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 : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (15516)9/23/2007 11:39:04 AM
From: longnshort  Respond to of 224749
 
40 Talibs Toes Up

I’ll list the forty enemy dead but… I’d much rather the story supported the lede. Poor press release construction.

Approximately 40 anti-coalition militants were killed early this morning [September 21 2007] in the Garmsir district of the Helmand province during an operation to deter hostile activities in the area.

A combined Afghan and Coalition team made their way to the Garmsir district where credible intelligence indicated violent extremist forces may be hiding.

During the course of operations the combined force employed precision munitions killing a large number of combatants.

A search of the area revealed multiple weapons caches – consisting of more than 20 rocket propelled grenades, significant amounts of ammunition, and landmines. One building containing munitions was suspected of being an improvised holding cell.

“This was one of the largest caches of weapons found to date,” said Maj. Christopher Belcher, Joint Task Force 82 spokesperson. “Several rooms were found filled with small-arms, explosives, rocket propelled grenades and large caliber ammunition.”

In order to destroy the caches and prevent their future use, both the buildings and caches were destroyed using munitions and timed charges.

There were no injuries or deaths to non-combatants. Damage occurred to the buildings and the surrounding area during the course of operations.

CJTF-82



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (15516)9/23/2007 11:41:34 AM
From: longnshort  Respond to of 224749
 
Scores of Taliban Killed

Elements of the 1st Brigade, 205th Afghan National Army Corps (ANA), advised by coalition forces, defeated an attempted ambush while conducting a combat patrol near Kakrak village, western Uruzgan province yesterday.

The combined patrol was 4 kilometers (2.4 miles) northeast of Deh Rawod when a dozen insurgents were seen emplacing improvised explosive devices (IEDs) and preparing an ambush for the patrol. The ANA-led patrol dismounted from their vehicles and attacked the Taliban with small-arms fire. Within minutes, the insurgents reinforced their positions with more than 50 additional fighters. They struck the ANA patrol with small arms, machine guns, rocket propelled grenades and mortar fire from multiple compounds within Kakrak Village.

Coalition close air support was called in to repel the enemy attack. Precision-guided munitions were used on positively-identified Taliban firing positions, some within the various compounds comprising the village.

As the fighting continued, the joint ANA/coalition force was joined by an International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) unit. The combined ANA, coalition and ISAF force continued to return fire with accurate small arms and crew-served weapons throughout the day. More than three dozen insurgents were killed in the 14-hour battle.

“The coalition will not sit idly by and allow the enemies of the Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan (IRoA) continue to seek safe haven in the Uruzgan province,” said Army Maj. Chris Belcher, a Combined Joint Task Force-82 spokesman. “We believe that the extremist Taliban will continue to use the unconscionable tactic of attacking the IRoA and coalition forces from areas that contain a large number of non-combatants. We will continue to do our utmost to avoid civilian casualties but, in the end, it is the enemies of peace and stability who must be held accountable for their efforts to endanger the lives and future of the Afghan people.”

One Afghan national security force member was wounded and taken to a local medical center for treatment. No other ANA, coalition or non-combatants were reported injured or killed during the fighting.



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (15516)9/23/2007 11:41:52 AM
From: longnshort  Respond to of 224749
 
There’s a reason that I do not do much analysis on the war in Afghanistan. The losses by American and allied troops are fairly accurate but the enemy looses are vastly underreported. The graph above reflects the reports I have been able to document. Keep in mind that NATO does not, as a matter of policy, report enemy deaths and NATO is in command of the overall operation incountry.

The United States is averaging about 5.8 combat deaths a month in Afghanistan. Contrast that with months where the enemy is reported to have lost 200 or 300. For September 2007, so far we have lost two soldiers and there have been 366 enemy deaths reported.

Because we are losing so few soldiers and because the reporting of enemy losses is so spotty, analysis is next to useless. We are killing a vast number of enemy in Afghanistan at little cost to our own. That is the best statement that I can make.



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (15516)9/23/2007 12:16:08 PM
From: Ann Corrigan  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 224749
 
Mark Steyn: Bend over for Nurse Hillary

By MARK STEYN
Syndicated columnist, Sept 22 2007

Our theme for today comes from George W Bush: “Freedom is the desire of every human heart.”

When the president uses the phrase, he’s invariably applying it to various benighted parts of the Muslim world. There would seem to be quite a bit of evidence to suggest that freedom is not the principal desire of every human heart in, say, Gaza or Waziristan. But why start there? If you look in, say, Brussels or London or New Orleans, do you come away with the overwhelming impression that “freedom is the desire of every human heart”? A year ago, I wrote that “the story of the Western world since 1945 is that, invited to choose between freedom and government ‘security,’ large numbers of people vote to dump freedom – the freedom to make your own decisions about health care, education, property rights, seat belts and a ton of other stuff.”

Last week freedom took another hit. Hillary Rodham Clinton unveiled her new health care plan. Unlike her old health care plan, which took longer to read than most cancers take to kill you, this one’s instant and painless – just a spoonful of government sugar to help the medicine go down. From now on, everyone in America will have to have health insurance.
Hooray!

And, if you don’t, it will be illegal for you to hold a job.
Er, hang on, where’s that in the Constitution? It’s perfectly fine to employ legions of the undocumented from Mexico, but if you employ a fit 26-year-old American with no health insurance either you or he or both of you will be breaking the law?
That’s a major surrender of freedom from the citizen to the state. “So what?” says the caring crowd. “We’ve got to do something about those 40 million uninsured! Whoops, I mean 45 million uninsured. Maybe 50 by now.”

This figure is always spoken of as if it’s a club you can join but never leave: The very first Uninsured-American was ol’ Bud who came back from the Spanish-American War and found he was uninsured and so was first on the list, and then Mabel put her back out doing the Black Bottom at a tea dance in 1926 and she became the second, and so on and so forth, until things really began to snowball under the Bush junta. And, by the time you read this, the number of uninsured may be up to 75 million.

Nobody really knows how many “uninsured” there are: Two different Census Bureau surveys conducted in the same year identify the number of uninsured as A) 45 million or B) 19 million. The first figure is the one you hear about, the second figure apparently entered the Witness Protection Program. Of those 45 million “uninsured Americans,” the Census Bureau itself says over 9 million aren’t Americans at all, but foreign nationals. They have various health care back-ups: If you’re an uninsured Canadian in Detroit, and you get an expensive chronic disease, you can go over the border to Windsor, Ontario, and re-embrace the delights of socialized health care; if you’re an uninsured Uzbek, it might be more complicated. Of the remaining 36 million, a 2005 Actuarial Research analysis for the Department of Health and Human Services says that another 9 million did, in fact, have health coverage through Medicare.

Where are we now? 27 million? So who are they? Bud and Mabel and a vast mountain of emaciated husks of twisted limbs and shriveled skin covered in boils and pustules? No, it’s a rotating population: People who had health insurance but changed jobs, people who are between jobs, young guys who feel they’re fit and healthy and at this stage of their lives would rather put a monthly health-insurance tab towards buying a home or starting a business or blowing it on booze ’n’ chicks.
That last category is the one to watch: Americans 18-34 account for 18 million of the army of the “uninsured.”
Look, there’s a 22-year-old, and he doesn’t have health insurance! Oh, the horror and the shame! What an indictment of America!

Well, he doesn’t have life insurance, either, or homeowner’s insurance. He lives a life blessedly free of the tedious bet-hedging paperwork of middle age. He’s 22, and he thinks he’s immortal – and any day now Hillary will propose garnishing his wages for her new affordable mandatory life-insurance plan.

So, out of 45 million uninsured Americans, 9 million aren’t American, 9 million are insured, 18 million are young and healthy. And the rest of these poor helpless waifs trapped in Uninsured Hell waiting for Hillary to rescue them are, in fact, wealthier than the general population. According to the Census Bureau’s August 2006 report on “Income, Poverty and Health Insurance Coverage,” 37 percent of those without health insurance – that’s 17 million people – come from households earning more than $50,000. Nineteen percent – 8.7 million people – of those downtrodden paupers crushed by the brutal inequities of capitalism come from households earning more than $75,000.

In other words, if they fall off the roof, they can write a check. Indeed, the so-called “explosion” of the uninsured has been driven entirely by wealthy households opting out of health insurance. In the decade after 1995 – i.e., since the last round of coercive health reform – the proportion of the uninsured earning less than $25,000 has fallen by 20 percent, and the proportion earning more than 75 grand has increased by 155 percent. The story of the past decade is that the poor are getting sucked into the maw of “coverage,” and the rich are fleeing it. And, given that the cost of health “insurance” bears increasingly little relationship to either the cost of treatment or the actuarial reality of you ever getting any particular illness, it’s entirely rational to say: “You know what? I’ll worry about that when it happens. In the meantime, I want to start a business and send my kid to school.” Freedom is the desire of my human heart even if my arteries get all clogged and hardened.

I was glad, at the end of Hillary Health Week, to see that my radio pal Laura Ingraham’s excellent new book, “Power To The People,” has shot into the New York Times bestseller list at No. 1. It takes a fraudulent leftist catchphrase (the only thing you can guarantee about a “people’s republic” is that the people are the least of it) and returns it to those who mean it – to those who believe in a nation of free citizens exercising individual liberty to make responsible choices.
Do you remember the so-called “government surplus” of a few years ago? Bill Clinton gave a speech in which he said, yes, sure, he could return the money to taxpayers but that we “might not spend it the right way.” The American political class has decided that they know better than you the “right way” to make health care decisions. Oh, don’t worry, you’re still fully competent to make decisions on what car you drive and what movie you want to rent at Blockbuster.
For the moment.

But when it comes to the grownup stuff, best to leave that to Nurse Hillary.



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (15516)9/24/2007 11:01:38 AM
From: DizzyG  Respond to of 224749
 
You don't have the capacity for original thought, Kenneth...

This sounds like a DNC talking point to me.

Diz-



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (15516)9/24/2007 11:21:11 AM
From: longnshort  Respond to of 224749
 
breitbart.tv