previous post next post  

H&I Fires 23 April, 2008

April 23, 2008 | | Comments (16)

Open post for those with something to share, updated through the day. New, complete posts come in below this one. Note: If trackbacking, please acknowledge this post in your post. That's only polite.

You're advertising here, we should get an ad at your place...

Time to add a new caveat, because from email it's not clear to some folks (mind you, if you don't read this it won't matter...) Being an open post, people (collectively, the Denizens) other than I post in the H&I. They sign their work (most of the time) - keep that in mind when you want to flame someone in email please - if it doesn't say "The Armorer" or "John" then I didn't write it! And honestly - if you don't like something said or posted... leave a comment, and hash it out (within the context of The Rulez which are clearly posted on the comment form, I would add).
**************************************************************************

I'm too tired to write anything brilliant this evening/morning so I'll just throw up some links and a few drive by snarks. (and the crowd goes wild, screaming "Thank you Jesus!")

Speaking of Jesus, this being a gun blog and me talking about the ultimate original "Guns and God" founders...hearkening back to the second round of "Guns and God" in this country, Army Chorus does a rendition of the Battle Hymn of the Republic for the Pope last week. That is pretty much the quintessential "Guns and God" moment of all time. h/t I don't know cause I lost the link

Speaking of God and Guns, Religious justification eludes leaders of al-Qaeda in the Maghreb. Maghreb would be North Africa for any AQ affiliate challenged readers. Specifically, Algiers, Tunisia, etc.

This is why highly-regarded Salafist imams have been pressed to provide religious legitimacy for such actions. According to local media, al-Qaeda network members have recently urged Mohamed Ali Ferkous, Abdelghani Rouissat, Cheikh Lazhar and other Salafist leaders around the world to voice their interpretations of suicide attacks.

Several internationally-renowned Salafist ulemas, such as Tartoussi, Abou Bakr El Djazairi and Youcef El Qaradhaoui, have denounced the use of suicide attacks.

If you "no comprende", first, we take a pause from our own internal navel gazing at our great divides to witness the enemy's divide made public for our edification. Second, the bizarrely positive side effect of invading Iraq and having AQ blow up thousands of Muslims in their futile attempt to establish le grande kaliphat, you get to see real, meaningful, internal discourse on the Islamic version of the "law of land warfare".

Al Qaida to Iran: Stolen Valor

Sadr City Residents: Stuck in the Middle With You

"People have started raising doubts about Mahdi Army's intentions and operations, saying that helicopters would not hit unless attacked," she said. "People are not happy with the Mahdi Army or the government."

Barbary Pirates, Take 3 -Kat

*******************************************

Bill Roggio notices a change in the U.S. military's rhetoric about Muqtada al Sadr. Secretary Rice recently implied he was a coward, but that was only the beginning.

The French press continue report straight good news from Iraq that so many other outlets are ignoring. After the Bombs, Tomatoes. Arab Jabour was cleaned out just this spring as part of 3ID's pushing clearance operations southward from Baghdad. This was an area terrorized by AQ, and the people are incredibly grateful to see them gone (it includes interesting coverage of an aspect of AQ leaving an area that I'd never though of before). This is your heart-warming Iraq story for the day--don't miss it.

The MSM is finally admitting what so many of us have been grinding our teeth (and more) about: Objectivity is a fantasy.

To balance the Iraq good news, here's some reporting on "climate change" that will chill you in more ways than one.

And if you haven't heard about it yet, the inestimable LA Times suggests that perhaps McCain is not qualified for the presidency because he receives veterans disability payments. Line that up with McGovern's suggestion that since McCain was shot down and held as a POW, he's incompetent and see where that takes you... Well, a commenter at Ace's put it pretty well: "So if getting shot down makes you an incompetent loser, what does that make the 55,000 who were killed?" And I'll add: what about the tens of thousands severely wounded both then and now? I'm going to refrain from further comment until I've found a way to vent my rage. - FbL

*******************************************

All the Apache pilots around here want to know where they can find this ground crew? -the Armorer

*********************************

Gosh, what a surprise... LTG Petraeus has been tapped to be the next Commander of CENTCOM. LTG Odierno will take Petraeus' place. Be interesting to see how the Senate Inquisition treats LTG Petraeus this time around. H/t, Mike L. -the Armorer

**********************************
Speaking of the whining ex-Lieutenant Weiner (as we did yesterday) comes this missive sent to Neptunus Lex regarding IRR warriors who shoulder their burdens and soldier on. The system may be unfair, and if so, we should work to fix it. But once you take the Queen's Shilling, you should do your duty, as did these warriors. -the Armorer

**********************************

*A term of art from the artillery. Harassment and Interdiction Fires.

Back in the day, when you could just kill people and break things without a note from a lawyer, they were pre-planned, but to the enemy, random, fires at known gathering points, road junctions, Main Supply Routes, assembly areas, etc - to keep the bad guy nervous that the world around him might start exploding at any minute.

Not really relevant to today's operating environment, right? But, it *is*

The UAVs we fly over Afghanistan and Pakistan looking for targets of opportunity are a form of H&I fires, if you really want to parse it finely. We just have better sensors and fire control now.

I call the post that because it's random things posted by me and people I've given posting privileges to that particular topic. It's also an open trackback, so if (Don Surber uses it this way a lot) someone has a post they're proud of, but it really isn't either Castle kind of stuff, or topical to a particular post, I've basically given blanket permission to use that post for that purpose. Another term of art that might be appropriate is "Free Fire Zone".

Share This Article:

Categories:

16 Comments

By Maggie on April 23, 2008 8:28 AM
While the BHotR is a very stirring piece and the Army Chorus does an incredible job with it.....it was completely inappropriate to play this selection for the Pope. Pope Benedict is opposed to war in general and our going into Iraq in particular. I don't know if the playing of this hymn was an oversight or a zing, I'd like to think the former.
 
By Fishmugger on April 23, 2008 9:08 AM
The Pope arrived as Head of State not as vicar. He received a 21 gun salute as is our custom for all Heads of State. While he, like most sane people, is against war, a goodly number of his flock has the freedom to practice their religion because people wearing the uniform of the singers paid for that freedom. It isn't bad form to remind him of that fact.
 
By John of Argghhh! on April 23, 2008 10:17 AM
Being a POW means you were incompetent? Heh. A claim that can only be made by someone who's never walked or flown the fields where the Iron Crosses grow. Sometimes, the math just sucks. Oh, it *can* mean you became a POW because of incompetence, yours or other's - but the reverse doesn't hold true, that you're incompetent because you were a POW. As for the disability thing - my 70% rating is because of the short-term and long-term costs and limitations on my ability to live an average normal physical life. I get money because my hearing is damaged, my joints are damaged, and my endocrine system is damaged. I can still work, and make decent money doing it, too - but out at the farm, I work deals with people to get physical things done I used to be able to do for myself (or I impress Gollum). That's what the payment is for. I can't swing a hammer over my head anymore - not for more than a few whacks, because if I do, my left leg ceases to work because of damage to my neck - caused by my service. Besides, this meme coming from the people who gave us the Americans with Disabilities Act, and who revere the wheelchair-bound President Franklin Roosevelt - well, lets just say their grip of history is a little shallow or skewed. More honestly speaking - they consider being a Republican the disability that disqualifies you from the Presidency....
 
By ry on April 23, 2008 12:34 PM
I'm going to have to dissent, tangentially, on the no objectivity thing, Fuzz. Yes, there is such a thing as objectivity. If an electron of specific energy hits a detector in my IR spectrometer it tells me something. The conclusions I draw from that are something else entirely. News *can* be objective, and Ace hit on what the MSM should be doing: don't chew our steak for us just tell us what happened. If they did that news would be objective. "He said this, she said this in response." It would be utterly boring, but it'd be objective. Of course, they don't teach that much. No, one of the first things I remember being taught about journalism back in HS was that you had to have a 'hook', something that grabbed the attention and got the reader emotionally involved. That's a flippin' mistake, imo. BUt, yeah, news can be objective. It'd read like methodology section in a chemistry journal, but it'd be objective.
 
By Casey Tompkins on April 23, 2008 1:27 PM
Hmmm, that's not what the former UPI guy who taught Journalism at Miami told me, Ry. His primary question was: what's the real story? We had to learn to identify that before we proceeded to the whole "pyramidal writing" bit. :) He used to give us handouts which replicated incomplete notes and bad grammar as if taken from actual sources, then we would have to figure out the real story; he didn't just tell us. Caveat: I was not a Journalism major, but followed a special interest in technical writing, wherein I included journalism. Honestly; while there were obviously liberal professors at Miami University's English Department, everyone I've ever worked with was quite professional, and I never encountered any attempt at any kind of indoctrination there. Over at Ace's place some of the commenters have gotten rather ugly about McGovern's comments. Yes, go after the man's position or policy, but they're taking the low road, such as hoping he shuffles off this mortal coil ASAP. McGovern may be a goofy, squishy liberal, but also served honorably as a bomber pilot. In fact (just checked Wiki) he was awarded the DFC. Not too shabby. I think we can beat him up pretty well just on policy, without getting personal.
 
By John of Argghhh! on April 23, 2008 1:36 PM
Hence the Rulez for this place. Hence, why Ace is much more popular. I refuse to accept it has anything to do with content. 8^ ) I'm sure it's all to do with commenting policy. Yeah, I believe that.
 
By Damian on April 23, 2008 2:25 PM
Ry, objectivity is truly a fairy tale in the journalistic world. If only because, no matter how even-handedly they report it, reporters and editors still choose the column length, the headline, the lede, and where it's placed in the page. Not to mention that they choose what stories are considered "news" and what stories aren't worth reporting. Millions of cars drive down hwy 401 in Toronto every day, but only the crashes make the 6 o'clock news, as they say. Read this Robert Fulford piece about the fairy tale. And remember: fairness and objectivity aren't the same thing. One may be achievable in the reporting world, and the other simply isn't.
 
By fdcol63 on April 23, 2008 3:33 PM
Imagine a world where over 90% of journalists, academia, and Hollywood described themselves as "conservative" or "right of center". Did that scare you? Did you doubt their "objectivity"?
 
By Maggie on April 23, 2008 5:21 PM
"The Pope arrived as Head of State not as vicar." So? When another Head of State arrives on our shores, we should not be sensitive to their feelings to the extent which we are able? What's the message when we give you a big welcome and then play a song that highlights a painful difference of opinion? There were plenty of other options and we should have exercised them.
 
By ry on April 23, 2008 8:49 PM
Oh, you didn't just play the multi-culturalism card, did you Maggs? Right, so the next time our President goes to some country they ought to do things our way, you konw, to make them feel welcome. It's our rather formal thing. AFAIK, the Pope hasn't complained about it so what's the big deal? It's possible to be objective, and brief. That's what they do when they teach you to keep a lab journal(put as much detail into as few words as possible). It can be done. Likely is another story. Casey, I dunno, I just don't trust journos(on avg, some are okay). The mere fact that they're intentionally doing something to bring emotion into a statement of fact makes the whole exercise suspect to me. Yes, there's a lot more to it than simply reporting what is or wasn't said. But a lot of it is. There wouldn't be complaints if they hadn't screwed the whole enterprise up somehow.
 
By Argent on April 23, 2008 11:24 PM
Maggie if you look carefully, politeness may be the normal order of the day in diplomatic circles but sensitivity to feelings is not. It is possible to be objective. If your life and hopes are anything but, it's really a personal experience for you, not the way things actually are. Lack of objectivity in the media is related to the consumer and the lack of consequence for lining the facts with errors, spin, distortions and outright lies. They sell fabricated emotion, where the story is against a consumer's principles or for it yielding the emotionally addictive qualities required. They do not sell truth because few are buying it. How much do you pay for your news? You, Ry, brief? Hmm so it can be done. Lab journals you know are not entirely to serve you despite what you may have been told. Underneath the memory and diagnosis aid they can be, they are to allow the research entity to prove intellectual ownership of your ideas in case it's a problem later. Sometimes it's also used to show you're actually working.
 
By Casey Tompkins on April 23, 2008 11:46 PM
John, I think that's a fairly important point. No, really. Look at the traffic here (where I must confess I enjoy genuine discussions, even when I disagree with people) compared to (say) Hot Air or Balloon Juice. I don't doubt they generate numbers far in excess of yours, but the atmosphere is much, much better here! It's the difference between Budweiser and Beck's... Ry, I make a distinction between journalists -who believe that "the personal is the political," and reporters, who tend to follow the Joe Friday "just the facts, m'am" paradigm. The gentleman who taught my class was definitely a reporter. ;) Damien highlights a separate issue: the fact that modern "journalism" is really a subset of the entertainment industry. Back in the day (when both 60 Minutes and Dan Rather were respectable) the Big Three (CBS, NBC, ABC) didn't worry about the profitability of their news divisions. The news was a form of public service. These days, the news division of a media corporation is expected to generate revenue just like all the other divisions; hence the "if it bleeds, it leads" mentality. A tremendous portion of our day-to-day intercourse is guided by the MSM's innate dedication to any kind of scandal or controversy, just to generate good ratings. This tends to explain why the same organizations (say the NYT) are quite willing to laud Hilary or McCain one month, then flay them the next. It's all about generating hot buzz for that particular publication. Even Fulford's piece accepted the idea that scandal trumps objective. fdcol63 sez: 'Imagine a world where over 90% of journalists, academia, and Hollywood described themselves as "conservative" or "right of center". Did that scare you? Did you doubt their "objectivity"?' Dude, that's not a hypothetical, that's freaking science fiction... Heh.
 
By ry on April 24, 2008 12:29 AM
Casey, yeah, and that's why Eric Alterman isn't 100% wrong when he derides the MSM as 'corpratist'. That still doesn't mean that it's wrong how they do it now. If the industry had an ethical core they wouldn't do it like they do currently.
 
By Maggie on April 24, 2008 1:24 AM
Ry - I fail to see your point. How is this a matter of multiculturalism? As far as I have seen, when our President goes abroad no other government provides entertainment that is inappropriate. After all, that's what this was, a ceremony to entertain and welcome and celebrate the Pope. Everything else that day was planned with an eye toward pleasing him, wasn't it. We invited 9,000 people to come and sing Happy Birthday to him. Why would we not be concerned that all of the ceremony should be appropriate. "AFAIK, the Pope hasn't complained about it so what's the big deal?" What? This has to be one of the weakest defenses. LOL Just how would the Pope have conveyed his displeasure? "Alright, off with the funny hat! That's it! Cardinal McCarrick, hold my robe" Then he kicks off the Prada shoes and he and O'Malley wade into the crowd? So, since that didn't happen, Pope Benedict must have been pleased? Yeah, ok. ********** Argent - "Maggie if you look carefully, politeness may be the normal order of the day in diplomatic circles but sensitivity to feelings is not." Again, I feel this is splitting hairs. We, in essence invited a guest into our home. What is the difference between being polite, being good hosts and being sensitive to our guests feelings?
 
By HomefrontSix on April 24, 2008 1:47 AM
MacGyver says, with regard to said Apache crew, they are in the back of the Chinook. Apaches can't handle that many passengers...
 
By Argent on April 24, 2008 2:16 AM
Ry: There's only one real ethic in business. Every other ethic has to feed of the first. It has to be financially justified. Long term or short term. Not only that, the leaders and consumers have to have the vision to see such a new ethic in action. This has not been the case in news and I do not foresee that changing anytime soon. Maggie: If the pope wanted to display his displeasure he only had to open his mouth and speak. No, you invited the pope to your nation. This is not Miss Marple's teaparty with the vicar. And even that involves saying things the vicar may not want to hear. Diplomats are not just guests because the goals are different. The question to ask yourself is this. Why were they invited? If it was merely to convey pleasure to the guest then sure it's all politeness, niceness and pink petunias. Not a feather ruffled. Even this, I do not sit well with. Ask yourself have you never ever ruffled the feathers of a guest invited to your home? But diplomats go places for Reasons. They are invited for Reasons. Such Reasons are very rarely to just involve and convey pleasure. It's quite a bit of business. You see what I am getting at? The core of this is the difference between friends and allies. Something I think one of your founding fathers or leaders impressed on you. To you the pope is probably more a friend which explains your outrage, but to the US he's just an ally. It's really something I have to touch on more deeply considering Australia is in that position of ally not friend as well.
 
© 2008 John Donovan
All rights reserved.