Obama’s Media Propaganda Machine Targets the Military

Today I read an article about veteran’s and military members shifting strongly toward President Obama. The writer asserts that “Disaffection with the politics of shock and awe runs deep among men and women who have served in the military during the past decade of conflict.” Apparently Margot Roosevelt has no idea what Shock and Awe is or she would know that it has nothing to do with the way we have waged war in Iraq, Afghanistan and other places for the past four years.

Or military has been mired in a limited war or “Operations Other Than War (OOTW)” during that time. They have been hampered by ROE (Rules of Engagement) the likes of which two generations of military leaders have been trying to avoid since the Vietnam Conflict ended 40 years ago—yet another promise not kept to the Vietnam vets.

This article is an obvious attempt to make Obama seem more attractive to the military community and from the comment section it seems to be effective to some degree. I like to think military people who have been out at the pointy end of the pen writing history would be smart enough to know who has been driving that pen for the past four years. Ms. Roosevelt goes on to state “factually” that “If the election were held today, Obama would win the veteran vote by as much as seven points over Romney, higher than his margin in the general population.” Of course, there is no poll cited for her statement because she made it up.

From 2001 until 2008 the media made a point of broadcasting the numbers of KIA weekly and the running totals reported every night. We heard "This has been the deadliest week for US forces since (whenever)" on a regular basis. Each Sunday’s PARADE section of the paper had the full color pictures of those killed in the past week.

The media did not do that because they suddenly cared for the military (they haven't since WWII). They did it to erode faith in the GOP and President Bush. Democratic candidates ran on promises to end the bloodshed. Obama rose to the top of the heap by being the biggest anti-war dove in the pack. He attacked Bush on all facets of conducting the War on Terror and swore to end the violence and bring the troops home in a year. How's that working out for you?

Was it Mitt Romney or BH Obama running around the end zone spiking Bin Laden's head for the 253rd time? Wasn't it Obama saying "Mitt Romney wouldn't have the courage to pull the trigger" on bin Laden? In light of his actions, posturing and words, which candidate seems less likely to send troops to war? Obama is clearly trying to seem like a military war hero and he is willing to send troops anywhere for any reason to prove it.

Obama did not keep one of his promises on the war. He did not reverse any of Bush's policies in fighting it; he even claimed credit for every success those policies generated. The fact is, he could not care less for the men and women in uniform. He is still reluctant to return a salute. The troops have spent more time at war, not less. And despite media collusion, soldiers have NOT stopped dying under his watch. They still return in flag-draped coffins; the media has found it prudent for their man in office if they don't publish pictures of them.

And that is the worst of it. Living or dead, the democrats see military people as tools for their own political ends and not the brave protectors of Liberty that most Americans know them to be. They are . . . WE are . . . your sons, husbands and fathers; wives, mothers and daughters. We deserve a man in office who will care more for the lives he sends to war than the tiny ticks in poll numbers as he goes off to another round of golf.

The Moving Wall

I took dad down to Southaven, Mississippi to see the Vietnam Traveling Memorial Wall today.  The display has passed through here in each on the previous years but this is the first time he wanted to make the pilgrimage.

The sight from the road is at once unimpressive and moving. The tiny white names etched in the black panels blur into haze from a distance.  Fifty-eight thousand names written small still take a long display. 

We came on an overcast Friday which seemed appropriately somber. Finding parking was easy; much less crowded than the throngs still crowding to see THE AVENGERS movie a few miles away. 

I noticed most of the people there were mostly older men; veterans drawn to the memory of a faraway jungle from their youth.  Some of their children (like me) accompanied men too old to drive themselves anymore.  Some lost the ability to stand on their own; possibly that long ago.  Few young people came.  Even in a conservative area like the MidSouth, young people have little interest in a war as remote to them as the Civil War was to me in my teens.

The traveling wall is different from the main wall in Washington DC.  Of course the panels are lighter and smaller to save weight and the font is smaller, the names closer together.  My father pointed out that the names also lacked the unit designations making it harder to find the right Smith or Johnson.

My father had so many names in his mind spread over four tours in country in eight years there was no way to find anyone in particular.  To him, all of the names on the panels were brothers in arms and he felt enough just being in their presence.

I didn’t know anyone personally despite having grown up in an Army family during the war.  None of my friends’ fathers came home in a box.  Inwardly I wanted to see a name that stuck in my mind from the book and movie WE WERE SOLDIERS; Jimmy Nakamura, the young mortar-man who had just found out he was a new dad. I couldn’t find him but someday when I got to the big wall I will look him up.

Eventually it was time to go. The ghosts of the past perhaps appeased for a time, perhaps tired of clinging to the living bid us adieu—for now. The sign at the entrance read “Welcome Home Brothers.”  The message was not for me but for the few remaining stragglers like my father absent from muster on the other side. I am content to keep him with us for a little while longer. The other formation can wait; they have all the time in creation to fill remaining files.

"Shaken, Not Stirred" No more

DEconSTRUCTING JAMES BOND

James Bond 007 returns in SKYFALL later this year.  The suave, sophisticated secret agent, possessing a license to kill and a Walther PPK from the British MI6 is making his 23^rd movie appearance.  He was created by Ian Fleming to be the perfect secret agent.  Based on exploits of a real-life agent Fleming met during WWII.  He took outrageous risks, romance beautiful women and tweaked the noses of Nazis while skating on the Death’s razor-edge.

Many of us have grown up more with the movies about the life and adventures of the Fleming 007 character. We know him inside and out; we expect him to find away when there seems no way out—and to look good doing it. That iconic agent is all but gone in the new Bond movies.  After SKYFALL Bond will likely never be the same.

Wussification of Bond

Another common factor in all of the early Bond movies was the Bond Girls.  Some of Hollywood’s and the world’s most beautiful actresses have made an appearance in bond movies. Their main role was to act as eye candy for the male audience and provide an element of romance for Bond.  Some were helpless bimbos; others were razor-sharp foreign agents like Michelle Yeoh (Wai Lin in TOMORROW NEVER DIES).

Starting in the 90’s, perhaps earlier, the writers made an effort to make the female actresses more relevant – hence the Wai Lin character. More often than not they were fellow agents, competition and even villains to match wits against.  More and more of 007’s traits were exported into the female character.  His depth of knowledge in esoterica started coming from the women.  Critical data came from the ladies when in the past he figured things out himself.  They were the ones downloading the villain’s secrets while bond stood by holding his “pistol.”

Finally in the latest CASINO ROYALE Daniel Craig cannot even dress himself properly.  Eva Green (as Vesper Lynd) not only holds the purse strings over Bond, she picks out his suit so he doesn’t look bad when he sits down at the high stakes poker table.

Rebranding Bond

James Bond has certain clichés associated with him; the Walther PPK, the British-built Aston Martin cars, and his martinis – “shaken, not stirred.”  Once before the studio tried to change a factor in his character (driving a BMW in GOLDENEYE) and the fans erupted.  The Aston Martin returned in CASINO ROYALE.  So far fans are tolerating the blond Daniel Craig (all previous Bond’s had brown hair or darker).

Another change appearing in the upcoming SKYFALL will have the cantankerous 007 hoisting a Heineken™  brew in place of the iconic martini. Already fans are reacting.  The Facebook fan page is aflame with unfavorable responses. Time will tell if the studio will listen to the fan base or charge ahead with what is likely a marketing stunt.  Generally, upsetting your target audience is a poor business strategy.

The Future for Bond

The producers have altered the Bond character significantly in the past decade.  “M” is now a woman (heartless bitch that she is as played by Dame Judi Dench).  Q is portrayed by the sarcastic British comedian John Cleese.  Bond himself has lost most of his wit, all of his knowledge base and his smooth swagger. He has turned into a two-dimensional action figure fit only for car chases and shoot-outs.

The final betrayal of our childhood hero will come in this movie or no later than the next two.  Look for James Bond to have a homosexual romantic interlude.  No matter how it is rationalized as a necessary part of his cover, it will sound the death bell for 007.  How do I know? Nothing definite yet, just Hollywood’s tendency to push the LBGT agenda in every avenue. It’s in most television shows, many movies and even in commercials.  Disney, Nickelodeon and Sesame Street all have openly Gay characters in programs aimed at children.  How long before James Bond, 007, curls up at the end of the movie with the first “Bond Boy?”

Life After Lottery Letdown

If I Could Have One Wish . . .

Right now Sunday morning is dawning across America.  Tens of millions of citizens (and illegal aliens) are still recovering from the fact that they did not hold one of the winning tickets in this past week’s Mega-Millions lottery.  Three tickets will split the jackpot that finally reached 640 million dollars; that is $640,000,000.00 nearly two-thirds of a billion dollars.  Who wouldn’t want a piece of that – or all of it?

Of course, the sobering reality is the real chances of hitting the winning combination are ridiculously small. The fact that three tickets did seems to fly in the face of statistics, but they don’t.  Mathematicians who created the game give the odds of winning as 1:176 million.  As the pot was over three times that size it almost works out to the three winning tickets.  Nicely done, government bean-counters, nicely done.

Meanwhile the many millions of us who did not win return to our normal lives, somewhat deflated after inflated expectations.  It was hard not to catch “Lotto Fever.” Instead of covering the high gas prices, the Iranian nuclear program, the impending Israeli raid to stop such, the latest Muslim terrorist attacks, the Republican primary and the myriad of other important news items, the mainstream media spent as much as a third of their daily programming talking about this lottery.

I watched the talking heads muse about what they would do with the money.  They chatted about it as they broke for every commercial, dragged the sports and weather personalities into it on their segments, and called in lottery winners, psychologists and statisticians.  It was a full court press like as reserved for major war stories, hurricanes and elections that matter.  No wonder the lottery was on everyone’s mind.

Now back to reality.

“All you need is a dollar and a dream.”

That’s how the lottery is sold in many states.  Who doesn’t have the occasional dollar to spare?  When you get change at the convenience store, it is very tempting to try one’s luck with a ticket or two, maybe a scratch off; hey, somebody has to win, it might be you!  Are you feeling lucky?

Everybody has a dream of how they would spend so much money but the dreams of normal people are inadequate to the task. Consider that each winning ticket will actually be worth only 150 million in lump sum payouts. After Uncle Sam dips his monstrous hands in the pot (again) you will be left with 100 of the 640 million that had you panting breathless Saturday morning – a big step down.  But still it is more money than you and likely everyone you know have ever held in the totality of their lives. And it’s all yours.  Now what?

You can’t spend that kind of money

You can blow through that money, many lottery winners end up broke in a few years with nothing much to show for their winnings, but people of our level cannot spend that kind of money properly.

Back in the 80’s I did this experiment with a shipmate on the ENTERPRISE.  Earvin “Magic” Johnson had just signed a 40 million dollar endorsement contract and my fellow sailors were alternately complaining and dreaming about what that must be like.  I told them, “You can’t spend that kind of money.”

After the protests died down I took out a piece of paper and began to ask specific questions; what would you do with that kind of money.  I listed each purchase a person had.  House, car, bills paid off; the usual things people say when asked on television after a big win. But be specific; what kind of car, how big a house, where are you going to build?  Gifts for mom and dad, share with the siblings – yeah I wrote those down too.

Some big numbers piled up.  We moved into extravagances like jewelry and luxury travel while the big house was under construction.  The Riviera is nice in the spring.  First class tickets and beach front rentals are not cheap.  Eventually that first year winds down and you want to settle into something a little more normal, so you go home.

I totaled up the bills from that big blowout and it came to 2.5 million or less for everyone!  My estimate still holds true today.  A money manager who advises those who are suddenly rich from the lottery or a big athletic contract to take three million in “mad money” and go do their dreams and leave the rest to start working for them.  Thirty years later, just three million can cover the average person’s dreams.  Bill Gates can burn that much money every day of his life and the fire would never go out.

You Can’t Go Home Again

But home isn’t what it once was.  Your friends still have money problems and you want to be generous but you start to feel taken advantage of.  Eventually, money envy turns into resentment.  People think you just got lucky (which is true) and you are no more deserving of such wealth than they are.  One thing the money did for you quickly was reveal who are your real friends. It’s time to move into your new home – and get an unlisted number.

It’s not all doom and gloom, though.  You can find friends with approximately the same standard of living you now possess in your new neighborhood.  And you don’t have to fear bills coming in for a few years – if you are handling your money properly.  Taxes won’t even scare you.

In the long run money in any amount cannot make you happy.  A pundit once opined that big money only makes you more of what you are.  If you are a jerk, you will just become a rich jerk with enough money to be a more noticeable jerk.

But a wise person will still be wise no matter the balance of their bank account.  A fool goes broke in a few years, a wise person does all he or she wants to do in their lifetime and leaves an inheritance to their children.

I didn’t play the lottery.  I don’t play no matter how big the pot gets because I can do Math.  I prefer to work for what I get and, being a Christian, I prefer the odds I get investing my spare dollars in God as opposed to a government run lottery.

But I still dream of a life different from my own. A nice house in the country, a couple of new cars paid off.  I will get them, too.  It will come through effort, through training myself and disciplined investing of time, money and faith, and possibly a little luck.  But I like my odds.

No need to worry about Magic Johnson either. He didn’t win the lottery – except the genetic lottery that made him freakishly tall and talented – but he also got where he is today through hard work, careful investing and wise spending.  Even the rich have dreams.

My Day With the Gamers

Escape to Another World

I got out of the house today and out of my routine.  I drove across town to attend the final day of the MidSouthCon 30 here is Memphis.  It has been a long time since I attended a convention of any type. Fifteen years ago I went to a STAR TREK convention in San Diego.  Things are done differently on the West Coast.  Most notably the number of celebrity guests is always higher as many active and retired stars live in easy driving distance.

One thing that hasn’t changed much is the guests.  Nerds still look like nerds and gaming geeks still look like gaming geeks. What has changed is nerds, geeks and gamers are no longer social outcasts.  Nerds have become socially acceptable over that last few decades after the general population took to computers and discovered that nerds are not only useful but they have the potential to earn vast amounts of money.

Another thing changed from my early days of geekdom is the ubiquitous electronics; they were everywhere.  I was there pushing my own eBook TULA WARS for the KINDLE.  When I purchased a book from an author she read my card using a banking app on her cell phone.  Guests had the schedule of events on iPhones and tablets with events they were interested in highlighted and posting audible notices when set times approached.

Electronics were at the gaming tables as well.  I started out when Dungeons & Dragons© was played with stacks of books, bags of dices and paper character sheets.  We used to draw maps by hand on graphing paper – not anymore.  Today I saw Role Playing Games (RPGs) of all sorts where the Game Master sat behind a laptop instead of a cardboard screen.  Everything he needed was indexed and searchable.  One of the players had his character sheet on a tablet.  Dice still clattered on the table but not much else remained from the early days.

My Superman™ tee-shirt gave me adequate cover to blend in but my ball cap started and carried most of the conversations.  It read “Navy Retired” along with the gold braid.  Many people wanted to hear about my time in the service.  I spent most of my sea time on a ship with the most recognizable name in geek world, the USS ENTERPRISE.  You might as well walk around wearing a flight suit; you couldn’t capture more ears with any other name.

I swapped business cards with a lot of local writers and hope to set up an online interview sometime soon.  Overall, it was a good experience.  I recommend attending a convention of some type at least once.  You are guaranteed to come away with interesting stories.  You will meet unique people with a different take on the world.  You can take some great pictures of attendees in costume (some of them quite pretty and scantily clad!)  Most of all, you just might learn something. 

Don’t forget to buy a t-shirt!

Defenseless

Defenseless in the Face of Danger

The most bizarre thing to hit the news circuit this week is the concept that self-defense is never warranted.  No, no one explicitly stated it that way, but it is implied in the diplomatic messages sent from the United Nations to Israel.  It seems that bloated body of parasites thinks that any attack on Israel is justified and therefore should be silently endured by that nation.

In fact, there are actually two places where unprovoked murder of and mayhem on civilian populations is deemed acceptable: Israel and the United States.  Israel is a legitimate target for anyone who is having a bad hair day because very few countries are interested in their continued existence.  Americans are targeted both because it is an open supporter of Israel and because it is also a nation that few others wants to see continue to exist.

In a rational world, when a country’s citizens are subject to a sudden barrage of missile from across the border, that country would be justified in gathering its military might and rolling across said border in massive retaliation.  That is the very purpose of having a military.  That was the reason the United States entered World War II.  That also is the reason the US and allies mounted up and rolled into South Korea, Kuwait and many other countries over the years.  It is acceptable to defend oneself and one’s allies from armed aggression – except if the victim nation is called Israel.

Imagine the US sends a covert ops team south of the border to kill a drug lord who had been targeting American Border Patrol agents for interfering with his export business.  Also imagine we have a president not named Barack Obama.  This other person would actually care enough about American citizens to act with force instead of immediately apologizing to everyone and everything in sight.

Now suppose this dead kingpin had bought powerful allies in the Mexican government and they responded to that assassination by firing rockets and missiles over the border at cities in California and Texas.  What would be an appropriate response?  Long ago America sent Army expeditions south including a young firebrand cavalry officer named George Patton searching for Mexican bandits who had been raiding over the border.  A modern US Army force has a lot of options at their disposal and could move in unrelenting force at the direction of Congress and the President.  No posturing by the UN could stop us from acting in such a case.

Yet just this week, the UN and nations around the world either ignored Israel’s plight (like Obama did) or they called on Israel to “use restraint and restore peace.”  Calling on the victim to restore peace is not rational.  That is like asking a rape victim to remain calm while the attack is in progress and not to retaliate when it is over.  No civilized mind could think in those terms.  They do in Muslim countries but that merely proves my point.

Fact: Arabs the world over want to kill Jews. Fact: people running the United Nations don’t mind if they do. But it is also a fact that Israel will never go down without at least giving it a fight.  Too bad others lack the courage to call a bully a bully.  They cower in fear on the Potomac or in New York hoping the Islamic murderers won’t notice them.  The final fact is, if Israel falls, anyone else could be next.  And don’t expect any help or support from any of the other nations cowering against the walls. Like townsfolk in old Western movies, they know somebody has to stand up to the bad guys; it just won’t be them.

1.      Palestinian terrorist photo courtesy of: http://www.jewishpolicycenter.org/prr/groups.php

2.      Obama poster source: http://www.whiterabbitcult.com/obama-bow-debate-recalls-clinton-era/

3.      Photo of Pershing and Patton in Mexico © CORBIS, source: http://dummidumbwit.wordpress.com/2010/04/25/11569/

An Offensive Defense

I recently read up on the Israeli missile defense system “Iron Dome.”¹  It has shown excellent real world performance in recent days shooting down over 90% of the missiles fired across the border from Gaza at Israeli population centers.

Iron Dome was developed following experiences during the 1991 Desert Storm conflict. Sadaam Hussein attempted to drive a wedge between the West and Arab allies by dragging Israel into the conflict.  He ordered SCUD missiles fired into Israel hoping to force retaliation.  Muslim countries could not stand against a fellow Muslim (even one as reprehensible as Sadaam) alongside Israel.  They would rather lose to a morally defunct dictatorship than suffer that indignity.

The United States countered that strategy in two steps.  First they deployed a radical new anti-missile system, the Patriot missile to cities in Israel in range of Scuds.  Second, American commanders retasked fully one-third of their air assets to hunting for and destroying the missiles and their launchers.  The first part is defensive; preventing damage by knocking down missiles in flight.  The second part is offensive; preventing those missiles from being launched in the first place.

That is the problem of relying on the Iron Dome systems alone; no offensive punch.  Iron Dome systems are like the goalie in a football game (or soccer for Americans).  The goalie blocks most shots most of the time but some do get through. 

One of the big drawbacks of any anti-missile system is cost.  Hamas and other terrorists can assemble large quantities of Kassam rockets and missiles in an average garage cheaply.  These rockets do not have to be accurate; they just have to “go over there and go BOOM!”

Anti-missile systems need sophisticated search and track radar and highly accurate, high-speed missiles aiming to hit a target less than a foot thick moving at high speed through the air.  The analogy of hitting a bullet with a bullet accurately describes the challenge here.  A missile that can meet these challenges is necessarily expensive.  Each Iron Dome missile costs an estimated $50,000 while the Kassam rocket costs only a few hundred dollars to build.

With this disparity, the terrorists can hobble the Israeli defense budget with a constant need for expensive replacement missiles at a very low cost to themselves.  All they need is a sponsor willing to funnel money and materials into the Gaza region.  We are certain that part is taken care of.  The evidence being that the insurgents were able to mount a sustained barrage of projectiles over a four day period on a moment’s notice; all they were waiting for was a trigger event. That came with the IDF’s assassination of Popular Resistance Committees leader Zuhair al-Kaisi.  His killing was probably justified and carefully planned to avoid collateral damage.  The Palestinian response to events or instigation of hostilities never takes that into consideration.

But the cause of this latest exchange is not germane to this piece.  What is important was how the Israelis reacted.  Iron Dome performed very well living up to its original purpose of saving Israeli lives. After four days of bombardment no ne were killed and “only several were injured.”² The same article reports 22 terrorists killed when Israeli jets responded to the launch.  Fourteen rocket launched teams were struck before they could launch their projectile.  That is offense used for defensive purposes.

No system is perfect in defending against an enemy assault. Castles seldom held out against attack for long with relief forces arriving.  Carrier battle groups have layered defensive rings to intercept aircraft, missiles and shells before the strike the expensive target floating in the middle but a determined effort by a sophisticated enemy can succeed.  However, retaliation for that success would render the initial victory irrelevant.

The lesson from the past weekend’s Middle East action is no system is perfect in defense. It must be coupled with an offensive response that is swift, accurate and relentless.  Stopping the launch of projectiles and killing those who make the attempt is far simpler and more effective than trying to shoot down a bullet with a bullet.

1. http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=1530

2. http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_article.php?id=3500

3. Image courtesy of ShalomLife: http://www.shalomlife.com/news/15049/4-more-iron-dome-batteries-by-end-of-2012/