Comments for Cleaning up some loose ends from the week

Cleaning up some loose ends from the week

Sun, 26 Apr 2009 13:00:48 -0600

First off, no, we didn't get hit by the tornadoes that whipped through Leavenworth County yesterday, thanks for asking... (Terry is excused from the snark, she *called* to check). The same storm killed a man from Lawrence when he was struck by lightning while riding his motorcycle. That would appear to be the Lord calling you home, and for his sake, may that be the case.SWWBO and I heard the sirens, twice yesterday - but only because we were outside and the storm that produced the tornadoes was south of us. If the sirens had been meant for us... well, our...

Comment from ry on 2009-04-27

Mon, 27 Apr 2009 21:36:32 -0600

So, does that mean that SWWBO's sewing machine is down there now, too? Dude, you'd catch major grief over that. (Just covering you're back, before running for a bunker)

Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2009-04-27

Mon, 27 Apr 2009 19:49:42 -0600

The Castle Armory is in the Castle dungeon. Tornadoes usually just strip off the upperworks, leaving the main floor intact. Sans walls, but the contents of the basement (including the occupants cowering inside) are usually left in place.

Comment from MCart on 2009-04-27

Mon, 27 Apr 2009 18:37:07 -0600

Hope the Castle has a good reinforced concrete roof. I expect the good folks over at the BATFE would flip their cookies if that collection was re-distributed across the countryside.

Not to mention that it would suck to lose everything you've gathered.

Comment from Olga on 2009-04-27

Mon, 27 Apr 2009 15:59:42 -0600

I only heard about tornados late last night right before the entire electric grid went off line in my area... I am glad that you are well and were missed by those.

Comment from AFSister on 2009-04-27

Mon, 27 Apr 2009 10:33:00 -0600

I did hear about the tornadoes, but not until last night. Glad you're all ok! We're supposed to start getting the storms tonight.

Comment from ry on 2009-04-27

Mon, 27 Apr 2009 10:32:34 -0600

Heh. Take it easy on the new guys. YOu guys *never* took it easy on when I was new, and you sure don't now. Just spreading 'da lurve here, Armorer.

I agree. The rules are there to keep us away from what Clauswitz termed 'Total War'. That's not a nice place to go, since it comes to genocide.

Unk, see, that's the kind of crap that chaps my hide. A) If we could've gotten our hands on the bastards who did the KOrean War massacres, without starting another war to get them, they'd have been hung 50 years ago(since even The Hague folks still believed in hanging then). We couldn't so they weren't. B) What does their having crossed the line have to do with our doing it? Just as what you do, illegal or legal actions, does not create a legal precedent for me to do the same so too are our actions mutually exclusive from Commie attrocity. I mean, really, do I hae to turn into your mom and ask if everyone else jumped off a bridge you would too?

Armorer, I agree. I usually draw out a flow chart for people when I argue it in person, showing that terrorists and sometimes NSA(non-state actors) fall outside the purview of both the group of stuff refered to as the Law of Land Warfare(GC included) and civilian law.

Yet, simulated executions is beyond the pale, terrorist or not. You wanna slap the guy? Fine. You wanna do some play acting? Fine. You wanna lie to him(like telling him that you're putting out the rumor that he talked, knowing that it's a death sentence for his family)? Fine. They exist outside the rules and stuff you couldn't do to Sov soldiers you can do to terrorists is a legal bit of reasoning I can follow and agree with. But saying that because others don't honor them is not an excuse for us to allow ourselves to devolved into wolves from sheepdogs.

It does not mean fighting with one hand tied behind you back.

Comment from BillT on 2009-04-27

Mon, 27 Apr 2009 10:00:50 -0600

The Japanese performance (and the rational Marine response to it) is the poster child for the Geneva Conventions...

And the basis for the 1949 update. Just in time for the Norks and ChiComs to be able to violate the new, improved one.

Ooops -- *neither* one ratified it until '56. Silly me -- so Commie massacres of POWs was no violation, then, right?

Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2009-04-27

Mon, 27 Apr 2009 07:53:18 -0600

Yeah, interesting how y'all just ran down here and had your own conversation that had little to do with the post. Newbies to blogs are probably a touch confused.

The Japanese performance (and the rational Marine response to it) is the poster child for the Geneva Conventions - i.e., providing an agreed-upon framework for ending hostilities, whether wholesale or retail, in order to contain the mayhem.

The problem with how it's evolved in usage is that signatories are expected to behave IAW the Accords even when fighting someone who does not, when in fact someone who refuses to follow the Accords is allowed to be treated outside the scope of the Accords, which argument the Bush Adminstration was making wrt to "unlawful combatants."

Comment from ry on 2009-04-27

Mon, 27 Apr 2009 07:23:38 -0600

The words 'insufferable smart@55' came to mind, but mysteriously vanished. I think Carbo was involved.

Was refering to the Obie bruhaha, Unk.

Comment from BillT on 2009-04-27

Mon, 27 Apr 2009 00:39:33 -0600

Are we talking about criminal acts? Some of them are.

I don't think the Swiss Guard's collection of subguns violates the weapons ordinances in Vatican City.

Comment from ry on 2009-04-26

Sun, 26 Apr 2009 21:19:01 -0600

Fm. No. I told him every time that I didn't want any part of his lying to his, then, fiance. The day it happened when we left, in my car no less, I asked if everything was cool and she knew what we were doing and we weren't picking up girls. His answer: It's all good. We got to the coffee shop, and immediately he's being Mr. Smooth with the waitress, hitting on her. We go home a couple hours later, and guess who's there? The GF. Lied to, ambushed, and after making it clear I didn't want any part of lying to his GF---who I wanted no part of, couldn't stand her but if he's going to marry her and all. I simply don't play 'the game'. Life's a lot simpler when you don't go in for that BS. You play "The Game', then she gets the book 'The Rules' and plays a ton of games to get what she wants. Just be honest and up front from minute one and life would be so much less full of heartache, imo.

Sigh. All hail the drama queen arguments, huh? Oh, if we admit we did wrong we have to resort to martydom and seek to hide away. Bollucks. Totally.

Yeah, we firebombed Dresden. A classic example of overkill and a violation of the rule of proportionality. There were military targets there. Dresden itself was a righteous target. Vaporising all the civilians there, on the other hand, was not. Mixed verdict.

Hell, the mastermind of the Tokyo firebombing said he should've been up on charges. VD Hanson has the quotes in the forward to Soul of Battle. Un-mixed verdict. LeMay himself knew he belonged up on charges for it. Victors justice sucks.

My point is let's be honest with ourselves. Did we do bad things? Yes. Does that make us hopeless? OMG, that's such a 2nd grade argument, and it wasn't very good back then either. If it's against the rules, take our knocks for it and get on with it.

If it's illegal lets own up on it. Are there idjits who'll use this as ammo for anti-mil screeds? Sure. But their reach is pretty limited, and blogs, plus the honest admissions of error that humanize, limit that. What's worse are the arguments of 'well, if we admit that we lose a,b,c...' type stuff.

Marines at Iwo had a mitigating factor. They enemy didn't surrender and was often not hors de combat. Righteous kills.

D-Day? Yeah, we took prisoners. What're you talking about? Was it inconsisten in how prisoners were taken? Yeah. Some of that was righteous, and some was not.

But what's wrong with admiting mistakes were made? A lot of this is based on the honor of the Services. Fine, but what's honorable about lying and hiding the truth?

Comment from Fishmugger on 2009-04-26

Sun, 26 Apr 2009 20:01:21 -0600

Hey ry, did you at least tell your buddy, who you covered for 6 months that you no longer were going to cover for him? The only time it is acceptable to turn states on a bud is when she is drop dead gorgeous and you want her for your self. And..."despicable" is a very strong word for someone cheating on his gf, that's not despicable...it's a game. Now if he was married...or did strange thinks with ducks or small boys...then despicable works.

And...the Marines had to be forced to take prisoners on Iwo, and we didn't take prisoners on D-Day, and we fire bombed Tokyo and Dresden and gave blankets with small pox to the idians. And we must be very terrible people who should be neutered and walled off from the test of the world who are all upstanding individuals of great merit and don't mean us any harm.

Comment from rikkochet on 2009-04-26

Sun, 26 Apr 2009 17:51:54 -0600

Looks to me that a bullet went through that magazine.

Comment from ry on 2009-04-26

Sun, 26 Apr 2009 16:41:27 -0600

Unka Chief, y'know, I just read the Tank's write up of it, and, I gotta say, I don't get it. I don't get the anger or the fear.

It's a question I had to deal with very young, and my Marine buddy still disagrees with my answer. See, he was cheating on his gf, a lot. After about 6 months I stopped covering for him, and when asked by the gf I gave the truth. Loyalty does't mean covering for a buddy doing dispicable things. IT never has, and it shouldn't. I didn't go run to her to cough up, but when asked, yeah, I came clean.

Same here. Are we talking about criminal acts? Some of them are. What's wrong with letting that be known? Come on, really, how is that a direct attack on the honor of the Grunt? I don't get it.

Seems to me some are arguing that loyalty to the military means going back to the WW2 set-up where we gave medals to US submariners for gunning people in the water but sent IJN sailors to war crimes trials for same. I don't, and won't, play that way.

Honestly, I suspect this is just a proxy for hatin' The One(gorge rises in throat).

Comment from The Thomas on 2009-04-26

Sun, 26 Apr 2009 15:24:29 -0600

My wife received one of those there, NOAA Weather Radios as a Day Care Operator (your government dollars at work).
We had it set to "all counties" and "alert enable" and it was hooting every 20 minutes yesterday.
Watches, warnings, marine advisories (we're not that far from Lake Michigan) ... you name it.

Our area is served by KIG63 on 162.550 at 1000 watts out of Grand Rapids MI.

It looks like you are served by KID77 on 162.550 at 1000 watts out of Kansas City MO.
NOAA KS Station listing http://www.weather.gov/nwr/CntyCov/nwrKS.htm

Comment from BillT on 2009-04-26

Sun, 26 Apr 2009 15:08:39 -0600

Pic 2 shows a guy obviously wondering where he's gonna get a stronger mag for his M-2 carbine...

Comment from BillT on 2009-04-26

Sun, 26 Apr 2009 15:02:06 -0600

We didn't hear 'bout no tornadoes, but we *did* hear that Obie caved to the ACLU and released "torture" pix taken at Gitmo -- no doubt to further ease the minds of the CIA that nobody would be prosecuted. Unless, of course, the ACLU demanded it.

The shapes on the shelves *could* be 16th Century morions (they're the right color), but that spike is a poser -- unless it held bundled ostrich plumes in place. The helmets at the far end are ringers for some I saw in the Ducal Palace armory in Venice (and no, they don't let you take pix inside).