skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Interesting observations from a German reporter embedded ... yes, embedded with the Islamic State.
Heck, let's go back to Mod-Trotsky; "You may not be interested in fighting radical Islam, but it is interesting in fighting you."
ISIS is 'much stronger and much more dangerous' than anyone in the West realizes, a journalist who spent ten days embedded with the group in Iraq and Syria has warned.
Jürgen Todenhöfer, 74, said that the West has 'no concept of the threat it faces' from the Islamic State and has underestimated the risk posed by ISIS 'dramatically'.
The German reporter spent most of his time in Mosul in northern Iraq, but he also traveled to the ISIS-controlled territories of Raqqa and Deir ez-Zor in Syria.
...
Todenhöfer went on to say that ISIS have plans for mass genocide, with the aim or eradicating all atheists and religions that are not 'people of the book' or who do not subscribe to their particular brand of Islam.
...
Speaking on RTL's Nachtjournal program after his return to Germany last week, Todenhöfer said that he constantly heard the view that ISIS want to 'conquer the world'.
'This is the largest religious cleansing strategy that has ever been planned in human history,' the journalist added.
As they have stated elsewhere, they plan to continue to expand. Like all expansionist religious movements with a martial aspect - they will until defeated.
As you can see by the map, they are succeeding - and what we have been doing is not working in the broader conflict. What we need right now is a Kissinger with the ear of the President, but it seems that instead we have Biden-actual - someone wrong about almost all national security related events in the last 30+ years. It shows.
First thing we need to do it to stop going after Assad directly or indirectly. He is the only one who is protecting Shi'ite, Druse, Alawite, Christians and other religious minorities in Syria. We don't have to support him, just stop working with the Islamic State fighting him. He is a SOB, but he is not the worst option for Syria.
Let the Russians help Assad, we don't have to. That will squeeze IS from one side. We should redouble our efforts with the Kurds and the Iraqi governments on the other. Let's work with the Russians and coordinate our "proxy work." We can work to turn Syria in to Switzerland later.
We do not need to see a 2015 expansion like we saw in 2014.
... the South to Yankees and other foreigners.
So, though imperfect, I'll let Rich Hall a shot to ed'u'mu'cate 'ya on why you don't know nut'n.
I'm going to build off a theme from last week's FbF with el-Sisi - moral courage and forthright defense of natural law's first freedom from those who actually are putting their lives in danger by doing so.
The last week has seen a sickening parade of morale and physical cowardice in the defense of essential liberty. Afraid of what may happen if they stood with the French, politicians and much of the press instead hid behind "responsible speech" - which is their way of cowering in the face of threats against the very freedom they need to exist. That is the true Islamophobia - a twisted partonizing attitude that you cannot risk offending even in the slightest the tender feelings of a Muslim because, well, they just can't take it like everyone else and might become dangerous. A phobia of the followers of Islam: Islamophobia.
Heck, even last night I was reminded why I used think I was of the left. It used to be that there was a very libertarian streak on the left, but in the last 30 years they have been swamped by the Stalinists. One of the last of the traditional libertarian leftists I have found myself in rough alignment with is Bill Maher of all people.
Well, this week I am bringing in another man of the left who has it right. He gets extra points because he is Dutch. He speaks with the directness of a Dutchman, gets the enlightenment, and - more than most - he has stepped in to the field of fire to defend the flag.
The Salamander freedom fighter of the week is Ahmed Aboutaleb, member of the Labour Party, de Partij van de Arbeid (PvdA), and mayor of Rotterdam.
This is how you defend freedom as a political leader.
On a minor side-bar: I also had and continue to have a lot of "fun" with those of the left (or clueless) who have some kind of verbal tic that makes them want to want to call opposition to a radical religious sect a kind of "racism" and/or look at Arabs, Berbers, Turks, etc., as a "race" different than other whites/caucasians. As a result, if you have issues with them, it must be somehow based on "race."
More hogwash. Unless you want to take a pre-mid 20th century view of race more in line with the KKK and the Nazi party, no - they are not a race or races. I'll stick with the US govt directive if I must, they are white. Look at Mayor Aboutaleb again. Dude is as "white" as I am.
Of course, I know why they are throwing around race. Simply, that is the cultural bully's tool to shut people up. Well, to those people I say, "rot op."
I feel sorry for Bob Work today. He spent a lot of personal capital exclaiming, "We don't need frigates."
Then this happened ...
U.S. Navy Secretary Ray Mabus on Thursday said the Navy would rename the modified Littoral Combat Ships it plans to build as frigates, given their enhanced capabilities.
"One of the requirements of the Small Surface Combatant Task Force was to have a ship with frigate-like capabilities. Well, if it’s like a frigate, why don’t we call it a frigate?" Mabus told the annual conference of the Surface Navy Association.
Mabus said the new designation would apply primarily to the next 20 such ships to be built but 32 LCS that have already been built or ordered would also be reclassified if and when they are retrofitted with additional weapons.
OK. It could be worse, I guess.
Let's see, the last FF we had was the KNOX (though when we took off the MK-13 launchers, the OHP effectively became FF), maybe we'll do a comparison later.
This makes my day; I'll be laughing at random moments for hours.
Oh, and if you are serious - you need to start with FF-1098.
Sometimes it seems that over the last two decades we have been making every effort to make the CVN more and more vulnerable and its airwing less robust and flexible. Many of the reasons are the same as why the British Army kept the bolt action Lee-Enfield as their primary infantry weapon more than a decade longer than it should have been.
Add a long fat tail, no armor, with only one ear and blind in one eye ... and good googly moogly, what have we done to long range strike?
At least in the knife fights in DC, unquestionably, there is no slack in light attack.
As we saw in the carrier debate last weekend, here, and many other places - over the course of the last quarter century we have thrown away one of the most effective aspects of TACAIR - its legs.
Gone are the long legs of the F-14 and A-6 - replaced by a deck full of light strike fighters with no organic tanking (sorry, buddy tanking does not count).
At the same time, we have a smaller airwing and possible opponents at sea are forcing our CVN to operate further from shore.
Everyone knows this challenge ... but we still keep making the move to shorter range, less capable assets on our most important force projection asset. Penny stupid and pound stupid.
Here we go. Take it away Sam;
The Navy is will almost certainly select the Bell-Boeing V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor to replace the Northrop Grumman C-2A Greyhound as its next carrier onboard delivery (COD) aircraft, according to a Jan. 5 memo signed by Department of the Navy leadership.
The memorandum of understanding (MOU) — signed by Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) Adm. Jonathan Greenert, Marine Commandant Gen. Joseph Dunford and Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus — will have the Navy buy four V-22s starting in Fiscal Year 2018 to 2020, according to the document first reported by Breaking Defense.
“The Navy is responsible for modifying these V-22s into an HV-22 configuration for the COD mission,” reads the document.
From David Axe's SEP13 article;
But the V-22 has less range and less payload than the C-2: Northrop’s prop plane can haul five tons of stuff 1,500 miles, but the V-22's range with the same load could be as little as 50 miles, according to Navy statistics and Bell and Boeing’s own literature. That’s in part because the V-22 has just over a third the internal space of a C-2 and in the case of bulkier supplies would likely need to haul them slung by a rope suspended from the fuselage—a huge source of drag.
War is Boring attempted to reach two different Boeing spokespeople for comment, but received no reply.
Extending the tiltrotor’s flying distance would require the constant attention of Air Force aerial tankers, which can cost up to $10,000 per hour to operate. The V-22 is also slightly slower than the C-2, can’t fly as high because it’s unpressurized and costs more: $68 million for a new V-22 compared to an estimated $50 million for a new C-2.
Some of those familiar with the aircraft are already looking at the operational issues that will come with the shoehorning of the V-22 in to the COD role. They have poor reliability, and are so temperamental that the marines who work on her call her the "princess." What will happen after we start riding them hard like we do the C-2s and start chewing up their less than reliable and very expensive prop-boxes.
Via some C-2 Bubbas - here is something that we know a CV-22 will not be able to do that we rely on being SOP today;
Up to about 6,000# load, C-2A cruised at 275-280 ktas between FL190 and FL250 and hit ~290 ktas when we were hauling the chili at 4,000# or less. Above that it dropped off quick and was 255-260 => 8,000#.
Stealing from my own stuff SEPCOR, face it; the Navy painted itself in a corner. This was almost pre-ordained when they CANX the Common
Support Aircraft. It was killed by the worst possible habits of a parochial and blinkered leadership. If you don't like this, yell at Clark, Mullen and Roughead. CSA was slowrolled until it was too late.
A good HV-22 now will be a better CSA that may never show up I'll grant you that, but really. We should ignore the paid lobbyists and those still in uniform who wish to soon be one - and think this through.
All is not lost. There is hope;
The Navy did not comment on the MOU directly to USNI News and said the final decision would emerge until the budget submission in February.
“The Navy continues to consider acquisition strategies and options to recapitalize the carrier onboard delivery, or COD, capability by 2026,” read the statement provided to USNI News.
“Our recommended way ahead will be submitted as part of the normal budget process.”
Ummmm ... yea. In the end, we'll wind up with a HV-22 and Sailors and aircrew will do the best they can with what their Navy has given them.
We could have done better, but then again - those making the decisions are not the ones who will live or die by them.
I know there are jobs at stake here ... grievances to nurture ... self-righteous victim pimp'n to do ... but perhaps we should hoist the following from Harvard Business Review onboard.
There are two reasons to do diversity training. One is to prevent lawsuits. The other is to create an inclusive environment in which each member of the community is valued, respected, and can fully contribute their talents. That includes reducing bias and increasing the diversity of the employee and management population.
Lana made it clear to me that Bedia was interested in the second reason, not just the first, and I agreed to investigate.
But after speaking with a number of people in the organization, it confirmed a feeling that had been pestering me for years:
Diversity training doesn’t extinguish prejudice. It promotes it.
...
A study of 829 companies over 31 years showed that diversity training had “no positive effects in the average workplace.” Millions of dollars a year were spent on the training resulting in, well, nothing. Attitudes — and the diversity of the organizations — remained the same.
It gets worse. The researchers — Frank Dobbin of Harvard, Alexandra Kalev of Berkeley, and Erin Kelly of the University of Minnesota — concluded that “In firms where training is mandatory or emphasizes the threat of lawsuits, training actually has negative effects on management diversity.”
Which shouldn’t come as a surprise, actually. Anybody who has ever been scolded is familiar with the tendency to rebel against the scolding.
But it’s deeper than that. When people divide into categories to illustrate the idea of diversity, it reinforces the idea of the categories.
Which, if you think about it, is the essential problem of prejudice in the first place. People aren’t prejudiced against real people; they’re prejudiced against categories. “Sure, John is gay,” they’ll say, “but he’s not like other gays.” Their problem isn’t with John, but with gay people in general.
Categories are dehumanizing. They simplify the complexity of a human being. So focusing people on the categories increases their prejudice.
It's not like this is new - this was first published almost three years ago - but - hard to get traction when you are going against the narrative.
How many times have you read this on DivThu?
The solution? Instead of seeing people as categories, we need to see people as people. Stop training people to be more accepting of diversity. It’s too conceptual, and it doesn’t work.
Instead, train them to do their work with a diverse set of individuals. Not categories of people. People.
Teach them how to have difficult conversations with a range of individuals. Teach them how to manage the variety of employees who report to them. Teach them how to develop the skills of their various employees.
And, while teaching them that, help them resist the urge to think about someone as a gay person, a white man, a black woman, or an Indian. Also help them to resist the urge to think about someone as “just like me” — that’s a mistake too.
Move beyond similarity and diversity to individuality. Help them see John, not as a gay white man, but as John. Yes, John may be gay and white and a man. But he’s so much more than that.
Don’t reinforce his labels, which only serve to stereotype him. Reveal his singularity. Don’t ask: What are the dreams of a gay white man. Ask: What are John’s dreams? What does he hate? What are his passions?
The antidote to the ineffectiveness of diversity training is the opposite of diversity training. If you want diversity, think about an individual, then another, then another.
Read it all - and feel free to bring this up the next time you are forced to sit through some of this FOD.
Standard Kristen Warning for the below.
Perhaps it is just me.
The late Patrick Swayze said once in an interview I saw a long time ago, something to the effect, "If you let it, this town will turn you in to a whore." If you have HBO, you may have seen a perfect example of that last night.
I don't watch, "Girls" on a regular basis (I know, shocking) though I have sat through a couple of episodes in the last few years just to see what was going on. Meh.
Anyway, I'm going upstairs to change after a long walk with the dogs and turn the TV on, and it comes to the last channel that was watched, HBO. I'm too lazy to change the channel, so let it run. About 30-seconds in, after a short while seeing Lena Dunham's stupid arm tattoo filling up half the screen, the scene shifts.
There is it - Brian Williams 26-yr old daughter doing soft pr0n. Call it what you want, but that is exactly what it was. It was totally unnecessary to the story line, I guess, but that is not the point. It was put in there for one reason - so people would talk about it, raise ratings, and try to keep a show's relevancy as we all tire of it all.
Well, Allison - you just let a peddler of highly questionable rape accusations make a whore out of you.
I'll let Kat Rosenfield of MTV (of course) outline it for you.
By now, you’ve probably heard about the infamous “Girls” season opener scene in which Marnie’s (Allison Williams) butt gets vigorously motorboated by Desi (Ebon Moss-Bachrach.)
Moss-Bachrach already confirmed to MTV News that the scene was 100% legitimate face-to-butt contact
It is all rather sad. Allison could have said no - but I guess peer pressure is what it is. Even more sad, if she looked to her parents to help, she got the opposite:
...how Allison’s father, news anchor Brian Williams, handled seeing it onscreen.
...
“She’s always been an actress,” Williams said. “For us, watching her is the family occupation and everybody has to remember it’s acting, no animals were harmed during the filming, and ideally nobody gets hurt.”
Ummm ... Brian. That wasn't acting. That was pr0n.
How's mom?
Allison Williams mentions that not only were her parents proud supporters of her big butt-eating moment, but that her mom was a chief strategist when it came to rigging a bit of costumery between the actress’s cheeks, so that her co-star’s time in there would be as comfortable as possible.
“I’d get a call from my mom and she’d be like, ‘Maybe if you took a thong and cut it away from the sides but you stuck it on in the front and the back it could work,’” Williams said. “I was like, ‘Mom, I like your thinking.’ Just your regular dinner conversation! We’re changing as a family; it’s lovely.”
Of course, Allison is not a whore. She is simply a young lady who is trying to make her way in a tough business, surrounded by people who have no real care for her, but only what they can make off of her.
She allowed herself to be used by sociopaths;
Ebon Moss-Bachrach
I hope this is okay to say, but honestly I think this scene comes about by Lena saying, “How can I put Allison through the ringer?" "How can I tighten the screws on Allison?” I think Lena gets a kick out of that, Lena does.
...
Lena Dunham and Jenni Konner
JK: When we were shooting that, I said I thought we had done all of the funny, crazy sex we could do, but … Part of that was improv on Ebon’s part, and we died laughing.
LD: Allison was a good sport.
JK: She was game — a down girl. She’s a serious actress and she takes it all seriously. She was brilliant.
LD: Let me tell you this, when someone puts their face in your butt, whether there’s a barrier or not, their face is still in your butt. And she handled that with aplomb.
JK: Even when someone you love puts their face in your butt, it might be weird!
...
Alex Karpovsky
Yeah! Let’s do it! Let’s go there! Let’s explore all the cavities. Yeah, 2015 is the Butt Year. There is some type of sexual revolution happening, and maybe that’s one of the cliffs or peaks that we need to begin to incorporate into our societal representation of this revolution, specifically in television. This could be the year of the anus.
Like I said; pr0n.
As we do often in life, she found herself at a professional pivot point. I would offer that she did not choose well.
She's an adult, her call - but I don't think it is anything someone should see and say, "Hey, I wish my daughter was a quasi-famous actress to a small segment of the population."
If that is what an Ivy League education and a career in show business gets you before you even reach the age Morrison and Hendrix assumed room temperature - then no thank you. I will continue to keep my family out of it.
Maybe it is just me. I don't think so. Below is just about top right 1/4 of what you saw. It is far enough down that you don't have to scroll.
You've been warned, but I can't/won't show her naked from the waist down, and the fully naked guy behind her.
Just be happy I don't show a gif of when he wiped his face before he ... well ... like I said; its pr0n.
Sad, but again - maybe I'm' the problem here.
Wait ... those who know me well know I am no prude. If the below gif is not enough to make my point - click here to see the full thing.
If you want to see the mindset that thinks this is just dandy - then read this.
Wait. This is just way too depressing. I can't do this to my readers. Let me see what I have here .... something to leave you dragging for the rest of the day ... something from the Salamander mix tape ... oh, here we go.
