm engaged in sophistry...<BR/><BR/>Typical.<BR/><BR/><I>The orthodox, conservative, view of history is that it was the Democratic Congress (elected in a post-Watergate landslide in '74) that led to the fall of South Vietnam, by cutting off American military aid and banning American air support in the face of the North Vietnamese invasion.</I><BR/><BR/>Too bad you didn't comprehend the documents I posted. Just who did General Brown and Nixon blame for the congressional cut-off?<BR/><BR/><I>[...] your theory -- unsupported by any evidence that this airlift denied South Vietnam of military equipment it would have received otherwise before it was invaded by the North over a year later -- isn't "orthodox" at all. It's dubious.</I><BR/><BR/>I already posted some of the evidence, and there is plenty more. Why don't you use logistical statistics to tell me how insignificant Nickel Grass, the biggest airlift in history until the Gulf War, was?<BR/><BR/>I'll be waiting, but not holding my breath...<BR/><BR/>PS I could have used access to private academic databases to make an even better case, but I judged this unfair considering that most people here probably do not have access to them.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-69371639160304768292007-08-26T20:25:00.000-07:002007-08-26T20:25:00.000-07:00Technologically, Pakistan is 50 years behind Ameri...<I>Technologically, Pakistan is 50 years behind America in the development of nuclear weapons, and the rest lag even farther.</I><BR/><BR/>Of course, it isn't like much has changed in nuclear technology in the last few decades.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-78971610528970134692007-08-26T20:23:00.000-07:002007-08-26T20:23:00.000-07:00Re: Off topic comment on Montana wages:Why is it s...Re: Off topic comment on Montana wages:<BR/><BR/>Why is it suddenly the government's obligation to provide businesses with labor at whatever price the business wants to pay? Businessmen, God bless us, have the right to <I>try</I> to make a profit. That doesn't give us the right to dictate the price we pay for labor, anymore than I have the right to walk into Mr. Montana McDonald's owner's establishment and demand a Big Mac for 10 cents.<BR/><BR/>I happen to believe that I could make a killing in the market if I could sell 10,000 square foot McMansions for $10,000 a piece. My business plan calls for buying them at $2,000 a piece. I know I'd sell millions of them and put every other real estate company out of business. Now if only that damned government would get off its big fat arse and provide me with the product I need at the price I want to pay!<BR/><BR/>I don't know much about Mr. Montana McDonald's owner, but I do know one thing: he expects a helluva lot more than $10 an hour for his own efforts. If he has to close up shop for lack of access to dirt-cheap labor then don't expect me to feel any guilt. And trust me: I won't.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-34862408092855498962007-08-26T20:10:00.000-07:002007-08-26T20:10:00.000-07:00If a superpower wants to remain a superpower and r...If a superpower wants to remain a superpower and retain its respect then it occasionally needs to actually use that power. That was especially the case during the Cold War, where - like it or not - we were engaged in an actual, legitimate life-or-death struggle with aggressive, evangelical Marxism.<BR/><BR/>Vietnam, Korea, and even tiny Grenada proved we were willing to go the distance to thwart Marxist expansion. The problem that arose in Vietnam was that elites were only willing to risk the lives of the plebe's children, not their own, in said defense.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-34809111607660878852007-08-26T18:17:00.000-07:002007-08-26T18:17:00.000-07:00"Isn't it also obviously right that the "loss" of ...<B>"Isn't it also obviously right that the "loss" of Israel wouldn't seriously threaten the security of the US?"</B><BR/><BR/>You talk like America has any say in the matter. The "loss" of Israel? Here's a reality check: <BR/><BR/>Israel/Diaspora controls the US Congress outright. <BR/><BR/>Israel/Diaspora controls the fundraising of both the Democrats and Republicans national and local operations.<BR/><BR/>Israel/Diaspora controls at least 80% of the US media. <BR/><BR/>Israel/Diaspora controls the software architecture of the US phone system. <BR/><BR/>Anyone who disputes these facts of modern life is a clumsy liar. It all adds up to CONTROL over the future of USA on any and all issues relating to Israel. It is up to them to decide when the "special relationship" is no longer worthwhile. Not you, pal.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-18741201615104579512007-08-26T17:20:00.000-07:002007-08-26T17:20:00.000-07:00Bill,You are engaging in sophistry. You claim to h...Bill,<BR/><BR/>You are engaging in sophistry. You claim to have demonstrated something when you clearly haven't. You haven't demonstrated that the brief airlift to Israel in October of 1973 led to the fall of South Vietnam in the Spring of 1975. <BR/><BR/>The orthodox, conservative, view of history is that it was the Democratic Congress (elected in a post-Watergate landslide in '74) that led to the fall of South Vietnam, by cutting off American military aid and banning American air support in the face of the North Vietnamese invasion. The orthodox, liberal, view of history is that South Vietnam would have fallen anyway, even if Congress hadn't cut off American aid, and that, in any case, the war wasn't worth fighting. <BR/><BR/>So far, you are the first person I have seen claim that it was the October 1973 airlift to Israel that doomed South Vietnam; your theory -- unsupported by any evidence that this airlift denied South Vietnam of military equipment it would have received otherwise before it was invaded by the North over a year later -- isn't "orthodox" at all. It's dubious.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-36764565597736318482007-08-26T17:19:00.000-07:002007-08-26T17:19:00.000-07:00Isn't it also obviously right that the "loss" of I...<I>Isn't it also obviously right that the "loss" of Israel wouldn't seriously threaten the security of the US? </I><BR/>You are not asking me but since Israel is a huge thorn in America's side, costing both money and international good will, from my paleocon perspective, the loss of Israel couldn't be more welcome.<BR/><BR/>I admit, seeing myself as awfully conservative, I don't get warmongering conservatism. All you need is a stockpile of nukes, some statements to the effect that you <I>will</I> use them if seriously threatened, and then you can go about your business. MAD (i.e. mutually assured destruction)=peace. It's analagous to ever man having a gun, with civility ensuing. Vietnam was a serious waste of time and money and all kinds of western nations got stuck with Asiatic "refugees" who never went home. If war is going to be used as apolicy instrument then let's see some actual <I>benefit</I>. Is this too much to ask?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-56843398010008019872007-08-26T15:16:00.000-07:002007-08-26T15:16:00.000-07:00Bill,Kudos to you for creativity. That's the first...<I>Bill,<BR/><BR/>Kudos to you for creativity. That's the first time I've seen Israel blamed for the fall of South Vietnam.<BR/><BR/>-anon</I><BR/><BR/>Well then you haven't seen much. It wasn't just General Brown; Nixon said it too:<BR/><BR/><I>"I'm the <A HREF="http://www.slate.com/id/1003783/" REL="nofollow">director of the Nixon Library</A> and thus the promulgator of the analysis of the tape opening that Timothy Noah quotes.<BR/><BR/>Here's what I noticed about the NY Times article: It neglected to mention a principal source of RN's frustration about the Jewish community, which is plenty clear in our analysis and the tapes themselves: Many of the same folks who wanted the U.S. to support Israel against her aggressive foreign enemies did not particularly want the U.S. to support South Vietnam against hers."</I><BR/><BR/>Why would the Israel lobby be against supporting S. Vietnam at the time? Because they wanted the material support to go to Israel, obviously. <BR/><BR/><I>A couple of little problems with your scenario though: The Yom Kippur War happened in October, 1973, and was over in about a month. Assets flown into Israel came from the United States and Europe for the most part, not one of our massive bases in Asia supporting the Vietnam War. And the North's final invasion of South Vietnam didn't start until more than a year the Yom Kippur War was over.<BR/><BR/>-anon</I><BR/><BR/>The NVA used the US diversion of supplies from Vietnam to the ME to build their own stockpile, and when the balance was clearly in their favor, they made their move. <BR/><BR/>So yes, the orthodox (paleocon) historical view is that support for Israel undermined the Vietnam war effort.<BR/><BR/>I don't know why people see this as a moral judgment call -- it's just what's been documented. Perhaps supporting Israel was more in our interest than supporting S. Vietnam at the time. Why don't you make an argument for that instead of denying historical facts?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-37288810681387673122007-08-26T14:35:00.000-07:002007-08-26T14:35:00.000-07:00Regarding Korea and China and Japan and potential ...Regarding Korea and China and Japan and potential dominos falling:<BR/><BR/><I>“…Despite a ban on offensive capabilities, both Japanese and U.S. planners say the only effective ballistic and cruise missile defense of Japan must include the ability to penetrate enemy air defenses to strike missiles before they can be launched. …”<BR/><BR/><BR/>Ares <BR/>A Defense Technology Blog <BR/><BR/><BR/>Japan's Raptors on the Radar<BR/><BR/>Posted by David A. Fulghum at 8/1/2007 11:24 AM <BR/><BR/><BR/>The unstated rationale for selling F-22s to Japan is to build a cruise and ballistic missile defense in conjunction with the U.S., say U.S. Air Force and aerospace industry officials. The F-22’s advanced active, electronically-scanned array (AESA) radar is necessary to detect small, stealthy targets in flight or to pick out ballistic missile launchers on the ground. With the idea of insisting on the F-22, but knowing that it may take time to push through the U.S. bureaucracy, Japanese planners have decided to upgrade its F-15J Eagles with AESA radars to extend their operational life. That would at least start laying the foundation for a cruise missile defense of Japan. It will, however, take the F-22’s air-defense evading stealth capability to go after ballistic missile launch sites.<BR/><BR/>Despite a ban on offensive capabilities, both Japanese and U.S. planners say the only effective ballistic and cruise missile defense of Japan must include the ability to penetrate enemy air defenses to strike missiles before they can be launched. Hawks, Patriots and Aegis air defense ships aren’t enough to stop all the ballistic and low-visibility cruise missiles, military and aerospace industry officials say.<BR/><BR/>Some of them also contend that non-stealthy aircraft can’t penetrate an integrated air defense if it includes double-digit surface to air missiles like the Russian-designed SA-10, SA-20 and SA-22. ( But why does the a/c have to be manned? – DD. ) An air force must at least have the capability to attack the launch sites “to put an offensive ballistic missile capability at risk,” a senior Air Force official involved in the debate says. “You’ve got to get out in front of [cruise and ballistic] missile launches. Otherwise, some are going to get through.”<BR/><BR/>Japan is now reordering its priorities and will accelerate upgrades of its F-15Js. The 200-odd Eagles ( Betcha didn’t know Japan has that many F-15’s. Japan arguably has a better equipped Air Force than the entire European Union, including the UK. Or should I say, the EU provinces formerly known as UK? ) also will stay in service longer, according to a budget plan that is clearly designed to allow the country to later renew its push for F-22s, despite the U.S. House Appropriations Committee’s decision last month to maintain the export ban. …</I><BR/><BR/>http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs...1-9ca89286e819<BR/>dominoes<BR/><BR/>Israel wants F-22's also, I read.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-63715016287525146972007-08-26T14:03:00.000-07:002007-08-26T14:03:00.000-07:00On the central question -- would the "loss" of Vie...<I>On the central question -- would the "loss" of Vietnam seriously threaten the security of the United States -- liberals were obviously right and conservatives obviously wrong. </I><BR/><BR/>Isn't it also obviously right that the "loss" of Israel wouldn't seriously threaten the security of the US? <BR/><BR/>A yes or no answer to this central question, please. <BR/><BR/> :0\ ?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-74998683465010373042007-08-26T13:43:00.000-07:002007-08-26T13:43:00.000-07:00Steve: my point is that there is no "fortunately" ...Steve: my point is that there is no "fortunately" about the Soviet focus on places like Ethiopia or Afghanistan rather than Poland or Europe. As I see it, they simply did not have the military power, the resources, or the influence/moral credibility to hold on to Europe. The Russians considered a military response to Solidarity, but knew they couldn't afford it. I don't think we dodged a bullet because of Russian mistakes, we fundamentally had the Russians in a box already. Vietnam had nothing to do with that.<BR/><BR/>Anon 11:31 presents us with more evidence of insanity:<BR/><BR/>"does it matter if Spain is conquered by Morocco? I'll note you can't rebut that fact (it would be easy absent US military force to do it)."<BR/><BR/>According to the latest data, Morocco spends less than $3 billion annually on its military, while Spain spends about $16 billion. Furthermore, Spain is a member of the EU, which collectively spends $293 billion annually on its military and includes two nuclear powers. If the U.S. vanished from the earth tomorrow, the EU could easily defeat all of the Arab/North African powers combined. In fact, it would be *easier* for Europe to defeat the Arabs without the U.S., because most Arab money and equipment comes from the U.S.<BR/><BR/>"This is laughable MQ. We saw a decrease in military spending per GDP, and "moral authority" does not exist. Any more than Santa Claus"<BR/><BR/>Military spending per GDP isn't what win wars, the absolute size of the military wins wars. <BR/><BR/>Also, moral authority not only exists, it is extremely important. At least as important as military might. You don't seem to know much about military history or strategy, but a rather famous general once said "the moral is to the physical as three to one"...no liberal he! <BR/><BR/>"There is no such thing as Moral Authority. Nations act in their own interests out of fear, greed, and ambition. Nothing more."<BR/><BR/>Nations act in their own interests, so they fight hard and violently against foreign powers they do not trust to respect their interests in a reasonable way. "Soft power" refers to the moral credibility that leads other nations to believe that you will reasonably accomodate their legitimate interests, and they can trust you to negotiate and cooperate in good faith. It is much cheaper and easier for all concerned to be able to cooperate and settle things peaceably rather than fight wars. <BR/><BR/>"Liberals are clueless and stupid about the use of military force." <BR/><BR/>Wrong, liberals are realistic and knowledgeable about the use of military force. In particular, liberals understand the limitations of military force, as revealed in e.g. WWI, also in all the various colonial-type wars waged since WWII (Algeria, Vietnam I and II, Afghanistan, etc.), and in the Cold War, where the Soviet Union was not defeated by direct application of military force. Violent force is extremely risky, expensive, uncertain, breeds resistance, generally involves immoral levels of civilian causalties in order to work, fails more often than it succeeds, and even when it does succeed has unpredictable consequences.<BR/><BR/>"Military force got Tibet for China. It ended the Rwandan Genocide. It got Saddam (briefly, absent US force) Kuwait and out of his war debts. It got India an independent Bangladesh instead of East Pakistan."<BR/><BR/>The first two cases involve some of the smallest, poorest countries on earth, lessons are limited. You might as well point to the successful U.S. invasion of Panama. Gulf War I was only "successful" (partially so), because the planners understood the limits of military force and did not drive on to Baghdad. India's problems with Pakistan are in no way solved. <BR/><BR/>In general, very few large-scale strategic problems are solved by the application of military force, although force may be some part of the answer. (For example, force in can buy time or deter aggression until political or social evolution causes the problem to fade. This is usually most effective in a defensive or deterrent posture). The major exception this century was the problem of Hitler, which was solved by aggressive war. But Hitler only rose to power because of the misguided resort to war that occured in WWI. If the West had been wiser and more peaceful in 1914, Hitler and Stalin would both likely have stayed minor street thugs.<BR/><BR/>A sober and realistic assessment of our experience this century will tell you much about the limits of war as a solution to human problems. The problem is that many self-styled conservatives today seem have psychological problems that lead them to sentimentalize war and violence, and to desparately wish their own country would engage in more of it. I think that this has to do with feeling insecure in their masculinity. Perhaps their own feelings of powerlessness create an unconscious identification with violence. It wouldn't be so interesting, except that some of them have managed to take power in this country.<BR/><BR/>MQAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-68209046026859111982007-08-26T11:02:00.000-07:002007-08-26T11:02:00.000-07:00Off topic comment:I'm sure Steve could have a fiel...Off topic comment:<BR/><BR/>I'm sure Steve could have a field day with this idiotic article on low unemployment in Montana. No, it isn't satire.<BR/><BR/>http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070825/D8R820QO0.html<BR/><BR/>HELENA, Mont. (AP) - The owner of a fast food joint in Montana's booming oil patch found himself outsourcing the drive-thru window to a Texas telemarketing firm, not because it's cheaper but because he can't find workers.<BR/><BR/>...<BR/><BR/>John Francis, who owns the McDonald's in Sidney, Mont., said he tried advertising in the local newspaper and even offered up to $10 an hour to compete with higher-paying oil field jobs. Yet the only calls were from other business owners upset they would have to raise wages, too. Of course, Francis' current employees also wanted a pay hike.<BR/><BR/>"I don't know what the answer is," Francis said. "There's just nobody around that wants to work."<BR/> <BR/>...<BR/><BR/>For years, the resort has imported dozens of workers from Eastern Europe who often come as much for the summer recreation opportunity as the money. This year, however, that wasn't enough and so for the first time the resort also sent recruiters to a high school job fair, said spokeswoman Greer Terry. It only helped a little.<BR/><BR/>...<BR/><BR/>He said the problem is compounded by the fact that employers, accustomed to paying relatively low wages, have been slow to increase salaries. Montana wages have historically been among the lowest in the country, and still rank near the bottom. The silver lining for workers is that wages are now growing at the third-fastest rate among U.S. states.<BR/><BR/>...<BR/><BR/>"The squeeze is on. You get into these 2 percent and less unemployment rates and you're moving into a seller's market with the seller being the worker," Swanson said.<BR/><BR/>Officials worry the razor thin labor market could bind economic growth, although there has been no indication of that yet.<BR/><BR/>"One of the reasons we are seeing the lower (unemployment) rates is we are starting to see more investment in our economy. It's like finding an undervalued stock," said Tyler Turner, Montana's economic development chief.<BR/><BR/>...<BR/><BR/>But questions remain about how long the West can weather the problems that come with low unemployment.<BR/><BR/>"The hardest thing is to keep the economy growing at a strong rate when you have a low unemployment rate," he said. "Take a company that wants to expand. Where is the next worker going to come from?"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-17617305125920627842007-08-26T10:54:00.000-07:002007-08-26T10:54:00.000-07:00Bill,Kudos to you for creativity. That's the first...Bill,<BR/><BR/>Kudos to you for creativity. That's the first time I've seen Israel blamed for the fall of South Vietnam. <BR/><BR/>A couple of little problems with your scenario though: The Yom Kippur War happened in October, 1973, and was over in about a month. Assets flown into Israel came from the United States and Europe for the most part, not one of our massive bases in Asia supporting the Vietnam War. And the North's final invasion of South Vietnam didn't start until more than a year the Yom Kippur War was over.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com