On accident, or on purpose?

See: Military ballots may not count in Illinois

Cray says she is currently compiling data from each of Illinois' jurisdictions to determine which were compliant and which were delinquent. Cray said it's possible the ballots may not be counted because the state was tardy in sending them out.

Illinois was required to have all of its absentee ballots mailed by Sept. 18, the national deadline. Election officials have until Nov. 15 to count the absentee ballots, which must be postmarked by midnight Nov. 1 to be eligible.

This kind of stuff is not acceptable.

Piracy On Falcon Lake - And Soon Off Of Our Gulf and Pacific Coasts

Pirates and American Victims (Someplace much closer than South East Asia or East Africa.)

See: Pirates threaten boats on US-Mexico border lake

ZAPATA, Texas (AP) - The waters of Falcon Lake normally beckon boaters with waterskiing and world-record bass fishing. But this holiday weekend, fishermen on the waters that straddle the U.S.-Mexico border are on the lookout for something more sinister: pirates.

Twice in recent weeks, fishermen have been robbed at gunpoint by marauders that the local sheriff says are "spillover" from fighting between rival Mexican drug gangs.

Boaters are concerned about their safety, and the president of the local Chamber of Commerce is trying to assure people that everything's fine on the U.S. side of the lake.

At the fishing camp his family has owned for 50 years, Jack Cox now sleeps with a loaded shotgun at his feet and a handgun within reach.

How long before this stuff hits our Pacific and Gulf Coast waters?

What would stop them?

Why should they expect any kind of action other than the inaction that they have already come to expect from us at our borders?

Mexico is in bad shape.

It's leaders snivel about US gun laws while Mexican Narco-Cartels have effectively taken control of large swaths of their county. They have let the drug-lords run free for so long that they now threaten to topple the Mexican government.

It is Columbia all over again. And it is just next door.

Illegal immigrants continue to flow across our porous border. Our cowardly government talks about sending troops to the border and then loudly proclaims that the troops are not going to do anything about the human waves of illegals crossing in from Mexico.

What a fucking farce.

Now we have a pirate problem to add to this mess.

Just a few fishing boats for now. But they will see that NOTHING will be done about it. It will look to the criminal element south of the border like a “Money for Nothing” scheme. They will say to themselves “The gringos won't do anything. They haven't the cajones.” Have they seen anything from us that would make them think differently?

Piracy on our near oceans will come of this if our nation continues to play weak.

The borders must be made secure. (Build the fucking wall already!)

The pirates must be killed.

Pirates must be hunted down, captured and killed. The killing of the pirates part is important. For pirates, this is something that must be done, especially on the salt waters, whether here off our southern coasts or across the world off of East Africa or South East Asia.

You have to kill pirates.

You have to protect your nation's borders.

Nations that don't do these things risk becoming someone else's country.

American Troops Begin Withdrawel From Haiti

We have been very fortunate that American troop presence in Haiti has thus far been remarkably trouble free. With UN troops taking over, American troops can pull out and leave Haiti to the UN and the people of Haiti to rebuild after that terrible earthquake destroyed what little that there was to wreck in that poverty stricken nation.

See:American troops withdrawing en masse from Haiti

Soldiers are not best suited to aid work. Putting American troops in a position where they might have to shoot and kill civilians in riot situations was very risky. The downside risks in this operation were tremendous. It is good that we have dodged this bullet.

A Compassionate Invasion?

From a Time Magazine article titled: The U.S. Military in Haiti: A Compassionate Invasion

The Obama Administration is doing things differently: Haiti, for all intents and purposes, became the 51st state at 4:53 p.m. Tuesday in the wake of its deadly earthquake. If not a state, then at least a ward of the state — the United States — as Washington mobilized national resources to rush urgent aid to Haiti's stricken people.

I wonder if these idiots understand what they are saying here. They are putting us in the position of being responsible for Haiti. Do they sling around their words like the meaningless guttural utterances of drunkards or do they really think that the US should become Haiti's owner?

Will Haiti Devolve Into A Mogadishu?

The Earthquake in Haiti is truly a catastrophe.

The number of dead may be innumerable. We will likely never really know the true number of causalities. In that kind of climate, the bodies must be disposed of quickly. There will not be time for careful counts.

The desperation of the survivors will soon be at a pitch. They are on the verge of losing what little ties they have to civilization. There are no police. There is no government. There are reports of armed gangs setting up road blocks to demand money and goods from relief trucks attempting to bring in emergency relief supplies. Armed shop keepers are attempting to protect their property from roving gangs of looters.

While there are some UN “Peace keepers” there in Haiti, individuals are left to fend for themselves against looters and thieves that would rob them of what they have left. Relief workers and even those driving truckloads of the dead off for disposal are being threatened and even killed while they attempt to do what little they can.

Sending US troops into this mix is problematic.

What will be their mission?

What will be their Rules Of Engagement(ROE)?

How can they bring law and order to that country without operating as an Army of Occupation? And most importantly to that question, do we have the will and courage as a nation to allow our troops to use the deadly force that will be necessary for them to use in order to bring Haiti back from the brink of anarchy.

Are we prepared for that first day that an American soldier has to kill a Haitian? What if he kills several, or if several troops get trapped and have to kill and wound a whole lot of them? Can we allow US troops to put down the Riots and Unrest that are likely to result in the days and weeks to come?

This is a very dangerous situation for us to be in.

It will get worse before it gets better.

Obama will have to be very careful if he is to avoid having Haiti become his Mogadishu.

The Price Of Obama's Weakness

Iran smells weakness in Washington. They have been playing Obama and the EU states for idiots and cowards over their Nuclear Weapons development. Obama and the rest of the West have done nothing but whimper and whine.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has decided to up the stakes. Iranian troops have marched into Iraq and have siezed an Oil Well in Iraqi Territory.

This is an act of war.

The Iranians are betting that Obama has no balls.

An official of the state-owned South Oil Co in the southeastern city of Amara, and west of the field, said: "An Iranian force arrived at the field early this morning (Friday).

"It took control of Well 4 and raised the Iranian flag even though the well lies in Iraqi territory," the official added.

What will Obama do?

Will he do anything more than just whimper and whine?

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

Living In The Land Of Make Believe And Wishful Thinking

In the wake of the Fort Hood Massacre, our nations leadership will try to make us all ignore the obvious.

ABU DHABI, United Arab Emirates — The U.S. Homeland Security secretary says she is working to prevent a possible wave of anti-Muslim sentiment after the shootings at Fort Hood in Texas.

Janet Napolitano says her agency is working with groups across the United States to try to deflect any backlash against American Muslims following Thursday's rampage by Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, a Muslim who reportedly expressed growing dismay over the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I think that we have to come to an honest consensus about what Islam is and is not.

Is Islam what the Qur'an and the Haddith describe? Or is it something else?

Massacre In Texas

Is this a Jihadi attack?

Twelve people have been killed and 31 wounded in a shooting spree at a Texas military base by what officials believe was possibly carried out by an Army officer.

The suspected gunman was identified by ABC News as Major Malik Nadal Hasan.

The shooter was killed and two other suspects, who are also soldiers, have been apprehended, Lt. Gen. Robert W. Cone said.

Later in the article

Cone said the motive for the attack, which took place just after 1:30 p.m. CT, is unclear.

Some things come to mind.

The Obama Administration Considers Letting The Taliban Win In Afghanistan

The Obama Administration will certainly go down in history as one of the worst in US Forign policy history. Worse than even the Carter Administration.

From an AP article:

WASHINGTON - Senior al-Qaida leaders are forging deeper relationships with Pakistani militants and often operating from their camps inside the Pakistan border, fueling Obama administration arguments for a shift in the Afghan war strategy that more narrowly targets the terrorists.

For eight years since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, the U.S. has focused mostly on Afghanistan's Taliban as an unabashed ally of al-Qaida.

Now, however, forced to choose between sending more troops in an intensified counterinsurgency campaign against Afghanistan's Taliban or largely maintaining troop levels and using more drone strikes to take out al-Qaida along the border, U.S. officials must first determine which enemy is the greater priority.

The Obama Administration will lose Afghanistan with this kind of thinking. I am inclined to think that they would be less bothered by losing Afghanistan to the Taliban then be perceived as pursuing victory. Victory over the enemy is something that the modern day left can’t seem to stomach.

If the Obama Administration fails to defeat the Taliban, or at the very least, fails to keep them out of power in Afghanistan, then Afghanistan will return back to the stone age country that it was when it was executing woman in Soccer fields for showing a wee bit too much of ankle or daring to leave their homes without a male relative as an escort.

If Obama does not choose to pursue victory over BOTH the Taliban and al-Qaida, then his legacy will be one of surrendering to despair and misery from the farthest corners of the world to the very windows of our skyscrapers.

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.

Foreshadows of Defeat

There are a number of stories in the MSM about Afghanistan recently. This is one in the New york Times. Obama's dithering and failure to support a "Win" strategy is having predicable results.

WASHINGTON — President Obama’s national security team is moving to reframe its war strategy by emphasizing the campaign against Al Qaeda in Pakistan while arguing that the Taliban in Afghanistan do not pose a direct threat to the United States, officials said Wednesday.

As Mr. Obama met with advisers for three hours to discuss Pakistan, the White House said he had not decided whether to approve a proposed troop buildup in Afghanistan. But the shift in thinking, outlined by senior administration officials on Wednesday, suggests that the president has been presented with an approach that would not require all of the additional troops that his commanding general in the region has requested.

It remains unclear whether everyone in Mr. Obama’s war cabinet fully accepts this view. While Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. has argued for months against increasing troops in Afghanistan because Pakistan was the greater priority, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates have both warned that the Taliban remain linked to Al Qaeda and would give their fighters havens again if the Taliban regained control of all or large parts of Afghanistan, making it a mistake to think of them as separate problems.

The Taliban must be destroyed. Their worldview is absolutist. An absolutist response is the only sane way to deal with them. Anything less is a Happy Rainbow Farting Unicorn fantasy.

There is also the problem of object lessons. The Taliban was instrumental in the 911 attacks. Such attacks need to be "punished" so severely that nobody would look at the result and think that they, and more importantly - their cause, could survive attacking us in a like manner or method. They must be taught to believe that thinking that such attacks could succeed is a dangerous and hopeless madness.

The Obama Administration is playing a dangerous game very badly.