START - Finished

What does START mean to you? For many of the new generations it means the little button you click in Microsoft Windows that gives you access to a bunch of programs not sitting on the desktop...

For older generations and the slim minority of newer generations that care about history, START is the STrategic Arms Reduction Talks that began on June 29, 1982 and culminated in an agreement with the USSR about Nuclear missile and material reduction in 1991. START II began in June 1992 and ended with President H.W. Bush and President Boris Yelstin's agreement in January 1993. START III was dead on arrival in 1997 and dealt a death blow by the George W Bush Administration's withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.

Before I mention why I'm bringing up START let's talk about a strange trend that you can notice in that last paragraph.. did anything about the culmination of the START talks strike you as odd or telling? START I: Pres. Reagan brings it up, pushes it until it passes. START II: Pres. George HW Bush brings it up with the Russians, Pres. Clinton pushes it until it passes. START III: Offered by Russian diplomats, agreed to in principle by sane State Dept. diplomats, killed by Pres. GW Bush. Sad.. It is like we this Bush Administration has taken pride in wasting and throwing away all the good will and soft diplomatic power the US possessed and worked hard to gain. Hard work by Presidents and proud American men and women who toiled to step America up just one more step so that the next global generation would see America on a pedestal not in the dirt. Thanks, Dubya - you have spoiled and deserted their ideals then threw them out all in the name of a new American "power" - force and terror.

Well... Where was I before my diatribe? START! That's right, START is going to expire! START expires in December 2009. The United States and Russia are trying to come together to come to an agreement. There are a few, uh how to put this.... problems.

First, US diplomats have zero credibility or power because they represent a lame-duck President with less than 90 days to serve.

Second, this Bush Administration is more interested developing ABMS (Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems) and antagonizing the Russian Bear than it is willing to actually doing something truly courageous - working towards a more peaceful world.

Third, the Russians are looking to regain the Soviet glory of military power with no international restrictions (obviously they have rose-colored glasses on their hindsight along with a severe case of selective amnesia).

Fourth, there is a general disagreement as to exactly what a new START would cover - US diplomats want to limit the number of missiles period, the Russians would like to see a limit on warheads (there can be many of these per missile) and they want a limit on ABMS.

I hope that in the 11 months following the Presidential Inauguration that (then) President Obama will have the ability to multitask effectively and deal with the START talks seriously and with great care. As an aside - I do not believe that total disarmament should neither be a possibility nor a goal. The reduction of nuclear weapons will lend a hand to a more effective security between nations and will reduce the ability of rogue states or terrorists of getting their hands on Nuclear materials.

Have ideas? Share them here! Comment!

Veteran's Day

Honoring Veteran's Day

If you read this blog from time to time you will know that the Armed Forces and their Veterans are something I care very much about. No matter what the policy of their mission they ought to be respected and protected when they do their jobs right. [There are a few that do not and it is those who sully the name of our military forces.]

The members of the Armed Forces and their Veterans deserve our thanks and gratitude.

Show your gratitude by donating to the USO or by supporting veterans who have returned injured, physically or mentally. Remember the Government might let a soldier through the cracks, it is our job as a society to rescue them before they fall further.


Click here to donate to the USO (United Service Organization)

Click here to send a donation to DAV (Disabled American Veterans)

Found Innocent? Get back to your Jail Cell!

[I figured I should probably get back to posting something.. every once in awhile, so here it goes]


America use to stand for things like "Land of the Free" and "Innocent until proven Guilty".. you know that stuff Superman and your 4th grade teacher taught you. It seems that America is gone and is being replaced by a much uglier America. An America where what we believe to be true is truth and what we feel like doing is the right path. This is neither the America I want to live in nor is it the America we should let develop.

While discussing the charges against Salim Hamdan, Osama bin Laden's driver, the Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said that even if found innocent of all charges the military believes it would be too "dangerous" to release detainees. Hmm.. that sounds about as Un-American as a Religious Re-education Camp.

He also relayed to reporters that another 20 detainees were looking forward to the military tribunals and most of those defendants would also be kept for "some time" after their trial if found totally innocent of all charges. All other detainees not be tried or released although there is an "effort" to return those detainees (that there is no evidence against) to their home countries so that they can be released or incarcerated.


Hmmm.. wait.. twenty detainees have a trial.. what about all the others? Don't they deserve to be tried for their alleged crimes? Shouldn't they at least have the chance to prove they are not guilty and did not commit the crimes that they are accused of? Shouldn't we, the public, have a chance to exact justice on those who are truly guilty? Instead of letting both innocents and guilty people rot doesn't the public deserve to know that criminals, killers and terrorists are being brought to justice? Shouldn't we have the chance to know that those guilty of the most heinous crimes are being put to death for their transgressions? Is it really too much to ask!



I hope that I've been clear. I want Guantanamo shut down not because I think everybody out there is a perfect little angel but because I believe in Justice. Justice for all. Release the innocent. Punish the guilty. Give these people fair and speedy trials so that they may find their place along side the free and their families or to be condemned and punished with the guilty.





Give Justice a Chance.





Flaming Moderate [If you wish to contact me, I also read strongmoderate's email account, just address the e-mail to me.]





Gitmo detainees subject to detention even if acquitted: Pentagon - Raw Story

When The Wrong People Like You...

This friend is nothing to boast about...


I am talking of course about Senator Obama's recent semi-endorsement by Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki this week in Der Speigel, a German Newspaper.

You may hear from the Obama campaign that a semi-endorsement by al-Maliki is a true triumph of Obama's international appeal and a show of his foreign policy prowess.. those statements are wrong. Flat out wrong. The withdrawal plan Obama has been talking about for the past.. year or two seems like a pretty good idea.. until you get an endorsement on it from al-Maliki. Why my change of opinion on the plan? The endorsement.

Which leads to the question: Is Al-Maliki really that bad?

Simple Answer: Yes.

More complicated answer: Propping up and promoting PM Nour Al-Maliki is perhaps the one of the biggest mistakes of this Bush Administration. Now it seems natural for the Bush Administration in their simple-mindedness to take a Shi'ite to head the government.. but obviously beyond that fact they didn't do any vetting or research. This man LIVES for Iran and a united Shi'ite front of Persians (Iranians) and Arabs (Iraqis). He is only glad to see US troops getting out of the country because it will mean he will have more latitude and freedom in the targeted killing of Sunnis all in the name of the War on Terror and battling Al-Qaeda.

His power base comes mostly from Shi'ite clerics like Moqtada al-Sadr and al-Sistani who are very clear that they wish Iraq to be a nation for Shi'ites and Shi'ites ONLY. This kind of political alignment is hardly a testament to good will, political reconciliation or national unity.

Furthermore, you cannot trust this man any further than you can throw a dozen used car salesmen. He'll say anything to stay in power and keep international aid money coming his way. That aid money.. mostly goes to pad his and his cronies pockets and as much as 70% of arms bought "for the Iraqi National Army" in fact find their ways to militias run by his Shi'ite thug friends. Sure, he puts on a show every now and then to prove he's actually 'tough' on these militia criminals but in fact every time the outcome is the same, a 'truce' is announced and back to the status quo they go!

Well, I would hate to just rant and demolsih on al-Maliki, as I just did, for too long.. I should probably conserve some energy to spend on offering solutions. (I know, I know.. typical political bloggers and pundits are just suppose to whine without giving alternatives or solutions.. but I'm not your typical political enthusiast)

Solution(s): According to the Obama website, Sen. Obama's plan is basically two movements at once: combat troops out in 16 months, political pressure up to push progress. Instead Obama should focus on a series of benchmarks and goals to remove troops at varying speeds from differing areas depending on the political progress of his "diplomatic surge." The quick removal of troops is not exactly going to ratchet up the pressure on a government whose Interior Ministry basically exists to send out death squads and then protect them as government employees. It is Barack Obama's goal to "end the war" as soon as he is elected but instead taking a page out of this Bush Administration's book by blindly trying to do that, he should direct the military leaders on the ground there of his intentions to begin the removal of all non-essential combat troops and reserves and then listen to where from and when to remove them. The US needs to have a strong presence in the Iraq in order to at least slow down the total influence of Iranian politics on the Iraqi government.

Remember Barack, what this nation needs is a change of politics not just a change of policy.



Link: Original Article about Al-Maliki's Endorsement of the Obama plan - Der Speigel

Link: Analysis of Al-Maliki's Comments to Der Speigel - CNN

New GI Bill Needs to be passed

Salute our Soldiers, Pass the New GI Bill

The New GI Bill must be passed. It is the only right thing to do.

The New GI Bill as developed by Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA) and Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE) (and supported by John Warner (R-VA) and so many more) is being discussed right now in the Senate and I believe after taking a look at it that passage of this bill would really benefit our fighting men and women in uniform. It sets out to revamp the benefits that military members get after they leave the service. When the first GI Bill was passed to help the veterans of World War Two, the GI Bill gave these brave veterans a shot at a higher education that was completely paid for - a real boost to our economy no doubt as these people moved up the pay scale and had their minds opened to new ideas.

Senator John McCain (R-AZ) however (along with Senator Lindsey Graham(R-SC) ) disagree with that position. They say by offering more money for our brave veterans' education we are discouraging them from re-enlisting. This position is ridiculous! Are we not proud of their service? We should allow them to do with their time as they please considering they volunteered to put their lives on the line! In the McCain version of a new GI Bill (although it is difficult to not call it an anti-GI Bill) the military would slowly give the soldier more money based on the number of deployments and years they put in. Is one tour of duty in Iraq not enough? Senator McCain thinks so.

I believe I stand with many veterans and common sense decent Americans in saying, let the reward fit the service, Pass the New GI Bill.

---

Links:

The Carpetbagger Report - Webb calls McCain out on the GI Bill
CNN Story - Here

The US Re-education Camp in Iraq

Nothing draconian going on here...

The United States military runs a re-education prison in Iraq... yes, a re-education camp with 21,000 suspected militant sympathizers. It has been awhile since I last heard of a re-education camp but when I do it mostly pertains to Chinese "re-education facilities" where people disappear or draconian facilites run by the Soviet Union, Nazi German, or some other despotic dictatorship. The "Land of the Free"run by Rule of Law not barbarism runs a re-education camp... What would Dwight D. Eisenhower say if we told him? What would Thomas Jefferson say? Have we lost our common decency and national character in trying to stay secure from terror? The sad answer seems to be, Yes.

The re-education camp of 21,000 people or so is run mostly by the Marines in Camp Bucca, Iraq. The camp has been repeatedly reported for "incidents of detainee abuse", being undermanned, under resourced, and overpopulated. Some of Camp Bucca's inmates have been held for over three years without the benefit of a hearing. The inmates are generally those picked up from the Southern Iraq and the Basra region on suspicion of sympathizing with Al-Qaeda. Thousands get rounded up for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, or associating with the wrong people and are sent to this prison camp (the American taxpayer just spent 2.3 million dollars building a brick factory to provide hard labor for the inmates). The inmates are then held until a hearing board hears their cases and with little or no evidence to go on either extend their detentions or let them go.

If you remember, the military operation to conquer Iraq and depose Saddam was called Operation Iraqi Freedom, Freedom being the operative word there. So, instead of freedom we go over there and detain people who probably haven't done anything (of the 3,000 people who have been released from the prison only 9 have returned to jail.) Just in case you think this is some run of the mill Abu-Ghrarib, it isn't - it also has extensive "reeducation facilities".

On first thought, the idea of inmates being taught math, civics, and other skill seems like a very good idea.. however, they also have a religious reeducation course, which make me wonder... Obviously, for the 2,000 inmates that are put aside as possibly involved with Al Qaeda religious (re)education could be helpful in teaching them the Truth of peace in Islam but the thought of mandatory religious education classes seems a bit contrary. First of all these inmates should have access to lawyers, a guarantee of speedy trials, and protection of indefinite detention. Next, the inmates should have the option of whether to go to these classes or not. If they do perhaps it would lead to some sort of earlier release so they can serve as a testament to others as reformed terrorists. If they do not attend then they do the time for the crime for which they were convicted.

Don't like the idea? Love it? Please Comment!

CNN Story: Here

Afghan President: Stop Killing Taliban

What is politics if not just a random mess of relationships and interests?

Yesterday in a interview with the New York Times, Afghan President Hamid Karzai demanded that coalition (NATO) forces, especially US forces, stop targeting and killing Taliban militants because they are killing civilians. He suggests that the US military go after "terror sanctuaries" in the wildly unstable Pakistani frontier lands across the Afghan border.

What does this all mean though?

Does he like terrorism and the Taliban now? Has he entered some kind of unholy alliance with his enemies? The answer to those questions is No. What did happen was that like any politician when you start seeing an election coming up you must ruffle your feathers and sing to the tune of the electorate. The Afghan elections are just around the corner and one of the top issues on Afghan minds is being more independent AND reducing the number of casualties from military strikes of villages. On the issue of further sovereign independence (at least topically) Karzai absolutely needs the US and NATO troops in his country to hold it all together because his Afghan Army is weaker than most militias in Iraq, so Karzai instead of enacting real change that would anger his closest allies he has opted to try to solve the problem by changing the image of the US forces.

The Taliban are still out there and attacking Afghan targets but there is no way that any military action will oust them from their positions in Afghanistan and Pakistan . The only way to oust a political foe who is among the people is have the people turn against them, and with significant amounts of villagers and innocent civilians being killed by US air strikes the people are angry at the US military and the government for not protecting them. So, Karzai's move is partially targeted towards answering the people's cry for help and partially targeted towards bringing down the popularity of Taliban and other renegade forces in the far reaches of his country. He figures, most logically, that if the majority of Afghan casualties are caused by Taliban attacks (such as one of the most recent on a police station) the people will slowly turn against them, and according to every piece of military literature (including the US War College's study on insurgency) when an insurgency loses the backing of the people it will fade out of existence very quickly.

However, I know a few of you reading this must be outraged wondering how this "peaceful" approach would ever work against groups who are so ideologically driven to kill people. My approach to the problem would be more two-pronged, part precise military intervention and part peaceful interaction. The US military is a beautiful machine of force, capable of either leveling a country or two simultaneously or silently putting a bullet in someone with ever being detected. The military is currently using its big hammer to crush targets in Afghanistan, which is not the best instrument to use when it comes to an insurgency-like movement. Instead the US military and coalition forces should be focusing on Special Operations (even more) in order to exact scalpel-like efficiency in removing and arresting the Taliban's key members, and to keep civilians happy, publicize the Afghan Army's a role in them.

Terrorists must be dealt with no doubt, but air strikes and large show of force attacks do more to help insurgencies by scaring and killing civilians.

Links:

New York Times article: Here
MSNBC Story: On Karzai's Comments
CNN Story: On the Afghan Police attacked

Defense Secretary Gates Cares

I just read something that really reminded me why I was so happy to hear that former Texas A&M President Dr. Robert Gates was named to be our Defense Secretary a year and a half ago:

Gates chokes up among cadets

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Defense Secretary Robert Gates' voice cracked with emotion Monday night as he wrapped up a lesson to cadets at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates thanked Army cadets at West Point, New York, for enrolling.

Gates delivered a lengthy lecture about the complexities of war, underscoring the responsibility of junior officers to challenge their superiors even if it put their careers at risk. A tape of the talk was released by the Department of Defense's Pentagon Channel.

"I encourage you to take on the mantle of fearless, thoughtful, but loyal dissent when the situation calls for it," he urged.

At the end of his talk, the Pentagon chief paused to thank the cadets for their decision to attend the academy in West Point, New York, despite what he said was "the knowledge of almost certain deployment to a distant and dangerous battlefield."

Gates appeared near tears as he choked out the words, "I feel personally responsible for each and every one of you, as if you were my own sons and daughters."

He paused again, composed himself, and continued, "So my only prayer is that you serve with honor and return home safely. And I personally thank you. Good luck and Godspeed."

It is no wonder that this was the guy that President Bush (the Father) picked to be the head of the CIA and is a personal friend of his. This guy really cares about everyone who serves under him and understands the responsibility that he has to ensure that every person in the military be given the best chance to succeed no matter the consequence.

I had the distinct honor of listening to Secretary Gates speak at a gathering on Capitol Hill last summer and was surprised at his sincerity and genuine nature. It will be a travesty that he only will have had two years to fix the mess that Donald Rumsfeld created at the Pentagon when he is ousted to make way for the next Administration.

In his tears and emotion he has shown us not weakness of heart but the strength of responsibility, honor, service, and heart. Proud Americans everywhere salute you Secretary Gates, Thank you for your service.

CNN Link: Here

MIlitary lowers Entrance Requirements.. Again.

The United States Military Service is quickly turning from the pride of the US to a rehabilitation service for felons and delinquents.

Today it was revealed that the Army and Marines would give even more waivers to those who want to enlist for felonies. This after they brought down the requirements for physical discipline, brought up the age at which a person could enlist, and had earlier given waivers for other crimes. Felonies, though? Really? COME ON! Shame!

If it were just some crazy felonies like.. I dunno.. Whale Hunting in Nebraska or something, I'd be cool with it but here are a few of the felonies that were waived so scum could join the military: assault, drug possession, sexual assault, and making terrorist threats. Hmm... Assault - maybe not so bad - I mean they are going to be trained to assault people anyways but maybe having a big temper isn't a good thing for someone who will be equipped with a weapon and interacting with some of the most powerful military machines in the world. Second, Drug Possession - Do you really want people who were on drugs and possibly still are to be in the Army, again equipped with a weapon, in Countries which have A LOT of drugs? I'm talking of course about Afghanistan, Iraq, and the US. Third, Sexual Assault? Is this possibly the reason that there are at least 527 investigations of Sexual Assault and Rape in Iraq alone? Just sayin'... Lastly and most ironically, Making Terroristic Threats, isn't that what we are sending them to FIGHT? I mean if they are making terroristic threats the Army should be sending them to be tortured "interrogated" at Gitmo, don't ya think?!

This is really despicable and the only lame excuse the Army and Marines could come up with is that it is there are fewer recruits today meet their standards. So that means we lower the standards? This is an insult to those who entered the service before these Waivers were issued and a slap in the face to anyone who believes in the honor and service of the US Military. That proud honorable people who joined the military service because of their patriotism and love for service have to serve in the same Army or Marine unit as convicted criminals is a slap in the face of every current and former person in the US Army and Marines. These criminals will sully the reputation of our military and our image worldwide. Do you want to be represented by some criminal? It will be no small wonder that our reputation around the world will keep plummeting around the world when the first thing face-to-face interaction with an American could be one of these convicts.

Certainly a few of these criminals who received waivers just made a mistake during their youth or something and are now better people.. however it is safe to assume that not 100 percent of them are and even one such person is a disgrace to our Department of Defense, after all these men and women are suppose to reflect our volunteer "patriot" soldier Army.

The only good thing that I can say concerning this topic is kudos to the US Air Force who did not give a single waiver in 2006 or 2007 and I am less disgusted with the Navy who reduced their waivers from 48 in '06 to 42 in '07.

Link to CNN story here

1.7M of your tax-dollars have gone to a Polygamist Terrorist

Sometimes I wonder, why is everyone so angry with government? Is it because they involve themselves unnecessarily into our lives? Sometimes. Is it because they waste our money? Sure, a little. Is it because they do too little? No.. it isn't, it is because they usually do too little of the right things and too much of the wrong.

For instance, the Department of Defense needs some spare parts for its aircraft. OK, there is a lot of waste going on at the DoD with contractors and all that.. but spare parts for aircrafts seems like a pretty good expenditure. I, like most Americans, want the US Air Force to be the most powerful on the globe, ready for anything at comes their way. So.. usually I wouldn't complain about the USAF buying spare parts for aircraft. Oh sure, I'd complain about them being overpriced.. or ordered in too little numbers or in grossly exaggerated numbers.. but none of those problems are the subject for today's anger.

It seems that the DoD has been buying thousands of those parts from Warren Jeffs' three main companies. Jeffs is a the head of the FLDS church that supports polygamy, child rape, and other deplorable acts and was just a week ago raided (twice) and all of the children and most of the women removed or allowed to escape this cult society controlled by Jeffs and his male accomplices.

Now if the money was spent before the FBI and police knew of Jeffs' activities I would be satiated however, it wasn't. The companies that we are talking about here not only provided parts to the DoD while Mr. Jeffs was on the run from the FBI, on the FBI top-ten list, and in custody but also after he was captured and put on trial!!!!

Can you believe that?!

It wasn't as though the parts were terribly specialized or the case was something that quietly happened! The capture, trial, and conviction of this religious terrorist and child rapist were covered on every news source! His companies were being watched closely by the FBI and state police as well because the companies were making weekly "donations" to the FDLS church for more than $50,000 dollars a WEEK. That makes over TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS A MONTH!

We, law-abiding tax-paying citizens, have contributed 1.7 Million Dollars to this madman's wealth through DoD contracts to his companies. Imagine the anguish that could have been avoided if as soon as Warren Jeffs came under investigation and a warrant was put out for his arrest those contracts would have been voided. Instead, the government has used our money to partially fund this sickening man and his "compound" where he prays on the young and keeps his followers in darkness to any other truth than the one he preaches. Isn't faith strongest when it has withstood the test of the challenge of others?

Just to add insult to injury a spokesman for the DoD said "nothing inappropriate" happened. The sad thing is that almost certainly hundreds of cases like this happen everyday, where our government spending money that directly goes to fund criminals.

A little more information Here

Please Leave a Comment!