"Spike the Ball" Mr. President. It is important.

From: Obama: I won't release bin Laden death photos

In explaining his choice not to release the photo, Mr. Obama said that "we don't need to spike the football." He said that "given the graphic nature of these photos it would create a national security risk."

Uhm. . . yes you do Mr. President.

You need to show "the enemy" that you have contempt for him.

You need to show the world that we are not afraid of "the enemy."

You don't have to let "Islam" be the issue in this case. Osama was "the face" of Al Qaeda. Showing "the face" of Al Qaeda blasted half away with American bullets is a message that needs to be shown to the enemy and to the world.

Spike the damn ball!

A Shot Across Our Bow?

See: Mystery Missile Launch Seen off Calif. Coast

(CBS) A mysterious missile launch off the southern California coast was caught by CBS affiliate KCBS's cameras Monday night, and officials are staying tight-lipped over the nature of the projectile.

See: Mystery 'missile' launch near L.A. no threat to national security, government officials say

Officials with the Defense Department, the Navy and the Air Force said they did not have any details on the object or its launch site. Pentagon officials said that initial indications were that the military was not involved.

"We are aware of the unexplained contrail reported off the coast of Southern California yesterday evening," according to a statement Tuesday from the North American Aerospace Defense Command and the U.S. Northern Command, which operates the U.S. and Canadian missile warning system. "At this time, we are unable to provide specific details but we are working to determine the exact nature of this event.

China?

Sheriff Babeu Explains Arizona's Problem With The President

See: Arizona Sheriff: ‘Our Own Government Has Become Our Enemy’

“What’s very troubling is the fact that at a time when we in law enforcement and our state need help from the federal government, instead of sending help they put up billboard-size signs warning our citizens to stay out of the desert in my county because of dangerous drug and human smuggling and weapons and bandits and all these other things and then, behind that, they drag us into court with the ACLU,” Babeu said.

What is the Obama Administration's goal? Why do they refuse to meaningful defend the border and why do the want to prevent the States from doing the job the Federal Government refuses to do?

Could it be that the Obama Administration does not think that the border should be effectively closed to illegal immigrants?

Lula's Unserious And Infantile Response To The Iranian Nuclear Weapons Problem.

While it might be breathtakingly stupid, it is all too commonplace on the left to argue that nations that have nuclear weapons should just crumple them up and toss them away in order to achieve a moral high ground when dealing with other nations that have or are attempting to develop Nuclear Weapons.

I suppose it is possible for someone to be so naive as to really believe that such a strategy is anything more than madness.

From the Chinese Xinhua News Agency

Brazilian president: only countries without nuclear weapons can criticize Iran

RIO DE JANEIRO, Dec. 3 (Xinhua) -- Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva said on Thursday that the countries which criticize Iran's nuclear program should get rid of their own nuclear weapons as well, according to news reaching here from Berlin.

In order to have the moral authority to criticize Iran, "It is important that those which have a (nuclear) arsenal let go of it, so that we will not have any more arguments," he said during a joint press conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who had said that negotiations with Iran were not progressing.

Lula, if the world was run only by Gandhi's, such a strategy might even work. Gandhi is dead. There was only one of him and he only had the success he had because the British did not have it in them to fight and kill several million Indians in order to maintain an expensive and unprofitable empire.

Either Lula is a fool of the first order or he is just bloviating out of his gaseous ass to make himself a figure on the world stage. Dangerous loons like Lula end up provoking wars that other people have to fight and die in.

If Lula is not willing to commit Brazilian troops to a land war in Iran, he should not be allowed anywhere near the discussions on Iran's Nuclear Weapons Program.

~

Hat tip to Correspondence Committee: C2 Saturday A.M. Bulldog Edition

NATO Backs McChrystal In Afghanistan

Thom Shanker at the New York Times Reports that Nato backs General McChrystal’s strategy in Afghanistan.

BRATISLAVA, Slovakia - NATO defense ministers gave their broad endorsement Friday to the counterinsurgency strategy for Afghanistan laid out by Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, increasing pressure on the Obama administration and on their own governments to commit more military and civilian resources for the mission to succeed.

General McChrystal, the senior American and allied commander in Afghanistan, landed here early Friday to brief NATO defense ministers on his strategic review of an 8-year-old war in which the American-led effort has lost momentum to a tenacious insurgency. The closed-door session — which had not been disclosed in advance — added a note of drama to the sort of NATO ministerial meeting that is often mundane.

“What we did today was to discuss General McChrystal’s overall assessment, his overall approach, and I have noted a broad support from all ministers of this overall counterinsurgency approach,” said NATO’s secretary general, Anders Fogh Rasmussen.

We can hope that NATO will give Obama the needed courage to work towards winning in Afghanistan over choosing to lose.

Obama Dithers On Afganistan

Timesonline has an article up that discusses Obama's lack of leadership in Afghanistan.

IN Afghanistan they would call it a shura, the traditional tribal way of listening to elders’ views before reaching a consensus. In Washington, where President Barack Obama has now held five war councils, they are starting to call it dithering.

With another council on the Afghan war scheduled for this week, US officials admit it could be November before a decision is finally taken on whether to agree to General Stanley McChrystal’s request for more troops. One participant revealed that the protagonists have not yet discussed troop numbers.

Latest polls show a majority of Americans now disapprove of Obama’s handling of a war which may come to define his presidency. Many senior members of his own party are in open revolt.

Afghanistan seems to have transitioned in the mind of Democrats from "The Right War" to the "What War?"

These are dangerous times, made all the more dangerous by an indecisive, weak, and vacillating leader in Washington D.C. But then again, Obama is a Democrat, so it may silly to expect anything different from him.

Democrats Versus Defense Spending.

Democrats have different priority's when it comes to what should be done with Defense Spending.

From the Washington Times.

Senators diverted $2.6 billion in funds in a defense spending bill to pet projects largely at the expense of accounts that pay for fuel, ammunition and training for U.S. troops, including those fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to an analysis.

Among the 778 such projects, known as earmarks, packed into the bill: $25 million for a new World War II museum at the University of New Orleans and $20 million to launch an educational institute named after the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat.

Elections matter.