SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: unclewest who wrote (38421)4/7/2004 9:34:01 PM
From: LindyBill  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 793928
 
It will be interesting to see if this goes anywhere. I know you and your "crew" are hot of the trail. And there is still the question of "1971, Kansas City!"

Kerry has adamantly refused to release his military records, which could immediately clear up much of the mystery. This, despite the fact that his opponent, President Bush, released all records, up to and including his dental records, when his Air National Guard service was publicly questioned. By leading Democrats who actively campaign for Kerry. I strongly suspect that in doing so, Bush campiagn officials were consciously baiting a trap for Kerry on the question of his service records.

I love this final line about what the Dems would do if Kerry faltered.

And we all know who is waiting in the wings.

American Thinker - A Boston Surprise this Summer?
April 7th, 2004

The Democrats have hitched their Presidential hopes to one of the strangest nominees in a long time, John Kerry. His cold aloofness, his thin-skinned nastiness, his habit of marrying wealthy women and living grandly on the proceeds, and his unique propensity for deep-cutting self-satire (“I voted for it before I voted against it”), make him remarkably unappealing to the non-ideological swing voters who will decide the election.

Recall for a moment that the only reason he became the front-runner was the Democrats’ desperation in the wake of the Howard Dean public meltdown. Prior to that moment, Kerry’s campaign had gone nowhere. He was tested and rejected by the activists anxious to back a winner. Only by virtue of his ability to mortgage a house purchased with his wife’s late husband’s money was his campaign even alive to pick up the pieces.

His sole positive attribute is his putatively heroic war record in Vietnam. But political gossip-mongers have long known that it is only a matter of time before serious questions about that record reach the public arena. Kerry received three medals, and an early exit from the combat zone, based on self-reported injuries which caused him to miss but one day of work.

Anyone who ponders this record for more than a moment or two is bound to ask questions. How can someone get so many heroic decorations based on his own testimony? How can three injuries serious enough to merit decorations have allowed him to continue his military service unimpeded by hospitalization, crutches, surgery, or visible consequences?

These questions are not in the same league as sexual innuendo, or questioning of anyone’s patriotism. They represent legitimate curiosity about facts which comprise the cornerstone Kerry’s campaign.

Yet Kerry has adamantly refused to release his military records, which could immediately clear up much of the mystery. This, despite the fact that his opponent, President Bush, released all records, up to and including his dental records, when his Air National Guard service was publicly questioned. By leading Democrats who actively campaign for Kerry. I strongly suspect that in doing so, Bush campiagn officials were consciously baiting a trap for Kerry on the question of his service records.

Then there is the entire matter of Kerry’s anti-war activism, yet to be seriously explored. After adamantly denying it, documentary evidence turned up which indicated Kerry had been present at meetings in which leftist activists discussed assassinating politicians. Although Kerry resigned from the anti-war organization holding the meetings, there is no evidence that he reported the criminal activity he witnessed to any authorities.

In other words, he observed the Mafia custom of Omerta, when political assassination was at issue.

Keep in mind that there are still almost 200 days left before the election. There is plenty of time for second and third thoughts about Kerry, on the part of America’s non-ideological voters, and plenty for them to think over. The vetting of candidate Kerry has only just begun.

But of course, Kerry isn’t really the nominee yet. He is only the “presumptive nominee.”

So it is time to seriously wonder if the Democrats might not exercise what we can call the “Torricelli Gambit.”

In the 2002 elections, New Jersey Senator Robert Torricelli experienced a collapse in his electoral viability after securing the Democrats’ nomination for re-election. Despite New Jersey state law to the contrary, the Supreme Court in that state decided to allow the Democrats to substitute a more viable candidate after the Torch withdrew from the race. All in the interest of giving the voters a choice, you see. And, as you may recall, the Democrats still hold on to the Senate seat vacated by Torricelli

If you don’t think such an option could be exercised again, you are kidding yourself. Would Kerry voluntarily withdraw, the way Torricelli did after being ‘counseled’ by Democratic power-brokers, to smooth the way? Only time will tell. But if there are any skeletons in his closet, the prospect of facing the electorate without support from senior members of his own party can not be terribly attractive.

Then there is Teresa factor. She has never visibly demonstrated a lot of enthusiasm for her husband’s candidacy. Would she support her husband pushing ahead under such circumstances, which could possibly lead to ridicule or scandal? Now that John Kerry has personally borrowed millions of dollars, secured by the Beacon Hill house in which he owns only a half interest, and which he cannot afford to pay back without access to his wife’s checkbook, can he disregard her potential opposition?

Even if he doesn't voluntarily withdraw, he could still be rejected by the convention. The Super-delegates are under no compulsion to vote for his nomination. And if delegates selected by primary voters to vote for Kerry do not do so, who exactly is going to stop them? The New Jersey Supreme Court?

If the situation in Iraq is difficult enough to give the Democrats hope of winning the Presidency, and if Kerry continues his propensity for gaffes, bursts of anger, bullying voters with the temerity to ask difficult questions, and his need for rest and recuperation in the midst of heated battle, the urge to withdraw a damaged Kerry and substitute a candidate who would face less than four months of campaign scrutiny could become overwhelming.

And we all know who is waiting in the wings.

Thomas Lifson



To: unclewest who wrote (38421)4/7/2004 9:56:16 PM
From: LindyBill  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793928
 
Military News - ELECTRONIC BATTLEFIELD: REMBASS Rolls On

April 7, 2004: The fighting in Iraq is more like Vietnam than most people imagine, but in ways that rarely show up on the news. One bit of Vietnam déjà vu is the use of the REMBASS (Remote Battlefield Sensor System) family of ground sensors. During the Vietnam war, the use of remote sensors (microphones or other devices that transmitted what they picked up to distant listening stations) became common. The sensors and radio equipment had gotten reliable, rugged and cheap enough by the 1960s to make this gear very useful on the battlefield. It was also a lot safer to put a bunch of REMBASS sensors, rather than troops, out there where the enemy might suddenly appear. As a result of REMBASS, it became a lot more difficult for communist guerillas to move around. We tend to think of Vietnam as an unmitigated disaster, but if you read any of the books written (since the 1990s) by troops on the communist side, you get a sense that the American troops and all their technology were a pretty lethal combination.

After Vietnam, the sensors got smaller, more powerful and more reliable. The current system used in Iraq, REMBASS II, contains sensors that can detect sound (acoustic sensors), vibrations traveling through the ground (seismic), heat (thermal, or infrared) and metal (magnetic). Troops have to use some imagination in placing the sensors. You don't want them to be easily spotted by hostile troops, or just curious civilians (who might decide to take it home, along with the radio transmitter that is placed nearby and connected to the sensor via a wire.) The radio signal can be picked up 10-15 kilometers away (or much farther, using repeater stations.) The batteries in the sensors have to be changed every 30 days or so. You can also use an aircraft or UAV overhead to receive the signals from your sensors.

The big change with REMBASS II is the software in the laptop computer that is used to monitor each sensor network, as well as the sensors themselves. With decades of experience using all these sensors, it is possible to equip sensors with software that has information that enables the sensor to eliminate most false alarms. Thus the sensor fires off a message to the control system only when it has detected what it is programmed to detect (people or vehicles or only vehicles of a certain size of type and so on). The sensors can be used in combination to get more information. For example, by including a magnetic sensor, and you can detect people passing by who are carrying rifles (which are metal). There are also sensors that can, less reliably, detect explosives or chemical weapons being carried.

The U.S. Army Special Forces are particularly keen on REMBASS II. A lot of what Special Forces do has to do with stakeouts in remote areas. Special Forces troops believe fewer (people) is better when they go into hostile country. Sensors, carefully placed, allow a team of four to six Special Forces troops to monitor a huge area. In places like Afghanistan, this is essential if you are going to have a chance of covering the vast, unpopulated areas the bad guys can travel over. In Iraq, REMBASS is heavily used in protecting bases, and in staking out border areas that are being used by terrorists or anti-government fighters to smuggle themselves, and weapons, into the country.

REMBASS II is one of those items of military equipment that just don't attract much attention, but they make a big difference. All you see is a soldier working on a laptop, which is connected to what appears to be a radio. That's a REMBASS II control station, and that GI could easily be monitoring foot and vehicle traffic for miles around, 24/7. Spotting the enemy first has been a key military goal for thousands of years, and all REMBASS II does is use current technology to do it.

March 17, 2004: Generally unnoticed technical developments often have enormous impact on military operations. The combination of videocam technology and satellite telephone technology produced the UAVs of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. These UAVs were able to watch large areas below them around the clock, making it much more difficult for the enemy to sneak around. This changed the way wars are fought, especially those against irregular and guerilla forces.

Two new technical developments are about to knock this use of "persistent UAVs" up a notch. First, there is the new flash memory hard drive. Using the flash memory (memory chips that retain their information when you turn the power off) used in digital cameras and memory sticks, flash memory devices with the capacity of hard drives have been produced. This was possible because flash memory was becoming smaller and cheaper. The current products put 90 gigabytes of flash memory into the same container that normally holds a 2.5 inch hard drive found in notebook computers. The "flash" hard drive uses less power (3-5 watts), the same electronic connections as a regular hard drive, and moves data faster as well.

A flash memory hard drive has no moving parts and works more reliably in places like a UAV. This is very important. One of the problems with UAVs and their video cameras is that there is not enough communications satellite capacity available to support all the UAVs that can be put in the air. With a 90 gigabyte flash hard drive, you can hold 11 hours of high resolution video, or 80 hours of lower resolution stuff. This means that a UAV can record everything it sees, and send it when satellite transmission capacity is available. It's also possible for the UAVs computer to scan the video and only alert the UAV operator when something possibly interesting shows



To: unclewest who wrote (38421)4/8/2004 9:16:52 AM
From: Suma  Respond to of 793928
 
Special Services. Worked in the service clubs. The 2nd,10th and 11th Regiments... Indian Town Gap is a depressing place.... I am from PA and it was near my home. The only advantage.

Were you in that camp ? Wonder if we ever met.

Suma



To: unclewest who wrote (38421)4/8/2004 8:37:05 PM
From: LindyBill  Respond to of 793928
 
IRAQ: House to House Fighting
Military News

April 8, 2004: Fighting continued in Fallujah, with the marines holding nearly half the city, and inflicting over a hundred casualties on the armed Iraqis. The marines are using a combination of tanks, aircraft and infantry to advance against the Iraqis defending from the tightly packed, low rise (one or two story) housing that covers most of the city. There are numerous different groups resisting the marines, so there is no coordinated resistance. The criminal gangs appear to be the best organized. The gangs of Fallujah, like many Sunni Arab criminal organizations, proved resistant to Saddam's attempts to destroy them, so Saddam made a deal with the gangs, and got a cut of their loot. The former Saddam military and secret police people have formed anti-American (and sometimes criminal gangs, which causes tension with the existing gangs.) There are also groups of Arab nationalists (whose philosophy seems to be "better to be a slave under another Arab than to be free through the efforts of a non-Arab) and Islamic radicals. This lack of centralized organization makes it harder for the marines, as killing off one group does not have an immediate effect on the others. However, killing the resisting Iraqis does have an effect on others. The number of Iraqi gunmen is diminishing as Iraqis note that the marines kill all who fight them, and the marines are not taking nearly as many casualties as the Iraqis.

American troops have arrested over a hundred Arabs trying to cross the Syrian border to join the fighting against American troops.

The al Sadr Shia militia that have taken control of towns and neighborhoods from Baghdad to Basra. These militias are not well organized, nor do they have very effective leadership. American and coalition troops are arresting and killing the Sadr men who are armed and resisting. The Sadr followers have little military training (or if they do, it doesn't show) and poor organization. Sadr is trying to get more Shia to join the fight. But this becomes more difficult as more Iraqi fighters are killed fighting the better armed and organized coalition troops.

The Iraqi police and security troops have been a disappointment. With few exceptions, they refused to oppose armed Sunni Arabs in Fallujah or Shia areas in the south. This was expected from the security troops, who are basically security guards. The police, although they received training, were recruited locally. So if a local strong guy gathers together enough armed men, the local cops will back off. This is a vestige of the Saddam era, where the police were basically security guards, which the heavy duty terrorism was performed by various secret police, pro-Saddam militias and intelligence organizations. Coalition troops are able to use the security troops and police and the current fighting, putting the Iraqi forces in charge of security in areas that have been pacified.

The annual rotation of new American troops relieving those who have already served a year has been halted, and experienced units held until the current unrest in Fallujah and Shia areas is over.