BREAKING News – Major Terrorist Atrocity in Paris, Just Weeks until COP21

[snip -over the top -mod]

Or body bags, at the very least.

[snip -over the top -mod]

Wriies Mike the Morlock:

My country is the only one to ever use nuclear weapons. Not test them use them. It shows how far we will go. While I fear when my Nation is angered others should crap their pants in utter terror. We have a overlong fuse but once it is lit….

Yep.

The American way of street and town fighting did not resemble that of other armies. To Americans, flesh and blood and lives have always been more precious than sticks and stones, however assembled. An American commander, faced with taking the Louvre from a defending enemy, unquestionably would have blown it apart or burned it down without hesitation if such would save the life of one of his men. And he would be acting in complete accord with American ideals and ethics in doing so. Already, in the Korean War, American units were proceeding to destroy utterly enemy-held towns and villages rather than engage in the costly business of reducing them block by block with men and bayonets, as did European armies. If bombing and artillery would save lives, even though they destroyed sites of beauty and history, saving lived obviously had preference. And already foreign observers with the United States Army – not ROK’s – were beginning to criticize such tactics.
Observers from France and Britain, realizing that war was also highly possible in their own part of the world, were disturbed at the thought of a ground defense of their homelands. For the United States Army, according to its history and doctrine, would choose the lives of its men over the continued existence of storied cathedrals. These observers wrote news releases – and soon Frank Munoz [a company-grade infantry officer] could get no artillery on the enemy assembling in plain sight in the villages below him. When he asked Battalion to fire on the village, and burn it down, Battalion replied it could not. Fortunately, such orders in Korea were soon changed.

— T.R. Fehrenbach, This Kind of War (1963)

Mike the Morlock writes:

oh and from an earlier thread ..do you have any Grey Poupon?

But of course. However, I’ve always held that Eloi tartare is best served with nước mắm.
And, of course, fava beans and a nice chianti.

If he [Franklin Delano Roosevelt] became convinced tomorrow that coming out for cannibalism would get him the votes he needs so sorely, he would begin fattening a missionary in the White House yard come Wednesday.

— H.L. Mencken, The American Mercury (March 1936)

Have not been exposed to nước mắm.
Its on my list.
michael

Two words: Monte Cassino.
Of course the British weren’t shy about blowing up and burning down historic architecture, either. But that was RAF Bomber Command. Monty, the ground forces CO, however approved the destruction of Caen during the invasion of Normandy.

No, it wasn’t. That’s a Soviet propaganda lie. The KGB came up with the line, “the perfect capitalist weapon, which kills people but leaves property intact”. They had to stop it because it would stop them if they decided to pour through the Fulda Gap.
It was invented as an anti-tank weapon, to stop massed Soviet armored attacks with a minimum of damage to German towns. It’s not a bomb. It’s an artillery or short-range rocket projectile, ie a tactical, battlefield weapon, never intended to be used on cities, but in the open space between built-up areas.

TA,
So you missed out on the propaganda war unleashed by the KGB against the “neutron bomb” in the 1970s.
The low-yield, tactical nuke arty rounds of the ’60s (which you presumably stored) would have worked against invading Red Army Tank Armies, but only at the cost of destroying some of the German villages we were trying to save, especially in your AO.
Sam Cohen’s ERW rode to the rescue. Naturally the ghoul Andropov had to stop this game-changer, so launched a furious propaganda campaign which the useful idiot of the Euroweenie Left naturally fell for hook, line and sinker.

rah wrote:
November 15, 2015 at 4:41 am
“Winter of 1988 the SF team I was serving on did a little training exercise right in that area near Archfeld. The first phase was observation of border without being detected. The second phase was an unassisted escape and evasion exercise. The first phase lasted a week and the E. German border guards with their towers, fences, dogs, and helicopters apparently had no idea we were there until we let them know by openly showing ourselves the day we left.”
That’s funny. In 1968, my small unit of four men was out in the wilderness around Wildflicken, doing our thing, and we had a tent pitched out in the middle of nowhere, with three feet of snow all around.
One morning, I was the first one out of the tent and I stood there for a moment just looking at all the snow, not suspecting anything, and then not 15 feet away from me, an armed man in a snowsuit stood up, and whistled and another 10 or 12 men stood up out of the snow all around the tent, and then they all marched off through the woods without ever saying a word.
It turns out they were German commadoes and they were practicing their stealth movements on me and my guys! It was quite a surprise.
TA

but soros said the borders have to be open

I suspect it’s because Trump is a YUUUGE threat to globalism.

How about a reward for No. 8?

dbstealy, I have to let you know, I have the feeling I am being told exactly what I want to here.

This one ended up here. Something definitely wrong.

No “Repeal Obamacare” as No. 1.

The Jewish interest being,…. what ?

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/11/13/breaking-news-major-terrorist-atrocity-in-paris-just-weeks-until-cop21/#comment-2072557

Happily, we no longer need nukes to inflict major punishment. We still need them to deter their use against us, but that’s about it.
Israel would have to use nukes against deep, hardened targets in Iran, because they don’t have bombers, but we can use conventional penetrating ordnance. (I guess they could try to deliver 30,000 pound bombs with C-130s, but Herky Birds are a lot easier to shoot down than a B-2.)

S-300s or the Iranian equivalent, which they claim to have made, would disappear on Night One of any bombing campaign. They can’t track stealth aircraft anyway. B-2 is a stealth aircraft.
Iran is a sitting duck for the USAF and USN.

Bang on Mike!

Not as bad as it sounds.
What they went to were “Enhanced Radiation Warheads”, which Soviet propaganda labeled “Neutron Bombs”. In fact, they are very low yield artillery projectiles designed to be used in between German villages (which are usually more than a km apart) against Soviet armored battalions. The fast neutrons penetrate the thin top armor of tanks and kill their crews (eventually). It’s the ultimate hard penetrator round, better than DU. The Red Army tried to cancel ERWs out with anti-neutron armor, but it wouldn’t have helped much.
The idea was that Germany had the right to use nukes on its own territory in self-defense. The risk was that the Russians wouldn’t see it that way, and use offensive tactical nukes on Germany’s soil, too.

Conventional explosions.

[snip those comments have been removed – mod]
What the world needs is a revival of the right to armed self defense for all people. Disarmed people are sitting ducks, and that is not a political comment; it is simply an established fact.

Writes tomdesabla:

What the world needs is a revival of the right to armed self defense for all people. Disarmed people are sitting ducks, and that is not a political comment; it is simply an established fact.

More properly, it would be recognition “of the right to armed self defense.” Such a right is unalienable, and cannot be forsworn by the individual human being. It needs no “revival,” merely recognition that it is being violated – infringed – by the agents of government whenever these thugs in public office so much as mention “gun control.”

One cannot legislate the maniacs off the street … these maniacs can only be shut down by an armed citizenry. Indeed bad things can happen in nations where the citizenry is armed, but not as bad as those which seem to be threatening our disarmed citizenry in this country at this time.

— Lt. Col. Jeff Cooper, USMC

In reply to Tucci78.

Dunno if my brother would want me to use his name. He’s an aviation author in AZ who also writes on guns and was a high level IPSC and SASS competitor.
Don’t think he ever accompanied Jeff on safari, but went to the same places. Promoted the Scout Rifle concept from the git-go. Our dad was a Marine aviator in the Big One. Dunno how many .45s we went through, but both my brothers loaded countless rounds on Dillon presses. When he worked for Champlin Aviation Museum (aircraft collection sold to Seattle; gun collection broken up), the AZ brother also shot Dillon’s Quad Browning .50s and his aircraft-mounted miniguns.

Whilst I understand that carrying a gun might make you feel safer, and if you carry a gun you might consider that you have a degree over any situation,, but unfortunately, the fact is that violence only begets violence, and the more weapons that are available to the public, the more killings that take place.
How many have died in schools and in college campuses these past 12 months in the US? We don’t have that problem in Europe, especially not in the UK where gun control is at its tightest.
See The Washington Post article on gun ownership and gun killings per capital. It states:
“The United States has the highest gun ownership rate in the world and the highest per capita rate of firearm-related murders of all developed countries.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/nation/gun-homicides-ownership/table/
Of course there are other countries far more violent than the US, particularly some in South America, and lawlessness in and around Mexico City, but there is no doubt that gun ownership net overall poses a greater risk to the population.

davideisenstadt remonstrates

…actually read the study..it omitted states with very lenient gun control laws, which nonetheless had very low rates of violent crimes because the authors felt that since there was so little crime in those states, that the crime rate statistics were “unreliable”
really, read some John Lott.
CCW rates are negatively correlated with violent crime…that is, the greater proportion of civilians who have CCWs, the lower the rate of violent crime.

The work of John Lott to which you might principally direct your correspondent is his More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws (1998, 2000, 2010), though his The Bias Against Guns: Why Almost Everything You’ve Heard about Gun Control Is Wrong (2003) is assuredly worthwhile as well. In the former title, Lott drew upon F.B.I. crime data – the single most unimpeachable nationwide dataset on the subject, which can be parsed by state, county, and city – to run statistical analyses of crime data in order to develop a measure of the effects of eleven different types of “gun control” laws on crime rates in those jurisdictions.
Another interesting title to consider is Stephen P. Hallbrook’s That Every Man Be Armed: The Evolution of a Constitutional Right (1984, 1994, 2000) which “…traces the Second Amendment’s origins from ancient Greece and Rome to 18th century France and England through the American Revolution, ratification of the Constitution and adoption of the Bill of Rights” in order to support Halbrook’s premise …the right to bear arms is in indispensable form of individual protection against both violent crime and government infringement of human liberties.”

In the late 1960s, violent crime in America had exploded to a point where one individual in three was pretty much guaranteed to be raped, mugged, or otherwise harmed by criminals, who ran no risk, because self-defense was socially out of style, and even illegal in some places. This gave rise to movies — which is how our culture works out its problems — like _Death Wish_ and _Dirty Harry_ in which ordinary people, failed by the authorities, took their own protection into their hands. In real life, they disregarded the “advice” of those authorities and took martial arts lessons, and bought guns.
At that time, Orlando, Florida was experiencing a sort of rape epidemic. Some genuine genius in the city government abandoned all of the conventional non-working counter-measures such things tend to provoke, and suggested that women show up for free, police-conducted shooting lessons in the park. They expected 400. They got 4000. When news of this got to the national level, the epidemic ceased. After years of stupid political debate, Florida made it microscopically easier to carry a gun legally, and violent crime declined in double digits.
This trend has continued, and the downtrend in crime has become a national phenomenon. A growing handful of states have even followed Vermont’s example, and eliminated all restrictions on carrying guns. Over the 45-year duration of this social revolution, violent crime in America has fallen 40 percent. The authorities and their media whores hate this, because it means there is no real need for them in society. Most violent crime survives in the inner-city-centers controlled by leftists.

— L. Neil Smith, “Paris: The High Price of Willful Ignorance” (15 November 2015)

BTW, cremation is not permissible in Islam.
Some US Marines got in trouble when I was in Afghanistan for burning the bodies of dead Taliban, filmed by an Australian journalist of my acquaintance.
It was summer. Afghanistan is hot. They couldn’t take the bodies into town. Burying them would have exposed the Marines to hostile fire.