XBradTC

In 2008, the Bush administration, along with the “six powers,” was negotiating with Iran concerning that country’s nuclear arms program. The Bush administration’s objective was to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. On July 20, 2008, the New York Times headlined: “Nuclear Talks With Iran End in a Deadlock.” What caused the talks to founder? The Times explained:

Iran responded with a written document that failed to address the main issue: international demands that it stop enriching uranium. And Iranian diplomats reiterated before the talks that they considered the issue nonnegotiable.

The Iranians held firm to their position, perhaps because they knew that help was on the way, in the form of a new president. Barack Obama had clinched the Democratic nomination on June 3. At some point either before or after that date, but prior to the election, he secretly let the Iranians know that he would be much easier to bargain with than President Bush.

via How Barack Obama Undercut Bush Administration’s Nuclear Negotiations With Iran | Power Line.

Since the Logan Act and treason have been bandied about lately, where are all the leftists and libs calling for the immediate imprisonment and execution of Barack Obama?

The fact that he had weapons in his possession was discovered during the investigation of his phony finery. That’s all I’m asking for – sure it would be nice if he’d been convicted for stolen valor, but more importantly, the crimes that he was also committing were discovered because of his play-acting. If prosecutors everywhere could take a lesson away from this case, I’d like that lesson to be that valor thieves are almost always guilty of something else. Investigations of stolen valor will undoubtedly turn up something else that would get a criminal off of the street.

via Rahn sentenced : This ain’t Hell, but you can see it from here.

Emphasis mine. Stolen Valor doesn’t happen in a vacuum. These so-called people are always working an angle. Many are scammers of one sort or another, trading on the general goodwill most grant to veterans to lull their victims into a false sense of security.

Lawmakers on Capitol Hill today voiced concerns about the U.S. Marine Corps’ new amphibious vehicle, questioning the service’s selection of wheels over the venerable tracked design.

Marine Corps leaders testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee’s Subcomittee on Seapower to discuss modernization efforts in the proposed Fiscal 2016 budget request.

The Corps has identified its new Amphibious Combat Vehicle as its top modernization priority. The effort is set to replace most of Marine Amphibious Assault Vehicles that are well over 40 years old.

via Marines Defend New Wheeled Amphibious Vehicle Design | DoD Buzz.

The Marines are somewhat at fault here after futzing around with the ECV for 20 odd years. But Congress isn’t helping by sticking its nose in now. Does anyone really honestly believe that –
Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, said she was worried that first version of the wheeled ACV will be less capable since it is designed to carry 10 infantrymen instead of 14 like the current AAV.-
knows jack-all about armored fighting vehicles, amphibious lift, mechanized and  mounted maneuver?

Essentially, at this point, handwringing in Congress takes us back to the days before the entry into service of the MV-22. So many people worried about minor issues with its performance that they completely overlooked the problem that the CH-46 faced. High accident rates, abysmal maintenance rates, terribly short range and crippling vulnerability issues.

Well guess what? At this point, recapitalizing the amphibious assault lift for the Marines is rapidly approaching a crisis. You can buy a relatively cheap increment now, and get 80% of the performance you want, or you can risk hundreds of Marine lives now and in the near term in vehicles that give you 50% of the performance you want, in the hopes that you’ll be able to spend a stupendous amount of money in the future for a vehicle that gives you 90% of the performance you want.

(Reuters) – Seven Marines and four soldiers were presumed dead after an Army Black Hawk helicopter crashed on a nighttime training mission off Florida’s Gulf coast, where U.S. military officials continued a search-and-rescue operation on Wednesday afternoon.

Some human remains had washed ashore, said a spokeswoman for Eglin Air Force Base in north Florida.

Officials did not immediately release information on what caused the crash involving the Marines and four members of the Louisiana National Guard. Heavy fog was reported around the time the helicopter was reported missing around 8:30 p.m. on Tuesday. Fog hampered the search effort on Wednesday.

via Search continues in military copter crash off Florida that left 11 presumed dead | Reuters.

At its best, training in military operations is fun, but always risky. In an instant, things can go wrong, people can make a mistake. In fact, things always go wrong, and people always make mistakes. Usually, the repercussions are minor. Sometimes, the outcome is worse.

Eleven members gone, presumably, just like that. Their families and friends lives changed in an instant. Their friends and comrades in arms in their units shaken and similarly grieving. Beyond that, those units will face merciless scrutiny to see if there were shortcomings that could have prevented these deaths. Maybe. Maybe not. Either way, it’s an uncomfortable proceeding. All while still having to train to accomplish the unit mission, even while in pain, short of men, and short of equipment.

Paul Bracken, a professor of political science at Yale, says that the threat of a nuclear Iran is already realigning the balance of power across the globe. With Russia and China’s growing influence in the Middle East, a nuclear Iran threatens U.S. influence in the region and, by proxy, internationally.

According to Bracken, we are living in a second nuclear age, in which the rapid technological development of nuclear arsenals has led to the erosion of non-proliferation pacts and declining confidence that the U.S. can protect its allies from nuclear attacks, especially Israel, allied Arab states, and Japan.

via A Second Nuclear Age – The Takeaway.

Bracken’s book was pretty good, and lays out the obvious advantages of a nuclear arsenal, beyond fighting nuclear war. It allows you to be far more obnoxious than you otherwise could be, and constrains your opponents from taking drastic steps against you.
That’s particularly true if you’re seen as a non-rational state, such as, say, Iran.