Previous 11 - 20 Next
There's a relatively simple response to this: terrorize the terrorists. ISIS is still operating openly in relatively open territory. Use air power and limited ground presence to herd this rabble into a central location, then carpet-bomb them to dust. If any survive, chain them to posts, cover them with lard, let dogs tear them to pieces, and post the videos online. Eventually even the dimmest jihadists will get the idea that attacking us will get them not only a horrible death, but also a ticket to hell.
By the way, it's "by-product," with or without a hyphen.
Exactly right. A ceasefire is useful for conducting negotiations, for finding out whether the combatants are still officially at war, for burying the dead, and for getting civilians out of harm's way. Hamas does not negotiate in good faith. Indeed, the main difference between Fatah and Hamas is that Fatah seeks to destroy Israel with negotiation and violence, and Hamas has formally disavowed negotiation. There's no doubt at all that Hamas will remain at war with Israel and with Jewry until its leadership is dead and its surviving supporters are sick of conflict and thoroughly demoralized. Putting civilians in harm's way is central to the Hamas strategy. It uses every ceasefire to regroup and attack. Ceasefire can't be a goal in dealing with Hamas. It can't even be a step. If it is to survive, Israel must accept nothing less than the unconditional surrender and permanent disarmament of Hamas. Any other approach boils down to scheduling the next round of atrocities.
In response to:

De-Mil...Militar...

Matt in N.C. Wrote: Aug 18, 2014 9:50 AM
The percentage of military veterans in law enforcement is probably higher than that, and their military experience is extremely helpful to them and to the agencies that hire them. But the missions are different. There are many military veterans in banking, retail, and manufacturing. Military experience is invaluable in those occupations, too; but I don't expect to see cashiers with M-16s at Best Buy. A chronic problem with moving between government agencies or from the public sector to the private is awareness of what's on each side of the door. For example, many of our worst public-policy difficulties come from lobbyists who forget that they're no longer government officials and officials who act as if they were still lobbyists. This isn't much different.
We shouldn't be giving transfer payments to American citizens, never mind the huddled masses yearning to get freebies. There are arguments for open borders and for the welfare state. They're all bad, but some people do believe in the legitimacy, rightness, or righteousness of one or the other. But only a fool or a traitor would suggest that we implement both. The only quicker means of national suicide is unilateral disarmament.
In response to:

De-Mil...Militar...

Matt in N.C. Wrote: Aug 18, 2014 8:22 AM
Exactly right. We also end up with officials who treat transnational terrorists as if they were domestic criminals and treat the entire civilian population of this country as if they were transnational terrorists. I wonder whether anyone has seriously challenged the federal transfer of military technology to state and local law-enforcement agencies as circumvention of the Posse Comitatus Act, which forbids use of the national armed forces against American civilians except in extraordinary circumstances. If city police departments, county sheriff's departments, and state police are armed, equipped, funded, trained, and coordinated by the federal government, they are, in effect, part of the armed forces, and we are, in effect, under martial law.
An excellent piece, sir, especially this part: "if we decide to pull up stakes from the world, we are making a conscious choice to cede it to our enemies." In practice, though not in theory, San Marino may enjoy the luxury of having no effect. We don't. Whatever course of action or inaction we choose, we change everything. It's delusional to think otherwise. The only thing I presume to add is that our foreign policy should promote fear in our SURVIVING enemies.
I was going to put Bill in the second spot, but your list works.
They either end up in jail or get killed—or go into politics.
In response to:

The New Republican Party

Matt in N.C. Wrote: Aug 17, 2014 9:05 PM
"Electing RINOs is merely a defensive strategy against more Damnocrats. Nobody thinks it is the desired end." Nope. I detest the Republican establishment every bit as much as it detests my kind, and I'm sick of voting for the lesser of two evils. But for the last five years we've seen what the greater of two evils looks like.
In the late summer of 1969, Charles Manson and his "family" tried to inflame race hatred and take political advantage of it. They were just a few evil amateurs with no chance of succeeding, but they terrorized parts of California for a while. Since January 2009, Obama and his "family," notably AG Holder, have been trying to inflame race hatred and take political advantage of it. They're experts at agitation, they have the vast resources of the federal government at their disposal, and they seem well on their way to succeeding.
Previous 11 - 20 Next