1.12.2006

Iranian Military Plane Crash: Sabotage? >>> What remains to be seen is if the Iranian government accepts the sabotage theory and then takes any retaliatory action against its opposition. Obviously, this could heat up Iran's internal conflict. The tricky part is whether that would be a positive or negative development: Any further radicalization of the Iranian regime would be dangerous, given their present level of rhetoric. However, anything to widen the gap between the regime and the Iranian people--already working towards revolution--will only bring that revolution about faster. By far, revolution is preferred method of ousting Ahmadinejad and the entire Iranian mullahcracy, something that needs to be done one way or another and soon.

The Armor Debate >>> I covered this a few days ago, but I figured it was worth going back to again. More info here. As for my take on the whole armor issue, I just can't help but think about the men who fought in past wars--without any. Obviously, we must take any possible steps to protect our soldiers and extend their operational capability, but at what point does armor do more harm than good? And at what point did we apply the oh-so-typical American attitude of entitlement to body armor? The men who fought at Normandy or Guadalcanal or where-have-you didn't have the fortune of wearing body armor, yet they were victorious because they were soldiers, and soldiers are better at doing more with less than anybody else on the planet. These are not little boys who must be bubble-wrapped and closely guarded lest the outside world break their fragile little minds and bodies. These are warriors, highly-trained men whose job is to kill or be killed, who can save life or take it in the blink of an eye, who think fast and move faster. Give them whatever possible protection is available, but don't for a second think they need it.

US Military Recruiting >>> A great piece by Security Watchtower. I'll just let it speak for itself.