Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Only Democrats have agency, apparently.

The poor and middle-class pay taxes, the rich pay accountants, the wealthy pay politicians.

Something needs to be done about our bogus SCOTUS.

There are consequences to being an arrogant, sullen prick.

I like political parties that aren’t owned by foreign adversaries.

No offense, but this thread hasn’t been about you for quite a while.

No one could have predicted…

Republican obstruction dressed up as bipartisanship. Again.

Meanwhile over at truth Social, the former president is busy confessing to crimes.

They love authoritarianism, but only when they get to be the authoritarians.

I did not have this on my fuck 2024 bingo card.

Putin must be throwing ketchup at the walls.

“I was told there would be no fact checking.”

One of our two political parties is a cult whose leader admires Vladimir Putin.

I have other things to bitch about but those will have to wait.

When we show up, we win.

This must be what justice looks like, not vengeful, just peaceful exuberance.

You are either for trump or for democracy. Pick one.

Ron DeSantis, the grand wizard, oops, governor of FL.

An unpunished coup is a training exercise.

Thanks to your bullshit, we are now under siege.

The republican ‘Pastor’ of the House is an odious authoritarian little creep.

It’s all just conspiracy shit beamed down from the mothership.

This fight is for everything.

You are here: Home / Open Threads / Shots Fired

Shots Fired

by | 160 Comments

This post is in: 

Heh:

Wonder who he is talking about.

Forgot to take pictures of the dinner last night, but we do have a photo of a slightly tipsy Holly loving on Tam’s dogs:

Tonight mom, dad, my cousin Jody, and neighbor Taylor came over to watch the Steelers game and have Tacosagna, which is exactly what it sounds like- layers of tortilla with taco/burrito fixings baked like a lasagne. Also made guacamole, salsa, a corn/bean salad, and some other stuff.

How bout you all?

Reader Interactions

160Comments

  3. 3.

    Gravenstone

    Just seeing the thread title, my first thought was, ‘literal or metaphorical?’ Unduly pleased for some reason to see it’s the latter.

  6. 6.

    Omnes Omnibus

    Tacosagna, which is exactly what it sounds like- layers of tortilla with taco/burrito fixings baked like a lasagne.

    All I can say is that I hope it is better than Stouffer’s Mexican Lasagna, which is inedible.

  7. 7.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    @Major Major Major Major: Yeah, I could think of three or four nightmare scenarios in the moment before I saw the quoted text

    If McCain succeeds in taking down trump as his Commendatore farewell aria (think I’m using the opera references correctly), I will forgive him for a lot

  8. 8.

    Mike in NC

    So proud to have seen that picture of fucking Trump in the Oval Office with shitbird Ted Nugent. We are not worthy.

  12. 12.

    Adam L Silverman

    https://www.amazon.com/AWOL-Unexcused-Absence-Americas-Military/dp/0060888601

    In America, it is increasingly the case that the people who make, support, or protest military policy have no military experience. As Kathy Roth-Douquet and Frank Schaeffer assert in this groundbreaking work, the gap between the “all-volunteer military” and the rest of us is widening, and our country faces a dangerous lack of understanding between those in power and those who defend our way of life.

    Editorial Reviews
    From Publishers Weekly
    In this impassioned, convincing manifesto, Schaffer (Keeping Faith) and Roth-Douquet, a former Clinton White House and Department of Defense staffer, call for class integration of the military. Their arguments are personal: Roth-Douquet is a military wife and Schaffer’s son is a marine, and the authors fall within the demographic they critique. Alternately narrating, they relate their experiences with the military and detail the liabilities of the present all-volunteer “corporate” force: the hindered policy-making ability of a civilian leadership without significant ties to the military, the weakening of the armed forces themselves, and “the sense of lost community and the threat to democracy that results when a society accepts a situation that is inherently unfair.” While Schaffer proposes a lottery draft and Roth-Douquet suggests the military “convince” people to sign up, they both call for all young people to submit to some form of national civilian service. Though the authors occasionally exaggerate (“we are fast approaching the day when no one in Congress and no president will have served or have any children serving”), they make a clarion call in the face of increasingly controversial foreign policy and a military stretched thin. (May 9)

  16. 16.

    MelissaM

    A day of cooking here: turned two pecks of second apples into sauce, made pie dough (pie to come later), some banana and dried fruit & ginger muffins, then dinner (lamb brats, fried potatoes, roasted squash, applesauce.) This is the last year for the orchard whence came the apples, which is too bad. Where can you get a peck of seconds for $5?? But the owners want to truly retire.

    I’ve made a tacosagne as well, but called it taco glop. Your name sounds more enticing.

  17. 17.

    fuckwit

    I got a better idea.. how about we… stop trying to dominate the whole fucking planet with our miiltary presence.

    Then again, most of the countries that don’t go around doing that kind of shit, also have a draft. Maybe there’s something to this draft idea.

  19. 19.

    dmsilev

    McCain really holds a grudge, doesn’t he? Kind of ironic that he ended up with a deep and abiding hatred of two diametrically opposite Presidents, for wildly different reasons (Obama had the temerity to beat McCain; Trump is, well, Trump).

  22. 22.

    dmsilev

    @Corner Stone: He’s still a Republican, don’t get me wrong. But, witness his spiking of the health care bill, milking the drama as much as possible until the very last minute and then knifing McConnell and by extension Trump.

  23. 23.

    Corner Stone

    @dmsilev: Sure. But IMO waiting for the last minute to give the thumbs down isn’t actual leadership. He can spite Trump all he likes. We need someone in the GOP who is going to knife that fucker in the guts while looking right at him.

  27. 27.

    Schlemazel

    I worked very had to get Congress to end the draft when I was a kid in the 60s and early 70s. I mistakenly thought it would help reduce the ability of future Presidents to make unnecessary wars. I am older now & see that I was very wrong & the all volunteer army is a disaster. We need a draft, sadly.

    BTW – this did not get a lot of notice but hair furor signed an executive order this weekend giving the SecDef the ability to call up the ready reserve if he feels the need. That sounds like something that would be very helpful if one were planning an invasion of some large Middle Eastern country.

  30. 30.

    geg6

    Much as I hate to say it, for now I’ll taken Country Last as an ally. It sucks to be in this space, but desperate times means desperate measures.

    Speaking of which, I know there is lot of Anthony Bourdain hate around here, but his latest installment of Parts Unknown on Pittsburgh is beautiful, lyrical and philosophical. He gets us. That’s all you can ask in a medium such as his.

  31. 31.

    Smedley Darlington Prunebanks (Formerly Mumphrey, et al.)

    @Corner Stone:

    I think that’s what we’re missing here. Yes, Corker is saying things and McCain is saying things and that’s all better than nothing, but what we really need is one of these Republicans to just stand up and say what they all know, and say it outright: Trump is unfit for office and he needs to go. They’re talking about stability and adult day care and bone spurs, and that’s cute, but somebody needs to say he’s unfit, that he’s a fucking disgrace to the country and to humanity, and say it loudly, plainly, and ideally, to his fucking face with a whole room full of onlookers and the cameras running. I don’t know what these shitheels are waiting for. Yes, maybe it’ll cost somebody a political career, but it isn’t like there’s no shortage of people who could just as well give it up for the privilege of being remembered for all time as the one who helped put an end to this cheap-ass would be Napoleon. For Christ’s sake, Corker himself is retiring next year and McCain is dying. To quote a well known assclown, what the hell do they have to lose?

  32. 32.

    Adam L Silverman

    @Schlemazel: SecDef already had that authority. What the President’s order did was to restate (extend?) the post 9-11 state of emergency because of threat of terrorist attacks, reaffirmed the DOD’s and the Services’ authority to activate the individual ready reserve and recall general officers/flag officers back to active duty, and then issued an order allowing the Chief of Staff of the Air Force to recall up to 1,000 retired pilots if necessary. Prior to that that order being given the Air Force could only recall 25 retired personnel per year. Same with the other services.

    Even if we recall the individual ready reserve, and recall some flag officers, and recall some pilots it is still not enough to generate the forces that would be required to fight wars in Iraq or North Korea, let alone in both places at the same time. And that’s not counting that as soon as we were to get militarily involved with one or both of those countries that Russia would attempt to take the Baltic states and other areas in Eastern Europe he wants by force. And we have NATO commitments we won’t be able to fulfill in those locations.

    As I’ve written here on several occasions, we are at least one US Army Corps, two Army Divisions, and four Army brigade combat teams too light for what we’re doing right now. Adding a full scale war someone where else would require a significant build out.

  34. 34.

    Steeplejack

    Just got home. What’s this pestilential cloud hanging over the Falcons-Patriots game? (Literal, not metaphorical.)

  35. 35.

    Schlemazel

    @Adam L Silverman:
    you can say that is not enough to fight a war in Iran or Nork but that does not mean the tangerine tantrum knows that, or would listen to anyone who told him that. Why do it unless you foresaw a need?

  39. 39.

    Adam L Silverman

    @Mike J: General officers/flag officers can always be recalled. Retirees below those ranks can be, but there’s a limit per year per Service. And then there’s the Individual Ready Reserve, which, if I’m recalling correctly, requires one be subject to recall for 7 years after one resigns their commission as an officer.

  41. 41.

    Jeffro

    Slow cooker chicken mole’ and grilled street corn here tonight- MMM!

    Also made a spicy sweet potato and lentil stew to enjoy for lunches over the next few days

    Tomorrow night is a beef burrito skillet dish and then I’m taking a few days off.

  43. 43.

    Gin & Tonic

    @Steeplejack: It’s been unseasonably warm here the last couple of days, so getting ground fog at this time of night when the temp drops is not unusual. I’m not at (nor watching) the game, but assume that’s what you’re talking about.

  44. 44.

    Mike J

    @Jeffro: So just today I learn Martha Stewart has a slow cooker cookbook out and now you’re telling me about slow mole? Is that just a sloth? Sorry, slothé.

    Point us at a recipe?

  45. 45.

    Omnes Omnibus

    @Mike J: No, most officers serve on a seven year deal. What they don’t serve on active duty is served on inactive (subject to recall).

  46. 46.

    Adam L Silverman

    @Mike J: But you have to understand that the Individual Ready Reserve requires one to do nothing. There’s no annual training. No annual fitness tests. Nothing. It is unclear, and I’m not going to look for info/data on it now, what the estimates are on the fitness of anyone in the Individual Ready Reserve to actually serve if they were recalled.

  47. 47.

    Seth Owen

    I think calls to reinstate the draft are never going to go anywhere and wouldn’t solve the problem even if it were.

    Fundamentally the era of mass mobilized armies is over. Every military trend is for fewer troops being needed overall. Our shortfalls tend to be in specific narrow areas such as riflemen and pilots, but technology ensures overall numbers will never need to be in the millions again. Given that reality, any draft will necessarily only involve a relatively small number of people and won’t change the reality that the vast majority of people will not have first hand military experience.

    Add to that the historical reality that the draft has never been popular in Anglo-American military history and has only been grudgingly accepted during authentic national emergencies. Addressing some abstract concerns about civil-military relations doesn’t begin to approach the kind of crisis that could overcome our historical distaste for the draft.

    Any sort of ‘national service’ in addition to or in lieu of military service also doesn’t address the civil-military divide and would necessarily be expensive and inefficient.

    To the extent there is a solution I think it involves some serious scaling back of our unending military expeditions, more emphasis on service in the reserves and national guard and more incentives to increase the diversity of the force so it appeals to more than just military families. The draft is a dead end.

  48. 48.

    Mike J

    @Adam L Silverman: Yes, but this talk was all started by Trump wanting to recall pilots, who won’t be current, at a minimum, in type. Isn’t it close to where we were last week, just with an added dash of Trump stupidity?

  52. 52.

    Adam L Silverman

    @Seth Owen: Explain to me how you fight a war on the Korean peninsula with only three Army Corps? When two of them are already allocated to CENTCOM – either deployed forward or preparing to deploy forward. And they’re not even staffed at 100%.

  54. 54.

    Seth Owen

    @Adam L Silverman: Interestingly, I was called out of the IRR for the war in Iraq. I had been in troop units relatively recently, so I was deploysble. One other officer had recent troop experience. Most of the rest in my group were former West Pointers who had been offered some sort of buyout which involved accepting service in the IRR while they waited to qualify for their 20. Neither they nor the Army had ever considered the possibility they might actually be called up short of WW3.

    Only about a dozen of us, out of about 40, who were recalled actually showed up, which probably shows the biggest problem with the IRR. Without a connection to a troop unit the Army tended to lose track of you. I am pretty sure the no-shows never realized they had been mobilized.

  55. 55.

    Adam L Silverman

    @Gin & Tonic: Let’s put it this way, I emailed a former student two days ago, who’d retired last year, and asked him how he was enjoying his retirement? He’s subject to that recall if they ever implement it.

  57. 57.

    catclub

    @Smedley Darlington Prunebanks (Formerly Mumphrey, et al.):

    Yes, maybe it’ll cost somebody a political career, but it isn’t like there’s no shortage of people who could just as well give it up for the privilege of being remembered for all time as the one who helped put an end to this cheap-ass would be Napoleon.

    Except what you are saying is contradicting itself: If saying he is unfit will lead to him being ousted, then the person who says it first will be lauded as a hero.

    However, if saying it leads to nothing, then that persons’ career is over. And I think they are concerned about this second possibility.

    I think Trump backers will simply say: The nation has not collapsed over the past ten months, so there is really no problem. He is fit enough.
    So simply saying ‘unfit’ means very little.

  58. 58.

    Seth Owen

    @Adam L Silverman: Obviously you don’t. But I don’t see any proposals being floated around to increase the Army by anywhere near that much. There is undoubtedly a serious mismatch between our aspirations and our willingness to pay for it. But that’s a diffferent issue than bringing back the draft in order to give more Americans military experience.

  60. 60.

    Adam L Silverman

    @Seth Owen: Thanks for the info. That tracks with what I remember. When I was at USAWC I was on an examination committee for a student who’d done his research project on actually making the IRR a robust program. I think those 40 to 50 pages were the most I’ve ever read on the Individual Ready Reserve.

  62. 62.

    catclub

    @Seth Owen:

    while they waited to qualify for their 20. …

    … Without a connection to a troop unit the Army tended to lose track of you.

    strange, I bet you could be found via your retirement account.

  67. 67.

    Seth Owen

    @catclub: Maybe, although I’m not sure there was any systemic link between the mobilization bureaucracy and the retirement bureaucracy that could have exploited that information at the time. It wasn’t my situation so I don’t know the details of how it worked. It’s my recollection of what I was told by people more than 15 years ago. I had never even heard of such a thing and yet there they were, 8-10 people in the same boat. It was weird.

    I’m just giving the no-shows the benefit of the doubt. I have no reason to suspect they were ever even notified so I’m not going to accuse anyone of shirking.

  68. 68.

    Suzanne

    @Schlemazel:

    I am older now & see that I was very wrong & the all volunteer army is a disaster. We need a draft, sadly.

    I deeply oppose any sort of draft that would require someone to join the armed forces. I will not support a war with my labor that I don’t believe is moral or just. If the draft has some sort of civilian service option, like rebuilding infrastructure or service to the disadvantaged within the country, then I can get behind that. The idea of reinstituting a Vietnam-style draft is horrifying to me—a blatant violation of a person’s autonomy. If the military can’t find enough people willing to join up, then that should be a cue to our country that the cause isn’t compelling enough.

  71. 71.

    Another Scott

    @Adam L Silverman: It seems to me that the days of the US conquering a foe by sending in, say, 20 divisions of men, to grab and hold territory are over.

    There are too many Kalashnikovs, too many cheap and effective explosives, etc., etc. It’s too easy for an insurgency to rise and work to kill an occupying US force, with help from our adversaries. It’s the recipe for a never-ending conflict that we cannot win.

    Wars will be fought and won in the air and by breaking important logistics routes. If Kim wants to rule the remaining rubble of the DPRK, we should let him. We don’t need to have millions of bootsonaground there to protect the US or our allies.

    I certainly could be wrong, it seems to me that times have changed. Someone one said that the purpose of war is to kill people and break things. We are very good at doing that without being on the ground and seeing the “whites of their eyes”….

    :-(

    Rumsfeld told us all that the GOP is more than willing to go to war without enough people, without enough weapons and body armor, without international political support, without sensible logistics routes. Having too few divisions in the Army won’t stop a war from happening if Donnie says “go”.

    :-(

    My $0.02.

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  73. 73.

    Czanne

    Huh. Regarding previous thread, which I missed thanks to lovely people… (Who are really very lovely; sorry you flatlanders couldn’t join us.)

    There’s a quick rubric/test in trauma therapy called the Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) score. It’s a reliable screening tool for propensity to psychological trauma later in life (plus several autoimmune disorders and hey, early death, but that’s for another day…) The short version is a 10 question score, and anyone with a score over 4 should be considered vulnerable to PTSD.

    In that one excerpt, I identified 4 ACE events in Junior. Death of a caregiver, physical trauma from neglect, kidnapping and absence of parent. That’s not good.

    Not that it’s a call for mercy or forgiveness, because seriously, therapy was available, all of those children had enough money to walk away and restart their lives… but under #DutyToWarn: an adult’s behavior that leaves a child with an ACE+4 doesn’t mend without significant intervention. Which has never happened. And there are multiple children still within that adult’s orbit. (I’m not sure what we can do about it, but if the professional gossip is accurate, there are shrinks involved and working.)

  74. 74.

    Adam L Silverman

    @Mart: The PRC has an agreement in place. I have no idea what the current PRC leadership would do if the DPRK invoked it. At one level they have to respond, at least nominally, or be seen as faithless allies in their quest to ascend to at least regional hegemon and rule maker in the Asian-Pacific region. On the other hand it depends how annoyed they are by Kim Jong Un – as in did he do something stupid that warranted a response that required the PRC to get involved.

  75. 75.

    SWMBO

    @Mart: Perhaps this is irrelevant but I don’t think Tangerine Taint is going to do any more than bluff and bluster with NK. Xi explained it to Trump in less than 10 minutes. “Walmart will be without stock. You will not have cheap steel to build Trump Moscow. Jared and Ivanka will not get refinancing. We have larger armies, nukes and will defend NK per our treaty alliance. Don’t come at him, Bro. Have some beautiful cake.”

  76. 76.

    Repatriated

    @Adam L Silverman:

    Explain to me how you fight a war on the Korean peninsula with only three Army Corps?

    Nuclear weapons, and a callous disregard for both our allies’ populaces and for the the judgement of the rest of the world (and its consequences).

  77. 77.

    Adam L Silverman

    @Another Scott: Wars are fought on land. Because that is where people live. There can be an air component and a naval component, but war is ultimately about killing/capturing more of your opponents personnel and destroying or taking their territory so as to cause more harm than they can withstand. The US Air Force has been claiming for 60 years that they are all that is needed to win a war. And for 60 years they’ve been proven wrong over and over and over again. The US Air Force, and the air components of the US Navy and Marine Corps are excellent. But they are not sufficient to win a war. In the case of the DPRK, given the actual physical geography and the human geography, there is no way to win a war without significant, prolonged, and sustained amounts of Landpower. And that requires an Army.

  79. 79.

    ?BillinGlendaleCA

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    All I can say is that I hope it is better than Stouffer’s Mexican Lasagna, which is inedible.

    Add cheese and a high quality hot sauce.

    My Milky Way shoot tonight was a bust, I got there and found that I didn’t have the quick release for the tripod(turns out I found it in my camera bag when I got home). I did get a nice picture of Mr. Bone Spur’s golf course.

  81. 81.

    Adam L Silverman

    @Another Scott: One other point:

    Rumsfeld told us all that the GOP is more than willing to go to war without enough people, without enough weapons and body armor, without international political support, without sensible logistics routes. Having too few divisions in the Army won’t stop a war from happening if Donnie says “go”.

    And that has worked out so well in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Yes, if the President says go and Congress provides some form of authorization, then it will happen. But let’s really be honest, no one in the US military leadership wants to lose a 2nd war on the Korean peninsula in 60 years and a third one in Asia in 40 years. Not counting the prolonged theater strategic stalemate in Afghanistan and the real question of Iraq and Syria imploding again/further coming apart even as we’re successful in the fight against ISIS on the ground.

  83. 83.

    Enhanced Voting Techniques

    @Adam L Silverman: Over all strategy and policy aren’t that complicated that an intelligent person can’t understand, famous examples being Lincoln and FDR had no military experience.The problem is the current president is a man child and refuses to learn and congress is doesn’t want to do it’s job and would rather just grandstand.

  84. 84.

    Adam L Silverman

    @Czanne: From reports of his former dorm mates at Penn, he was a black out drunk. Whether he’s still an alcohol abuser/alcoholic has never been reported on as far as I know.

  86. 86.

    Another Scott

    @Adam L Silverman: It’s ambiguous at present, at best. WaPo (from August):

    BEIJING — China won’t come to North Korea’s aid if it launches missiles threatening U.S. soil and there is retaliation, a state-owned newspaper warned Friday — but it would intervene if Washington strikes first.

    The Global Times newspaper is not an official mouthpiece of the Communist Party, but in this case its editorial probably does reflect government policy, experts said.

    […]

    In an editorial, the Global Times said China should make it clear to both sides that “when their actions jeopardize China’s interests, China will respond with a firm hand.”

    “China should also make clear that if North Korea launches missiles that threaten U.S. soil first and the U.S. retaliates, China will stay neutral,” it added. “If the U.S. and South Korea carry out strikes and try to overthrow the North Korean regime and change the political pattern of the Korean Peninsula, China will prevent them from doing so.”

    […]

    FWIW.

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  87. 87.

    Adam L Silverman

    @Repatriated: Let me rephrase: explain to me how you fight a war in the technical sense of the term. I don’t mean to be pedantic, but I’m using the term in a very precise manner. The US reducing the Korean peninsula with a preemptive nuclear strike is not a war. It may lead to a war. More likely it leads to Russia and/or the PRC launching back at us.

  92. 92.

    Citizen_X

    @Smedley Darlington Prunebanks (Formerly Mumphrey, et al.):

    Yes, maybe it’ll cost somebody a political career, but it isn’t like there’s no shortage of people who could just as well give it up for the privilege of being remembered for all time as the one who helped put an end to this cheap-ass would be Napoleon.

    Hey, Westeros may have needed the Kingslayer, but he didn’t end up being appreciated for it in his time.

  93. 93.

    Adam L Silverman

    @Enhanced Voting Techniques: The book is far more about how the upper echelons of American society have essentially used the All Volunteer Force, and before that resources and access, to exempt themselves and their families from military service while often either cheerleading the US into war or actually serving in elected and appointed positions that put others and other’s children in harm’s way.

  95. 95.

    Viva BrisVegas

    @Adam L Silverman:

    the gap between the “all-volunteer military” and the rest of us is widening

    I’m a long way away so my opinion probably doesn’t count for much, but isn’t this a deliberate political strategy in the US?

    Other countries do not worship their military. They see them as fellow citizens who have a dangerous job, but who have taken on that job for various personal reasons, only one of which is duty.

    If I were to go up to an Australian soldier and thank them for their service, I would be regarded at best as eccentric and at worst as some sort of dangerous crank. It would make no more sense than if that soldier came up to me and thanked me for their pay packet. We are both citizens, one is not beholdened to the other. One is not morally superior to the other. One does not have more “honour” than the other. We both exist in the same society, just with different roles. There is no question of a divide.

    It seems to me that the US fetishising of the military is the inevitable result of decades of abuse of the military for political purposes. How otherwise can the political class justify the military failure that they created in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, except by exalting the sacrifice made by individual soldiers? What else is there to celebrate?

    The way to stop a civil-military divide is to stop using the military as a political tool, and to stop forcing the military into half baked, half arsed expeditions to god forsaken places of no real consequence to American interests.

    Of all the US military actions of the past 60 years, how many could actually be described as defending the American way of life?

    It’s good that there are heroes. It’s not good when politicians find the need to create them.

  98. 98.

    Adam L Silverman

    @Mart: Yep. Every time Erdogan does something a whole lot of us hold our breath and slowly and softly intone: “don’t invoke Article V, don’t invoke Article V”. Over and over and over like a mantra.

  99. 99.

    CaseyL

    @Adam L Silverman: But the C-in-C knows little and cares less about that stuff. I can see him starting a war we can’t win unless we use nukes (you know he’s itching to use them). And I don’t trust the military to refuse a direct order; certainly not that we now know his “adult minders” are fully on board with him.

    So: reserve call-up indicates he is going to start a major new war, by bombing Iran or NK. Nukes sure to follow, once the going gets tough.

    I’ve been worrying whether I’ll have enough money to retire. If that malignant excrescence starts a nuclear war, I guess I won’t need to worry after all.

  101. 101.

    Omnes Omnibus

    @Viva BrisVegas:

    The way to stop a civil-military divide is to stop using the military as a political tool, and to stop forcing the military into half baked, half arsed expeditions to god forsaken places of no real consequence to American interests.

    Our side isn’t doing that.

  102. 102.

    Repatriated

    @Adam L Silverman: Pedant away!

    The point is, well, your point: you can’t.

    This was a big chunk of our Cold War deterrence strategy in Europe though. We couldn’t overcome Soviet armor –at least numerical — superiority so we’d have had to go nuclear first (though its effectivenes was probably contingent on the expectation that any nuclear exchange would escalate into MAD).

    It’s far less effective as an offense strategy, and far less acceptable.

  103. 103.

    Adam L Silverman

    @Viva BrisVegas: No argument from me. I would also add that the US is an aging to old revolutionary state and society with a system that makes it almost impossible to update and/or renew the state and society to meet the issues of the current time period. So, more accurately, an aging/aged and sclerotic revolutionary state and society that is structured so that it constantly tries to default to reactionism. That goes a long way to explaining a number of our dysfunctions.

  104. 104.

    Adam L Silverman

    @CaseyL: There haven’t been any actual call ups. The USAF pilot issue is long standing going back almost a decade and has been a drag on the USAF’s operational capability for a while now. No one has been recalled. All that has been done is that the paper trail has been created in case the Chief of Staff of the Air Force decided to do so.

  107. 107.

    ? ?? Goku (aka The Hope of the Universe) ? ?

    @Adam L Silverman:
    I’ve only heard the US referred to that way by reading you here at BJ. Do you have any recommended sources you could send me to for further reading about it?

  108. 108.

    Another Scott

    @Adam L Silverman: It depends on what one’s goals are.

    We sent a mess of people into Iraq. We haven’t “won” there – Iran has more influence on the government there than we do. We sent a mess of people into Afghanistan, and we haven’t “won” there – clearly. I think a case can be made that boots on the ground are no longer even helpful to win a major war these days.

    I get your point. The Air Force propaganda about the ability to pacify a country via air power alone was always overblown. But there is no conceivable scenario where we will again have many millions of men (and women) on active duty in the Army. And since Gen. Shinseki was obviously right that hundreds of thousands were needed to do the job to occupy Iraq (2:04), it seems likely that war planners will take that requirement (and the impossibility of fulfilling it any time soon) into account. As you say, the geography of the DPRK makes the problem even worse.

    The ultimate purpose of war is “politics by other means”. At one point that required sinking the adversary’s dreadnoughts and marching through their capitol on horseback. About 75 years ago in Europe, it required sending millions of men and thousands of tanks through capitols. But that isn’t how the war ended in Japan, of course…

    I think we would be insane to send even a division to the DPRK. China has made it clear that that is not acceptable. The US can achieve its stated aims there – neutralizing the threats to the USA and our allies from Kim’s nuclear and missile program – though the air. [blink with klaxxon] Of course, it would be a disaster for ROK and Japan and maybe the 7th Fleet and Guam [/blink with klaxxon], but we could eventually eliminate the military threat from the DPRK. We cannot, under any conceivable circumstance, no matter how many divisions we have, conquer the DPRK because China will not permit it (and Russia shares a small border and would do what it could to make any occupation fail as well). Given that, it would be insane to try, IMHO.

    My $0.02.

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  109. 109.

    Repatriated

    @CaseyL:

    I can see him starting a war we can’t win unless we use nukes (you know he’s itching to use them).

    That’s the problem.

    I think he gets 25th-Amendmented if he tries and can’t be dissuaded. It may be the only thing that would get him there short of an live on-camera mental breakdown.

  110. 110.

    Wapiti

    @catclub: IRR personnel are not retired. They generally are people who signed up for something like 4 years active duty and 3 years in the reserves. Duty in the reserves could be with an Army Reserve unit or National Guard – if you can find a slot open. Otherwise, it’s IRR, which isn’t paid. So the services can lose track of them.

  111. 111.

    Suzanne

    @Adam L Silverman: One aspect of the military that I think also contributes to a “divide” is this idea that they will take 18-year-olds and turn them into disciplined men. The idea that the military is an acceptable place for those who are essentially boys (in spirit if not in age) is mystifying to me. I cannot think of any other employer who would tolerate that sort of nonsense.

    If you need to find yourself and man up and learn life skills, PLEASE do that before holding a gun in your hand,

  113. 113.

    J R in WV

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    And flying MD80s and big Boeing aircraft means you’re useful how to the USAF ?

    No offense, but longhaul truckers can’t switch to Abrams tanks either.

  115. 115.

    efgoldman

    @Gin & Tonic:

    getting ground fog at this time of night when the temp drops is not unusual.

    And that section of I-95 and US1 fogs over pretty regularly.

  117. 117.

    Omnes Omnibus

    @J R in WV: Please explain how flying a big ass plane is different from flying a big ass plane.

    Just off hand, can you explain how tanks and howitzers are different?

  118. 118.

    jl

    @? ?? Goku (aka The Hope of the Universe) ? ?:

    ” I’ve only heard the US referred to that way by reading you here at BJ. Do you have any recommended sources you could send me to for further reading about it? ”

    My two cents To get an early analysis you can get the writings of John Adams, second pres, particularly his letters to Jefferson. Adams had an eerily prophetic description of how depraved a US political aristocracy of wealth and power would become. He felt all aristocracies became depraved. He was an old school pessimistic conservative, rather than a con man reactionary. But IIRC Adams correctly ID’d some of the special kinks of the US plutocratic and political aristocracy.

  119. 119.

    Lulymay

    @debbie: @O. Felix Culpa
    Methinks Mr. McCain has had enough of the “I had a bone spur, or I think it was on the left leg, or I just didn’t want to put my life on the line for Murrica”: he has challenged this very unoriginal POTUS to actually step up to the plate and proceed with “just a little honesty” but is that really anticipated? John McCain is leading up to something and I don’t think it’s “I was such a weakling that I naturally got captured, tortured, and paid a huge price for supporting all those who had a wealthy physician to write a letter that I was somehow unable to defend my country”

  121. 121.

    Wapiti

    @Suzanne: I think the main reason the services recruit young people is that the end of high school is a key point for the not-bound-for-college. Kids are looking for a job – maybe not a career, but at least a job, or they want to do something before settling down. If the services waited until recruits were 21 or 23, the pool would be much smaller, more people married, already in a job, etc.

  122. 122.

    Omnes Omnibus

    @Wapiti: I joined the army after college, because I wanted excitement and adventure. I wanted to go to OCS and Airborne School – it took me a year and two weeks. Then I owed years of service.

  124. 124.

    Suzanne

    @Wapiti: Then they can spare me the “greatest America has to offer” rhetoric. It sounds more like “the Americans who can’t figure out WTF else to do”.

    Of all of the people in my generation who I know who have served or are serving, there are only two who chose the military out of a sense of duty and who gave up any sort of other opportunity to do so (and my cousin is not one of the two). It is really hard for me to get excited about the greatness of the military when it’s a lot of dudes who couldn’t keep a civilian job or who wanted some sweet benefits.

  125. 125.

    jl

    I wonder how well the military brass remember how they were treated during the early Dub years, when Rummy and Cheney were calling the shots, and Dub was still lost in whatever weird Bibilical mandate he thought justified him to start a massive war crime. Anyway, the attitude of many in the administration, and most horrifyingly, many GOPers in Congress was that the military was a slave. Particularly the troops.

    That era may be what gives the phrase ‘what they signed up for’ such a bad vibe today. The attitude of the civilian leadership was that the troops had signed an oath and they were going to damn well do was they were ordered. Did it make any sense, were they properly equipped, was it moral, were they being worked into death despair and madness, were their families being cheated? The response was STF assholes, you tricked you into taking and oath, we own your lives, and you will damn well do as we say. It was shocking to me to hear people in the Dub administration, the GOPer Senators and Housefinks say, but they said, only slightly prettied up from how I expressed the attitude above.

    How dumb would a person, or an organization, have to be to think that this administration and most of the GOPers in this Congress is worse?

    Edit: and of course, these GOPers brayed the loudest about blind patriotism, and were the first to go jingo in the face of any criticism. The new saying for the those types is that patriotism is the first refuge of the scoundrel.

  128. 128.

    jl

    I guess a glimmer of hope is that I did hear news clips of dissatisfaction in the Senate over recent problems with troop deployments. One issue is that the US military said there was no sign of recent attacks by groups associated with the terrorists who killed the 4 troops in Niger. But I heard on the news that the UN has recorded over two dozen over the same time period. And also heard Senators wanting to know whey they hadn’t been informed of use of contractors, and rather slap dash shoe-string contractors at that. Who knows how much damage Donnie has done, and how well Mattis has been able to stop it? I imagine it’s all secret special knowledge only safe in the hands of the president (bitter laughter goes here).

    Contacting Senators. to raise hell on Dummy’s militaristic BS, as on rich persons tax slash plan might be helpful. I doubt Senators will do all that much But if they do anything at all, will gum up the executive crazy train, and batshit insane reaction from House GOPer lunatics will slow down things even more.

    Edit: letter from me to DiFi tomorrow on my deep concern over apparent serious problems in military. She eats that national security stuff up, and I’m sure to get some form letter back on it. Always fun to get an official communique from DiFi. Highly serious stuff.

  129. 129.

    Adam L Silverman

    @? ?? Goku (aka The Hope of the Universe) ? ?: In regard to the US? Not that I’m aware of. When I’ve done cultural preps of other states, such as Iran, one of the things I’ve done is refer to them as, and then describe what I mean, as an aging – in Iran’s case 38 years on – revolutionary state and society. Because that’s what they are. What I’ve done in that comment, and others here, is apply the same conceptual lens to the US. I’ve never seen anyone else apply it to the US, but at the same time I’ve never really looked. Shoot me an email to remind me to take a look and see what, if anything, I can find.

  130. 130.

    Adam L Silverman

    @amygdala: I wouldn’t say uppity. Each Service chief knows he’s got an unconventional president who is a strategic communication nightmare. This is just cleanup.

  131. 131.

    Adam L Silverman

    @Another Scott: The purpose of war is not politics by other means. The purpose of war is to inflict sufficient harm on one’s adversary/adversaries that they either choose to stop fighting or become unable to do so.

    The nature of war may be, if you’re a Clausewitzian, politics by other means.

  132. 132.

    Suzanne

    @Omnes Omnibus: Um, American society? Apparently they’re HEROES and I can’t question them ever and I am supposed to THANK THEM FOR KEEPING ME FREE.

    When I was in DC a few weeks ago, I saw a whole slew of Vietnam vets at the Memorial wearing shirts that read, “If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read this in English, thank a veteran.” Um, FUCK YOU. When we were waiting to fly out at the airport, a group of veterans was flying in to visit the city. There was a dude with a French horn playing patriotic songs as the veterans got off the plane, and apparently we were all supposed to stop and applaud as they all walked by. After they all walked off the plane, the dude with the French horn played the Star Wars theme.

    I hate this sort of forced veneration of the military.

  133. 133.

    No Drought No More

    I wonder if GW ever contemplated buying a doctor’s John Hancock for a bone spurs diagnosis? I mean, before he disappeared on his years long lost weekend. It’s an idle question, but it’s fair to assume that McCain included Bush when he cited those who refused to served. In Bush’s case, of course, while he was in uniform and had sworn to do just that.

    Wouldn’t it be refreshing if congressional democrats were to throw that fact into the face of the next republican that dares impugn their individual or collective integrity? And into the face of every stinking republican that might dare thereafter? Because it would be OK. There’s not a single democratic voter in the country worth their salt that would object. Not a single one.

  134. 134.

    Adam L Silverman

    @? ?? Goku (aka The Hope of the Universe) ? ?: Doubtful. With the exception of maybe one contributing columnist, the entire publication seems to be made up of religiously conservative moral scolds. So this is more likely something along the lines of Halloween is somehow satanic and will lead the kids astray. Remember, the editor in chief of that mess accused a retired 3 star admiral and Navy SEAL of being an Iranian agent because he was born in Tehran. He was born in Tehran because his father was assigned to US Embassy Tehran at the time as one of the Service attaches.

  137. 137.

    jl

    @Adam L Silverman: I think only Ambrose Bierce and Twain can beat John Adams for ferocious political invective. And only Twain for invective in more or less a good cause and right reason, rather than bigoted conservatism and then nihilism (where Bierce, is our beloved, from a distance, king).

  138. 138.

    jl

    @jl: sorry, a bad typo in my comment above. If the military gets ‘uppity’ out of a sound sens of self preservation, and decent regard for not being contemptuously and cynically used again, by false lying political patriots who praise them in public but obviously despise them in private, I will not be too concerned. How bad could that road get? Pretty bad, But so is Trump, and Trump is just as much a danger to our physical and political safety, IMHO. Bad times can call for hard choices.

    ” How dumb would a person, or an organization, have to be to think that this administration and most of the GOPers in this Congress is NOT worse? “

  139. 139.

    Fair Economist

    @jl:

    One issue is that the US military said there was no sign of recent attacks by groups associated with the terrorists who killed the 4 troops in Niger. But I heard on the news that the UN has recorded over two dozen over the same time period.

    You might ask Chad, which provides a significant fraction of the peacekeepers in Mali (where they’ve been operating). Oh wait, Trump’s been cutting contacts with them.

  141. 141.

    Ruckus

    @Omnes Omnibus:
    Probably the same people that wanted me to be excited about it.
    I served time, not once was I excited except for the day I got my discharge orders.
    I did my duty, every day. The equipment I was in charge of had 100% up time and readiness and that was all the navigation equipment, all the internal communications equipment, all the steering controls, all the helm to engine controls, all the power to that equipment and the guided missiles. I was 21-23 yrs old. None of that was exciting in the least. I also served at a time of war, an unjust war, that over 58,000 military died during, not to count those who have since died of wounds.
    What makes any citizen not of a mind, ability or place to get excited about the military? Or not.? What gives you the right to question a citizen’s right to question the military? Or am I misunderstanding your question?

  143. 143.

    jl

    @Suzanne: It sounds more like “the Americans who can’t figure out WTF else to do”. That seemed to be US Grant’s take on typical person in the career military.

  144. 144.

    Ruckus

    @Viva BrisVegas:

    Of all the US military actions of the past 60 years, how many could actually be described as defending the American way of life?
    It’s good that there are heroes. It’s not good when politicians find the need to create them.

    Depends on whose doing the defining. The rich, who rarely serve would probably say all of them. The poor who got drafted or who joined because they like to eat would most likely say none. Everyone else might say, depending on if they served or not, the first gulf war. Of course all of this is pure speculation.
    Your last line is great. The line about heroes is good if you meant that it’s good that people stepped up and went beyond the expected.

  145. 145.

    jl

    Need to start focusing on the GOP rich persons ginormous tax slash plan.
    It is another front on the war against health care, the war on Medicaid and Medicare continues. Which is why Collins and Murkowski should be hearing holy hell about their lack of opposition to the Senate budget resolution. Below is a good explainer, found via Josh Marshall’s twitter.

    I think little chance to outright defeat the rich person’s super duper tax slash plan in the Senate. But need to try. And a much better chance of nudging Senate towards saner policy that would make the House gag up and send it to a big conference fight. Maybe run out the clock. I’ve read that the lesson that the House GOPer reactionaries have learned from their defeats earlier this year is ‘never compromise, never retreat an inch, charge ahead mindlessly’. I hope that is true. If so it bods well and should encourage everyone to call Congress.

    Dr. Kathie Allen
    @kathieallenmd
    Say goodbye to Medicare as we know it. You know, that program YOU paid for. And the Medicaid cuts are the very…
    https://twitter.com/kathieallenmd/status/922255090941079552

  148. 148.

    Ruckus

    @jl:
    Do remember that while Medicare and SS do not affect the deficit, employers do pay 7.65%, or half of the amount that goes into them. We as employees pay the other half. This is what moneybags want take away, what they pay into Medicare/SS. That money could go directly to the stock holders, to management. You know if it went away they wouldn’t lower prices. They don’t care about killing Medicare or SS, they just don’t want to pay for it.

  149. 149.

    jl

    @Ruckus: A substantial part of both Medicaid and Medicare spending come out of general revenue. For Medicare, it is mostly some part B benefits that are not covered by premiums. I’ll have to go look up how substantial that is now, but likely to grow in the future.

    The GOP of course, doesn’t care about deficits if they go to rich people (deficits to fund services for middle or working class, and of course the poor are very very bad, though). Anyway, they feel they need to cut Medicaid and Medicare spending to get their rich person’s super sized tax slash.

    Which is why the destruction of US health care and the ginormous tax slash theft always come together. The rich man’s tax slash con is the next front in the health care battle. Everyone needs to let Congress know that everyone knows this and will hold them to account in upcoming elections.

    I think the billionaires’ tax slash swindle will be hard to stop outright, but if Senate version can be moderated enough, might cause House GOPers to gag up and cause a delay, maybe due to endless toddler tantrums over what they will agree to entertain in conference negotiations.

  151. 151.

    Ruckus

    @jl:
    I was a bit overly broad in my comment. I stand by my comment that a good part of why conservatives want to end medicare is the 7.65% tax employers pay. Yes any money saved will go towards a rich cocksucker’s dream, of no taxes on the rich. They really don’t give a shit if everyone but them and their companies pays taxes.

  152. 152.

    Aussie Sheila

    @Adam L Silverman:

    Clausewitz is describing the decision of a state to go to war. What you are (accurately) describing, is the means to bring about the desired political decision in the field. Two different things, connected by the ‘ends/means’ relationship as applied to violent interstate conflict conducted by states, using a part of their population as a means to achieve those aims by the conduct of war against another state. It also applies of course to violence conducted by a state against a part of its own polity-civil wars and violence conducted against out groups and insurrections conducted by groups or social stratas in that society.

  154. 154.

    Barbara

    @Seth Owen:

    To the extent there is a solution I think it involves some serious scaling back of our unending military expeditions, more emphasis on service in the reserves and national guard

    Yes, X 1000. One of the things that chaps my hide the most about Trump supporters is their unwillingness to judge him according tho his own promises, one of which was to scale back U.S. foreign commitments. I never took it seriously because I know how foreign policy works in Washington. When I was a kid there used to be a tunnel with brick pavers that were so old you could put your car in the little track created by hundreds of thousands of prior trips, take your hands off the steering wheel, and not veer an inch off course. That’s how foreign policy works in Washington. But Trump hasn’t even tried and he has a personality that loves conflict and thus ratchets up the threat of actual conflict with our traditional adversaries, which will assuredly overwhelm nearly anything he would want to do domestically to help those who voted for him.

  156. 156.

    No One You Know

    @Adam L Silverman: @Barbara: I am wondering if the only point of rattling sabers is to focus us on perceived (and actual) deficiencies in the military, while the treasury is looted and social programs are destroyed. I.e., The war being threatened is actually, and consciously, being fought against the people who will be called to serve, and against the people they will leave to serve.

  158. 158.

    Mike in Pasadena

    @Adam L Silverman: Both relatively slow. A-10 jet, C-130 prop. C-130 can land and takeoff on short runways with fairly crude runway surfaces. A10, being a jet, cannot take the risk of FOD (foreign object damage from junk on the runway being ingested). A10 firepower great. The AC130 has great firepower, but most are long gone. A desert in Tucson has many A10s roasting in the sun and unlikely to be usable except as aluminum scrap. The C130 has many forward area capabilities that jet cargo planes do not. Pilots who have flown them love these planes (both A10 and C130). Generals and politicians hate those planes because they are slow. MCain loves the A10, mostly because it keeps lots of Arizonans employed. The A10 can stay over target for a respectable time, but IIRC the A9, which was in the flyoff against the A10, had a better hover time (and superior in many other ways, too). However, the A10 had better political supporters in Congress. Good luck reviving either production line in a reasonable time. Both C130 and A10 can sustain quite a lot of damage and keep flying. C130 can put paratroopers into a forward area, A10 can make the enemy seek cover while they are coming in. The A10 can put lots of lead where it is needed in a hurry. The AC130 can do the same, but there aren’t many left operating. C130 needs a loadmaster or jumpmaster, the A10 needs neither. Both need lots of skilled mechanics after a mission.
    How am I doing so far? This is all from memory, no reference to Janes.

Comments are closed.