Aerial Interdiction

The volcano that is erupting in Iceland is having a fascinating effect:

The cloud of ash from the eruption has hit air travel all over northern Europe, with flights grounded or diverted due to the risk of engine damage from sucking in particles of ash from the volcanic cloud.

So what would have happened if this had happened during the Cold War?

NATO relied on rapid reinforcement by an air bridge over the northern Atlantic of US troops flying in to stored unit sets of equipment  and the bulk of our air power flowing into European bases from North America.

And is there a volcano anywhere in Japan that could screw up our air bridge to South Korea, should we need to activate that?

Unless This is the Jane Fonda Class of LPD ...

The Navy plans to name an amphibious warfare ship after John Murtha? Is the Navy kidding?

The late Rep. John Murtha, Pennsylvania Democrat, has achieved his highest undeserved honor. Navy Secretary Ray Mabus has decided to name the Navy's newest San Antonio Class amphibious transport-dock LPD 26 the USS John P. Murtha. This is a slap in the face to every service member who bridled when Murtha publicly accused Marines in Iraq of intentionally killing women and children in cold blood.

Murtha made his views known after details emerged about a firefight in Haditha in November 2005 in which 24 Iraqis were killed. Murtha accused the Marines of engaging in premeditated murder and agreed with MSNBC's Chris Matthews that this was "exactly" like the 1968 My Lai massacre in Vietnam. Charges later were brought against eight Marines but have since been dropped against all but one. However, Murtha's theatrical rush to judgment still rankles Americans in uniform, whose views on the congressman range from disappointment to the belief that he gave aid and comfort to the enemy.

Murtha surely served his country when he was a Marine in uniform. But he more than made up for that in his over-the-top anti-war antics that tarnished all troops.

Let Code Pink name a chapter after the man. I'd sooner name LPD 26 the USS Tokyo Rose.

Like I Said

The US Naval Institute has a couple articles on issues I've flogged lately.

One, carriers are not invulnerable. I addressed that here.

Two, numbers of ships matter. See here for my view.

We can't go on the way we've been going since the end of the Cold War.

Information Operations

Our enemies in Afghanistan deliberately kill civilians either directly or by fighting and using them as human shields.

We are very careful in using firepower in Afghanistan. But accidents happen.

So this is frustrating to read:

Afghans burned tires and chanted "Death to America" after U.S. troops fired Monday on a civilian bus near Kandahar, killing four people and wounding more than a dozen. Afghanistan's president accused NATO of violating its commitment to safeguard civilian lives.

The attack enraged Afghan officials and the public in Kandahar, the Taliban's birthplace, and dealt a blow to U.S. and NATO efforts to win popular support for a coming offensive to drive the insurgents from the biggest city in the south. NATO expressed regret for the loss of civilian lives and said it was investigating.

Nearly 200 Afghans blocked highway where the shooting occurred, burning tires, firing weapons and chanting "Death to America" and other slogans. They also called for the ouster of Afghan President Hamid Karzai, a Kandahar native who has been appealing for the people here to support the U.S.-led campaign against the Taliban.

"The Americans are constantly killing our civilians and the government is not demanding an explanation," protester Mohammad Razaq said. "We demand justice from the Karzai government and the punishment of those soldiers responsible."

It would be too easy for war supporters to just throw up our hands and say, "Ef them! They don't appreciate our sacrifice and want to complain? Have fun with your Taliban overlords. Bye. You're on your own."

But that neglects that we'd be reacting exactly the way our enemies want us to react.

Remember that these are generally mobs gathered by the Taliban with Taliban-bribed or -threatened journalists making the initial reports then picked up by "our" press.

One, the enemy wants to convince Afghans that we are the problem. Opinion polls show they are failing in that goal.

Two, the enemy wants to reassure our Left that we really are hated for our many so-called war crimes and so should get out. That's the easy objective and they did that. Heck, the Taliban had our Left at "hello." They had them at "hello." All the Taliban have to do is show them the atrocity--real or not doesn't matter.

But there is a third target--war supporters here in America who react as I initially laid out. Our enemy would like us to react that way. But don't. We have more support among Afghans than these well-publicized rent-a-mobs would indicate. Drive on. Carry out our plan to defeat the Taliban.

Ignore the jabs that get under your skin and provoke a reaction that gives the win to our enemies when they cannot achieve that on the battlefield against our troops.

Well, Moscow Likes My Idea

I proposed modularized auxiliary cruisers about three years ago (more fully fleshed out here) using shipping containers as the basis for weapons and systems modules to be mounted on container ships.

Moscow seems to like the idea:

A Russian firm is marketing a version of the Klub cruise missile that can be carried in a 40 foot shipping container. The launcher and the missile have to slide out of the container before firing, thus limiting where it can be placed on a ship, particularly your typical container ship. But you could get two or three of these shipping container Klubs on most cargo ships, turning the vessel into warship.

Not a great warship, of course. But not every mission needs to be carried out by the best ships we can send.

The Gomer Pyle Effect

So we reach out to Syria with an open hand, and the Syrians screw us:

Syria has transferred long-range Scud missiles to the Lebanese Shiite militant group Hezbollah, Israeli and U.S. officials alleged, in a move that threatens to alter the Middle East's military balance and sets back a major diplomatic outreach effort to Damascus by the Obama administration.

Surprise! Surprise! Surprise!

And it probably really is a surprise to the Obama administration. As I've mentioned before, if it was amateur hour at the White House, I'd have hope they could learn from experience. But they believe we have to keep on reassuring enemies no matter what in order to bring them over from the dark side. So no, it is no set back for outreach. They'll keep on trying, I imagine.

The rockets that our enemies in Iran and Syria are supplying to Hezbollah are getting bigger. How long before Hezbollah gets chemical, biological, or (one day) atomic warheads?

After all, if you are a nutball in Tehran and are reasonably sure Israel will retaliate with nukes, why not fight to the last Arab instead?

The Russo-German Non-Aggression Pact?

So much for collective defense in NATO, at least as far as the old Europeans think of the new Europeans.

Does nobody see the problem of the Germans cooperating with Russia's desire to be able to freeze Poles and other East Europeans without cutting off Germany's heating fuels shipments?

To understand why this undersea pipeline [from Russia to GErmany under the Baltic Sea], officially known as Nord Stream, is already called by some in Poland (including foreign minister Radek Sikorski) the “Molotov-Ribbentrop pipeline,” one must realize that its primary purpose is to serve the Kremlin as an instrument for political pressure. If economic considerations and demand for Russian gas in Western Europe had been the primary motivations, a second pipeline parallel to an existing one through Baltic and Polish territory could have been built more quickly and cheaply.

But such a pipeline would not have allowed Russia to turn off the gas to its Eastern neighbors while continuing to sell it to Germany and Western Europe, and thus would have denied the Kremlin the ability to blackmail the former, as it already has on several occasions in recent years.

Feel the love, Poland. Russia wants to be able to freeze you (and nuke you, given their opposition to our missile defenses in Poland, too) and Germany doesn't want to catch a chill if you find yourselves in the cross hairs of Moscow.

Luckily, we'll be developing a large discovery of shale gas discovered in Poland.

Not that the Russians want to cut off anyone right now. After all, we'll still get our Manas air field. But Russia sure does want to have the option of squeezing supply lines should they need to.

Of course, did anyone in Berlin consider that when the Nord Stream pipeline is completed that Russia can cut off Germany's winter heating fuel without harming East Europeans? Funny how that works.

This pact will work as well as the last one, eh?

Blue on Blue

Actually, it wasn't that tough to predict that the Global Left would mock President Obama for his quick visit to Afghanistan.

So here you go.

And as a bonus, no presidential troop visit commentary from the Left is complete without perpetuating the plastic turkey myth!

I support the president on the war, and I think the complaints of fearing to go to Afghanistan are ridiculous--we have to protect our presidents wherever they go, and why would a war zone be one of the safer places?

But am I evil to enjoy the spectacle of his ideological ilk becoming rabid critics of the president?

The Shoe is the Sign!

Oh what the heck. We already make allowances for beheadings and car bombings in order to be culturally sensitive, why not shoe throwing, too?

Since so many in the Global Left say that Americans are just a basically violent people, couldn't we argue that killing our enemies is a cultural thing?

Follow the Holy JDAM!

Ecologically Blonde

The religion of peace insists that blasphemers must be killed.

One question, though. Is it "ecocide" if I just don't give a damn, or do I actually have to pollute?

These people really are just stupid.

Sanity Breaks Out

The idiots who have portrayed a good strike in Iraq as a war crime haven't stopped our brass from supporting the troops involved:

A video showing U.S. Apache helicopters killing 12 people, including two Reuters news staff, is painful to watch but an investigation into the attack was very thorough, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said on Sunday. ...

The stark helicopter gunsight video of the July 12, 2007, attack has been widely viewed around the world on the Internet since its release on April 5 by the group Wikileaks, which promotes leaks to fight government and corporate corruption.

Some international law and human rights experts say the Apache helicopter crew in the footage may have acted illegally. The video includes an audio track of a helicopter crew conversation. Many have been shocked by the images and some of the fliers' comments.

"It's obviously a hard thing to see. It's painful to see, especially when you learn after the fact what was going on. But you -- you talked about the fog of war. These people were operating in split-second situations," Gates said.

The U.S. military said an investigation shortly after the incident found that U.S. forces were unaware of the presence of news staff and thought they were engaging armed insurgents, mistaking a camera for a rocket-propelled grenade launcher.

There were armed men, as I understand the incident. And there was a battle going on at the time. Just because some Reuters idiots decided to embed with the enemy to glorify their murder sprees does not mean our troops did anything illegal.
 
And war is killing. What do the critics expect? Tom and Jerry violence where the enemy is blackened and flattened, but who spring back a moment later to run off?
 
The important thing is that our leadership is standing by our troops. If troops can't kill enemies, how are we to fight and win?

We'll Be Back

America's economic power is the bedrock of our military power. I've long written that critics too easily write us off as beginning a decline in the face of some competitor. And I've commented on this even in the last year as many have pointed out the all too true problems of embarking on a course of accumulating massive debt and expanding the power and reach of the state to possibly economy-killing levels.

We have national advantages that will help advance our economy when even bone-headed policies are implemented. And foreign countries have problems we don't have, so relative decline is even less likely, I think. So while we have problems to address, don't panic (although I'll admit that perhaps the panic we feel over potential problems is one reason we emerge from problems time and again). Have we reached a tipping point where we can't recover from bone-headed policies? Maybe. But I doubt it.

The problems of deficit spending with a new health care system and the stimulus and all that, which don't appear likely to subside any time soon, are surely problems in the 5-20 year time frame. I don't assume that we won't address the problem in non-destructive ways in that time.

And in the short run, while the stimulus and other financial rescue measures are surely massively inefficient, they did throw money at the economy. Some of it has to stick no matter how much the program was a political wish list of pork barrel spending rather than a smart and focused stimulus package for hard hit areas. So in the short run, that spending and the basic strengths of our economy--even if we are taking hits from federal policy that discourages economic activity--could very well lead to short term robust recovery:

But the long-term decline of the U.S. economy has been greatly exaggerated. America is coming back stronger, better, and faster than nearly anyone expected—and faster than most of its international rivals. The Dow Jones industrial average, hovering near 11,000, is up 70 percent in the past year, and auto sales in the first quarter were up 16 percent from 2009. The economy added 162,000 jobs in March, including 17,000 in manufacturing. The dollar has gained strength, and the United States is back to its familiar position of lapping Europe and Japan in growth. Among large economies, only China, India, and Brazil are growing more rapidly than the United States—and they're doing so off a much smaller base. If the U.S. economy grows at a 3.6 percent rate this year, as Macroeconomic Advisers projects, it'll create $513 billion in new economic activity—equal to the GDP of Indonesia.

So what accounts for the pervasive gloom? Housing and large deficits remain serious problems. But most experts are overlooking America's true competitive advantages. The tale of the economy's remarkable turnaround is largely the story of swift reaction, a willingness to write off bad debts and restructure, and an embrace of efficiency—disciplines largely invented in the United States and at which it still excels. America still leads the world at processing failure, at latching on to new innovations and building them to scale quickly and profitably. "We are the most adaptive, inventive nation, and have proven quite resilient," says Richard Florida, sociologist and author of The Great Reset: How New Ways of Living and Working Drive Post-Crash Prosperity. If these impulses are embraced more systematically and wholeheartedly, the United States can remain an economic superpower well into the current century.

The problems we face ecnomically are real. And dangerous. We could sail over the cliff, Thelma and Louise-like, I suppose. But Thelma and  Louise aren't the only ones in the car. Someone might grab the wheel and turn us. And that pending recovery could lessen the problems of the long term debt outlook and inflation risks, giving us more time to steer away from policies that may appear too dangerous to recover from. It is a mistake to assume that we can't recover despite the best efforts of our leadership class to turn us into a slow-growth, European welfare state. Just as I firmly believe that our economy is too large and complex for our leaders to organize and direct with any success, I suspect our economy is too large and complex for them to wreck completely. So maybe even if Thelma and Louise keep aiming for the cliff, the effects of tens of millions of people leaning to one side will shift our vector and allow us to ride into the future. That won't mean their policies of aiming for the abyss will be vindicated, but for all their passengers (that's you and me), not going over the cliff is still a good thing even if they claim success.

I remain an optimist about our future--even in the age of hope and change.

You Can, In Fact, Fight City Hall

Terrorism gets results, apparently, even over here.

So we'll get more of it.

How Shall it Be Written?

In Thailand, "red shirt" protesters who are mostly from the countryside are clashing with security forces in the capital city. There are also protests going on in other cities. The government is made up of the urban elements who have denied the red shirts the power that they've achieved in elections thorugh their superior numbers. The stand off seems to be escalating on both sides:

Thai troops fired rubber bullets and tear gas on Saturday at demonstrators who retaliated with petrol bombs in the biggest confrontation of month-long street protests for new elections.

At least 171 people, including 64 soldiers and police, have been wounded in skirmishes near the Phan Fah bridge and Rajdumnoen Road in Bangkok's old quarter, a protest base near government buildings and the regional U.N. headquarters.

Hundreds of "red shirt" protesters also forced their way into government offices in two northern cities, raising the risk of a larger uprising against Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva.

"We are changing our demand from dissolving parliament in 15 days to dissolving parliament immediately," protest leader Veera Musikapong told the "red shirt" demonstrators. "And we call for Abhisit to leave the country immediately."

So far the government isn't using live ammo. The security forces have lots of recruits from the countryside, however, and so the government must be careful in how it moves against the protesters lest the security forces waver and switch sides in sufficient numbers.

But the protesters are both using deadly weapons and demanding more, which could raise the stakes and make the government take the risk of using deadly force. We shall see what the government decides to do.

Strategypage has had good coverage of the situation.

The Thais haven't really embraced democracy. Until they accept election results without first checking to see who won at the ballot boxes, all they have is another method of maintaining the regime. I'm hoping Iraqis can set an example for the Thais.

Decapitated

This is horrible:

Polish President Lech Kaczynski and some of the country's highest military and civilian leaders died on Saturday when the presidential plane crashed as it came in for a landing in thick fog in western Russia, killing 96, officials said.

Russian and Polish officials said there were no survivors on the 26-year-old Tupolev, which was taking the president, his wife and staff to events marking the 70th anniversary of the massacre in Katyn forest of thousands of Polish officers by Soviet secret police.

The crash devastated the upper echelons of Poland's political and military establishments. On board were the army chief of staff, national bank president, deputy foreign minister, army chaplain, head of the National Security Office, deputy parliament speaker, civil rights commissioner and at least two presidential aides and three lawmakers, the Polish foreign ministry said.

Although initial signs pointed to an accident with no indication of foul play, the death of a Polish president and much of the Polish state and defense establishment in Russia en route to commemorating one of the saddest events in Poland's long, complicated history with Russia, was laden with tragic irony.

Yes, considering that the Katyn Massacre was an effort to wipe out the upper echelons of Poland to prevent resistance to Soviet rule from organizing, this loss of life on the anniversary of this event is doubly tragic.
 
My sympathies go out to the Polish people. This is just horrible. A tragic date for Poland has been deepened.

UPDATE: The two tragedies.

Return of Forces to Georgia

After coming to an agreement with Abkhazia on a Russian base there, Moscow has concluded an agreement for a base in South Ossetia:

During the talks the defense ministers are expected to sign "an Agreement between the Russian Federation and South Ossetia on a joint Russian military base on the territory of the South Ossetian republic," Kuznetsov said.

A similar agreement was signed in Moscow on February 17 with Abkhazia, another former Georgian republic. The agreement is for a 49-year term and can automatically be prolonged at 15-year intervals. ...

The military bases are expected to be built in Gudauta, Abkhazia, and Tskhinval, South Ossetia. Each base is likely to host up to 1,700 servicemen, T-62 tanks, light armored vehicles, S-300 air defense systems and various aircraft.

The size of the force is not a threat. Both bases, I imagine, will mostly be used as a staging base for troops brought in from inside Russia proper. Perhaps equipment without the troops will be based their so troops only have to be trucked or flown in. Call it REFORGEOR, eh?

So logistically, the Russians will be closer to Tbilisi.

Carrot and--Well, Just the Carrot

So our president basically tells the Iranians and North Koreans that we won't use nuclear weapons in response to a non-nuclear state's attack on us--even if the attacker uses chemical weapons.

The steely eyed rulers in Tehran and Pyongyang are supposed to swoon and reach back to our outstretched hand, buy the world a Coke, and all that Up! Up! With People feel-good notions of winning the hearts and minds of our enemies.

Well, the Iranians have indeed unclenched their fist--well, one finger anyway:

"American materialist politicians, whenever they are beaten by logic, immediately resort to their weapons like cowboys," Ahmadinejad said in a speech before a crowd of several thousand in northwestern Iran.

"Mr. Obama, you are a newcomer (to politics). Wait until your sweat dries and get some experience. Be careful not to read just any paper put in front of you or repeat any statement recommended," Ahmadinejad said in the speech, aired live on state TV.

Ahmadinejad said Obama "is under the pressure of capitalists and the Zionists" and vowed Iran would not be pushed around. "(American officials) bigger than you, more bullying than you, couldn't do a damn thing, let alone you," he said, addressing Obama.

And the Iranians keep rolling along:
 

Iran unveiled a third generation of domestically built centrifuges Friday as the country pushes ahead with plans to accelerate a uranium enrichment program that has alarmed world powers fearful of the nuclear program's aims.

 
Well what about the North Koreans? Surely the starving wretched over there (well, not the rulers personally, of course, but surely they get sad faces when they think about their poor people) will be more willing to extend their hands to President Obama.
 
Apparently not:
 

North Korea has denounced President Barack Obama's nuclear policy as "hostile," and is vowing to keep building and expanding its arsenal of atomic weapons.

 
First, at best North Korea has nuclear demolition devices movable by truck. They've likely not weaponized anything that can be fired or dropped. But they are going that way.

More to the point, I've said it before and I'll say it again: we can't placate the North Koreans. If we signed a peace treaty with the Pillsbury Nuke Boy, promised him gagillons in cash (that's a real budgetary term these days here, I think), and send Madeleine Albright to dance with him until dawn, Kim Jon-Il would think it was all a ruse and still believe we're continuing our 50+ years of preparing to invade North Korea.
 
Besides, the way we screw our friends these days, why would any rogue want to switch from being a wooed enemy to being a spurned friend? Has anyone in the White House even thought through the flaw of their basic logic of their policy of screwing friends and reaching out to enemies?
 
Ajami concludes in this article:
 

The shadow of American power is receding; the rogues are emboldened. The world has a way of calling the bluff of leaders and nations summoned to difficult endeavors. Would that our biggest source of worry in that arc of trouble was the intemperate outburst of our ally in Kabul.

 
Strap in boys and girls, this could get rough.

Yes, And Flowers, Too

Seven years ago, we liberated Baghdad.

And yes, our troops were greeted with flowers.

We did a good thing. I'm proud of our troops who've won there.

I'm proud to have supported the war.

Say What?

Notwithstanding President Bush's mantra-like recitation that Islam is a religion of peace, the Obama administration is determined to erase the Bush language of hate that makes the Islamic world think we are at war with all of Islam:

President Barack Obama's advisers will remove religious terms such as "Islamic extremism" from the central document outlining the U.S. national security strategy and will use the rewritten document to emphasize that the United States does not view Muslim nations through the lens of terror, counterterrorism officials said.

The change is a significant shift in the National Security Strategy, a document that previously outlined the Bush Doctrine of preventative war and currently states: "The struggle against militant Islamic radicalism is the great ideological conflict of the early years of the 21st century."

That statement about the struggle is indeed in the 2006 strategy paper. It's on page 41 of the PDF's 54 pages (Numbered page 36). So that's right out.

So let's see how many cases of "Islamic extremism" we have to find and replace, since the Obama administration finds that term odious. It must go!

Huh. Using the search function of the document, it tells me "No matches were found." That's odd. I mean, for a document that supposedly shows the Bush administration's ham-handed attitude toward the Islamic world, surely it would crash the search function.

Well how about just "extremism"? We all know what that has to mean!

Ah hah! There are two mentions of "extremism!" One even specifies "religious" extremism! I'm sure getting rid of that adjective for all the Moslems who pore over our 2006 strategy document right before they decide whether or not to sign up for the global jihad will lead them to choose to enroll in community college to learn that plumbing trade instead.

Well how about the word "Islam" or its variations? Surely the Crusader document drips with scathing references to Islam in thinly veiled attacks on the great religion.

On page 14 of 54:

While the War on Terror is a battle of ideas, it is not a battle of religions. The transnational terrorists confronting us today exploit the proud religion of Islam to serve a violent political vision: the establishment, by terrorism and subversion, of a totalitarian empire that denies all political and religious freedom. These terrorists distort the idea of jihad into a call for murder against those they regard as apostates or unbelievers–including Christians, Jews, Hindus, other religious traditions, and all Muslims who disagree with them. Indeed, most of the terrorist attacks since September 11 have occurred in Muslim countries – and most of the victims have been Muslims.

Hate speech against Islam, pure and simple. Read between the lines, folks!

What else is there that damns the Bush approach to the war?

The very next page! On page 15 we read:

Terrorism ultimately depends upon the appeal of an ideology that excuses or even glorifies the deliberate killing of innocents. A proud religion – the religion of Islam – has been twisted and made to serve an evil end, as in other times and places other religions have been similarly abused.

Where's CAIR when you need them? Bush kisses his mother with that mouth?

And on page 16:

The strategy to counter the lies behind the terrorists’ ideology is to empower the very people the terrorists most want to exploit: the faithful followers of Islam. We will continue to support political reforms that empower peaceful Muslims to practice and interpret their faith. The most vital work will be done within the Islamic world itself, and Jordan, Morocco, and Indonesia have begun to make important strides in this effort. Responsible Islamic leaders need to denounce an ideology that distorts and exploits Islam for destructive ends and defiles a proud religion.

My God! It's like we're deliberately trying to provoke them!
 
There's the above-cited damning reference on page 41. What else?
 
Nothing else.

Well how about "Muslim?" (There are no references to "Moslem".)

Skipping the repeats, we have this arrogant assertion (page 16) that we actually fight with Moslems against the terrorists! The nerve!
 

Many of the Muslim faith are already making this commitment at great personal risk. They realize they are a target of this ideology of terror. Everywhere we have joined in the fight against terrorism, Muslim allies have stood beside us, becoming partners in this vital cause. Pakistan and Saudi Arabia have launched effective efforts to capture or kill the leadership of the al-Qaida network. Afghan troops are in combat against Taliban remnants. Iraqi soldiers are sacrificing to defeat al-Qaida in their own country. These brave citizens know the stakes – the survival of their own liberty, the future of their own region, the justice and humanity of their own traditions – and the United States is proud to stand beside them.

 
Proud to stand beside them, indeed. More like proud to slaughter them all, eh? Who's kidding who, here?
 
And check out page 50 on what we need to do:
 

Strengthening our public diplomacy, so that we advocate the policies and values of the United States in a clear, accurate, and persuasive way to a watching and listening world. This includes actively engaging foreign audiences, expanding educational opportunities for Americans to learn about foreign languages and cultures and for foreign students and scholars to study in the United States; empowering the voices of our citizen ambassadors as well as those foreigners who share our commitment to a safer, more compassionate world; enlisting the support of the private sector; increasing our channels for dialogue with Muslim leaders and citizens; and confronting propaganda quickly, before myths and distortions have time to take root in the hearts and minds of people across the world.

 
Thinly disguised code words for putting JDAMs through minaret windows is more like it! No wonder the Islamic world thinks we're at war with all of them!
 
Thank goodness the Obama administration will fix these glaring insults that clearly make the whole conflict a grand misunderstanding. If we can only change the language of hate that permeates our basic strategy document, that outreach to the Islamic world will kick into high gear and erase the causes of jihadi recruitment.
 
Finally, at long last, we've answered the Leftist question they've asked since 9/11 when misunderstood Moslems killed nearly 3,000 of our people of  "why do they hate us?"

UPDATE: Per Mark Steyn, if you go just by the body count and human wreckage, you should be asking why do Moslems hate Moslems? We're pikers, even with all our Predators and whatnot.

Place Your Bets

The Russians say the new nuclear arms control treaty with Russia links our missile defenses (and thus limits them) to offensive limits:

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov recently stated that “linkage to missile defense is clearly spelled out in the accord and is legally binding.”

We say the treaty does no such thing.

Of course, we didn't exactly deny the Russian charge. What we said is this:

Another senior Obama administration official pointed out that Prikhodko never asserted that there are any “constraints on the development of US missile defense in the treaty,” which is – to the White House -- what’s key.

Ah, well that isn't denying what the Russians said, now is it? That senior official is only saying that the treaty doesn't limit our research and development--which means the Russians are completely accurate if you are talking about our ability to actually deploy missile defenses and actually--you know--defend ouselves from enemy missiles.

Defending ourselves is the key--not designing really cool weapons that we never deploy but are simply stolen via cyber-espionage by our enemies who then build what we created.

This appears to be shameful spinning by the administration. If our administration is so proud of their achievement, why not just spell it out? I hope I'm wrong. I doubt I am.