SIXTH COLUMN

"History is philosophy teaching by example." (Lord Bolingbroke)

New Email Address: 6thColumn@6thcolumnagainstjihad.com.

Saturday, May 27, 2006

Why We Still Need Our Military


Recently commissioners of San Francisco declared San Francisco a "military free zone." Anti-war protests again are happening on America's campuses, and calls to impeach Bush are on the rise because of our involvement in Iraq. Don't these people understand that the end of the Cold War and the fall of the Soviet Union don't mean that America is in any less danger? Perhaps they need to reminded of the rise of other world threats:

China has been increasing spending on military equipment,expanding the size of their military force to include an enormous army and a deep-water navy that could challenge the United States in waters all over the world.

The concern is that U.S. interests in East Asia, the Straights of Malacca, and even in the Western Hemisphere, could be thwarted by Chinese businessmen backed up by their navy and expanding army.

Japan can't help but notice the rising threat by its neighbor, China, and is revising its constitution to allow them "broaden the government's ability to send forces overseas... [and] The revision also opens the door to a broader interpretation of the constitution, permitting what some call "collective self-defense" -- or coming to the military aid of other countries."

Russia, flush with oil wealth, again is making a resurgence, but not without international tension.

Relations between Washington and Moscow are at their lowest ebb in 10 years, and in his recent Address to the Federal Assembly -- equivalent to the State of the Union address -- Putin remarked that "far from everyone in the world has abandoned the old bloc mentality and the prejudices inherited from the era of global confrontation."

The speech as a whole was an intricate balance between the need to arrest Russia's internal societal decline -- one-third of the population, which is shrinking rapidly, lives in poverty -- and a desire to play an ever-greater role in world affairs. Moscow's involvement in the Iranian nuclear affair is a case in point. Its refusal to sanction serious Security Council measures against Tehran is a growing source of concern to the United States and Britain.

This newfound confidence has its basis in Russia's economic resurgence since the collapse of the rouble in 1998, the single largest cause of which is the high (and rising) price of oil...


Continued tensions betweenThe Koreas and between North Korea and the United States are matters of concern. Disturbances from Iran and its surrogates, such as Hamas and other Palestinian groups threaten and annoy Israel and the United States.

The is no let up "The War on Terror", the "War" in Iraq, and tensions and hostility in the Middle East. The rise in the price of oil and oil products cause by increased competition among nations for access in a crucial reason for keeping our military as our economy and lifestyle are based on oil.

South America is not tension free:

Populists movements in Venzuela, Bolivia, and Peru are worrisome, joining the ranks of Cuba and Brazil in a growing dissatisfaction with the U.S. As an example, Venezuela is actually teaming with Iran and has decided to buy war planes from Russia.

Mexico's upcoming elections could put a populist president in power. Nevertheless, relations with Mexico have been tense because of the strain over immigration, the border, and the legalization of many millions of Mexican migrants that are present in the United States, inducing the United States to post armed National Guardsmen close to the border.

The head of the U.S. National Guard surprised Border Patrol officials, declaring some of the troops he will send to assist them will work in close proximity to the border, be armed and allowed to fire their weapons if necessary.
"Any soldier assigned to a mission where he would be placed in harm or danger, where his life would be threatened potentially, will in fact be armed and will have the inherent right of self-protection," Lt. Gen. H. Steven Blum told the San Antonio Express-News Thursday.

Federal troops are scheduled to begin deployment to the four states on the Mexican border next week once the Guard and the Defense Department approve the memorandum of understanding that will define the mission's parameters. The document will also require signatures from the border governors.

Representatives from the National Guard and the offices of the governors of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California have been meeting in Phoenix this week to craft an agreement on the use of force. The talks have focused on "harmonization" of the different states' laws on self-defense and the use of deadly force, said Texas National Guard commander Army Maj. Gen. Charles G. Rodriguez.

The rules of engagement "will be the same in Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas," said Blum.

According to the current plan, the National Guard will conduct border securty operations for two years while the Border Patrol and U.S. Customs increase their numbers. The number of troops deployed at any given time would represent less than 2 percent of available Guard forces, none of which will be assigned from states likely to experience hurricanes this year.
While the Guard will assist with many support functions – conducting aerial surveillance and reconnaissance, building new roads and fences, providing intelligence and analysis to help track illegal crossings, transporting Border Patrol officers and detainees, and assisting with a number of logistics functions – some of their duties will put them in close proximity to the border and illegal crossers.

Troops stationed at vehicle inspection stations and engineers working along the border could be armed, said Blum, with M-16s, 9-mm handguns and shotguns.

"But we're not going to be carrying machine guns. We're not going to be carrying heavy weapons. We're not at war here," Blum said, adding he wants his troops "to be in a position to protect themselves."


Some folks seem to think that withdrawal into the territory of the United States would solve all America's problems. However, U.S. interests could not be protected without the use of the military and access oil and other necessary commodities would surely be denied, or be used as a weapon against us by hostile countries or groups such as al Qaeda.

The catalog listed above is only a small sampling of current and possible conflicts for which we a strong military.

2 Comments:

  • At Sat May 27, 12:15:00 PM PDT, Blogger Cubed © said…

    Damn. I am getting tired. 1) Our being "stuck on stupid" with our failure to recognize and name the enemy, Islam, and to squash it like the bug it is; 2) the growing influence on Hispanic countries of Russia's hostile humiliation left over from the self-induced death of the Soviet Union; 3) the resulting willingness of Hispanic countries to ally themselves with anyone - ANYONE - who would like to see us gone, outta here; 4) the increasing intensity of partnerships between Iran and places like Venezuala, and indirectly, via Hezbollah, between Iran and other Hispanic countries, where they are using the drug lords and the gangs to help them invade the U.S; 5) the increasing numbers of gang members enlisting in the US Armed Forces, with all the training, combat experience, and equipment (available to be stolen); 6) the long-held ambition of Bush, going WAY back, to make of Canada, Mexico, and the U.S. a "European Union"-like entity, complete with the relegation of the Constitution, our national sovereignty, our national security, and the Englightenment values upon which the Founders based the design of this country to the trash heap of history, and now 6) our increasing awareness of the hostile intents of China. . .

    Well, I'm getting REALLY tired.

    Oh, well, maybe it won't matter. In 1029, NASA astronomers in Huntsville, Alabama, predict that the 350 yard wide asteroid Apophis, discovered in June of 2004, will pass about 1000 miles inside the orbits of our geosynchronous satellites (23,000 miles out) and the earth.

    On the astronmers' "threat scale," the so-called "Torino Scale," we will at that time have a one in three hundred risk of impact.

    But that gives us a pretty good chance of a near-miss instead of a collision. Chances are that Apophis (the astronomers who named the asteroid were Stargate-SG I fans) will go on to make another six orbits between 2029 and 2026.

    That's the pass that has them really worried. There is something they call a "resonance keyhole" that helps them determine the impact risk; it's a point in space that constitutes a "gravitational sweet spot" and if Apophis, as is expected, passes through it on orbit number 6, is sufficient to change the asteroids trajectory to vastly increase the chances of impact. Given that in 2029 the odds are 1 in 300, I don't like the sound of that - and apprently, neither do the NASA scientists.

    The impact is currently estimated to occur off the western coast of Mexico (that will definitely solve their problem of a "poor underclass" that they are now dumping on us). It will have the effect of 870 tons of TNT, 58 times the power of the largest nuclear weapon ever detonated - that was in 1961, by the Soviets.

    It would have from 2-4 times the destructive effect of Krakatoa's explosion in 1883.

    NASA scientists say that 2013 will provide an excellent - and probably our last - opportunity to deflect the orbit of Apophis enough to made sure it doesn't hit us.

    Maybe, just maybe, the idiots around the world will drop their stupid-ass ambitions of destroying the only nation on the face of the planet with the technical know-how and the economy to pull off the means of placing a transponder on the surface of the asteroid so we can effect such a deflection.

    Well, probably most people - the Hispanics, the Europeans, the Canadians, the Chinese - would recognize that re-allocating our resources in the direction of solving the "Apophis Problem" would be the better part of virtue.

    I have my doubts about the Muslims, though; with their idiot religion; their lack of education; their stupid self-destructive philosophy; their absence of intellectual resources; their lack of ability to develop their material resurces; all topped off by their insane desire to see "Armageddon" happen, with the destruction of the infidel and the emergence of the imaginary "Mahdi" from that stupid well south of Tehran, they would probably not participate in any solution, especially since the most likely victims will be in Mexico, so why should they care?

     
  • At Sat May 27, 02:28:00 PM PDT, Blogger Eleanor © said…

    Can we wait until 2013 to solve this problem? I think not. However, at the rate we are going, no movement will take place until 2013. Perhaps we each chip in $5-$10 to assist the Minutemen to build their fence as they probably will finish long before the government does...

     

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home