summer patriot, winter soldier

warning w/ regard to alliant powder's "reloader 22" rifle powder ...

friends:

update, 03.01.2013.  in the text below, i make reference to powder not flowing through a "shoot" as evenly as it should.  i am a dolt.  the word is "chute," as i was using it.   as in a "chute" that a bull rider exits to begin his ride on the bull, abbreviated or not.  i should be taken out in the street and flogged for such idiocy.  i am appropriately apologetic for such an error.   and, to think that i called maxine waters an idiot today. (oh, she is, believe you me.  laughing.)   but, people who live in glass houses  .... .   end update.

i am beginning some reloading for my 7mm remington magnum, and the apparent powder of choice is "reloader 22," made by alliant corporation.

a lot of people like it, and a lot of ink gets spilled over it, because of its ability to speed a wide variety of bullet weights for a given cartridge at very high velocities, and all at moderate pressures.

but i want to issue a warning/caution about its use.--

it doesn't meter for shit.  what do i mean by that?  i mean precisely that it does not flow evenly through reloading equipment such as i have at my disposal, and such as i use.  now, if you have money up the ying yang you can afford electronic/digital equipment that weighs and dispenses a powder charge at a given weight, at the command of buttons, you are in good shape and needn't worry about the troubles i am encountering:  punch in 66.5 grains, and the measure augers out 66.5 grains, on the button.

my old equipment was given to me by my older brother over 35 years ago, ... , it is not "digital."  the powder dispenser, for instance, uses a rotary drum with a movable cylinder to dispense powder by volume.  it is moved by muscle and sinew, and is not directed by electronic command.

what's wrong with that?

well, if a person such as i is using a hodgdon spherical powder, made of tiny little round balls or small cylindrical extrusions, there is nothing wrong with it, because the small granules fill the set volume of the rotary drum very uniformly, as they flow very smoothly to fill it.  it comes out evenly, and predictably, as established by a bit of tinkering.

well, "reloader 22" happens to be comprised of very large and coarse cylindrical particles, measuring .045" across the cylinder (diameter), and .060" in length.  it does not flow through my powder measure, hanging up in the disposing bin, hanging up in the shoot below the rotary drum where it is measured by "volume," and god only know where else.

as a result, it meters very unevenly.  as compared to the "h-322," the "reloader 22" is like gravel through the hour glass, so to speak.

in comparison, when i load a bunch of prepped cases in a suitable cartridge with "h-322" i usually check the amounts being dispensed by the measure against the scales about every 25 or 30 loads, or twice every batch of 50 rounds.  and, i don't use any elaborate rituals to try and assure an even weight, the stuff just flows like good clean sand.  by contrast, with the "reloader 22" i am giving the rotating drum three little sharp taps to move the powder into it, and when i rotate the drum to empty powder into the case, i give it three more taps/pats to make sure it has in fact emptied and all powder has fallen out of the tube below the drum, and into the case.  and, then i weigh a charge if it doesn't feel right.

and still it varies.  now, with h-322, which although not technically a spherical powder is still comprised of small granules, i might get a variation between charges of .1 grain.  (keep in mind, that there are 440 grains in an ounce.)  that a pretty even measure, and it makes cartridge performance predictable as a result: that is good.  it appears to me, by contrast, that the charges of "reloader 22" are varying as much as .75 grains, plus or minus, over/under the intended charge weight, or varying as much as 1.5 grains per charge.  this is not good.

and, it could be dangerous.  you don't want too much powder in a cartridge.

what this means is that i will approach maximum charge weights extremely cautiously, to make sure that i am comfortably below the maximum charge.  i don't want to exceed this.  i don't want to damage either my reloads, or the rifle that i am shooting them in.

and, there is the little matter of fingers and eyeballs, and stuff like that.

john jay @  11.27.2011

p.s.  well, then, why don't i just use a suitable spherical powder of the same weight and power, and get the desired performance that way?  the answer is quite simple, ... , i simply don't know of any spherical powder that will push the particular bullet i am using as fast as i want to push it.  so, to get the desired performance, i am going to pay a price, and that price is in terms of the time it will take me to be very meticulous, and very careful, and to manage the charges weights in question to make sure i do not ever experience what is called a "pressure spike," or "pressure excursion."

caution, not willful stupidity, is the order of the day.  just call me, prudent priscilla, if you will.

because, yes, i can get in trouble by the use of an "extra" 1.5 grains of powder.  a "ruin your day" sort of trouble.

not all "fools" are necessarily stupid .... some are idiots, but others are conniving and calculating ....

friends:

as i watch the financial crisis in europe deepen, as good money is thrown down the toilet to try and reprieve gargantuan financial irresponsibility, and as germany is dragged into insolvency and the euro managers talk of a "unified" european financial system, ... , something becomes abundantly clear.

this is not the result of stupidity, or misjudgment or mismanagement.

this whole thing is being manipulated, and connived.  the destruction of european currencies is sought.

it is the obvious intent of the euro union bureaucrats to destroy the currencies and financial systems of the individual european states so that the euro union "emerges from the ashes" of financial collapse as the single monetary system in all of europe.

tip of the hat, theo spark.  update:  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/markets/8918763/Markets-pricing-in-endgame-for-the-euro-warns-UBS.html .  just as i have said, (right at midnight last night), and without an advanced degree in economics.  it is just as simple as the old saw, ... , "don't throw good money after bad."  which is all the european union and the bankers and the bureaucrats can do.  well, do you thrash in the quick sand, or slip quietly into the goo?  end update:  11.27.2011.

i base this opinion on one incontestable fact.--

no group of financial managers could purposely follow the path which has seen the bankruptcy of greece, italy, spain, and ireland, and which has seen even more handouts & bailouts badgered from germany, without intending the collapse of the current financial arrangements in the euro union.

it cannot be otherwise.

the outcome of this colossal foolishness is entirely foreseen, and entirely foreseeable, and anyone who has the vaguest notion of a financial ledger knows what the end result of the whole affair is going to be  ...  and that is the utter and total failure of the monetary systems.

in short, those managing this whole ludicrous dumb show have foreseen the result.

idiots could not be oblivious to it.  everyone knows you cannot pay back bond debt when you are broke, and that all the worthless money in the world is just that, worthless money.  no one has forgotten weimar germany, and what it led to.

therefore, the results of this mismanagement are sought.  the results of this are so inevitable that no one can honestly believe it is not foreseen.  it is as simple as that.

there could be no purpose in engineering 27 separate collapses, only to struggle towards 27 separate revivals.  no, the only rational and logical explanation for this purposeful destruction of the monetary systems of the separate members is that the imposition of a single scheme of finance and currency and monetary policy is sought by the euro union bureaucrats who are engineering this lunacy.

the bureaucrats have decided that "all chips are in."  they have decided the euro union is a failing proposition, and that no loyalty toward the union is inspired in europe.  geert wilders and others have exposed the lie of the "euro-med," and the euro union immigration policies which lie behind all the "cooperation agreements."  the union is coming apart.

the managers have decided that they will risk all on the chance of managing "the rise of the euro union phoenix" from the ashes of the destruction of europe's monetary systems, which they are engineering, and seeking.

i practiced law for 25 years in the state of washington, that practice including at various times, defending and prosecuting criminal offenses (up to and including murder charges.)  in the state of washington, the law says that one intends the natural and foreseeable consequences of ones actions: in short, your mental state may be inferred from what you do.  i assume the point of that observation, and the law, is comprehended with regard to the above essay.

john jay @ 11.27.2011

how about l.s.u. trades schedules with oregon state, and oregon trades schedules w/ old miss for next year's college football season ...

now, i think it is a pretty correct assertion that louisiana state u. and u. of alabama are probably the two best teams in college football.  i really have very little difficulty with two teams from the same conference playing for the national championship.

they earned it.

and, i have no sour grapes that u. of oregon will not be in the championship game, because if only they had beaten u. of southern california as they should have, they might be in it.  as it is, oregon will likely be in the rose bowl, with a good opponent, and that will be a good game.  it is enough for a pacific northwest lad, such as myself.

but, i do get tired of those mullet heads who are always claiming that no one can play with the s.e.c. with this, i do not agree.  the s.e.c. gets the good records from scheduling sacrificial lambs at the start of the year, the whole s.e.c. beating the bejesus out of the louisana-hyphens, e.g., louisana-monroe, louisana-lafayette, louisana tech, tennessee-martin, and the eastern, western, south east western tennessees.  and, we cannot leave out the ohio little sisters of the poor, as a dependable patsy.  the south eastern conference even schedules a patsy towards the last two weeks of the season, as a bit of a breather, and time to heal up, before the big rivalry game to end the season.  (in oregon, that last game is called "the civil war," which it used to resemble.  no jersey went unbloodied, when i was a lad and cheering on the beavers.)

now, louisiana state went through the year undefeated on that type schedule, and playing in a conference division that included alabama and arkansas ...  a pretty tough row to hoe.  but, the s.e.c. despite 3 or 4 stalwarts also has a host of conference patsies that the big guys feast on year in and year out, with predictable and boring regularity.

this is my contention.--

i don't think that the big three of the s.e.c./west would get through a pac-12 conference schedule unbeaten.  oh, they would do well, they are wonderful teams, and as i said, louisiana state and alabama deserve to be considered the top college teams in the nation.  no quibbles there.  none.

i just don't think that they would get through the pac-12 unscathed, as i think that there are three teams in the pac-12 that could be depended upon to give them very stern tests, to include oregon, usc and stanford.  i think that they would be good enough to take a notch or two out of the best of the s.e.c.  and, i think the balance of the pac-12 teams are better than the balance of the s.e.c. teams, in general.

let's find out.  this is what i suggest.--

i propose that l.s.u., the probable champ of the s.e.c. simply trade schedules with oregon state university, which will finish near the bottom of the pac-12 this year.  in other words, oregon state plays all of l.s.u.'s scheduled opponents, and vice versa for l.s.u.

and, that oregon, the probable champ of the pac-12, simply trade schedules with old miss, one of the more woeful of the s.e.c. teams.  oregon state plays the schedule of the old missus, and the old school marm plays oregon's schedule.

(i can guarantee you, that pac-12 and western teams play tougher pre-season games, though they, too, play teams paying them "guarantee money" to lure them to their defeats, so that the pac-12 teams may pad their records w/ wins, to impress the computers & fans.)

let's see if louisiana state could waltz through a schedule filled with oregon, stanford, and u.s.c., as well as contending with the occasional very good teams from arizona state, utah and university of washington.   let's see if oregon is made of enough "quality stuff" to play louisiana state's usual opponents, and to come out of it unscathed (which i doubt), or with at least a very good record, (which i suspect.)

let's find out.  i will never get the chance of bedding some little hollywood starlet, to find out if the experience is qualitatively different from any other that i have ever had, so at least one of the great curiosities of life will never be answered me.  and, as ben franklin observed, i will find out if jesus is the son of god soon enough, but, unfortunately, not with any surety on this side of the puzzle.

so, it would please me very much, and humor me even more, if i could find out and satisfy this little curiosity (and, my own little conceit), about whether the pac-12 could play an entire schedule head to head and nose to nose with the s.e.c. teams.

john jay @  11.25.2011

p.s.  we could do this over a two or three year period, ... , say the year after the pairing discussed above, u.s.c. and kentucky swap, and utah and alabama swap schedules, perhaps followed the year after by stanford and mississippi state swapping, and georgia and washington state.

and, so on and so forth.

i think it would be fascinating, and perhaps shed a little light on all the rather unproductive heat that swirls around the arguments of fans.  for this reason alone it would be worth it, and, for this reason alone, it will never happen.

brian terry killed by mexicans armed by f & f ["fast & furious"] hunting for u.s. border patrol" ... fausta's blog ...

a u.s. border patrol officer, brian terry, was killed on december 10, 2010 by mexican nationals ten miles north of nogales, new mexico wielding ak-47 rifles they obtained via the united states justice department's "fast and furious" program, this from a sealed indictment from a united states federal grand jury.  

this, from a very good post with more details at "fausta's blog," http://faustasblog.com/?p=28000 .

two romanian built ak-47 rifles found at the scene of terry's death were purchased at a gun shop in glendale, arizona as part of the a.t.f.'s "fast and furious" program.  http://faustasblog.com/?p=28000 .

in my view, this was an illegal program, and those authorizing the illegal sale via "straw man purchases" of weapons intended to get into the hands of mexican nationals involved in the drug trade were complicit in terry's death.

this means, ... , precisely, ... , attorney general eric holder, president of the united states barack "the true hussein" obama, and the heads of the a.t.f. and f.b.i. who were involved in this insanity.  in addition, and in my view, it would appear that the "use" of these weapons by mexican nationals was to bolster support for hilary clinton's push on a united nations sponsored "gun control" treaty that would have blocked sales of such weapons to law abiding citizens.  before gun runner spread the use of such weapons to mexican nationals, the use of semi auto weapons in criminal activities was pretty rare.

for shame on the idiots obama, holder and clinton.  they should be prosecuted.   any prosecutors in the southwestern united states with the cajones to do it?

john jay @ 11.27.2011

p.s.  no one has covered this story as "sipsey street irregulars," http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/ .  go there, for excellent coverage on this topic, and many other stories.

on "arab spring" ... on george bush and the iranian bomb ... thanksgiving to george ...

1.)i guess the arabs, especially the egyptians and the syrians, just intend to plant the seeds of democracy directly into the rotting corpses on the sidewalks, and just say to hell with planting soil and commercial fertilizers.  (sort of like putting a dead fish in the bottom of every hole for the corn seeds, like the indians of lore taught the plymouth colony settlers.)

in short, dear friends, we just don't know exactly whither this is tending, now, do we?

2.)george bush was told by the c.i.a. and the i.a.e.c. that iran was building a bomb.  and, said so.

the c.i.a. infamously changed field on bush, in as bogus an "intelligence analysis" that ever was issued: the report writers repeated the facts very quietly, and then reversed their conclusions, very loudly, and stated "no bomb."

meanwhile, the head honcho of the international atomic energy commission, who did his best to "know nothing" about iran's bomb ambitions, has quit, and emerged as a leading candidate and proponent of the islamic brotherhood in egyptian politics.

and, the c.i.a. and the i.a.e.c. now both state that the iranians are well along toward fielding a bomb, and are "alarmed" about it.

and all seem to have quietly and conveniently forgotten that george bush was right, that he was betrayed and smeared by the c.i.a., and that he understood as few did then or do now what a risk it is to have the iranian mullahs in control of a country, a military and research scientists.

i have heard exactly "zero remembrance" on this score, from the left most certainly, and from the right, quite shamefully.

john jay @ thanksgiving day, 2011.

p.s.  yes, i think george bush in the right place at the right time, and for that, i continue to be very thankful, indeed.  happy thanksgiving, george, and good be upon you.

p.s.s.  and, for those of you not so good at connecting the dots, ... , please to keep in mind just who in the hell is getting the bomb, if iran attains the bomb.  in short, remember those corpses in the streets in egypt, syria, iran (and every other place on earth dominated by islam.)

update on the "arab spring" in syria:  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/8917973/Syria-despatch-inside-the-battle-for-Homs-centre-of-resistance-to-Bashar-al-Assad.html .  syria heads toward civil war.  the "chinless wonder" thinks that he can ride it out.  i doubt it.  jjjay.  end update.

update on the "arab spring" in egypt:  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/egypt/8919267/Egypt-military-leadership-and-Muslim-Brotherhood-join-forces.html .  it appears that the muslim brotherhood is wresting the "revolution" away from the pro-democracy forces, and that the brotherhood has teamed up with the military for the time being to remove the influence of the pro-democracy forces.  they have jointly labeled the pro-democracy types as under the control of the west.

it appears this whole mess is just about ready to "tip" to the muslim brotherhood, as anticipated.   end update, 11.27.2011.

what would i do ... to integrate israeli armor & infantry? ...

what would "i" do, were i israel, to fully integrate and coordinate "my" armor & tank warfare tactics with "my" infantry support tactics?

why, i would follow the advice of my rather clever friends matt g. and rollie t., that's what.  bobcats to the rescue.

the "bobcat" is a rather clever little construction vehicle, smallish so that it can do little excavation jobs, such as clearing away dirt and rocks from building foundations, walls, etc., and so that it can haul little loads of gravel into places a front end loader cannot get to.

they are low to the ground.  they have four little wheels, which are all driven, and they steer just like a crawler tractor, by differentiating the drive the wheels on one side of the vehicle or another.  they can turn in a pivoting motion in their own length, and they are nimble and will go in just about any terrain.

here is the key.--   they will easily go where any tank will go, and, if necessary, they could very well hide behind a tank, or even a large rock.  they would be very nimble in anything the golan heights could offer up, for instance.

and, this is what i would do with the bobcat, in regards to israeli infantry and tank tactics.  (hint, it would not involve hauling gravel, though i suppose combat engineers could do that in a pinch.)

were i israel, i would get about a gazillion of the little devils, diesel powered, and i would mount machine guns on them, 50's or 308's as the job called for, and i would equip them with sights just as used in assault/attack helicopters, so that the operator could simply look at the enemy through the optic on his helmet, press a button on the steering wheel/frictions, and unleash all sorts of hell upon his adversary.

i would use these little devils in direct assault upon dug in hezbollah positions, and also use them in infantry support of main battle tank formations engaged in attack.  they would not be heavily armored, to maintain speed and agility, but i suppose sitting behind a bit of armor plate would be preferable to walking in the open.  related post:  http://wintersoldier2008.typepad.com/summer_patriot_winter_sol/2011/11/from-viewers-like-you-a-lesson-in-combined-armor-infantry-warfare-.html .  more involved, but, pertinent.

say, two or three of these little devils scurrying around per tank, protecting it from infantry assault and swarm, should prove very effective.

would they replace infantry?  hell, no, would be the answer.  again, hell no.  infantry would be right up there along side them, in fighting vehicles, and on the ground, pounding sand with the boots, where infantry belongs.  in vast armada type attacks, the little bobcats could match speed and distance with the tanks, and would go with them, and armed w/ twin 50's and/or tow's, could really help protect the flanks of heavy armor.  troops in fighting vehicles could follow.

it would look just like the tank columns entering iraq in the last little dust up, the one that got saddam killed (eventually.)

in slower & tactical battle, they would be invaluable so armed against flanking infantry attack upon the tank columns, and they could prevent infantry from approaching with tows and rocket propelled grenades.  given the battle field sights i propose, they would be quite formidable indeed.

they would require infantry support, for the same reason that tanks require infantry support in such situations.

and, i cannot imagine a more formidable weapons system in urban conflict.  they would be much more maneuverable (they drive over piles of debris, loose bricks, broken concrete and the like every day all over the world) than a tank, and the weapons they carry much more conducive to killing dug in troops one at a time than any tank: in a city, a tank's cannon has very reduced utility.  what, a tank round per hezbollah "warrior?"  an absolute waste of capacity, and of very little utility, ultimately.  why kill some idiot with a 120mm cannon, when a 5.56mm infantry round will suffice:  an infantry man can carry far more "killing" ammo than a tank can.

you take a machine such as i propose, and put it into an urban setting with infantry support, and you go yourself a tactical solution to a whole lot of problems.

you will remember the german multi-barreled gizmo that waltzed into town in the penultimate scenes of "saving private ryan."  well, imagine it fast, nimble, and far more capable w/ suitably sized weapons.

now, imagine about 2 or 3 of them per israeli tank, and with coordinated infantry support, and you will have a truly versatile, nimble, adaptable and quite formidable fighting force.

capable of killing lots of arab soldiers, very quickly.

that's the desired goal, is it not?

john jay @ 11.23.2011

"from viewers like you" ... a lesson in combined armor & infantry warfare ...

p.b.s. is really two broadcast organizations, one operating in daylight to perform the usual indoctrination of leftist boobs, and the other toiling away in the wee hours of the night for us insomniacs and reasonably calculated to portray historical truths, unblemished by doctrinaire cant.

the following, paid for, "from viewers like you."

thus it was last night at about 3.30 a.m. that i watched a most informative program on the wwii battle for stalingrad, taking place over a 7 month period from the summer of 1942 until the surrender of the german 6th army in early 1943.  the defeat of the germans at stalingrad blunted the german advance into russian, and marked the beginning of their grudging and brutal retreat back into germany.

stalingrad lies on the eastern banks of the volga, and was a vital pivot whose capture might have allowed the germans access into the great oil fields, and bread basket, of the southern caucuses.  to the west of stalingrad lay the great crescent of the river don, which served to focus and concentrate the attacking german armies before the city.  it both concentrated german strength before the city, while at the same time exposing it to flanking attack from across its banks, and to the great pincer encirclement which doomed the 6th army to capture.

but, i am not concerned this day with great strategic issues, rather with an essential observation about the tactics of armored warfare, specifically dealing with tank battle.  my observations have to do with the nature of tank battle as we may again witness it in the middle east in warfare between israel and her arab/muslim enemies.

the program last night on p.b.s. was based upon recent access to the russian military archives of the battle, by military historians.  this access to both german and russian archives revealed several very interesting aspects of the battle.

a military historian reminded us that at this point in wwii the main battle tanks were not quite yet the behemoths that technology and the stress of battle would bring at the end of the war, and that the german panzers and even the russian t-34 (getting its first great introduction to battle at stanlingrad) were equipped with canons in the 65 to 75mm range.

and, that tank battles took place at ranges from 250 to 300 meters or so.

and, that because the t-34's armor was more or less impervious to the guns of the german armor, that german tactics to combat the russian tank involved german infantry swarming tanks, disabling them at close distance, and then mounting them to kill the crews by the use of hand grenades and explosives.

keep in mind, that russian tanks were supported by infantry, often times riding on the back of the tanks into battle, and that russian tanks fairly bristled with machine guns.

i do not know about you, but i can think of far more pleasant ways to wile away my day than fighting through tanks and infantry simply to have the chance to clamber up onto the top of a disabled soviet tank so that i could kill its crew at close quarters.

if you will but consider this for a moment, you will have to conclude that this sort of tomfoolery would have required the fairly coordinated efforts of german tanks & tank killers to try and kill the soviet tanks that they could, while also killing enough russian infantry protecting the tanks at close quarter, to enable german infantry to close on the then unsupported russian tanks.

not my idea of beer & dogs at an afternoon's barbecue.

the main thesis of last night's program was that hitler's grand strategy of trying to conquer the caucus by diverting the german 4th army, comprised of tanks and other armor, to the south and to the caucus, leaving the 6th army without army as it attacked stalingrad, led directly to the defeat of the 6th army.

in other words, by separating the armor from its infantry support, and depriving the infantry the heavy punch of its armored spear tip, hitler decreased the battlefield and operational capacity of both infantry and armor.

stated another way, the efficacy of armored attack is greatly increased when supporting infantry are present to protect armor from the combined force attack of armor and infantry, and the efficacy of infantry is greatly increased when it has armor to protect it.

this may seem obvious.  and, indeed it is, for in the battle array of modern armies one seldom sees armored attack unsupported either by infantry cover, or by massive and unchallenged air superiority using helicopters and close order air attack.

most of the great armies of the world accept this as doctrine, and understand the vulnerability of armor that does not operate under the cover of small arms and small artillery fire to interdict attacking infantry.  tanks are incredible weapons, especially against other tanks.  but, consider this.  it makes very poor "battlefield economics" and use of materiel, to shoot opposing infantry with tank rounds, and even the most formidable tank runs out of ammo pretty quickly in the presence of massed infantry.  and, then, they are helpless if they cannot run.

everybody sees this.

except israel.

i have written often of the one great limitation that israeli battle doctrine presents in fights with its arab foes, and that is the reluctance of israel to expose its infantry to battlefield casualty.  in short, israel will not allow its infantry to enter into infantry battle in which it will sustain heavy casualties.

what this equates to is a reluctance on the part of israel to kill arabs in numbers to make battle unpalatable to arab war fighters.  in essence, every time pan arabia goes to back against israel, it does so in a demographic sense, for free, and without lasting consequence.

look at it this way.

the arabs are subsidized to the hilt in the acquisition of military hardware.  those who wish to woe them to be proxy warriors give them tanks, artillery and airplanes for little or nothing.  there is no cost involved at all.  the proof of this assertion is easy, and quite obvious for anyone with a brain in his or her head, and a willingness to use it.  and, it is this easy.--  point to one arab nation that has an armaments industry capable of making a main battle tank, or an artillery piece.  (when saddam hussein was building the super gun to bombard israel, he gave the game away, because he was ordering the cannon barrels for the damned thing in england.  the cannon barrel guys, after they had been paid, simply called up english intel, and the plot was outed.)  or, for that matter, any of the implements of war, down to the lowly truck.

they spend a little oil money.  that's it.

they go to war.  israel destroys the hardware, and a few odd pilots and tank crews.

and, the war is over, and israel stops killing people.  just at that point where they might sustain infantry casualties.

as a consequence, the war cost the arabs nothing of any value, in a real economic sense.

and israel still has a very untested and not very effective infantry.

hezbollah & southern lebanon.

in the last war israel had great difficulty in using its armor against dug in positions & bunkers defended by hezbollah.  the reasons go back to the battle of stalingrad.

israeli tanks and tank crews were protected very ineffectually by israeli infantry, and it made it exceedingly difficult for armor to proceed against the dug in forces of hezbollah.  it made israeli armor, some of the absolute best in the world, almost helpless, because it exposed israeli tanks to the same "infantry swarm" that the germans used against the t-34's in wwii.

i am a little old pudgy gray haired guy in milton freewater, oregon as i was during the last war.  same vantage.  same chair.  same computer.  how in the sam hell do i say these things with such assurance?  well, it is quite easy, and quite obvious (as almost all logic is if a premises is accepted or proved.)

and that is, in the last war, as in all wars, israel experienced almost no infantry casualties.  and, it is quite a simple proof, and it goes like this.  if israel were not sustaining infantry casualties, then the israeli infantry was not committed to battle, especially against dug in fortifications, and especially not in close order battle in support of its armor and tanks.

it is as simple and irrefutable as that.

so, comes the next war, egged on by the iranian mullahs and their aspirations for nuclear weapons and foreign policy hegemony in the middle east and the indian ocean.  sort of  a "persia" shall rise again nostalgia thing, coupled with the various insanities inflicted upon the dumb bastards by islam.  persian ambitions, islamic delusion, and hatred of all things israeli and jewish make such a war inevitable.

and, endlessly repeatable.

unless israel learns the lessons of wwii, and somehow summons the will to commit its infantry to battle in order to make its armor and tank corps function as they should.  and, unless israel summons the will to kill its enemies, so that war stings.

now, if israel does not integrate infantry with armored attack, and by that i mean infantry on foot and riding on the backs of tanks, and not being hauled around in trucks from one safe haven to another, then israel will experience needless damage and destruction to its tanks and armor, and it will experience immense frustration in moving through static fortification to get at the enemy tank and armored formations it seeks to destroy.

now, if israel does not commit its infantry to battle, to kill in immense numbers and to utilize its armor in coordinated thrusts to kill immense numbers, than we shall simply see a repeat of these internecine wars with arab armies, again and again.  and, again.

this is historical proof that i preach.

in wars, you must kill your enemy until you take the glory of fight out of him.  you must make the bullet and the bayonet sting, so that your enemy suffers from his aggressions and thirst for war, so that he is dissuaded from further conflict.  or, if this cannot be done, (and, given the demographics of arabia, and the blood lusts of islam, this may not be possible), then you must kill him in sufficient numbers so that his ability to wage future war is gravely impaired, both in men and materiel.)

for, the history of war teaches one irreducible and unpleasant truth.  you must kill your enemies soldiers.  one at a time, if you eschew nukes.  and, the only way this is to be done is by infantry.  and, to do this, your infantry must be close enough to the enemy that he is capable of striking back.

this is why, if you are to minimize casualties to your own troops, (and you owe them that, don't you), you must engage in such warfare viciously and enthusiastically.  there should be no such thing as a fair fight, when it comes to killing.  (you owe that to your troops, don't you?)

this lesson, i fear, the israeli's refuse to adopt.

war in the middle east may never end.  but, it is guaranteed to never end, if israel never wages it.

john jay @  11.23.2011

why extradite some schlubs ... why not extradite obama and holder, and the directors of a.t.f. and the f.b.i.? ...

this from the "news" section at theo spark's blog, www.theospark.net, tuesday 22 november 2011, indicating that the mexican government is just a little wigged over the illegal shipment of guns into mexico via obama & holder's "brainchild," known as fast and furious.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/11/mexico_attorney_general_wants_us_gun_walkers_extradited.html

 

i've suggested that this is a possible course of action available to the mexican government, this suggestion going back a long time.  the fact is, that obama, holder & minions conspired to violate the law of mexico by lawlessly shipping guns there.

the only thing that i can see is that obama and holder are not yet named.  let's see how far this goes.

john jay @ 11.22.2011

social media ... as my luck goes, i just don't have any friends with nubile young titties ... * sigh * ...

the social media ... leaves me a bit cold.  i just don't get it.  i don't understand its appeal, ... , kind of along the lines of a very well thumbed "yellow pages," in my estimation.

i have a "facebook" account, and a "linkedin" account, and i cannot say that i've warmed to either.  i just don't get them.  they seem oriented towards building "herds" that one gets to "count" over and over, when "messages" are sent: its sole function seems to be not having to enter email addresses for broadsides, a sort of quick & easy self promotion.  i would assume high priced call girls love facebook, linkedin, easy to update price lists and schedules, i suppose.

i just don't get all "a'twitter" over them, i suppose.  not the call girls either, i guess.

now, i have belonged to some small chat rooms that i thought were fun and informative, and people actually discussed ideas, concepts and explored the topics and considerations raised by same.  i see absolutely none of that in facebook and linkedin, ... , it just self promotion, the intellectual equivalent of watching the oscars night after night, people preening into the blinding spotlight.

"look at me," "look at him, looking at me," that sort of thing.

i just delete email my notifications from linkedin & facebook.  quite frankly, if an email is not from a friend, or doesn't involve looking at nubile young titties, i am just not very interested.  and, no, as my luck would have it, i just don't have any friends w/ nubile young titties.  *sigh*  at least, not that i am familiar with.

i am afraid i am just an old curmudgeon, that time has passed by.

john jay @ 11.22.2011

p.s.  and, in the "interest" of candor, (whatever in the hell that might be), no old ones gone south, either.

wouldn't it be rich, if the rifle used to shoot at the white house were far more capable than an ak-47?

whoa, nelly!!

we must take a fresh perspective of mr. oscar ramiro ortega-hernandez, and be very cautious of labeling him a crazy person because of statements attributable to him, and his appearance.

he may be distinctly more calculating, and a good deal less crazily haphazard, then earlier presumed.

why do i say this?

well, my assumption that mr. ortega-hernandez was a hapless & deranged twit was based upon the choice of weapons supposedly used to shoot at the white house, this weapon described in the media as an ak-47 type or variant, the cartridge used in such a weapon being the 7.62x39mm russian assault rifle round.

the ak-47 is designed for urban close quarters combat, and the close battlefield, and the cartridge is described as an intermediate round with a useful combat range of 250 to 350 meters or so: oh, it may kill you quite dead indeed if you are hit with it at greater ranges, but that happening really means that you've had a bad day, and your luck has run sour, as this happening is likely to be less than purposeful.

bad bad ju ju, or shit house luck, if this happens.  in other words.

so, for a person to choose this weapon and this caliber to shoot at a target with any serious intention of hitting the same on a regular basis at over 800 meters does call into serious question his judgment, and yes, his sanity.

and, as it turns out, that is not the weapon nor the caliber that mr. ortega-hernandez either chose or used to shoot at the white house, as the media said.  it turns out, as apparently revealed in the government affidavits at mr. ortega-hernandez's preliminary appearance in federal court, that the rifle used was a romanian variant of the soviet dragunov semi-automatic rifle.  http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/21/justice/dc-white-house-suspect-hearing/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_cnn .  (3rd paragraph from bottom.)  the rifle used is a romanian cuigur armory variant of the soviet dragunov, http://www.dragunov.net/romanian_psl.html , and, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PSL_(rifle) , and it fires the russian 7.62x54mmR cartridge, first promulgated when the russian military still worked for the czars.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62%C3%9754mmR .

the "dragunov" type rifle is not meant for close order combat, rather it is meant for engagement of a target far more distant than the usual urban target, or infantry support of armor, in which the ak-47 is usually brought to bear.  by contrast, the dragunov rifle is intended for moderate to fairly long range sniping, and usually fulfills the function of a rifle used by a squad marksman or a sniper.  and, the cartridge used, the venerable 7.62x54mmR, though a bit "outmoded" in some respects, remains a front line cartridge in the russian army to this day, and has a performance level roughly comparable to the 7.62x51mm nato (.308 winchester).  the 7.62mm nato, for instance, is currently in use by almost all western military and civilian police forces to this day, and quite likely will remain so for a very long time, in just the same roles as the 7.62x54mmR is used by the ruskies.

both the 7.62mm nato and the 7.62x54mmR are, moreover, genuine 1,000 meter cartridges, and any edge the nato round has over the russian round is due to the precision workmanship in nato rifle and ammunition fabrication.  the russian round, and the rifles used to fire it, can be plenty accurate if enough attention to tolerance and fit and the like go into their production.  the finns, and the russians, have done quite well using the russian cartridge in international sport shooing competitions, and the dragunov remains in use against american soldiers in iraq and afghanistan.

(with another fellow's rifle, & he using his "dope" to dial in "the shooting solution" in his super sniper brand scope, i fired a five shot group at a measured 731 yards that measured 3.25" plus in diameter, with the 7.62mm nato in a remington model 700 bolt action rifle.  the rifle had a bipod on the front of the stock, and a pad was used on the butt stock to control elevation in the sighting of the rifle, and all i did was shoot the rifle after it was handed to me at the bench.  my friend, using the same rifle and his own 175 grain handloads, fired a 2.00" plus group, at the same distance.  a measured 731 yards.

now, the "dragunov" usually doesn't have this cutting edge precision, but a good shooting dragunov at 731 yards might have the ability to shoot into 7-10"'s plus or so, and that is plenty serviceable.  indeed.)

the choice of this weapon and this caliber by mr. ortega-hernandez vitiates any assumption that he was only capable of the most random order of chance in hitting anything at the distances involved, ... , e.g., that he was capable only of a "shit house luck" order of probability in hitting anything, ... , and rather compels an assumption that he was rather purposeful in his designs, and that he had a pretty good chance of hitting something he aimed at over an 800 yard distance.

if his rifle were fitted with the usual issue optical sight, possessed of the usual soviet target grade illuminated reticule, and if he had worked with the rifle at all, then we must assume that over 800 yards he had a very fair chance at hitting what he was shooting at.

a person with equipment that gives him a fair chance of performing his chosen task must be viewed in an entirely different light than a person who didn't have a tinker's chance in hades of completing an intended act.  the later is foolhardy, the former speaks of well considered design.  and, intelligence.  and purpose.  and, finally, capability.

given this, i think that in the end, we will find mr. oscar ramiro ortega-hernandez a far more capable, dedicated, and skilled adversary than his seeming buffoonery as depicted by the media might indicate.  in short, i think that in the searches that will follow, the government might well indeed find a well worn volume of "the diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders," commonly referred to as the "dsmr-iv-tr," (for "text revision"), by mental health professionals in the trade.

in short, i think he designed his defence in anticipation of the act.

based on the selection of this weapon, i do not think it likely that he is crazy.  working on a budget, maybe, but not crazy.

ahem, ... .  not by a long shot.

john jay @ 11.21.2011

 

p.s.  reconnaissance of the battlefield, in depth.  just testing the perimeter defenses.