A Mafan
-
Posts
1,332 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
5
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Gallery
Posts posted by A Mafan
-
-
And I'm still waiting for someone to give me a few good examples of anything the United States gained from having the world like us more. Because I'm trying to be as fair as I can, and I can't think of anything.
To be fair, we would also have to ask what the United States has gained from having the world not like us. Making people prove where Obama's foreign policy has done good for the US in the last year assumes that, e.g., Bush's years in the Oval Office would be rife with examples of how military aggression has benefited the US.
Many of diplomacy¡¯s benefits are either non-riveting (and not news worthy in the US) or involve avoiding something negative such as war, and are therefore hard to prove. In 2008, for example, how much play was given to the success of the Bush administration for helping resolve ¨C through diplomacy ¨C the armed conflicts in the Congo? Did it help the US? I don¡¯t know. We didn¡¯t get anything tangible from it like oil pipelines, but if the conflict had escalated ultimately it could have spilled over into American¡¯s lives either economically or through terrorism.
Well, for one thing: China allowed uncensored broadcasts of Bush's comments in China, but not Obama's.
The number of nations that signed on to help in Afghanist and and Iraq are good examples of Bush getting cooperation despite people not like the US, too. NATO did not want to pony up troops in Afghanistan!
Russia actually agreed to help with sanctions against Iran when Bush pushed for it, and they actually followed through on those promises.
Bush got Syria to back off in Lebanon a little bit.
Bush got the EP-3 crew out fairly quickly...we're still waiting on Iran to release the hikers they took from Iraqi territory.
Bush got North Korea to agree to, and take several steps to fulfill, the 6-party talks.
Bush got Taiwan to tone down some of their more inflammatory rhetoric toward China, and got China to increase their transparency on their military budget.
I think it is also clear that the pro-democracy Color Revolutions we saw between 2003-2005 were the direct result of Bush foreign policy giving them courage to stand up to dictators.
Now, we are looking at 8 years of Bush successes vs 1 year of Obama, so naturally there is going to be a disparity in numbers. I'm not trying to argue Bush has done 8 times as much as Obama, because that would be dishonest and unfair.
It's just that since President Obama has taken over, all sorts of rivals are getting more boisterous. I haven't seen any trade concessions from Germany, France, UK, etc. I see France calling the US too weak and indecisive. I see Russia getting concessions out of us in exchange for promises they blatantly refuse to follow through on. I see Iran doing whatever they want. I see Venezuala threatening Columbia due to its relationship with the US, and the US not doing anything. I see North Korea being more combative than it has been in the last 20 years.
It might be that the State Dept is inept, not the Office of the POTUS.
I do think that after nearly a year in office, there should be some diplomatic successes. I've seen zero.
-
We are Americans we do not bow to anyone! Good foreign policy comes from strength. Not from a courtsey. What makes me so upset since the Cold War has ended is that we Americans have let our Great Nation nation slip into mediocritcy.
Imo, this is the type of better than thou attitude that has helped lead us into mediocrity. I think we have entered into a new era that calls for understanding, respect, and dialogue more so than force and strength. Yes, we should carry a big stick and be prepared to use it but there is also such a tool as diplomacy which I feel we have collectively gotten away from over the years.
Kudos to Obama for having the courage to do this, knowing that he would face a lot of criticism for such an action.
Mankind is a predator. A predator only respects stregnth.
Thats old school Tony. I would like to think us younger generations are a little more enlightened.
Maybe in the US.
Putin isn't.
Chavez isn't.
Iran seems to think/act like predators.
Both China and Japan bluff and bluster to intimidate nations into giving up most of their advantages, and THEN start negotiating halfway from there.
The leaders in Burma aren't all that impressed with niceness, either.
This is a lowest-common-denominator equation, alas.
And I'm still waiting for someone to give me a few good examples of anything the United States gained from having the world like us more. Because I'm trying to be as fair as I can, and I can't think of anything.
-
Obama has promised to increase the number of US students in China to 100,000 ----that to me is significant, and long overdue.
Hey, we should make sure all the college students are female! That would help balance their gender ratio!
-
"..Much of this I would think has to do with the percentage of chinese students who are fluent in english vs american students who are fluent in chinese...."
Good point LIB, but it goes further than the fact that 50 MILLION Chinese children (last stat I saw about 3 years ago) are learning English in PUBLIC schools ----- it has more to do with the 'wake-up-call' that has not yet occurred in the US--- that if we are going to compete head to head, with China, our next generation needs to take the challenge seriously.
Again from the AP story I quoted earlier: "Many Americans still think of the US as an unassailable superpower and don't want presidents who make them think otherwise. (reference to Obama's bow) Problems in this area could make it more difficult to forge ahead with already diverse health care reforms, make bold choices on a new strategy for the drawn-out war in Afghanistan, or get re-elected."
China's education superiority might also have to do with schools being more concerned with education than teacher benefits, combined with intense parental concern/interest in education.
But in China, getting a degree is often just considered "checking a box". If you pass the test to get into college, you are already the best of the best, and many graduates never work a day in the field they get their degree in.
I think that's why Chinese universities don't compare well with US universities.
But that's just what I understand, I could be wrong.
-
The NY Times:
"The degree of control exercised over the most public event of Mr. Obama¡¯s three-day stay in China suggests that Chinese leaders are less willing to make concessions to American demands for the arrangements of a presidential visit than they once were."The White House spent weeks wrangling with Chinese authorities over who would be allowed to attend the Shanghai town hall meeting, including how much access the media would have and whether it would be broadcast live throughout the country. In the end Mr. Obama had little chance to promote a message to the broader Chinese public.
"The event in some respects signaled a retreat from the reception given at least two earlier American presidents, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, both of whom asked for, and were granted, the opportunity to address the Chinese people and answer their questions in a live national broadcast."
-
Normally I wouldnt be so cracked up about all the bows. But I think we have some making up to do with the international community. So given the circumstances, I am for it. Good for him.
Ah, this reminds me of the chest-thumping bravado of the Bush administration. That worked well didnt it?
Imo, this is the type of better than thou attitude that has helped lead us into mediocrity. I think we have entered into a new era that calls for understanding, respect, and dialogue more so than force and strength. Yes, we should carry a big stick and be prepared to use it but there is also such a tool as diplomacy which I feel we have collectively gotten away from over the years.
Kudos to Obama for having the courage to do this, knowing that he would face a lot of criticism for such an action.
I understand the thought behind it. President Bush was supposedly a rogue cowboy running roughshod over friends and enemies alike, a bull in a China shop who could only attack countries, couldn't used diplomacy.
But to be honest, I don't get this opinion at all.
Polls may show love for the US declined when President Bush was in office, and increased with the election of President Obama, but polls don't protect our allies or the United States.
I can see President Obama is trying to use diplomacy, but what has it gotten us?
I can't see a single positive result at all since President Obama took office.
We screwed over Poland and the Czech Republic to back out of the missile deal, in order to get Russia's help with Iran. Russia laughed at us.
We haven't gotten Iran to come to the negotiating table for their nukes. Every day brings us closer.
NATO countries won't pony up any troops for Afghanistan.
Venesuala just keeps getting worse, trampling on human rights, insulting the US, engaging in economic warfare against us, getting in bed with the Russians for military technology, threatening Columbia for helping us in the drug war. We betrayed Honduras for trying to rid themselves of a Castro-like socialist dictator wannabe who refused to step down from office at the constitutionally-mandated end of his term.
We apologized, profusely, for any perception of harm to almost all of our enemies. We did not demand any apologies from anyone else for their betrayals and selfishness.
What tangible thanks have we gotten?
It really seems like mos of the rest of the world likes us to be weak, indecisive, self-conflicted, and too busy with our own problems to stop them from gaining economically and diplomatically at the US' expense.
If I've forgotten some huge diplomatic breakthrough that dwarfs these diplomatic failures, please remind me.
-
One day I was, as usual, minding my own business, and a black guy accuses me of slavery. Starts yelling at me. I guess all white people are guilty for slavery, and can never be forgiven. Even if they were born well after it happened.
Even if their ancestors came to the US after slavery was ended. Even if your ancestors came to the US after slavery was ended. Even if half or more than half of his ancestors were slavers.
It's all about identity politics.
Some people live to harbor grievances. Thank God we have people of all races who actually seek Martin Luther King, Jr.'s dream: to be judged by character, not color of skin.
-
I think that the big problem for the China's future is not an economic one, but a political one. It is inevitable that the Chines people will want and demand a government that provides representation, transparency, rule of law, and civil rights. I say it is inevitable because as the Chinese people become more educated their aspirations increase. They will come to feel that they deserve these things as a rights, and will push for them.
The biggest problem I see for China is that most people don't understand the reasons for the US' rights and freedom: balanced, separate powers; rule of law; difficult-to-amend Constitution.
Popular voting for leaders doesn't even make the top 3 for guarantors of freedom (although I'd hate to see us do without it), but it seems to be what most people in and out of the US focus on.
They need to reform their judicial system first, I think...then develop some system of letting the legislature and judicial systems be more independent of the executives, then they can work on human rights and have them stick.
Without the first two, they are just whistling past the graveyard, no matter how much voting they do.
-
Sorry, I should have worded it differently.
The article talks about Japan being extremely proud of having developed separately on their own island, genetically/linguistically/culturally unique, uninfluenced for hundreds, if not thousands of years.
It also talks about Japan claiming that their occupation of Korea was nothing more than returning to the natural historic status of yesteryear when the Japanese invaded and ruled Korea.
They feel so strongly about this they ignore archeological facts, and accept only those that support them being the only race that developed in near-total isolation. That's all in the article.
So I enjoy science kinda saying, "Um, no. You're Koreans."
It doesn't take away the occupation of Korea and the mutual disdain.
But I do enjoy seeing the truth become harder to deny in the same way I enjoy watching the Denver Broncos get beat.
-
-
My State (Mass) is in bad shape too.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Ten-most-tro...ml?x=0&.v=7
"The 10 most troubled states are: Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island and Wisconsin.
Other states -- including Colorado, Georgia, Kentucky, New York and Hawaii -- were not far behind.
The list is based on several factors, including the loss of state revenue, size of budget gaps, unemployment and foreclosure rates, poor money management practices, and state laws governing the passage of budgets."
I find it interesting that most of those states are traditionally blue states.
My state, Indiana, is in very good fiscal shape considering the tough times we are in.
Colorado and Nevada aren't your prototypical blue states...although apparently Colorado has so many people fleeing the People's Republic of California and bringing their principle of govt with them that I guess that it is starting to flip.
I don't know about Georgia and Kentucky, but I didn't think they were solidly in the blue state column like the rest of those on the list are.
-
Since leaving Missouri at age 8.5, I've lived almost all my life in:
#2 (Hawaii), #7 (Washington), #12 (Montana), and #21 (Texas).
I'm hoping to get assigned to Colorado (#4) next, and hope to have my post-retirement mainland home there.
-
Having guns should be legal. Having bullets in them should be illegal. End of debate over guns.
Now there is a compelling argument for that view:
Superman.
The bad guy fires shots at Superman. Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang!
They all bounce off his chest.
Then the bad guy throws his gun in desperation.
Superman ducks.
The subtle truth of this sequence cannot be underestimated.
-
its too bad this nut case did not go with the 55.4% majority
That's because he chose the course of action that filled his intent:
Killing as many soldiers as he could before they could go to Afghanistan or Iraq.
He stated that opinion.
His actions are in line with that opinion.
Any other questions of motivation really should be moot at this point. It is an indictment of the current norms of society and broadcast news that those questions are not moot.
-
I shudder to think another gun rights topic is on its way. Difficult subject. It's true from what I have read that a gun in the home is the one used to shoot a family member. I've also read that in areas where guns are common, crime rates are down. Sometimes I wonder if everyone packed a gun whether people would be more civil to each other?
In this case, I think it's sad one of the cops didn't go Chinese and make sure there would be no trial.
A death is a tragedy. It doesn't make it more of a tragedy if it is caused by a gun.
In the US, more children die of drowning in a pool than getting shot by guns.
And more than half of all murders in the US are with things like hammers, baseball bats, knives, bricks, etc.
The most difficult thing to consider is: would this death/murder have occurred without a gun available?
Sometimes the answer is no. Most of the time, however, I think the answer is yes: murderous rage or narcissism doesn't need a gun to act out.
Then again, one of the things I struggle with is:
Guns are, sort of, the great equalizer.
It doesn't matter if you are a 4'11" 80 pound female or a 6'5" Navy Seal cage fighter...you have the deterrence that comes from a few pounds of pressure from a trigger finger.
The problem is when only one side has a gun.
Most of the time, the presence of a gun is a deterrence to violence. The presence of a gun on each side is even more of a deterrence. But when it fails to deter violence, the violence is worse.
And when someone wants to kill, a gun allows them to kill people outside of arm's length.
Yet it is a gun that is the best way to stop someone intending to kill...there are increasing examples of people using knives to murder 5-6 people in places like Taiwan and China.
On the other hand, Baghdad on 18 August and 25 October showed that there are ways to kill far more destructive than a pistol.
Myself, I want the right to own and carry a weapon for my own defense, whether or not I actually decide it is a good idea to do so.
-
Link (the article has some live links for references at this source)
When Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan started shooting up the Soldier Readiness Processing Center at Fort Hood, Pfc. Marquest Smith dove under a desk. A.P. reports that ¡°he lay low for several minutes, waiting for the shooter to run out of ammunition and wishing he, too, had a gun.¡±Neither Smith nor the other victims of Hasan¡¯s assault had guns because soldiers on military bases within the United States generally are not supposed to carry them. Last week¡¯s shootings, which killed 13 people and wounded more than 30, demonstrated once again the folly of ¡°gun-free zones,¡± which attract and assist people bent on mass murder instead of deterring them.
Judging from the comments of those who support this policy of victim disarmament, Smith¡¯s desire for a gun was irrational. According to Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, ¡°This latest tragedy, at a heavily fortified army base, ought to convince more Americans to reject the argument that the solution to gun violence is to arm more people with more guns in more places.¡±
Note how the reference to ¡°a heavily fortified army base¡± obscures the crucial point that the people attacked by Hasan were unarmed as a matter of policy. Also note the breathtaking inanity of Helmke¡¯s assurance that ¡°more guns¡± are not ¡°the solution to gun violence.¡± In this case, they assuredly were.
The first people with guns to confront Hasan, two local police officers, were the ones who put a stop to his rampage. And while Sgt. Kim Munley and Sgt. Mark Todd acted heroically, they did not arrive on the scene until a crucial 10 minutes or so had elapsed and Hasan had fired more than 100 rounds.
If someone else at the processing center had a gun when Hasan started shooting, it seems likely that fewer people would have been killed or injured. Furthermore, the knowledge that some of his victims would be armed might have led him to choose a different, softer target in order to maximize the impact of his attack.
There would have been plenty of targets to choose from: any of the locations in Texas, including public schools, universities, and shopping malls, that advertise their prohibition of gun possession. The problem is that crazed killers tend not to follow such rules.
That problem was vividly illustrated by the second deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history, which occurred in Killeen, Texas, a stone¡¯s throw from Fort Hood. In 1991 George Jo Hennard drove his pickup truck through the window of a Luby¡¯s cafeteria in Killeen, jumped out, and began firing two pistols at the defenseless customers and employees inside, killing 23 of them.
One customer, Suzanna Hupp, saw Hennard gun down her parents. Hupp later testified that she had brought a handgun with her that day but, to her bitter regret, left it in her car, as required by state law. The massacre led the Texas legislature to approve a ¡°shall issue¡± law that allows any resident who meets certain objective criteria to obtain a concealed carry permit.
But people with such permits are still barred from bringing their weapons into areas designated as gun-free zones. And when a killer fires on people he knows will be unarmed, it matters little whether he has 20-round or 10-round magazines, a detail emphasized in press coverage of the Fort Hood massacre. The second or two it takes to switch magazines is a minor nuisance when the people you are shooting at cannot shoot back.
Even less relevant is the allegation that Hasan used illegal armor-piercing ammunition. The Brady Campaign bizarrely chose to highlight that claim even though there was no indication that any of Hasan¡¯s victims were wearing bullet-proof vests, let alone that his bullets penetrated them. Perhaps the group hoped that such puzzling illogic would distract people from the plain fact that having a gun is better than not having one when you are confronted by a homicidal maniac.
Jacob Sullum is a senior editor at Reason and a nationally syndicated columnist.
-
The conventional wisdom in Washington and in most of the rest of the world is that the roaring Chinese economy is going to pull the global economy out of recession and back into growth. It¡¯s China¡¯s turn, the theory goes, as American consumers ¡ª who propelled the last global boom with their borrowing and spending ways ¡ª have begun to tighten their belts and increase savings rates.
The Chinese, with their unbridled capitalistic expansion propelled by a system they still refer to as ¡°socialism with Chinese characteristics,¡± are still thriving, though, with annual gross domestic product growth of 8.9 percent in the third quarter and a domestic consumer market just starting to flex its enormous muscles.
That¡¯s prompted some cheerleading from U.S. officials, who want to see those Chinese consumers begin to pick up the slack in the global economy ¡ª a theme President Barack Obama and his delegation are certain to bring up during next week¡¯s visit to China.
¡°Purchases of U.S. consumers cannot be as dominant a driver of growth as they have been in the past,¡± Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said during a trip to Beijing this spring. ¡°In China, ... growth that is sustainable will require a very substantial shift from external to domestic demand, from an investment and export-intensive growth to growth led by consumption.¡±
That¡¯s one vision of the future.
But there¡¯s a growing group of market professionals who see a different picture altogether. These self-styled China bears take the less popular view: that the much-vaunted Chinese economic miracle is nothing but a paper dragon. In fact, they argue that the Chinese have dangerously overheated their economy, building malls, luxury stores and infrastructure for which there is almost no demand, and that the entire system is teetering toward collapse.
A Chinese collapse, of course, would have profound effects on the United States, limiting China¡¯s ability to buy U.S. debt and provoking unknown political changes inside the Chinese regime.
The China bears could be dismissed as a bunch of cranks and grumps except for one member of the group: hedge fund investor Jim Chanos.
Chanos, a billionaire, is the founder of the investment firm Kynikos Associates and a famous short seller ¡ª an investor who scrutinizes companies looking for hidden flaws and then bets against those firms in the market.
His most famous call came in 2001, when Chanos was one of the first to figure out that the accounting numbers presented to the public by Enron were pure fiction. Chanos began contacting Wall Street investment houses that were touting Enron¡¯s stock. ¡°We were struck by how many of them conceded that there was no way to analyze Enron but that investing in Enron was, instead, a ¡®trust me¡¯ story,¡± Chanos told a congressional committee in 2002.
Now, Chanos says he has found another ¡°trust me¡± story: China. And he is moving to short the entire nation¡¯s economy. Washington policymakers would do well to understand his argument, because if he¡¯s right, the consequences will be felt here.
Chanos and the other bears point to several key pieces of evidence that China is heading for a crash.
First, they point to the enormous Chinese economic stimulus effort ¡ª with the government spending $900 billion to prop up a $4.3 trillion economy. ¡°Yet China¡¯s economy, for all the stimulus it has received in 11 months, is underperforming,¡± Gordon Chang, author of ¡°The Coming Collapse of China,¡± wrote in Forbes at the end of October. ¡°More important, it is unlikely that [third-quarter] expansion was anywhere near the claimed 8.9 percent.¡±
Chang argues that inconsistencies in Chinese official statistics ¡ª like the surging numbers for car sales but flat statistics for gasoline consumption ¡ª indicate that the Chinese are simply cooking their books. He speculates that Chinese state-run companies are buying fleets of cars and simply storing them in giant parking lots in order to generate apparent growth.
Another data point cited by the bears: overcapacity. For example, the Chinese already consume more cement than the rest of the world combined, at 1.4 billion tons per year. But they have dramatically ramped up their ability to produce even more in recent years, leading to an estimated spare capacity of about 340 million tons, which, according to a report prepared earlier this year by Pivot Capital Management, is more than the consumption in the U.S., India and Japan combined.
This, Chanos and others argue, is happening in sector after sector in the Chinese economy. And that means the Chinese are in danger of producing huge quantities of goods and products that they will be unable to sell.
The Pivot Capital report was extremely popular in Chanos¡¯s office and concluded, ¡°We believe the coming slowdown in China has the potential to be a similar watershed event for world markets as the reversal of the U.S. subprime and housing boom.¡±
And the bears also keep a close eye on anecdotal reports from the ground level in China, like a recent posting on a blog called The Peking Duck about shopping at Beijing¡¯s ¡°stunningly dysfunctional, catastrophic mall, called The Place.¡±
¡°I was shocked at what I saw,¡± the blogger wrote. ¡°Fifty percent of the eateries in the basement were boarded up. The cheap food court, too, was gone, covered up with ugly blue boarding, making the basement especially grim and dreary. ... There is simply too much stuff, too many stores and no buyers.¡±
I'm skeptical. I've been hearing the same sort of thing for more than a decade now.
-
All officers can/do have command resposibilities, this traitor had command discisions in the rehab of soldiers and or their deployment to combat . He was a serious weakness/threat to the effectiveness of this base, but allowed to conitinue.
Either way, I agree that he should have been removed from the officer corps LONG before his deployment orders came up, just based on the horrible, heinous things he had said and done earlier.
-
Unfortunatly he is a home grown terrorist and a serving officer, apart from murder he should be charged with treason,his trail should be speedy and his execution swift.
What made me so sad about this incident, is that I was stationed at Fort Hood for 5 years, and lived in Harker Heights(suburb of Fort hood, same as Killeen and Copperas Cove). I have actually been deployed though the same center as the shooting occurred.
When soldiers are being deployed the center is a madhouse. All US Army agencies (JAG for wills. Medical, shots, barbers, Supply to issue new equipment, etc, etc.) are there. You are either standing in one line or another, for the better part of a day. Suffice to say, and not making light of the situation, a person armed with a 5.56mm, in close quarters would be akin to "shooting fish in a barrel!"
I'm happy to see that one security person was "on the ball" and flamed him four times. Thank you, 9mm Beretta! If it had been a .45-caliber Colt, he may not have made it! 9mm have no stopping power, and this idiot get to pay the price. Yes Virgina! There is a Santa Claus!
From being in the US Army, stationed at this very same post, with a "clown" psychologist, that found Jihad or whatever, afraid to deploy or whatever...Well suffice to say that you wouldn't want me on your jury! BTW, she also was shot in the encounter http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/...or-bravery.html. Which tells me that he had a lot more people he wanted to shoot! He hadn't even started yet!
ROB, you were former SAS or SBS. How would have the soldiers in your country handled a soldier like this? Not flaming meant. I'm interested to see how Britain would have handled a clown like this!
Last report is that the clown (and I won't even respect him as an Army officer), is still critical, but stable. The first thing he did was to call his lawyer! Now this is a defense I HAVE to see! This is better than even O.J.
Any polls/wagers, on how long the jury pool will be out deliberating his fate? I suggest that his fate will be decided in 30 minutes, and the jury will sit out the court for another 2 hours, to make it look good, so that they aren't accused of "railroading" a man!
The one question that I did have was the weapon that was used. I haven't seen anything definite. I personally suspect a M4 carbine, 30 round magazine, with one taped to the side. The bullets at the close of quarters would not normally tumble, but would pass through one humans body and hit others in the same altered path. Hence, the large number of wounded.
Suffice to say, I believe that everyone knows where I stand. The sucking part is that in execution (if we are this lucky), is not a slow deserving death. It is extremely quick!
I hope/think he gets court-martialed. There is no reason to try him in the civil system.
Lets hope so, but politics its politics, right
BTW whats the punishment for treason/murder for a serving US officer ?
Not sure, but I think it would be death or a lifetime of (truly) hard labor.
I usually prefer death sentences for people who prove clearly they have rejected society completely through their heinous behavior...but in the military system, life imprisonment with hard labor truly is no joke.
-
Well I cant talk for all UK Army bases, but if it had happened in Hereford know one would ever know, if in Aldershot they would still be looking for his body parts.
I only remember one traitor a Para SGT who with a few ex- US marines signed up with the IRA, they caused a lot of trouble for a while, they where hunted down and justice served in a field in the south as soldiers.
As ex military to me the very worse thing is a soldier who is a traitor, I only survived my time due to being able to trust the man next to me and that trust is earned not given freely.
I'm bemused this guy was a Senior officer in the US Army with so much documented stuff about him, either the US army is inept in its security or its officer corps is reluctant to discipline its own, or maybe both.
As for how this mans trial and punishment will go, who knows, but the emperors of china past had some good ways of dealing with traitors.
I use the word traitor not lightly that is was he is.
He was an officer in pay and customs and courtesies, but he was not a line officer, meaning he would NEVER be a commander or in charge of troops.
That doesn't make him less of a traitor, of course, but it may explain why the Army was giving him more wiggle room than they would give, say, an Infantry officer.
-
Unfortunatly he is a home grown terrorist and a serving officer, apart from murder he should be charged with treason,his trail should be speedy and his execution swift.
What made me so sad about this incident, is that I was stationed at Fort Hood for 5 years, and lived in Harker Heights(suburb of Fort hood, same as Killeen and Copperas Cove). I have actually been deployed though the same center as the shooting occurred.
When soldiers are being deployed the center is a madhouse. All US Army agencies (JAG for wills. Medical, shots, barbers, Supply to issue new equipment, etc, etc.) are there. You are either standing in one line or another, for the better part of a day. Suffice to say, and not making light of the situation, a person armed with a 5.56mm, in close quarters would be akin to "shooting fish in a barrel!"
I'm happy to see that one security person was "on the ball" and flamed him four times. Thank you, 9mm Beretta! If it had been a .45-caliber Colt, he may not have made it! 9mm have no stopping power, and this idiot get to pay the price. Yes Virgina! There is a Santa Claus!
From being in the US Army, stationed at this very same post, with a "clown" psychologist, that found Jihad or whatever, afraid to deploy or whatever...Well suffice to say that you wouldn't want me on your jury! BTW, she also was shot in the encounter http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/...or-bravery.html. Which tells me that he had a lot more people he wanted to shoot! He hadn't even started yet!
ROB, you were former SAS or SBS. How would have the soldiers in your country handled a soldier like this? Not flaming meant. I'm interested to see how Britain would have handled a clown like this!
Last report is that the clown (and I won't even respect him as an Army officer), is still critical, but stable. The first thing he did was to call his lawyer! Now this is a defense I HAVE to see! This is better than even O.J.
Any polls/wagers, on how long the jury pool will be out deliberating his fate? I suggest that his fate will be decided in 30 minutes, and the jury will sit out the court for another 2 hours, to make it look good, so that they aren't accused of "railroading" a man!
The one question that I did have was the weapon that was used. I haven't seen anything definite. I personally suspect a M4 carbine, 30 round magazine, with one taped to the side. The bullets at the close of quarters would not normally tumble, but would pass through one humans body and hit others in the same altered path. Hence, the large number of wounded.
Suffice to say, I believe that everyone knows where I stand. The sucking part is that in execution (if we are this lucky), is not a slow deserving death. It is extremely quick!
I hope/think he gets court-martialed. There is no reason to try him in the civil system.
-
Well, if anything I said gave anyone the impression I blame Muslims or think that Muslims are all potential terrorists, let me dispel you of that notion now!
You should not feel worried when you meet a middle-eastern or Muslim individual.
You should feel worried when someone says that al who don't think the same way as the speaker should have their heads cut off.
You cannot and should not and must not assume that everyone in any given group has the same beliefs and desire as the most extreme of that group.
Watch people's actual actions. Condemn them only for their actual actions and statements. If you start blaming people by association, you are getting close to "thought crimes", discrimination/racism, and not giving people a chance.
Character will reveal itself through words and actions.
Well said Maffan, for once we are in complete agreement.
We agree on lots of things.
Just not the current health care reform bill, or whether this guy was a terrorist or a nut.
But I can live with your views on those, even if I don't agree.
-
Well, if anything I said gave anyone the impression I blame Muslims or think that Muslims are all potential terrorists, let me dispel you of that notion now!
You should not feel worried when you meet a middle-eastern or Muslim individual.
You should feel worried when someone says that al who don't think the same way as the speaker should have their heads cut off.
You cannot and should not and must not assume that everyone in any given group has the same beliefs and desire as the most extreme of that group.
Watch people's actual actions. Condemn them only for their actual actions and statements. If you start blaming people by association, you are getting close to "thought crimes", discrimination/racism, and not giving people a chance.
Character will reveal itself through words and actions.
-
I wish I would have asked her what her reaction would have been if I left 1 dirty plate on the coffee table instead of putting it in the kitchen sink on Sunday evening after spending the entire weekend caring for 2 little kids, raking so many damn leaves there were blisters on my hands, and putting together 2 wooden cabinet kits for her. I bet her answer would have been a little different from her actual reaction
You demonstrate exceptional insight and an ability to approach difficult situations with a healthy dose of wry humor.
I applaud you!
Obama in China.
in The Middle Kingdom - 中国
Posted
We can move it to PMs.