Medal of Honor Recepient Draws Support for Flag Pole

There are 26 pages of comments and climbing in the Richmond Times-Dispatch. In Richmond, VA, we have a population that appears to be quite patriotic and isn't ashamed to admit that there is a problem with not being able to fly the Flag of the United States of America from a flagpole, rather than from a small stick coming from the front porch. It made Fox News. That’s hilarious. The Board of the HOA that had a law firm notify this Medal of Honor recipient, this man who has had a highway named after him, that he is in violation of a covenant in the by laws of the neighborhood, in which he lives.

The story, he goes out everyday to raise the American flag up the flag pole in his yard, then in the evening he lowers the flag. According to his story, he has always been around the flag, from WWII to Vietnam. That's 3 wars he has been involved with and 3 wars that the flag of the United States has been beside him.

Maybe, just maybe, there should be something in the U.S. Constitution stipulating the right of Americans to display the Flag of the U.S.A. in a manner, which would override a local zoning ordinance or Home Owners Association's (HOA) rules governing how the Flag is displayed.

I can enjoy the fact that we have this many people still remembering what things are great about America. Our men and women who serve in our Armed Forces and the Flag for which they saluted and fought beside. I think the HOA is outgunned and outclassed. But, I can see a future where this may just slip away, quietly after a surrender. ...lakotahope
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Col. Van T. Barfoot, the 90-year-old Medal of Honor recipient who refuses to remove his flagpole from his property, speaks out on what the flag means to him.

RICHMOND, Va. -- A flood of help is building for an embattled Medal of Honor winner in Henrico County who was ordered this week to remove a flagpole from his yard by his community's homeowners association.

From the halls of Congress to the 90-year-old colonel's old infantry unit, a local law firm and scores of service members, help is making its way to Col. Van T. Barfoot.

"He said he was outraged and wanted to help," Barfoot's daughter said yesterday, speaking of U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner, D-Va., who learned of Barfoot's plight on TimesDispatch.com yesterday.

In a five-paragraph letter that he received Tuesday, Barfoot was ordered to remove the flagpole from his yard in the Sussex Square community in far western Henrico County. The decorated veteran of three wars raises the American flag every morning on the pole, then lowers and folds the flag at dusk in a three-corner military fashion.

The Coates & Davenport law firm in Richmond sent a priority-mail letter ordering Barfoot to remove the pole by 5 p.m. Friday or face "legal action being brought to enforce the covenants and restrictions against you." The letter states that Barfoot will be subject to paying all legal fees and costs in any successful legal proceeding pursued by the homeowners association's board.

A Richmond law firm, Marchant, Honey & Baldwin, offered yesterday to represent Barfoot at no cost, partner John Honey said.

In a statement released last night, the association said Barfoot is in direct violation of its board's July decision to deny his request to erect a flagpole.

"This is not about the American flag. This is about a flagpole," the statement reads, noting that many homes in the neighborhood display the American flag.

Margaret Nicholls, Barfoot's daughter, said last night that the statement is using semantics to back up a board decision about the pole that was made on aesthetic, not regulatory grounds. There is no covenant that expressly forbids flag poles, she said.

Warner has known Barfoot for years and has a high regard for him, Warner spokesman Kevin Hall said. "The senator definitely wants to step in to get something resolved."

Nicholls said her father's phone "is ringing off the hook." Members of the 157th Infantry Unit, with which he served, have called along with scores of people concerned about Barfoot's welfare, she said.

Barfoot can't understand why the board allows a flag to hang from an angled pole mounted to the side of a house but disallows a flag flown from a free-standing vertical pole.

"Where I've been, fighting wars, displaying the flag, military installations, parades, everything else, the flag is vertical. And I've done it that way since I was in the Army," Barfoot said.

"Dad sort of feels like this is the end," said Nicholls, who lives a few doors away. But she said yesterday that she and her husband are attempting to generate support for her father's cause, a flag-raising rite that he has undertaken for most of his life.

Barfoot received the Medal of Honor on the battlefield during World War II in Italy and fought as well in the Korean and Vietnam wars. A portion of a highway in rural Mississippi, his native state, was named in his honor this fall. A building at McGuire Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Richmond, also carries his name.

Barfoot regularly began flying the flag on Veterans Day this year, after he returned from an extended trip that began in September, despite the Sussex Square board's decision.

He said last month that not flying the flag would be a sacrilege to him.

"There's never been a day in my life or a place I've lived in my life that you couldn't fly the American flag," he said.

Barfoot's neighbors are split, with some saying that the community covenants should have no exceptions, and that Barfoot was given the community's covenants before he bought the property. Others support him regardless.

Sally Hedleston, whose house has a legal flagpole attached, said she has asked board members to make an exception for the Medal of Honor winner.

"Some board members say that rules are rules -- well, how many of them have broken the speed limit every day here?" she asked.

---

Contact Bill McKelway at (804) 649-6601 or bmckelway@timesdispatch.com .

Ahmadinejad: Says Israel Cannot Stop Iran From Enriching Nuclear Fuel

The President of Iran is quite outspoken about what Iran will do to its neighbors and what it will do to have "peaceful power" options in place for itself. Stating Israel can't stop Iran from making enriched uranium, Ahmadinejad forgets that the world can stop them and if needed, the United States can and will stop them from producing nuclear weapons. Whether the USA acts after weapons are produced is quite the unknown. As of this time, I believe if the USA discovered Iran had weapons, it wouldn't be long into the future that we would be quite adamant about removing Iran from the nuclear club.

Iran is isolated to the point that only North Korea would support them as Russia recently voted along with the Western Nations in denouncing Iran and its nuclear ambitions. Russia and its sale of the S-300 long range missile system to Iran is still being held up and will be a "large game changer" where Israel and the United States is concerned. . ... Lakotahope

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Wednesday, December 02, 2009

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said there isn't a "damn thing" Israel can do to stop its nuclear program, Reuters reported.

"The Zionist regime (Israel) and its (western) backers cannot do a damn thing to stop Iran's nuclear work," Ahmadinejad said in a televised speech, according to Reuters.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Tuesday Iran will now enrich its uranium to an even higher level, defying a U.N. call to halt the process due to fears over the country's nuclear program.

Ahmadinejad expressed frustration with negotiations over a U.N.-backed deal to swap Iran's low-enriched uranium for higher-enriched fuel rods to power its medical research reactor.

"I declare here that with the grace of God, the Iranian nation will produce 20 percent (enriched uranium) and anything it needs itself," Ahmadinejad told a cheering crowd of thousands in the southern city Isfahan.

"We told them, give us the 20 percent fuel (in an exchange)," he said. "But then they started adding conditions. So we said, if you want to give us the fuel we'll take it. If not, then fine and goodbye."

The defiant call is similar into tone to the president's announcement Sunday that the country would boost its nuclear activity 10-fold, despite the widespread belief that Iran simply does not have the resources to match its boasts.

Iran currently has one operating enrichment facility, at the central town of Natanz, which has churned out around 3,300 pounds of 3.5 percent enriched uranium over the past years.

The research reactor in Tehran, however, needs uranium enriched to 20 percent.

Enriching uranium even further, to levels around 90 percent, however, results in material suitable for a nuclear war head, something the West feels Iran is striving to do secretly.

The idea behind the swap was to get the bulk of Iran's uranium out of the country so it would not have enough material build a bomb.

Iran denies the charge and insists its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Navy SEALs Face Assault Charges for Capturing Most-Wanted Terrorist

What knucklehead came up with this plan to admonish troops after they captured a known terrorist that was probably on a "most wanted list". We usually punish errant soldiers when they do something heinous and inhumane--not for something as miniscule as a bloody lip. By doing this type of idiotic prosecution, our troops will not know for whom they fight. Certainly, not their leaders up the food chain.... lakotahope

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Navy SEALs have secretly captured one of the most wanted terrorists in Iraq — the alleged mastermind of the murder and mutilation of four Blackwater USA security guards in Fallujah in 2004. And three of the SEALs who captured him are now facing criminal charges, sources told FoxNews.com.

March 31, 2004: Iraqis chant anti-American slogans as the charred

and mutilated bodies of U.S. contractors hang from a bridge over the Euphrates River in Fallujah, Iraq.

The three, all members of the Navy's elite commando unit, have refused non-judicial punishment — called an admiral's mast — and have requested a trial by court-martial.

Ahmed Hashim Abed, whom the military code-named "Objective Amber," told investigators he was punched by his captors — and he had the bloody lip to prove it.

Now, instead of being lauded for bringing to justice a high-value target, three of the SEAL commandos, all enlisted, face assault charges and have retained lawyers.

Matthew McCabe, a Special Operations Petty Officer Second Class (SO-2), is facing three charges: dereliction of performance of duty for willfully failing to safeguard a detainee, making a false official statement, and assault.

Petty Officer Jonathan Keefe, SO-2, is facing charges of dereliction of performance of duty and making a false official statement.

Petty Officer Julio Huertas, SO-1, faces those same charges and an additional charge of impediment of an investigation.

The three SEALs will be arraigned separately on Dec. 7. Another three SEALs — two officers and an enlisted sailor — have been identified by investigators as witnesses but have not been charged.

FoxNews.com obtained the official handwritten statement from one of the three witnesses given on Sept. 3, hours after Abed was captured and still being held at the SEAL base at Camp Baharia. He was later taken to a cell in the U.S.-operated Green Zone in Baghdad.

The SEAL told investigators he had showered after the mission, gone to the kitchen and then decided to look in on the detainee.

"I gave the detainee a glance over and then left," the SEAL wrote. "I did not notice anything wrong with the detainee and he appeared in good health."

Lt. Col. Holly Silkman, spokeswoman for the special operations component of U.S. Central Command, confirmed Tuesday to FoxNews.com that three SEALs have been charged in connection with the capture of a detainee. She said their court martial is scheduled for January.

United States Central Command declined to discuss the detainee, but a legal source told FoxNews.com that the detainee was turned over to Iraqi authorities, to whom he made the abuse complaints. He was then returned to American custody. The SEAL leader reported the charge up the chain of command, and an investigation ensued.

The source said intelligence briefings provided to the SEALs stated that "Objective Amber" planned the 2004 Fallujah ambush, and "they had been tracking this guy for some time."

The Fallujah atrocity came to symbolize the brutality of the enemy in Iraq and the degree to which a homegrown insurgency was extending its grip over Iraq.

The four Blackwater agents were transporting supplies for a catering company when they were ambushed and killed by gunfire and grenades. Insurgents burned the bodies and dragged them through the city. They hanged two of the bodies on a bridge over the Euphrates River for the world press to photograph.

Intelligence sources identified Abed as the ringleader, but he had evaded capture until September.

The military is sensitive to charges of detainee abuse highlighted in the Abu Ghraib prison scandal. The Navy charged four SEALs with abuse in 2004 in connection with detainee treatment

Navy SEALs have secretly captured one of the most wanted terrorists in Iraq — the alleged mastermind of the murder and mutilation of four Blackwater USA security guards in Fallujah in 2004. And three of the SEALs who captured him are now facing criminal charges, sources told FoxNews.com.

The three, all members of the Navy's elite commando unit, have refused non-judicial punishment — called an admiral's mast — and have requested a trial by court-martial.

Ahmed Hashim Abed, whom the military code-named "Objective Amber," told investigators he was punched by his captors — and he had the bloody lip to prove it.

Now, instead of being lauded for bringing to justice a high-value target, three of the SEAL commandos, all enlisted, face assault charges and have retained lawyers.

Matthew McCabe, a Special Operations Petty Officer Second Class (SO-2), is facing three charges: dereliction of performance of duty for willfully failing to safeguard a detainee, making a false official statement, and assault.

Petty Officer Jonathan Keefe, SO-2, is facing charges of dereliction of performance of duty and making a false official statement.

Petty Officer Julio Huertas, SO-1, faces those same charges and an additional charge of impediment of an investigation.

The three SEALs will be arraigned separately on Dec. 7. Another three SEALs — two officers and an enlisted sailor — have been identified by investigators as witnesses but have not been charged.

FoxNews.com obtained the official handwritten statement from one of the three witnesses given on Sept. 3, hours after Abed was captured and still being held at the SEAL base at Camp Baharia. He was later taken to a cell in the U.S.-operated Green Zone in Baghdad.

The SEAL told investigators he had showered after the mission, gone to the kitchen and then decided to look in on the detainee.

"I gave the detainee a glance over and then left," the SEAL wrote. "I did not notice anything wrong with the detainee and he appeared in good health."

Lt. Col. Holly Silkman, spokeswoman for the special operations component of U.S. Central Command, confirmed Tuesday to FoxNews.com that three SEALs have been charged in connection with the capture of a detainee. She said their court martial is scheduled for January.

United States Central Command declined to discuss the detainee, but a legal source told FoxNews.com that the detainee was turned over to Iraqi authorities, to whom he made the abuse complaints. He was then returned to American custody. The SEAL leader reported the charge up the chain of command, and an investigation ensued.

The source said intelligence briefings provided to the SEALs stated that "Objective Amber" planned the 2004 Fallujah ambush, and "they had been tracking this guy for some time."

The Fallujah atrocity came to symbolize the brutality of the enemy in Iraq and the degree to which a homegrown insurgency was extending its grip over Iraq.

The four Blackwater agents were transporting supplies for a catering company when they were ambushed and killed by gunfire and grenades. Insurgents burned the bodies and dragged them through the city. They hanged two of the bodies on a bridge over the Euphrates River for the world press to photograph.

Intelligence sources identified Abed as the ringleader, but he had evaded capture until September.

The military is sensitive to charges of detainee abuse highlighted in the Abu Ghraib prison scandal. The Navy charged four SEALs with abuse in 2004 in connection with detainee treatment

Something mighty peculiar going on with this report. Department of Justice seems to be seeking to expand on their role in controlling information from U.S. companies and it's citizens. They must think they are operating in Communist China. Like the following article mentions--how many more of these subpoenas seeking private ip addresses of site followers are floating around with non disclosure stipends attached.... lakotahope

Web Site Says Justice Department Demanded It Secretly Turn Over Readers' Information

by Diane Macedo

FOXNews.com

Indymedia.us says the Department of Justice ordered it to release information on its readers -- then directed the news Web site to keep quiet about the demand.

An independent news Web site says the Department of Justice ordered it to release detailed information on its readers -- then directed the site to keep quiet about the demand.

Kristina Clair, systems administrator for Indymedia.us, said she was shocked when she received a subpoena from U.S. Attorney Tim Morrison in Indianapolis in January demanding the IP address of every person who visited the site on June 25, 2008. She said she was also instructed "not to disclose the existence of this request unless authorized by the Assistant U.S. Attorney."

Clair said she was astonished by the demand. "It's a purely aggregate site, it only pulls data from other Indymedia feeds," she told FoxNews.com. "There's no information fed to the site directly."

When she contacted the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a legal advocacy group for digital freedom, she was told the subpoena was riddled with problems.

"Not only was this request a plain violation of federal privacy law -- which would require the government to at least get a court order based on a factual showing to get that kind of data; not only did it violate Department of Justice regulations that require subpoenas to media organizations to be vetted by the attorney general; not only did it threaten the First Amendment right to read anonymously of all of Indymedia's users, it also violated Ms. Clair's First Amendment rights by ordering her not to disclose the subpoena's existence," EFF Senior Staff Attorney Kevin Bankston told FoxNews.com.

EFF said it sent a letter to Assistant U.S. Attorney Doris L. Pryor on Feb. 13 relaying its concerns with the subpoena and explaining that Indymedia didn't store IP addresses and didn't have the data the government was looking for.

"On February 24, I received a voicemail from Ms. Pryor in response to my letter," Bankston said. "In that message, Ms. Pryor said that I was correct that the subpoena did not compel Ms. Clair's silence, but that she would be seeking a court order, as she would confirm in a letter later that day."

Instead, Bankston said, he received a fax from Pryor the next day stating that the subpoena had been withdrawn.

When he called the U.S. Attorney's office later that day to discuss the newly dismissed subpoena, Bankston said Steven DeBrota, the assistant U.S. attorney working on the case, told him the office had reconsidered seeking a court order for Clair's silence but still insisted that disclosure of the subpoena would harm the investigation.

Still, Bankston said, DeBrota would not confirm that Clair would face no legal consequences if she disclosed the subpoena, so EFF sent another e-mail asking for confirmation that there was no legal bar to disclosing the subpoena. Three months later, there was still no response, he said.

"So we wrote them again saying, 'If you actually think this is going to hurt your investigation, go to court and we'll fight it out there, otherwise we're going assume it's not going to hurt your investigation and we're going to speak out about it,'" Bankston said.

With no response to the May letter, EFF and Clair said they decided to go public with the subpoena and EFF's report critiquing it out of fear that this may not be an isolated incident.

"We don't know how many people have received these subpoenas -- that would violate the privacy of anyone that ever read their Web site -- but didn't say anything about it and didn't contact a lawyer because there was a gag order attached to it," EFF spokeswoman Rebecca Jeschke told FoxNews.com.

When asked about the EFF report, U.S. Attorney Morrison told FoxNews.com "we can't comment about that."

Morrison then directed FoxNews.com to Justice Department spokeswoman Melissa Schwartz, who said, "The U.S. Attorney's Office of Indiana South issued the subpoena and it's a grand jury investigation. They're [Morrison's office] the one's giving comment. ... Unfortunately, we [the Justice Department] can't comment on grand jury deliberations."

A source with knowledge of the situation said the subpoena in question required the signature of the attorney general -- or, in his absence, of acting Attorney General Mark Filip -- but that Filip's office never saw it, and the subpoena was never kicked up for approval.

The source would not say whether an internal investigation into the matter, specifically Morrison's actions, had been opened.

The Threat from Iran Seen by Russia

Secretary of State Clinton has returned from her European tour and she states that Russia is very much aware of the dangers posed by Iran. However, Putin isn't about to let any political camaraderie get in the way of the money it is making off of Iran at this time. Russia needs money and Iran needs defensive and offensive materials, since Iran has been effectively quarantined because of its zeal to promote its theocratic government. That and we haven't forgiven them the 1979 assault on our embassy.

So, Putin, I mean Russia, will not go along with the U.S. demand for sanctions against Iran at this time, but it is keeping an eye on them.

Great! I wonder what the world will do once it is confirmed that Iran possesses a nuclear weapon? The president of Iran has made it known of his dislike for Israel and his wanting to destroy this Jewish state. What will Israel do? What kind of balls does the government of the U.S. of A. have to deal with a nuclear capable Iran? How far will we go to prevent the exploitation of this weapon by fundamentalist people intent on destroying anything, anyone that is not a member of Islam?

Saudi Arabia is doing its part in trying to broker a deal to buy missile systems from Russia in exchange for the ex-soviet union member not to sell any missile system package to Iran. This is to delay Israels intent on destroying the nuclear facilities in Iran before they finishing making a nuclear bomb. After all, what else can Israel do to stop the Iranians from producing and delivering a nuclear weapon first?

Countries do not want a major conflict in this region, but I fear there will be a meltdown within a couple of years when everyone has the weapons in hand to do what they have been planning for years. Maybe the year 2012 is important?
lakotahope
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
BBC News

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has told the BBC that Russia now recognises the threat posed by Iran.

Wrapping up a European tour in Moscow, Mrs Clinton said Russian leaders had in private said they were ready to act if Tehran did not meet its obligations.

But Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, on a visit to China, said it was too early to talk about sanctions on Iran.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Tuesday that threats of sanctions were counter-productive.

Iran denies allegations by the US, EU and Israel that it is trying to build the bomb under cover of a civilian nuclear energy programme.

Mrs Clinton told the BBC on Wednesday that Russia in the past six months had "moved tremendously" to acknowledge the threat of Iran's programme.

There is no need to scare the Iranians - there is a need to reach agreements Vladimir Putin Russian prime minister A Russian policy shift on Iran? Iran on defensive over secret site

She said Russian officials, in private talks, had recognised the need to act if diplomacy failed.

"We are in total agreement on all of that," Mrs Clinton told the BBC.

"And we are also in agreement that if our diplomatic engagement is not successful then we have to look at other measures to take, including sanctions to try to pressure the Iranians."

As a permanent UN Security Council member, Russia would need to back any fresh sanctions against Iran.

At the start of this month, Iran agreed at a meeting in Geneva to allow UN inspectors into a previously undisclosed nuclear site near its holy city of Qom, and to send low-enriched uranium abroad for enrichment to a higher level.

'Buying time'

Mrs Clinton acknowledged to the BBC that Tehran had bought itself more time with this move.

But she said Iran had also made commitments which the Russians and the Chinese now expected them to fulfil.

However, wrapping up a visit to Beijing, Vladimir Putin said talk of sanctions was premature.

"I believe it's too early to speak of them," Russia's prime minister told media, reports AFP news agency.

"There is no need to scare the Iranians. There is a need to reach agreements."

After Moscow, Mrs Clinton headed for Kazan, capital of the religiously and ethnically diverse region of Tatarstan, east of Moscow.

The US has been trying to "reset" relations with Russia

Her five-day European trip included stops in Zurich, London and Belfast.

US President Barack Obama, who met Russian President Dmitry Medvedev in July, has pledged to reset relations with Moscow.

Mr Obama, for his part, has met a key Russian demand to scrap plans to deploy interceptor missiles in Poland and a radar station in the Czech Republic as part of a US missile defence system in Europe.

The US administration insisted it did not expect concessions in return.

But Washington has called on Moscow to support, or at least not oppose, the idea of tougher sanctions on Iran if it fails to live up to its international obligations.

The council wants Iran to end uranium enrichment and has approved three rounds of sanctions - including bans on Iran's arms exports and all trade in nuclear material.

Bunker Buster Is Being Fast Tracked Into Service

This bomb is allegedly 10 times more power than the bomb it is replacing. I reckon the replaced bomb is the Moab, but since this thing weighs considerably more than most aircraft can lift and actually drop, I wonder if the C-17 aircraft is the only one capable of dropping this weapon? I mention this because it is so far, the only aircraft tested for this Big Bomb, or "Big Bitch"--I want to be the first to give it a nickname. The C-17 isn't stealthy, it isn't even fast compared to our other aircraft. I hazard to guess how the U.S. intends to deliver such a massive conventional device through miles of hostile territory.

Dale Brown has written books using advanced aviation technology to defeat enemy assets. I've been following his books and the last one I finished details events involving Qom, Iran, and nuclear facilities. Of course, his books have super-stealthy, space capable aircraft and all sorts of STAR WARS equipment....Good reading for those who enjoy reading any thing with military/ aviation scenarios.
lakotahope
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sept. 26: A facility under construction inside a mountain about

20 miles north of Qom, Iran, is most likely the location of the newly revealed uranium enrichment plant. (AP/GeoEye)

WASHINGTON (foxnews.com) -- The Pentagon is speeding up delivery of a colossal bomb designed to destroy hidden weapons bunkers buried underground and shielded by 10,000 pounds of reinforced concrete.

Call it Plan B for dealing with Iran, which recently revealed a long-suspected nuclear site deep inside a mountain near the holy city of Qom.

The 15-ton behemoth -- called the "massive ordnance penetrator," or MOP -- will be the largest non-nuclear bomb in the U.S. arsenal and carry 5,300 pounds of explosives. The bomb is about 10 times more powerful than the weapon it is designed to replace.

The Pentagon has awarded a nearly $52 million contract to speed up placement of the bomb aboard the B-2 Stealth bomber, and officials say the bomb could be fielded as soon as next summer.

Pentagon officials acknowledge that the new bomb is intended to blow up fortified sites like those used by Iran and North Korea for their nuclear programs, but they deny there is a specific target in mind.

"I don't think anybody can divine potential targets," Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said. "This is just a capability that we think is necessary given the world we live in."

The Obama administration has struggled to counter suspicions lingering from George W. Bush's presidency that the United States is either planning to bomb Iranian nuclear facilities itself or would look the other way if Israel did the same.

The administration has been careful not to take military action off the table even as it reached out to Iran with historic talks earlier this month. Tougher sanctions are the immediate backup if diplomacy fails to stop what the West fears is a drive for a nuclear weapon.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates recently said a strike against Iran's nuclear facilities would probably only buy time. Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen has called a strike an option he doesn't want to use.

The new U.S. bomb would be the culmination of planning begun in the Bush years. The Obama administration's plans to bring the bomb on line more quickly indicate that the weapon is still part of the long-range backup plan.

"Without going into any intelligence, there are countries that have used technology to go further underground and to take those facilities and make them hardened," Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said. "This is not a new phenomenon, but it is a growing one."

After testing began in 2007, development of the bomb was slowed by about two years because of budgetary issues, Whitman said, and the administration moved last summer to return to the previous schedule.

North Korea, led by Kim Jong Il, is a known nuclear weapons state and has exploded working devices underground. The United States and other countries have offered to buy out the country's weapons program. The Obama administration is trying to lure Pyongyang back to the bargaining table after a walkout last year.

Iran is a more complex case, for both diplomatic and technical reasons. Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, claims its nuclear program is peaceful and meant only to produce energy, but the West suspects a covert bomb program that may be only a year or so away from fruition.

Some experts say the bunker-buster bomb may serve as a deterrent to Iran's nuclear ambitions.

"I don't really see it as a near-term indication of anything being planned. I think certainly down the road it has a certain deterrent factor," said Kenneth Katzman, a specialist on Iran and the Middle East at the Congressional Research Service. "It adds to the calculus, let's say, of Ahmadinejad and Kim Jong Il."

Details about Iran's once-secret program have come out slowly and often under duress, as with last month's surprise confirmation of the hidden underground development site near Qom.

That revelation came a month after the Pentagon had asked Congress to shift money to speed up the MOP program, although U.S. and other intelligence agencies had suspected for years that Iran was still hiding at least one nuclear development site.

The MOP could, in theory, take out bunkers such as those Saddam Hussein had begun to construct for weapons programs in Iraq, or flatten the kind of cave and tunnel networks that allowed al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden to escape U.S. assault in Tora Bora, Afghanistan, shortly after the U.S. invasion in 2001.

The precision-guided bomb is designed to drill through earth and almost any underground encasement to reach weapons depots, labs or hideouts.

Did Weapons Fail U.S. Troops During Afghanistan Assault?

U.S. troops had these problems when they were transitioning to the M16 from the M14 rifle. One U.S. soldier I met after Vietnam (he was paralyzed by a mortar), said he wanted to keep the M14. The M14 was good, it had a better knock down component than the lighter .222 of the M16. M16's problems were finally ironed out--mostly. Still is this our problem today? We need more troops if we are sending in minimal forces to engage the enemy. But, do we end up like the Russians? A former Russian Officer, who fought in Afghanistan stated that he hoped the U.S. administration looks carefully at how the Russians were bogged down and finally withdrew in defeat by the local militias, taliban. (Our aiding the Afghan tribesman in knocking down the helicopters changed things)

Not that I have any express knowledge that would give any one an edge in fighting these taliban/ al qaeda in the Afghanistan areas, I would hope that we don't suffer from the obvious failures of past generations, such as: less men and supplies than required, inferior weaponry for the environment, micromanagement by non military government personnel and the lack of willpower by a Congress that really can't make up its mind on what to do. Although, the President has the final word on the troop deployments, Congress has to ok the budget. Give everything to the troops fighting, worry about the costs of material some other time. Like when we give $50 billion to a company that can't stay in business. .. lakotahope
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sunday, October 11, 2009

Sept. 25: U.S. Army Staff Sgt. Gerrad Mitchell patrols in Afghanistan with comrades from 4th Battalion, 25th Field Artillery Regiment.

WASHINGTON — In the chaos of an early morning assault on a remote U.S. outpost in eastern Afghanistan, Staff Sgt. Erich Phillips' M4 carbine quit firing as militant forces surrounded the base. The machine gun he grabbed after tossing the rifle aside didn't work either.

When the battle in the small village of Wanat ended, nine U.S. soldiers lay dead and 27 more were wounded. A detailed study of the attack by a military historian found that weapons failed repeatedly at a "critical moment" during the firefight on July 13, 2008, putting the outnumbered American troops at risk of being overrun by nearly 200 insurgents.

Which raises the question: Eight years into the war against the Taliban in Afghanistan, do U.S. armed forces have the best guns money can buy?

Despite the military's insistence that they do, a small but vocal number of troops in Afghanistan and Iraq has complained that the standard-issue M4 rifles need too much maintenance and jam at the worst possible times.

A week ago, eight U.S. troops were killed at a base near Kamdesh, a town near Wanat. There's no immediate evidence of weapons failures at Kamdesh, but the circumstances were eerily similar to the Wanat battle: insurgents stormed an isolated stronghold manned by American forces stretched thin by the demands of war.

Army Col. Wayne Shanks, a military spokesman in Afghanistan, said a review of the battle at Kamdesh is under way. "It is too early to make any assumptions regarding what did or didn't work correctly," he said.

Complaints about the weapons the troops carry, especially the M4, aren't new. Army officials say that when properly cleaned and maintained, the M4 is a quality weapon that can pump out more than 3,000 rounds before any failures occur.

The M4 is a shorter, lighter version of the M16, which made its debut during the Vietnam war. Roughly 500,000 M4s are in service, making it the rifle troops on the front lines trust with their lives.

Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., a leading critic of the M4, said Thursday the Army needs to move quickly to acquire a combat rifle suited for the extreme conditions U.S. troops are fighting in.

U.S. special operations forces, with their own acquisition budget and the latitude to buy gear the other military branches can't, already are replacing their M4s with a new rifle.

"The M4 has served us well but it's not as good as it needs to be," Coburn said.

Battlefield surveys show that nearly 90 percent of soldiers are satisfied with their M4s, according to Brig. Gen. Peter Fuller, head of the Army office that buys soldier gear. Still, the rifle is continually being improved to make it even more reliable and lethal.

Fuller said he's received no official reports of flawed weapons performance at Wanat. "Until it showed up in the news, I was surprised to hear about all this," he said.

The study by Douglas Cubbison of the Army Combat Studies Institute at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., hasn't been publicly released. Copies of the study have been leaked to news organizations and are circulating on the Internet.

Cubbison's study is based on an earlier Army investigation and interviews with soldiers who survived the attack at Wanat. He describes a well-coordinated attack by a highly skilled enemy that unleashed a withering barrage with AK-47 automatic rifles and rocket-propelled grenades.

The soldiers said their weapons were meticulously cared for and routinely inspected by commanders. But still the weapons had breakdowns, especially when the rifles were on full automatic, which allows hundreds of bullets to be fired a minute.

The platoon-sized unit of U.S. soldiers and about two dozen Afghan troops was shooting back with such intensity the barrels on their weapons turned white hot. The high rate of fire appears to have put a number of weapons out of commission, even though the guns are tested and built to operate in extreme conditions.

Cpl. Jonathan Ayers and Spc. Chris McKaig were firing their M4s from a position the soldiers called the "Crow's Nest." The pair would pop up together from cover, fire half a dozen rounds and then drop back down.

On one of these trips up, Ayers was killed instantly by an enemy round. McKaig soon had problems with his M4, which carries a 30-round magazine.

"My weapon was overheating," McKaig said, according to Cubbison's report. "I had shot about 12 magazines by this point already and it had only been about a half hour or so into the fight. I couldn't charge my weapon and put another round in because it was too hot, so I got mad and threw my weapon down."

The soldiers also had trouble with their M249 machine guns, a larger weapon than the M4 that can shoot up to 750 rounds per minute.

Cpl. Jason Bogar fired approximately 600 rounds from his M-249 before the weapon overheated and jammed the weapon.

Bogar was killed during the firefight, but no one saw how he died, according to the report.

Saudis Trying to Buy S-300 Missile Defense from Russia

One has to love the way diplomacy sometimes prevails in the Middle East. Iran has been trying to obtain the S-400 advanced missile defense system from Russia for a while. This system is as advanced as any U.S.A. system. Russia needs money and has proven more than willing to share its weapons for the right price with countries around the world. Recently, countries like India, Venezuela and India are buying nice new 'toys' from Russia.

Now we have an Arab country doing what it can to prevent a "Shiite Islamic" state from obtaining advanced weapons. Something the West couldn't accomplish all that successfully, because Israel is straining at the rope to destroy Iran's hopes of a nuclear capability. This Arab state is helping out the Jewish state in order to keep peace in the Middle East. Saudis don't trust Iran and for the most part Syria anyway.

Israel may go after Iran with or without the missile system in Iran. It still may happen, with U.S. help and/ or approval...Saudis laws are strict and treat women like garbage, but this little act will keep peace a day or two longer.... lakotahope
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
milplex
Saudis consider Russian air defense system

It is considered that the S-400 missile defense deal could be part of a much bigger arms deal with Russia. That would signal Riyadh's break from decades-old dependency on traditional arms supplying nations like Britain, France and the United States.

by Staff Writers
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia (UPI) Oct 7, 2009
Saudi Arabia is considering buying Russia's most advanced air-defense system in a deal that Riyadh hopes may deter Moscow

from selling a similar defense system to potentially nuclear Iran, experts argue.

Experts cited in a string of media reports from the region said Moscow and Riyadh

were close to signing a deal on the purchase of Russia's S-400 anti-missile shield. The deal is valued between $4 billion and $7 billion.

The system is the latest version of the S-300 long-range surface-to-air missile system that Russia has been negotiating to sell to Iran.

"The Russians were selling the S-300 in large part because of the money. Now, a larger deal will be made with Saudi Arabia," said a World News report, citing an anonymous Egyptian intelligence official.

Diplomats in the Gulf, however, argue that strong Western and Israeli pressure, capped by a multibillion-dollar deal with Saudi Arabia, may sway Moscow against its initial designs to sell the surface-to-air missiles system to Iran.

Saudi Arabia, influenced by Sunni Islam, is threatened by the growing influence of Iran, dominated by Shiite Islam.

It is considered that the S-400 missile defense deal could be part of a much bigger arms deal with Russia. That would signal Riyadh's break from decades-old dependency on traditional arms supplying nations like Britain, France and the United States.

In late August, for example, Russia's Interfax news agency reported that a $2 billion weapons deal was in the making between Russia and Saudi Arabia. Under the deal, Russia would supply up to 150 combat helicopters, and equal number of T-90S tanks and infantry fighting vehicles.

This week The Financial Times reported that as part of the deal Saudi Arabia demanded guarantees that Russia would not send the S-300 system to Iran.

"The Saudis would rather this weapon system were not sold to Iran or (another possible buyer) Syria," Theodore Karasik, director of research at the Dubai-based think tank, was quoted saying by Russia Today.

It said Tehran was initially interested in the S-300 system in 2005 when a deal was signed. The equipment, however, has yet to reach Iran.

Saudi officials are increasingly worried that Western pressure has failed to sway Iran's development of nuclear know-how. It has repeatedly contested Iran's insistence that its nuclear ambitions are entirely peaceful.

"The pressure from the U.S. is a stick and the huge weapons deal prepared by the Saudis is a carrot," Director of Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies Ruslan Pukhov told Interfax news agency. "We all know Saudi Arabia buys weapons as a 'bribe' to the world's great powers in exchange for support," he added.

Nuclear Free World

Visions of a nuclear weapon free world do inspire one to seek out the logical paths that may be necessary to guarantee that all nuclear weapons are destroyed/ dismantled. As in the following article mentions of controlling the nuclear sources and maybe offering ways to recycle uranium.

Years ago, I recall the advent of so-called Fast Breeder Reactors that produced more fuel than was consumed. Economically, they appear to not be as practical to operate in this economy. Given the readily available supplies of uranium.

But, I am straying from my premise for writing this little small blog. There are many reasons in existence for having the enormous firepower of a nuclear arsenal at one country's fingertips. Surely, the possible saving one million American G.I.s , in the Japanese theater during World War II. This was the estimated cost to the U.S.A. in the upcoming invasion that would have been required to completely subdue the Japanese. The haves are not at all likely to give up an arsenal that is cheaper to keep in place than continuously employed half a million strong army.

Granted, since WWII, this world hasn't seen it in its heart of hearts to not keep fighting with conventional weapons. It seems members of the nuclear club are more than willing to fight on someone else's home turf. We take the fight to the enemy and fight them on their ground. Keeps the dirty part of war away from our shores. ... lakotahope
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Outside View: The Reagan legacy

by Harlan Ullman
Washington (UPI) Sep 30, 2009
On March 23, 1983, in a speech to the nation announcing the Strategic Defense Initiative, U.S. President Ronald Reagan pledged to make "nuclear weapons impotent and obsolete." The left immediately attacked Reagan and his initiative was ridiculed as "Star Wars." Ironically, President Barack Obama is on his way to making good on Reagan's pledge. And for that, he is being roundly criticized by the far right.

Last week Obama sensibly reset the missile defense plans to station 10 interceptors and ground based radar in Poland and the Czech Republic against the threat of Iranian intercontinental ballistic missiles that may never be built. In his U.N. General Assembly speech on Wednesday, Obama renewed his call for a nuclear weapons free world and vowed that he would pursue genuine nuclear arms reductions with Russia and finally have the Senate approve the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and other measures. These steps surely were aimed at moving nuclear weapons towards Reagan's famous promise of impotence and obsolescence. Another critical step is needed, and we will return to that shortly.

Any military commander worth his or her salt will readily agree that tactical defense against ballistic and cruise missiles is essential. Given the geography of the two states of concern -- North Korea and Iran -- tactical or regional defenses needed by militaries applies to defending against the shorter-range missiles possessed by Tehran and Pyongyang. More to the point, as the Standard Missile Block Three becomes operational in the next five or so years, it has the capacity for ascent or boost-phase intercept -- that is, knocking the missile down while it is going up and before it can deploy any defenses. And the timing conforms to estimates of when North Korea and Iran might be able to acquire longer-range missiles.

Furthermore, as ascent-phased interceptors become operational, there is no reason the technology could not be made available to neighbors of these two states of concern including China and Russia. The effect would surely be to make Iranian and North Korean missiles "impotent and obsolete." And the ability to station these SM-3s at sea eliminates any problems of shore basing and national sovereignty.

Regarding the commitment to arms control, arms reductions and preventing the proliferation of nuclear fissile material and weapons, the United States had no choice except to take the high road and finally begin complying with the 40-year-old Non-Proliferation Treaty in which the nuclear weapons states were to make a good-faith effort to reduce those arms. This may work. Rationality and strategic logic are not always sufficient to overcome politics -- particularly in the Senate. And the right wing will have field days accusing the Obama administration of appeasement and unilateral disarmament.

So far, the administration has not sketched out or issued an overarching vision or statement of its strategic intent. And the shift away from the Ground Base Interceptor system in Europe was not rolled out smoothly for reasons that are still unclear. But given the new focus of missile defense and the president's U.N. speech, it is very clear where the administration wishes to go.

The missing element relates to proliferation. For the time being, as neither sanctions nor incentives convinced North Korea to halt its nuclear weapons program and are unlikely to do the same in Iran if the mullahs are determined to build an A-bomb, only military action can offers a means -- and an extraordinarily risky one -- of prevention. Yet, there is a surer option. Control the nuclear fuel cycle!

If guaranteed permanent access to nuclear fuel, states need not enrich. Furthermore, given nearly half a million metric tons of nuclear waste that must be stored, control of the fuel cycle could solve both the problems of proliferation and storage. Interestingly, a decade ago Russia approved a law that permitted storage of nuclear waste, at a price, within its borders. That approval has not been exploited.

Whether through an international organization such as the IAEA or competitive fuel recycling combines, provided guarantees could be made and honored, this approach offers a means to combat proliferation by applying better controls to the fuel cycle. And surely other states might find the incentives of storing nuclear waste sufficient to offer sites. That will not be easy given the U.S. impasse over Yucca Mountain and the resistance of Nevadans to accept the storage site planned for their state.

The notion of a nuclear weapons free world may prove to be utopian and therefore unobtainable. However, in the process of moving in that direction, while the Obama presidency may never make nuclear weapons "impotent and obsolete," it can greatly reduce the chances of one being used in anger. Ronald Reagan will be proud and the right will fume.

(Harlan Ullman is chairman of the Killowen Group that advises leaders of government and business.)

(United Press International's "Outside View" commentaries are written by outside contributors who specialize in a variety of important issues. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of United Press International. In the interests of creating an open forum, original submissions are invited.)

Ex-Pow Hopes a German Cellars Holds His Airmans Wings

Another grand moment in our nations history is shared by this WWII Bomber Pilot--Lt. Bernerd Harding. I discovered this unique story when I was investigating weather timelines in South Carolina. The internet is an interesting phenomenon to cruise through while sipping one's favorite beverage on a rainy afternoon ... Lakotahope

Norma Love - AP Writer
CONCORD, N.H. (AP) - Sixty-five years ago, 1st Lt. Bernerd Harding huddled in a cellar with a few other airmen captured by German farmers and buried his pilot's wings, fearful he'd be beaten or shot as an American bomber pilot.

By NORMA LOVE

Now, at age 90, Harding wants his wings back. He's headed to Germany on Sunday and hopes - with the help of a German doctor - to find the farmhouse cellar and dig up the 3-inch-long metal wings that he had proudly pinned to his shirt. The house was in rural Klein Quenstedt (pronounced klyn KWEN'-shted), Germany, southwest of Berlin, he said.

"I know exactly where the wings are. They're not very deep. I won't need a shovel," he said in a firm, clear voice during a telephone interview from his Milford, N.H., home.

A month after the D-Day invasion of Normandy, Harding was a 25-year-old B-24 pilot flying his 14th mission when he was shot down. Harding, a member of the 8th Air Force's 492nd Bomb Group, was leading nine other B-24s in the 859th squadron on a daylight mission to bomb an aircraft manufacturing plant in Bernburgh on July 7, 1944. He was carrying 11 other soldiers on his plane.

He had just dropped his bomb load when the support planes that kept German fighters at bay were diverted to protect bombers in another squadron. Shortly afterward, German fighters crippled his plane, nicknamed Georgette, and Harding ordered his crew to parachute.

"Our inboard engines were on fire. We lost every control. I gave the order for everyone to bail out. I bailed out last," Harding said.

All 10 planes in his squadron, carrying about 100 crewmen and pilots were shot down, he recalled. At least half died, he said. Of the 12 men aboard Georgette, only one died that day, shot in the head by his German captors, Harding found out later. The others were all captured and survived the war, but have since died.

Harding landed in a freshly cut wheat field. Three farmers, two with pitchforks and one with a gun, captured him and herded him into the cellar. They held him until German army officers could take charge.

Two other airmen who had been shot down were already being held when Harding arrived. He dug a hole and buried his wings.

"We were there a while. We heard a wagon rumbling over the cobblestones," he said.

A young German who spoke English ordered the airmen to take the body of a dead American airman off the wagon.

After several hours, German soldiers loaded the captured Americans into a van that took them to Halberstadt Air Force Base. About 100 other Americans had been rounded up from 36 planes shot down that day, Harding said. Three days later, they were loaded onto a train to Frankfurt, interrogated and sent to a prisoner-of-war camp in Barth.

After 10 months in the POW camp, the Russian army was approaching from the East. The German captors told the 7,500 prisoners to leave. The next morning, the Germans had fled, Harding said. The Russians freed the prisoners.

As the years passed, Harding didn't think much about his wings. He wasn't sure how the German villagers would treat an American pilot who had bombed their country.

Then last year, he attended services at Arlington National Cemetery for six airmen whose remains had only recently been discovered with the help of German villagers. Harding began to think Klein Quenstedt residents might help him recover his wings and close a chapter in his life.

Early this year, a friend of Harding's found a Web site about an old water mill in Klein Quenstedt owned by Dr. Ulrich Heucke (pronounced HOY'-kuh), a village resident. The friend e-mailed Heucke describing Harding's quest and asked for help.

Heucke, 41,became intrigued because of his interest in history, and wrote back. He began interviewing older village residents who remembered what had happened.

One resident remembered a dead airman with his parachute wrapped around him. That fit Harding's description of the dead man he helped take off the wagon.

Heucke sent Harding pictures of several houses that might be where he was held, but Harding didn't recognize them. The pictures showed the front of the houses, and Harding had entered through the rear.

Heucke plans to take Harding and his family to four farmhouses Wednesday in search of his wings.

"There were some places I definitely know American airmen were in. Others I just suspect," Heucke said.

The village hasn't changed much, but some buildings have been remodeled, Heucke said. Most of the older farmhouses are still standing.

He said chances of Harding finding the pin are slim. But people in the small village of 750 want to help.

"We will just go around. It is the last hope to find the place," he said.

Heucke also has arranged for Harding to fly over the village to see if that helps pinpoint the house.

"I would like to get to know Bernerd Harding after the time we communicated," Heucke said. "It is very interesting that a man 90 years of age is coming here, making a journey to see this place."

Harding just hopes that he finds the right cellar and that no one has poured concrete over the floor in the years since he scratched his shallow hole in the dirt.

___

On the Net:

U.S. Air Force 492nd Bomb Group: http://www.492ndbombgroup.com/

Navy, Families of 3 Killed in 1946 Plane Crash Clash Over Bringing the Remains Home

The survivors buried the 3 killed under a wingtip and the U.S. Navy considers the site a final resting place like the U.S.S. Arizona's site. The Joint POW/MIA Accounting Command has offered $200,000 to pay for a flight. Personally, I believe the families of the deceased should be allowed to bring them home. During World War II, most of the military men killed overseas were buried overseas. But, I believe there were some that were brought home. Of course, there are over 50,000 military personnel still listed as missing and periodically, some remains are found and brought back to Hawaii for identification. This accident also happened after the war--whether or not this has any bearing, who knows?. .... lakotahope

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Families: Find 3 sailors killed in ‘46 polar crash

SAN ANTONIO — The Navy and families of three sailors killed in a 1946 plane crash in Antarctica are clashing over whether to bring the men home.

Petty Officer 1st Class Fred Williams, Ensign Maxwell Lopez and Petty Officer 1st Class Wendell Hendersin died when their PBM-5 Mariner went down in a storm.

The six survivors wrapped their remains in parachutes and buried them under a piece of the aircraft’s wing tip. The Navy considers the site a final resting place, akin to the USS Arizona in Pearl Harbor.

Recovery supporters say glacial movement could cause the site to break off into the sea.

They’re forming a nonprofit to raise money for a recovery effort and want to meet with President Obama. The Joint POW/MIA Accounting Command has offered $200,000 to pay for a flight.

Information from: San Antonio Express-News, www.mysanantonio.com

Russia's Sale of the S-300 Air Defense System to Iran

The S-300 would be a tremendous boon to Iran's Air Defense network. This is the top of the line system from Russia and it rivals any systems the U.S.A. has in place at this time. Russia's Prime Minister Putin has claimed recently that he doesn't want anyone to interdict Iran's attempts at gaining peaceful nuclear power. He doesn't want the U.S. or Israel to do any pre-emptive strikes against Iran. He has firmly stated that it will not be tolerated and he believes Iran has only "peaceful" intent in pursuing nuclear capabilities for power. The following article is informative and delivers some notable points to ponder while dealing with Russia's re-arming of countries that are at odds with U.S. policies. Namely Venezuela and Iran. Both countries are obtaining missile weapons systems. .... lakotahope
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The S-300: Why so important?

September 12, 2009 - 1:09 PM | by: Michael Tobin

There has been a great deal of mention recently about Russia’s potential sale of S-300 air defense systems to Iran and Israel’s interest in stopping that sale. It’s been reported but not proven that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s disappearance last Monday was for a Secret meeting with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev was an effort to prevent that sale.

To understand why the S-300 is so important, first you need to understand that Iran does not have a conventional, modern military that can defend a line on a map. Its fleet of fighter planes is so old it includes a US F-14 Tomcat given to Iran before the Islamic revolution. If Israel were to order air strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities with their modern F-15s and brand new fleet of F-16Is (The ‘I’ indicates customized for Israel) Israeli fighter crews would make such easy work of destroying the Iranian air force, prudence dictates that Iran never clear a single fighter for takeoff. According to KT McFarland Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense under President Reagan, the S-300 “Is a game changer.”

The S-300 is Russia’s version of the Patriot or Arrow missile system. It is a state of the art surface to air defense system involving radars, which can track 100 targets at a time, and interceptors or missiles, which can be fired simultaneously at 12 different inbound targets. The S-300 would not put an impenetrable virtual dome over Iran but it would dramatically increase for Israel the complications and risk of a strike.

Although the weapon is designed to be defensive, there is no guarantee it will only used for that. Israeli Rocket Scientist Uzi Rubin, a designer of the Arrow system, fears that Iran could give missile batteries to its allies or proxies closer to Israel’s border. “They don’t hesitate to pass weapons along to Syria or Hizbollah,” Says Rubin. And Iran need not aim the S-300 only at Israeli targets. KT McFarland says, “If they deploy it on he Afghan or Iraq borders. It could even threaten US and allied aircraft.” In Iranian control, the weapons system would be nearly as effective as actual nuclear weapons in terms of increasing tension and stoking the embers of paranoia in the region. “The S-300 could destabilize the whole Middle East,” According to Rubin.

There is also a tremendous political element if Russia makes this sale. This would be the leaders of a major world power approving Iran’s nuclear program in such certain terms that they are “putting an umbrella of protection over it,” according to Rubin. Russian experts would need to train the Iranians on the system. It would require parts, upkeep and updates with changing technology. If the S-300s are delivered to Iran it is more than a weapons sale, it is an alliance. According to Rubin it means that “Russia is back in the game in the Middle East.”

Iran's Plan to Eliminate Nuclear Weapons Worldwide

Overall it is a grand idea, but one that doesn't quite fit into the rhetoric that has been spewed from Ahmadenijad in the past. For one, he has stated the intention of wiping Israel from the face of the earth. No secret there! Iran has always wanted Israel to dump its "nuclear weapons". However, Israel has as yet to admit to possessing nuclear weapons--I think we can say they have nuclear strike capability.

Fundamentalist Islam--the goal to to suppress and erase all religions but Islam. Straight up and no ifs ands or buts. Iran is fundamentalist to the core and Iran scares the other Arab nations in the middle east. Saudi Arabia is doing its best to distance itself from Iran and whatever their intentions will be.

Putin of Russia just recently stated that he will not tolerate any more sanctions or active strike against Iran. He believes Iran is trying to develop a peaceful nuclear base. But, in the same statement, said, "It is unacceptable for Iran to have Nuclear Weapons......" Go figure!!!! .... lakotahope
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

by Staff Writers
Washington (AFP) Sept 10, 2009
Iran is proposing to set up an international system to scrap and prohibit nuclear weapons worldwide, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's senior adviser said in an interview published Thursday.

Mojtaba Samareh Hashemi told The Washington Post that the Iranian package of proposals submitted Wednesday to the United States and other powers calls for the elimination of existing weapons and measures to prevent countries without weapons from acquiring them.

But he stopped short of promising that Iran would bow to international demands and halt its uranium enrichment program, which Washington fears is aimed at building a nuclear bomb but Tehran insists is for the peaceful use of nuclear energy.

"The methods of preventing development of nuclear weapons and a widespread system for preventing the multiplying and the proliferation of nuclear weapons are a part of the package," Hashemi said.

"Since nuclear weapons are an international threat, with the cooperation of all countries we can design an international framework that, basically, prevents research, production, multiplying and keeping nuclear weapons and also moves toward destruction of present nuclear weapons," he was quoted as saying.

"Iran is ready in this path to offer any and every kind of cooperation and effort. No country must be exempt from this international framework against nuclear weapons," Hashemi told the daily.

Iran has long called for Israel to abandon a stockpile of nuclear weapons it is widely believed to possess.

Hashemi gave no direct reply when asked repeatedly if the Iranian package contains a promise to stop uranium enrichment.

He appeared to reply affirmatively when asked if the proposal for a new framework aimed not only at eliminating existing nuclear stockpiles but also at clearing up doubts that countries like Iran aimed to build such weapons.

"Since today the threat of nuclear weapons comes from countries that have them, and to be secure and safe from future activities of countries that in the future will join the nuclear club, this framework must be widely implemented from now on," he said.

He suggested Iran's goal -- rather than trying to build a nuclear weapon itself -- is to establish an international system in which nobody will be allowed to make such weapons.

"Iran not only does not want to make nuclear weapons, but is actually intensely against nuclear weapons," Hashemi told the newspaper.

"In all truth, Iran is trying to establish a new regime to prevent nuclear weapons worldwide, which are an international anxiety," he was quoted as saying.

Social Security Payments to Shrink for First Time in a Generation

Would the Health Care Bill be more likely to pass muster when things like this affect the senior population? A slight of hand from the government.... lakotahope

WASHINGTON -- Millions of older people face shrinking Social Security checks next year, the first time in a generation that payments would not rise.

The trustees who oversee Social Security are projecting there won't be a cost of living adjustment (COLA) for the next two years. That hasn't happened since automatic increases were adopted in 1975.

By law, Social Security benefits cannot go down. Nevertheless, monthly payments would drop for millions of people in the Medicare prescription drug program because the premiums, which often are deducted from Social Security payments, are scheduled to go up slightly.

"I will promise you, they count on that COLA," said Barbara Kennelly, a former Democratic congresswoman from Connecticut who now heads the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare. "To some people, it might not be a big deal. But to seniors, especially with their health care costs, it is a big deal."

Cost of living adjustments are pegged to inflation, which has been negative this year, largely because energy prices are below 2008 levels.

Advocates say older people still face higher prices because they spend a disproportionate amount of their income on health care, where costs rise faster than inflation. Many also have suffered from declining home values and shrinking stock portfolios just as they are relying on those assets for income.

"For many elderly, they don't feel that inflation is low because their expenses are still going up," said David Certner, legislative policy director for AARP. "Anyone who has savings and investments has seen some serious losses."

About 50 million retired and disabled Americans receive Social Security benefits. The average monthly benefit for retirees is $1,153 this year. All beneficiaries received a 5.8 percent increase in January, the largest since 1982.

More than 32 million people are in the Medicare prescription drug program. Average monthly premiums are set to go from $28 this year to $30 next year, though they vary by plan. About 6 million people in the program have premiums deducted from their monthly Social Security payments, according to the Social Security Administration.

Millions of people with Medicare Part B coverage for doctors' visits also have their premiums deducted from Social Security payments. Part B premiums are expected to rise as well. But under the law, the increase cannot be larger than the increase in Social Security benefits for most recipients.

There is no such hold-harmless provision for drug premiums.

China Acquires Swiss Oil Producer

Geneva-based oil and gas producer Addax Petroleum Corp was purchased by China's largest oil refiner. Addax primarily deals in projects located in Africa and the Middle East. For the past decade China has been increasing its presence on the African continent. Many business deals and a large influx of Chinese into this region is a symptom of acquisition in Africa's infrastructure. What would be the overall problem of long term, maybe permanent Chinese influence in this area? China will own the world one day and we will wonder what we did wrong.... China already owns the largest share of America's debt and this will likely continue to increase. Especially, with Obama's planned stimulus debt of 1.3 trillion dollars or more. How will America pay for this HUGE burden in the long run--increased taxes is the only way..... lakotahope
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

BEIJING, August 18 (RIA Novosti) - Sinopec Group, China's largest oil refiner, has taken over Geneva-based oil and gas producer Addax Petroleum Corp., the Xinhua news agency said on Tuesday.

According to the agency, the Sinopec group purchased the Swiss oil company for around $7.2 billion. Sinopec said it paid $47.80 per share for 157.6 million Addax shares.

Sinopec have not confirmed the deal, however.

The deal would be the largest overseas takeover deal by a Chinese oil company.

Addax is an international oil and gas exploration and production company focused on Africa and the Middle East.

Pentagon's Joint Strike Fighter for the British May Be Revised

The F35, Joint Strike Fighter has been ordered to replace Britain's aging Harrier fleet. The replacement aircraft are the STOVL variety and it looks like they may be replaced for the standard variety of F35. The Pentagon had been depending on selling the F35 and allowing joint production with the U.S.A.'s allies as a means to get everyone on board for a universal fighter. A fighter that may indeed make money for our defense contractors. Earlier in the year, Obama scrapped plans to produce more F22 Raptors in favor of the cheaper and more "combat theater" versatile JSF..... lakotahope
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


British engine manufacturer Rolls-Royce has been given some $824 million in taxpayer's money to develop the highly complex jump jet engine enabling vertical takeoff and landing for the so-called STOVL Joint Strike Fighter. The plane would have succeeded the Harrier Jump Jet, which goes out of service in 2015. by Staff Writers
London (UPI) Aug 12, 2009
Britain may drop the short-takeoff and vertical-landing variant of the Joint Strike Fighter in favor of the conventional model to be used on its two planned aircraft carriers.

The decision would waste taxpayer's money and could result in job losses, British newspaper Daily Telegraph writes. The decision to drop the jump jet model could be announced this fall, the newspaper writes, citing unnamed sources from the British Defense Ministry.

London plans to build two new aircraft carriers and wants to equip them with Joint Strike Fighters. British engine manufacturer Rolls-Royce has been given some $824 million in taxpayer's money to develop the highly complex jump jet engine enabling vertical takeoff and landing for the so-called STOVL Joint Strike Fighter. The plane would have succeeded the Harrier Jump Jet, which goes out of service in 2015.

"We have to take an immensely important decision," Quentin Davies, the British procurement minister, told the newspaper. "The testing and evaluation phase has been ongoing of the first three aircraft. We have to take a decision as to which version of aircraft we shall be agreeing and we shall be focusing on this situation in the coming months."

If that model is indeed dropped, Rolls-Royce could lose hundreds of jobs and more than $8 billion in orders, the daily writes.

Military officials favor the conventional model, which takes off from a carrier runway, because it has a longer flight range and can carry more bombs. The so-called CV Joint Strike Fighter is also $25 million cheaper, playing into the cards of a Defense Ministry trying to slash costs because of budget constraints.

But as the first carrier, the HMS Queen Elizabeth, is already under construction, a later turnaround regarding its planes would mean that the ships would have to be redesigned, with additional costs involved.

The ministry did not dismiss or confirm the report.

"To maximize the flexibility that the carriers will offer over their service life, they are being built to an adaptable design that can operate both STOVL and CV type aircraft," it said in a statement. "(The carriers) are designed around the operation of the STOVL Joint Strike Fighter aircraft, and this remains our preferred solution to meet the UK's Carrier Strike requirement along with the Queen Elizabeth Class of carriers and the Maritime Airborne Surveillance Capability."

Are Nuclear Reactors Fair Game?

Are nuclear reactors truly out of reach of attack in rogue states. Definition of a rogue state.

"Rogue state is a term applied by some international theorists to states considered threatening to the world's peace. This means meeting certain criteria, such as being ruled by authoritarian regimes that severely restrict human rights, sponsor terrorism, and seek to proliferate weapons of mass destruction.^[5] The term is used most by the United States, though it has been applied by other countries.^[6]

In virtually all international foreign policy circles, rogue states are considered to be those nations utterly ruled by individuals (rather than subject to a popular electoral process) and whose legitimacy, intentions, and notions of the process of legitimate succession (if any) is highly suspect. Furthermore, rogue states (as opposed to nominal non-newsworthy dictatorships which pose no external threat) typically become consequential due to their engagement in the threat - or conduct of - war, particularly against neighbor states, without regard to international law.

Rogue states can also be differentiated from 'pariah states' such as Burma (Myanmar) and Zimbabwe who allegedly abuse the human rights of their populations while not being considered a tangible threat beyond their own borders, although the terms have been used interchangeably"..... wikipedia

While I believe countries should be able to determine how best to bring themselves modern conveniences and supply themselves with the material, food and power. Countries that are a constant threat, either should be reigned in or isolated. I leave open the idea of how to reign in a "rogue state", but I am not averse to using force. These countries are like a gangrenous limb that will eventually infect and defeat a bodies defenses to heal itself and remain viable. Unless, the limb is amputated or is treated with radical measures that may debride part of the limb but otherwise, keep it intact. Often, at least partial amputation is required. The same for countries that promote terrorism throughout their region or the world.

Israel is dealing with Iran and the rhetoric from the newly "reelected" President Ahmadinejad.
He has publicly stated his desire to wipe Israel off of the map and with nuclear weapons in his inventory, what is to stop him. Israel will act in their own best interest as evidenced by the destruction of reactors in Osirak, Iraq and Syria's. Vice President Biden has stated we will not stop Israel if they want to make Iran's reactor go away. I liked that, but Obama had to do some backpedaling. However, the message got out to Iran.

Military force is not off of the table, and now Iran is trying to get a 150 nation conference to vote on a measure to abolish attacks on nuclear reactors around the world. I don't believe for one second Iran wouldn't knock out anyone else's reactors if they could. It is the story of the wolf asking the flock of sheep for help.