|
|
June 26, 2008 - Refight the Tanker Battle There has been much press about the battle to build hundreds of new tankers for the USAF. Most assumed that Boeing would get the nod. However, Washington is now run by one-worlders who view every corporation as "multi-national" so it doesn't matter where American tax dollars flow. The European monopoly EADS won the bid and will "assemble" its tanker in the USA. Their supporters note that most components of Boeing's proposed tanker would be built overseas too. A far better option is to use the tanker money to build a revolutionary blended body-wing design. This has been proven with the B-2 bomber and updated with a new small NASA prototype dubbed the X-48B. (below) This "flying wing" design is far more efficient and requires one-third less fuel.
Boeing has pitched this idea for a decade, but airlines were reluctant to risk a revolutionary change. Now that fuel prices have tripled, some are expressing interest. Despite the rhetoric, there is no urgent need to begin building new tankers based on an old design. The tanker competition should be rebid and design money provided to require fuel efficiency levels that are only possible with a blended body design. Once KC-48 tankers begin to roll-off the production line, orders for blended body passenger aircraft will pour in. June 20, 2008 - Oil From Iraq This is from my article last year that explains why the USA occupied Iraq: "Iraq has the world’s third largest oil reserves and most are easily accessible. Its modern history is one of exploitation by western oil companies backed by Anglo-American military force. Time magazine wrote about their apparent success in 1932:
http://www.sandersresearch.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1322&Itemid=97 And now this from a June 19, 2008 AP article: "But they also
could mark the beginning of an important long-term toehold by big Western
companies into Iraq's potentially lucrative oil industry, by giving the
companies a bidding advantage over other companies in the future. Iraq's oil
ministry spokesman would not name the companies set to get the deals. http://news.ino.com/headlines/?newsid=68916867579790 The exact same big five oil companies will soon reclaim their oil fields, as predicted in my article last year: "The weak Iraqi central government will eventually accept privatization of their nation’s oil wealth, even if this requires an American backed coup, which was common during the Vietnam War. The next step is to sell oil leases. This will done in private using American appointed Iraqi agents. They will learn that western oil companies already have valid leases for most Iraqi oil fields from decades ago. They may have expired, but since they were illegally cancelled, the new lawful Iraqi government must accept an extension, even though they are overly generous. Once that is accepted and formalized, the question of compensation will arise. Western oil companies will present evidence that billions of barrels of oil have been illegally extracted from these fields the past few decades by the Iraqi government. Since these oil companies held valid production sharing contracts, they are due billions of dollars in reimbursement. The Iraqi government lacks funds to pay, so oil companies will withhold the government’s share of oil export revenues until this money is repaid, which may take decades. It doesn’t matter what the eventual oil privatization law says, but how it will be “interpreted” American appointed Iraqi judges. This will provide western oil companies with massive new profits and huge oil reserves, or recovered reserves in their minds. Western oil consumers may assume this will help them as well; however, Iraq’s National Oil Company is just as anxious to explore and pump as much oil as they can to western consumers. ...Knowledge that control of oil reserves is the prime objective in Iraq is so widespread among Washington DC insiders that former chairmen of the Federal Reserve, Alan Greenspan, wrote in his recently published memoir “The Age of Turbulence”: 'I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil.'" June 16, 2008 - Lost Battles of the Vietnam War One theme presented by supporters of the American empire is that the U.S. military is invincible, and that it can never lose unless stabbed in the back by impatient politicians. They claim the U.S. military never lost a battle during the entire Vietnam war. This was disputed by America's most decorated officer of that war, Col. David Hackworth, in his book "About Face." The U.S. military had every advantage over the Vietnamese, yet mistakes were made and small battles lost. Most losses were covered-up, but a quick Internet search provides some examples: The Battle of Kham Duc - this large Special Forces camp was abandoned as it was overrun, despite reinforcement by an American rifle company. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Kham_Duc The Battle of the Slopes - a company of American paratroopers was attacked by a large force and fled, leaving behind wounded. It suffered 76 KIA with two platoons wiped out. http://www.charliesnow.com/Default.htm The Battle of Dai Do - A Marine Corps infantry battalion was mauled and forced to retreat during a disorganized attempt to dislodge a large North Vietnamese force near the DMZ. Accounts of this action are hidden within reports of operations in region of Dong Ha. http://1stbattalion3rdmarines.com/operations-history-folder/battle_for_dong_ha.htm Ignoring these losses does great disservice to all those brave men who fought and died in these battles, as well as those now dying in Iraq for a lost cause. June 13, 2008 - Taboo Topics There are a dozen topics that Americans are trained to never discuss by corporate television, lest they be branded as crazy. For example, why did the third tower collapse after the 9-11 attacks? The 47-story WTC-7 tower was never hit by anything, and located 100 yards away from the other two, yet it collapsed neatly upon itself within seconds. The massive 9-11 Commission report didn't even mention that event. http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc7.html Another taboo topic is the power of the Israeli lobby in Washington D.C. While politicians seek to distance themselves from lobbyist connections during election years, one lobby is never shunned, as Jim Lobe reported: AIPAC’s in Town, and the Line-Up is HawkishMonday morning marks the formal opening of the annual three-day policy conference of the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) which, according to AIPAC’s press announcement of the event, is “consistently ranked as the most influential foreign policy lobbying organization on Capitol Hill.” You can expect a strong focus on Iran and a very hawkish line towards same. The press release makes the point that “ALL three remaining Presidential candidates, ALL four leaders of Congress… AS WELL AS Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert will address the conference. (Emphasis in the original.) So much for the argument that AIPAC really isn’t as powerful as its critics, like Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer, claim. http://www.ips.org/blog/jimlobe/?p=153 June 3, 2008 - Indefensible Spending Robert Sheer recently penned a great article about why our empire is crumbling from debt. http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20080601_indefensible_spending/ Cutting U.S. military spending BACK to Cold war levels is a taboo subject for political leaders of both parties. Many of you have probably heard the spin that we spend just 4% of GDP on our military. In reality, we spend twice as much, but half is not counted, like: veterans benefits, military retirement benefits, nuclear weapons, foreign military aid, and annual "supplemental" spending. Neither are the budgets for the only two organizations that truly defend the USA, the Border Patrol and Coast Guard. You might not think this affects you, but the primary reason that gasoline prices have risen in the USA is because the value of the dollar has fallen. Inflation hurts as well, and the phony government measurement means that citizens fall behind with meager cost of living allowances or inadequate raises. June 1, 2008 - Profiting from the Phony "War" From March 3, 2008 "Aviation Week": "...thanks to George W. Bush, shares in the Pentagon's leading contractors have appreciated dramatically as U.S. military spending reaches levels not seen since World War II. Even with the overall stock market's recent swoons, shares in Lockheed Martin Corp. are up 247% since Bush was elected in 2000, while L-3 Communications Holdings has risen 242%, General Dynamics Corp. 167%, Northrop Grumman Corp. 125%, and Raytheon Co. 121%. To put things in perspective, consider that the S&P 500 index has actually declined slightly during the same period." May 30, 2008 - Well paid GIs Contrary to myths, U.S. military personnel earn 50-120% more than comparable Americans. Yes, some work many more hours, but most do not. This does not include the generous pension benefit. Winslow Wheeler at www.cdi.org is one of few people in Washington D.C. concerned about soaring costs. He recently wrote: Cost
Growth for People: The
people, certainly the ones in uniform, are not irrelevant.
They are what enables Basic people costs in the Pentagon have been increasing, per capita, for decades. The Congressional Budget Office measures this “real” growth at 1 to 2 percent per year. In the new century, that growth has accelerated, especially for pay raises, health care and retirement benefits. Congress has accelerated pay raises for all in uniform, and it has enacted the Tricare for Life health care system that – while popular – has proven far more expensive than CBO first predicted and which continues to increase in cost today. And, Congress has repealed previous military retirement cost reforms and has layered on additional benefits for veterans and their survivors.
In a time of
conflict, it is understandable that Congress has added these and several other
personal benefits to express the nation’s appreciation for service rendered in
The costs are notable. In 2000, 1,449,000 active duty personnel cost $100.5 billion in “constant” 2009 dollars for pay and benefits in DOD’s military personnel account. In 2009, 1,445,000 active duty personnel (a reduction of 4,000) are expected to cost $128.9 billion, an increase of $28.4 billion (or 28 percent). Once again, we pay more for less. May 18, 2008 - Looting Kosovo The American media provided heavy coverage of Kosovo's declaration of independence. It was hailed as the world's newest nation and was quickly recognized by the USA and the UK. In reality, international law only recognizes new nations if all parties agree, or the United Nations approves. Neither has occurred, so Kosovo is still part of Serbia. Only 18 out of 27 EU nations recognized Kosovo's declaration, and only 36 out of 160 nations in the world. This is why it was not brought to a vote at the UN. Western media spins a story that UN approval is blocked by a heartless Russia, when in fact most nations do not approve, including those who represent most of the world's population, such as: China, Indonesia, India, and Russia. They do not approve when ethnic terror groups seize control of a nation's province by violence. To understand why the USA and the UK support independence, read my 2007 article: Looting Kosovo. Some have suggested that Kosovo could be partitioned, allowing northern Kosovo to remain part of Serbia since Serbs are the majority in that area. However, that region of Kosovo is rich in mineral resources, so the West refuses such a compromise since looting Kosovo is an objective. May 8, 2008 - Fred Reed It is unusual for one commentator to recommend a better one. Former Marine Fred Reed is a genius hiding in Mexico. He has vast experience and writes insightful comments about the United States, which is why no corporate media organization will publish his columns. He can be read at his own website: Fred Reed Several of his recent columns expose the realities of the US military and war: On Generals Testifying Before Congress - incompetent ramblings Dulce et Decorum Est - retired US Army officer Ralph Peters is a Stalinist and hypocrite Eeeek! - America's paranoid haters Blog from Past Years ©2008 www.G2mil.com |
