Bullseye!

Osama, from your hovel in whatever bleak, flea-bitten corner of nowhere it is, take note:

WASHINGTON (AP) - A missile launched from a Navy ship successfully struck a dying U.S. spy satellite passing 130 miles over the Pacific on Wednesday, a defense official said. Full details were not immediately available.

It happened just after 10:30 p.m. EST.

Two officials said the missile was launched successfully. One official, who is close to the process, said it hit the target. He said details on the results were not immediately known.

A satellite flying at who knows what blinding speed 130 miles overhead nailed with pinpoint accuracy by a missile fired from the middle of the ocean.

Got a missile cruiser, Islamist dog? A spy satellite? Technology more advanced than a satellite phone (which, by the way, we invented). If Islam is so hot, what does it have to show for itself, save box-cutters, four guys who could pass flight school, and the highly advanced technology of strapping someone else's C4 around the bellies of suicidal psychopaths?

And you want the world to come to where you're at. Speaking for all the billions of us, no thank you.

hat-tip: memeorandum

When Heroes Break Down

For those of you who weren't listening to Laura Ingraham at about 8:30 this morning, here's what you missed: One of the most powerful moments ever in radio.

Ingraham was interviewing Marcus Luttrell, the author of Lone Survivor, a Navy Seal who is the sole survivor of an Afghanistan gun battle when 150 Taliban attacked his team of four scouts.

At first, there were some questions about the mission, which was to scout a senior al-Qaeda operative with ties to bin Laden, find out about his movements and take him out if possible. Luttrell sounded solid, rock solid. His answers were like a briefing, loaded with military terminology, his words snapped off as if he were answering while standing at attention.

Then Ingraham said (all paraphrasing here):

I can imagine ... I can't imagine, really ... but I can try to think of what it's like. You train with the guys in your unit for years, you become close like brothers. How do you deal with them all gone, and you surviving?

There was just silence. Dead air. It went on for several seconds.

Then a slow, shaky sucking in of breath.

Then:

I .... Ma'am ....

Laura:

I'm so sorry. I'm just trying to understand, help my listeners understand ... the sacrifice, so we can continue to stand behind our military. I know it must be so hard ...

Luttrell:

I'm sorry Ma'am. I don't know what you want me to say. I don't cope. I bang my head into the wall. I cry every day. I lock myself in my room. Not 30 seconds of one minute goes by without me thinking about them.

They give me medicine, but I don't like that stuff. The only thing that helps is talking to the guys in my company, but now that I'm out of the Service, that's harder ...

His voice faded.

When they talk about being a Marine or a soldier or a sailor or a Ranger or a Seal for life, this is what they're talking about. Luttrell's team's lives ended up being short, but for the sole survivor, the fact that he was a Navy Seal in Afghanistan will never leave him.

And he's OK with that; OK with the suffering that is going to be with him a long, long time.

We're ready to give our lives, Ma'am. You can't give more than that.

I think Marcus Luttrell is giving more than his life. He's living the life of three others, wondering why he still has a life to live. Yet in his voice you know ... he'd go and do it all again, if called.

Keep him in your prayers.

Two Schools, Two Teachings, Two Results

My friend John Gillmartin assures me this story is true; he checked it through Urban Legends and I've confirmed -- they say it's true.

In September of 2005, a social studies schoolteacher from Arkansas did something not to be forgotten. On the first day of school, with permission of the school superintendent, the principal, and the building supervisor, she took all of the desks out of the classroom. The kids came into first period, they walked in; there were no desks. They obviously looked around and said, "Where's our desks?"

The teacher said, "You can't have a desk until you tell me how you earn them."

They thought, "Well, maybe it's our grades."

"No," she said.

"Maybe it's our behavior."

And she told them, "No, it's not even your behavior."

And so they came and went in the first period, still no desks in the classroom. Second period, same thing. Third period. By early afternoon television news crews had gathered in the class to find out about this crazy teacher who had taken all the desks out of the classroom. The last period of the day, the instructor gathered her class.

They were at this time sitting on the floor around the sides of the room. She said, "Throughout the day no one has really understood how you earn the desks that sit in this classroom ordinarily. Now I'm going to tell you."

She went over to the door of her classroom and opened it, and as she did 27 U.S. veterans, wearing their uniforms, walked into that classroom, each one carrying a school desk. And they placed those school desks in rows, and then they stood along the wall. By the time they had finished placing the desks, those kids for the first time I think perhaps in their lives understood how they earned those desks.

Their teacher said, "You don't have to earn those desks. These guys did it for you. They put them out there for you, but it's up to you to sit here responsibly, to learn, to be good students and good citizens, because they paid a price for you to have that desk, and don't ever forget it."

It's particularly appropriate that John sent this today -- for two reasons.

First, I heard this morning about a New Jersey high school that wanted to train kids for a terrorist attack, and decided to use Christian, not Islamist, terrorists in their drill. Here's how the American Center for Law & Justice summarized the event:

On March 23, 2007, the Burlington County Times reported that Burlington Township High School conducted a simulated hostage drill to test the reactions of the police, faculty and school administration. Officials were quoted as saying, “We need to practice under conditions as real as possible in order to evaluate our procedures and plans so that they’re as effective as possible.”

According to the article, two officers, playing the role of the armed intruders, invaded the school and pretended to shoot several students. Although the full student body was not present for the drill, several students volunteered to act as hostages or wounded victims. The officers barricaded themselves in the school’s media center with ten student hostages. The school resource officer and the Burlington County Joint Tactical Team worked to secure the school, and faculty members simulated a school lockdown and evacuation.

While preparing for a potential hostage situation is certainly a legitimate and important activity, the school went far beyond what was necessary to fabricate an outrageous story-line for the mock attack. According to the Burlington County Times,

Investigators described [the gunmen] as members of a right-wing fundamentalist group called the “New Crusaders” who don’t believe in separation of church and state. The mock gunmen went to the school seeking justice because the daughter of one had been expelled for praying before class. (emphasis in original)

Do you suppose the Burlington Township High School's administrators would have allowed the demonstration that was allowed in the Arkansas school? Most certainly not!

Rather than teach respect for the military and an understanding of the Judeo-Christian principles of honor, sacrifice and the protection on innocents, they would have their students think the biggest threat we face is evangelical Christians. Because they are so tolerant, they are blind to the real threat, and unfortunately they are in a position to spread the blindness with an evangelic fervor that outpaces that of most Evangelicals.

Put another way, they do not feel an obligation to teach the students entrusted to them anything truthful about their nation and the threats it faces. They might as well teach their students that on Dec. 7, 1941 American warplanes attacked Pearl Harbor.

Schools are obligated to teach more than reading, writing and arithmetic. More important than any of those skillsets to the furtherance of Democracy is the teaching of cognitive skills, analysis, discernment and something that is becoming all too uncommon today: common sense. How can we expect future citizens to analyze the world and act appropriately, to have the courage to defend what others have fought for, if we allow students today to see an ongoing onslaught of news about Islamist acts of terror around the planet, then ask them to accept Christian terrorists for their drill?

It's cognitive dissonance, and it destroys learning.

The other reason John's post is timely is that it's impossible to read what the Arkansas social studies teacher said of the soldiers ...

These guys did it for you. They put them out there for you, but it's up to you to sit here responsibly, to learn, to be good students and good citizens, because they paid a price for you to have that desk, and don't ever forget it.

... without thinking of Christ on the cross. Sure, there are differences of a cosmic scale between His sacrifice and theirs, but there are also similarities so close and profound that one can only stand in mute awe of our troops. God bless and protect them!

Two school districts, two teachings, two results. Which one would you rather have your children attend? And if you lived in Burlington Township, how terribly frustrated would you be knowing your tax dollars are supporting a school that does so very much worse than merely teach poorly?

If You're So Angry, Why Should We Call You "Gay?"

Yesterday, the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network was all worked up because Joint Chiefs of Staff prez. General Peter Pace called homosexuals immoral.

But when it turns out the gays, lesbians and whatever elses the Network represents are actually being treated better by the military, well, it's Big Snit, Act Two:

The number of homosexuals discharged from the U.S. military under the "don't ask, don't tell" policy dropped significantly in 2006, according to Pentagon figures released today, continuing a sharp decline since the Afghanistan and Iraq conflicts began and leading critics to charge that the military is retaining gay and lesbian personnel because it needs them in a time of war.

According to preliminary Pentagon data, 612 homosexuals were discharged in fiscal 2006, fewer than half the 1,227 who were discharged in 2001. On average, more than 1,000 service members were discharged each year from 1997 to 2001, but in the past five years that average has fallen below 730.

Well, that should make advocates of gays in the military happy, shouldn't it? Even if it makes the guy in the foxhole a bit nervous.

Think again, Breeder. Here's what the gay advocates at the Network say:

"It is hypocritical that the Pentagon seems to retain gay and lesbian service members when they need them most, and fires them when it believes they are expendable." (WaPo)

So do I have that straight (if that's the right term)? The gays want to be in the military as long as they're not needed, but if they're needed, well, they have a big problem with that?

C'mon, you emotional babies! You're not representing gays well by acting like a bunch of sissies in a mad pout.

Pentagon's New Math Adding Up

The military's new view of the world, as mesmerizingly presented in Thomas P.M. Barnett's The Pentagon's New Map, is starting to come to pass as big ideas so often come to pass -- via a series of small, pragmatic decisions.

The end of the Cold War military has been long in coming, but large, expensive platforms are beginning to be perceived as having less value in situations like Iraq than well-equipped, well-trained soldiers. Reuters reports on a recent decision that moves away from expensive equipment and towards better troop strength:

The White House plans to shift $3.2 billion in defense spending -- partly from new weapons like the Lockheed Martin Corp. F-35 Joint Strike Fighter -- to support troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, a trade publication reported on Monday.

In a letter to Congress detailing revised plans for its fiscal 2007 emergency wartime spending request, the White House said it would reduce spending on three aircraft programs by $923 million, freeing up money for armor kits and transport vehicles needed by U.S. troops.

The letter was obtained and released by insidedefense.com on Monday. ...

It said it would remove $388 million for five Lockheed C-130J transport planes; $146 million for one CV-22 tilt-rotor aircraft built by Boeing Co. and Bell Helicopter, a unit of Textron Inc.; and $389 million for Lockheed F-35s.

Instead, it would spend an additional $1.5 billion on armor kits and transport vehicles, including $500 million for Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, the newest generation of tactical vehicles designed to protect troops against mines and roadside bombs.

It's a simple, immediate decision: More armor is needed because of what's happening in Iraq and the money has to come from somewhere.

But in the process, the military is being transformed a bit. Full transformation will take greater commitment from above, but moves like this get the momentum going.

Hang In There, General Pace!

It's been leaked by senior aides that Marine Gen. Peter Pace won't apologize for calling homosexuality immoral — despite a lot of lip-flapping from homosexuality advocacy groups.

You've certainly heard Pace's comment by now:

"I believe homosexual acts between two individuals are immoral and that we should not condone immoral acts. I do not believe the United States is well served by a policy that says it is OK to be immoral in any way."

Hangin' right out there with the truth, unafraid. Like he was a Marine or something. As expected, the reaction was swift:

"General Pace's comments are outrageous, insensitive and disrespectful to the 65,000 lesbian and gay troops now serving in our armed forces," the advocacy group Servicemembers Legal Defense Network said in a statement on its Web site. (source)

Interesting ... there are currently about 1.4 million people serving in the armed services, so this group appears to be going with gays being less than 5% of the population, not 10%. Cool ... but I digress.

The Massachusetts Dem (natch!) who introduced legislation to replace the "Don't Ask/Don't Tell" policy with full acceptance of gay, lesbian, transgender and who knows what else in the military also was having a hissy little snit over the General:

"General Pace's statements aren't in line with either the majority of the public or the military. He needs to recognize that support for overturning (the policy) is strong and growing" and that the military is "turning away good troops to enforce a costly policy of discrimination." (source)

Is that so? Meehan didn't bother to quote a source, most likely because he was, as Incredible Wife has noted of my opinions from time to time, talking out his butt. Verification of his butt-talk comes from Jim, the Johnny Appleseed of story-planting in C-SM, who sent these AOL survey results over a bit ago:

How do you feel about Pace's comments?

Agree: 64%
Disagree: 33%
Not sure: 3%

Yeah, yeah, it's not scientific -- but considering that most polls that claim to accurately predict the national opinion do so on the basis of about 1,500 votes, let's not kid overselves. General Pace's comments are mainstream and acceptance of them is about on a par with votes in support of various states' initiatives proclaiming that marriage is only between a man and a woman.

In an interesting sidebar to the noisiness of the gay lobby, it's interesting to note that Pace also said this:

"As an individual, I would not want (acceptance of gay behavior) to be our policy, just like I would not want it to be our policy that if we were to find out that so-and-so was sleeping with somebody else's wife, that we would just look the other way, which we do not. We prosecute that kind of immoral behavior."

So, where are the howls of protest from the adultry lobby? Anyone? Anyone?