previous post next post  

H&I* Fires, 23 MAY 2008

By Denizens on May 23, 2008 | | Comments (22)

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).

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

Over at Murdoc Online - a very funny bumpersticker. Well, at least if you're me it is. H/t, CAPT H.

John Hawkins over at Right Wing News takes his marbles and goes home. Why I can no longer support John McCain. The problem I have with this approach is... go ahead, surrender the Supreme Court. It won't matter, right? Heh. It's easier to undo Congressional foibles than it is to undo the Court, especially since the Congress and Executive have defaulted an immense amount of power to the Court.

Bob Owens on the "Assault on soldiers in DC" that... wasn't really. -the Armorer

********************************
Heh. The pundits keep piling on Senator McCain - Stop the ACLU, La Malkin, Allahpundit. -the Armorer

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

Neptunus Lex - in teh belly of teh beast. -the Armorer

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

Wounded people never asked me about my sexual orientation. They were just glad to see me there.

It seems to me like the U.S. Air Force lost a heck of a nurse... - Damian

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

*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. Another term of art that might be appropriate is "Free Fire Zone".

Share This Article:

Categories:

22 Comments

By Murdoc on May 23, 2008 8:10 AM
Thanks for the link! I don't know why I didn't email you that. I usually try to send you everything that deals with anything in excess of .50 cal...
 
By wolfwalker on May 23, 2008 8:15 AM
Armorer, you wrote:
The problem I have with this approach is... go ahead, surrender the Supreme Court. It won't matter, right?
That's right. It won't. Here's why: All three remaining candidates support "comprehensive immigration reform" -- a code phrase for amnesty and a quick path to citizenship for illegals. So does a majority of Congress. Thus, amnesty and citizenship is now a fait accompli, impossible to stop and unlikely even to be delayed. I expect the new "comprehensive immigration reform" bill will grant immediate amnesty to be followed by citizenship within three years -- just in time for the next election cycle. If not, then certainly in time for the cycle after that (2016). That bill will pass before June 2009. Those new citizens will vote overwhelmingly Democrat. Therefore, a Democrat majority and Democrat control of all elected offices are now guaranteed within eight years at the most. That control will be permanent. Even a conservative judiciary, assuming RINO McCain could and would deliver such a thing in the face of a Demorat-controlled Congress, won't be able to stop the socialists. The United States is finished. I give it thirty years after the D's take over before they run it into the ground. Maybe forty. But no more than that.
 
By Jason on May 23, 2008 8:38 AM
"The problem I have with this approach is... go ahead, surrender the Supreme Court. It won't matter, right?" And by surrender, you mean "make it impossible to lock in a fully 'constructionist' right-wing Supreme Court, right?" Because best case, any replacements we see over the next eight years will be left-wing judges replacing left-wing judges. Why exactly is that a bad thing? You still get pro-torture, pro-warrentless wiretap, anti-Rowe v. Wade advocates tilting the balance throughout the next administration. Seems like a deal for your side.
 
By John of Argghhh! on May 23, 2008 8:38 AM
Wolfwalker: Heh. You and my buddy Kevin. It's been this bad, arguably worse, before. And we've recovered. Wilson and FDR come to mind, when discussing breath-taking power grabs, all in the name of doing the right thing, of course.
 
By John of Argghhh! on May 23, 2008 8:49 AM
Well, you're right, Jason. That's all I care about. I want to lock wimmin up in baby factories, torture the bad guys and anyone who we happen to pick up with them, and listen in on your phone conversations. So, you concede my argument that the Court has been ceded way too much power then, eh?
 
By Yu-Ain Gonnano on May 23, 2008 10:08 AM
I'm sorry, but the "He's abandoning Security for Amnesty" cries are BS. The question McCain was answering were about H1-B Visas with regard to highly skilled positions (scientists, etc.) These are not positions that get filled by illegal immigrants. I know, I hire a bunch. And that's because
 
By Jason on May 23, 2008 10:09 AM
Ceded too much power? Are you high? All the Court has been doing for eight years is consolidating power for the vast right-wing conspiracy, and you're guaranteed not to lose power for the next eight years, unless one of the conservative judges goes hunting with Dick Cheney. And I didn't say that those previously listed positions are YOUR high points, but they certainly do reflect the platform of the Republican Party (and the one-half of the Court). You are known by the company you keep, sir.
 
By Yu-Ain Gonnano on May 23, 2008 10:15 AM
Oops, don't know what happened to the 3rd paragraph. It's supposed to read That's because <1% of the population is qualified for my jobs. No one walks off the street and builds non-stationary stochastic models. If you want to blow up a building there are easier ways than spending 4 years getting a BS in Math and another 2-3 getting a MS in Statistics or 4-5 years getting a PhD in Econometrics. I'm sorry, these are not the terrorists you're looking for.
 
By Kevin on May 23, 2008 10:46 AM
What Wolfwalker said.... and "Wilson and FDR come to mind" You'll note that the sad, vast majority of their programs and their massive expansion of the Federal Government are still in place and plaguing us to this day. As for McAmnesty... isn't he meeting with La Raza? So much for not negotiating with our 'enemies'. My guy was/is correct on the two most important issues facing this nation. Write in or no, he's still getting my vote. Gadsden Flag and Stars n' Bars ready to be raised.
 
By wolfwalker on May 23, 2008 10:57 AM
John, I'm serious: can you give me any good reason to believe my analysis and prediction are wrong? The only chance I can see (short of a bloody revolution, which I really don't want to see) is that voters in general, and Democrat voters in particular, start crunching some numbers and realize this nation genuinely can't afford the spending commitments it's already made, let alone add any new ones, and vote out the tax-and-spenders. But they haven't done it yet, and I don't see any reason to think they will in future. Do you?
 
By Oldloadr on May 23, 2008 11:34 AM
Jason says those things like they are bad (LOL). I wish his gun-hating, baby killing friends all the best, too...
 
By BillT on May 23, 2008 11:44 AM
...voters in general, and Democrat voters in particular, start crunching some numbers and realize this nation genuinely can't afford the spending commitments... Never happen. Special Interests A-to-Z will dig in their heels and insist Special Interests AA-to-ZZ take the hits -- and, oh-by-the-way, they'll demand the "savings" be funneled to Special Interests A-to-Z. Meanwhile, Special Interests AA-to-ZZ will be etc., etc. Don't count on *anything* resembling a common sense approach emanating from the Left, especially if money's involved...
 
By Yu-Ain Gonnano on May 23, 2008 11:56 AM
Bill, That's the thing I don't get. The whole "If the Dems win then maybe the R will get it back together and be 'Real Conservatives' is predicated on the assumption that if things get "bad enough" people will wake up and start voting for limited gov't. The problem is that we have test cases all around us of countries much further left than we are and they keep voting for more socialism. Then they get it, and they vote for more of it. Where is this "Waking Up" we're being told would happen? I can't see any evidence of it at all. It seems to me, if you want the Republicans to become "Real Conservatives" you are going to have to do more than take your ball and go home.
 
By Cannoneer No. 4 on May 23, 2008 1:27 PM
Scylla won't get strict constructionist justices confirmed, John. Neither will Charybdis. At this point all we have left to decide is who the survivors of the future will blame for the fall of the Third Republic. wolfwalker has got it mostly right. Functional Westphalian nation-state representative republics don't last forever. The time to make preparations for the future is now, while you still have some property rights. Entrepreneurial Frontiersmen must act while the environment is still permissive. They will be the producers in what is left of the economy upon whose back the welfare state will be tightly cinched. Gated communities and islands of light in a sea of socialist darkness, the capable seceeding from the needy, those who can seperating themselves from the insatiable demands of those who can't. The future will be a struggle between Entrepreneurial Frontiersmen trying to preserve the fruits of their labors from rapacious redistributionist totalitarians. Don't want to live in that future? Tough. The previous choices all of us collectively made or failed to make have brought us to the edge of the abyss.
 
By Maggie on May 23, 2008 6:08 PM
Not sure why I want to bother with this. Kevin is never going to be budged. Neither am I. What the hell, in for a penny, in for a pound. I might catch a lurker on the fence and pull him/her my way. First, the whole "Teach the country a lesson" arguement, I addressed here. Next, John Hawkins calling McCain a liar for stating a view that he has always had and none of us can argue with is ridiculous. Does anyone think our current immigration policy works? I don't. Therefore, it requires an overhaul - comprehensive immigration reform. McCain used to say that was his top immigration priority, followed by border security and employer sanctions. Last summer conservatives rose up. McCain said he got the message - Border security first and foremost, immigration reform after. He never said he gave up the idea of immigration reform. Why would he? It needs an overhaul. Next Wolfwalker - You think no matter who is elected we are in a 30 to 40 year slide to the end. Ok, I don't think so, but if I concede your point....why rush it? Certainly this slide is slower under McCain than Obama. Judgeships are important, but what about Iraq? If you believe we are succeeding there, and I do, how can you abandon it? Surely there is no question that Clinton or Obama would snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. This arguement is of course irrelevent to isolationists and Bush haters. If you are angry with Bush, fine. McCain is not Bush. If you are angry that the Republican party didn't pick your guy, get over it. That's the way the party works. If McCain isn't as conservative as you would like, remember he's a lot more conservative than Obama. In short, an Obama presidency is too high a price to pay for whatever grievance you have. Oh and John, if you are listening in on coversations.....make sure you have a bowl of popcorn for mine. You know how I love to get a Sailor on the line!
 
By Azygos on May 23, 2008 6:19 PM
The future will be a struggle between Entrepreneurial Frontiersmen trying to preserve the fruits of their labors from rapacious redistributionist totalitarians.
And the Air Force shoots itself in the foot throwing away a part of their vital infrastructure when they booted that nurse. Yu-Ain Gonnano You make some good points. Nursing is similar to your profession. One can't just throw warm bodies in the slot and get a proper result. Here in Phoenix we are short thousands of nurses. I used to teach at the University and Community College but quit the CC. Ever try to explain acid base to a student who has not had pathophysiology, algebra, chemestry, nutrition? From personal experience in todays market I have seen what damage bureaucrats running healthcare can cause. Just ask my patient Jessie, Oh wait you can't because he is dead. Dead because a bureaucrat demanded the working therapy I was using on him be stopped (no I did not stop it someone else did after I removed myself from his care). And just wait for the future when the nurses don't have the depth of education they need to fend off the bureaucrats.
 
By big al on May 24, 2008 3:14 AM
I really don't know enough about McCain's actual actions and voting record,but if he gets in,from what I've seen,he would more likely do the right thing as he sees it...This may not always be pleasant or agreeable to everyone but his entire past seems to prove he can actually draw his line in the sand ,so to speak,and stand behind what he thinks has to be done......As I said,not always the way you want but what in life really does turn out that way..
 
By ry on May 24, 2008 9:13 AM
Only chemistry and algebra are necessary to teach acid-base chemistry. Pathophysiolgy? Nutrition? Nope, not necessary. I should know, I've been teaching chuckleheads Ahrenius, etc, for a decade on it. And quit bashing CC students. I was one, and worked my way up to being a PhD candidate in chemistry. Maybe the problem is that nursing candidates aren't the sharpest tools in the shed to begin with? In my experience, nursing students always made the worst students, not as smart as other pre-meds. Just a bunch of ticket punchers. They didn't want to learn any of it. But that's only at two JCs and three universities, so I could be wrong to paint with such a broad brush.
 
By John of Argghhh! on May 24, 2008 10:21 AM
Well, even with your qualifier, Ry, that does count as gratuitous bashing, doing nothing to advance your point, even if it vents your pique... Nothing like calling the other commenter a ticket-puncher just because he dissed community college students without knowing you were one. Snerk. Geez, take a half-day off to go to Rosebud to pick up some more Angoras for the Tribe of Argghhh! No, we're not going native, that's what you call a group of goats, a tribe. Ladies, there's probably a good snark in there for you next time you sashay by a construction site and the goats start whistlin'...
 
By Azygos on May 24, 2008 8:34 PM
I did not say all those courses were necessary to teach acid base but doing well in ALL of them make it easier for the students to understand how the body works. If you read what I wrote I said I stopped teaching at the CC because those courses were dropped. If a student is not provided with the proper tools to understand something that is not the students fault. And by the way I've interacted with plenty of PhD types who were one subject smart and life STUPID. Having taught at the university and a CC I have first person experience that the programs are not equal. What I was taught in chemistry at the university level in the first three weeks is what they teach at the CC level for the entire semester, or at least they used to. The point of my comment was that the people who care for us when we are sick are in serious trouble and government is NOT the answer' Here in Arizona they had a commission to study the nursing shortage. Who do you think was not included on the panel? If you guessed nurses ding ding ding ding. God help us if universal denial of healthcare is inacted and some bureaucrat with an inadequate 2 year degree decides which treatments we can receive. Oh, wait, here in Arizona its already happened.
 
By ry on May 25, 2008 10:35 AM
Well, there was some nose tweaking intended, but I was also trying a new tactic, subletly.(That's what this was for: "But that's only at two JCs and three universities, so I could be wrong to paint with such a broad brush. "). making a massive generalization about a type of student from a very limited sample is not good science or thinking. But, yeah, the snark was heavy. It should be. There's a lot of reasons some of us wind up going the JC route(one of them being that in CA Gov Brown built a three tiered system starting at the JC level to increase overall number of Californians going to college). But, hey, let's just pile on the supposed idiots, right? As for nurse shortages, I have one word: Phillipines. Wwhere they've done a 4 year program, but have to do the whole thing over again if they come here. Just not worth it. And, hey, they produce more nurses there than we do here. We'll just let them all go to Japan instead. Hell, we have a dental shortage too. I knew a woman, who had to leave the country recently, trained at one of the top schools in Japan for oral surgery and anesthesia who couldn't get a job in the US in the field without doing 3-6 years of work. The system, simply put, sucks, and I wonder which union(s) went to bat to make it like this? Having done both the quarter system at a 4 year and a semester system at a JC I can say I'm glad they didn't try to ram more down one's throat at the JC. The breakneck speed at the UC system didn't mean we understood it better---there's a reason why curves rather than scales are near universal after all---just that we met the curricular goals of covering said topics. I walked in knowing more O-chem than most because I took it elsewhere---major advantage. I *still* run into profs who complain that their grad student doesn't know something about the field they're in but should(and the kid went to Colgate, or UWashington, or wherever, where they were like UCD and just rammed stuff thru regardless of how well anyone learned it. At the JC we took the ACS exam at the end of a year, and if you didn't pass it you failed the second half of either general chemistry and o-chem. Never heard of a 4 year doing that, so keep on believing a 4 year gaurantees a better education, because I can tell you, it sure as hell doesn't.) Now, a two year degree? sometimes it is the worst thing. SOmetime's it isn't. Mom went with a 2 year certification program(in 1950) for her nurse's aid job, and worked burn wards until she had her own kids in 1968(I'm the 1974 edition). Worked then, but, of course, they had specialization then that they don't allow for as much as they do now. And we still aren't going to let all those Phillipine nurses in to meet that shortage, are we? (Skippy-san will be annoyed. (Insided joke, don't worry about this.)) ASt ot the subject smart, life stupid crack. What's your point? You came in blazing that JC students were dumb. No, we're not. Often we're people who by sheer bad luck had bad educations at the lower levels(HS, elementary) and have to work to make that up. So, yeah, they're all dumb and you're just an underappreciated teacher working with substandard clay. And, if you're not enforcing the prereq reguirements regularly(and not going to the admin to make sure they have the prereqs so they can even enroll) someone's not doing their job. I've done that at UCD and at Purdue. It doesn't make you popular with anyone, but it sure is the right damn thing to do to protect a program("gollum, you @55hole, do you know that Dean So-and-so just called because you went and did that stupid stunt of yours again! Get out of my sight!" heh, bad times.). But, hey, I could always just walk away, wash my hands of it, and let the program slip into suckatude such that nobody trusts the graduates anymore. I'll buy your comment on more often than not trained as lawyers in gov't not being the best ones to make certain types of decisions. That should be a given. I'm not big on the judiciary making certain types of calls either(like the thimerisol case, and it's total BS. Nobody has ever shown causation ergo the science is bad. It doesn't happen. MErcury2 salts are insoluble in human blood. It's a crock.) But, beyond that, we'll just have to disagree.
 
By Justthisguy on May 26, 2008 2:28 PM
I'm afraid I concur with Wolfwalker, and Kevin, and Yu-Ain, and Cannoneer. Owhell, I give y'all my two favorite Jerry Pournelle quotes; "Weep for The Republic!" and "Despair is a sin".