What was that about locking the barn door?
I'm done apologizing to fanatics who were determined to convert -or exterminate- anyone who didn't accept their particular flavor of religion.
Today, I'm ready to send them a clear, high message: game on.
The self-same group of fanatics has now attacked not one, but two, of our embassies in the middle east. Now, four Americans are dead-including Christopher Stevens, the U-S Ambassador to Libya. The same ambassador who fought tooth-and-nail to protect Libyans during the civil war that saw longtime dictator Moammar Ghadafi's regime end.
After the normal hand-wringing and some particularly rancorous political sniping, the administration has sent a contingent of Marines from the elite Fleet Antiterrorism Security Team (FAST) to reinforce security at the now-violated United States embassy in Benghazi, Libya. Reports also say that a carrier group is sailing that way, too.
Where I grew up, that's called locking the barn after the horses are gone.
Fortunately (for Libya and Egypt), I'm not in charge. There would still be U-S troops headed that way. But their jobs would be assembling after-action reports and BDAs (bomb damage assessments) from the absolute havoc we would have already unleashed on them.
Today, I'm feeling more than politically and socially incorrect. It's not time for apologies or restraint- it's time to respond -and I'd prefer it be with overwhelming force rather than some namby-pamby diplomatic protests. I'd like to see Madame Clinton attack the jihadists with the same fury she used to unleash behind closed doors at the White House.
The rules of engagement at all United States embassies should have a simple premise going forward: The Castle Doctrine. Invade my home if you must, but I will not run.
As if I wasn't already torqued up enough already, the not-surprising news is out that the United Nations has adopted the first portion of their International Small Arms Control Standard. That fundamentally flawed attempt at end-running the rejection of their Treaty on Small Arms has me again suggesting that we put our collective feet down and demand that the facility located at760 United Nations Plaza, NYC, NY 10017 be forcibly vacated and put back onto the real estate market.
Richard Patterson, managing director of the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers Institute (SAAMI) summed the rational objections to the UN standards pretty succinctly before the ISACS was approved.
It is, he said, "nothing more than a platform for adoption and pseudo-legitimization of the 'wish lists' of special interest groups."
"Advocates of gun control make two fundamental assumptions: First, that more guns will equal more violence and, second, that more gun control will equal less violence. Both these assumptions are confounded by history and by facts. They are simply not true. Countries with high rates of gun ownership have low rates of violence and countries in which civilian ownership of guns is banned have high rates of violence. Ignoring these facts can cause harm by removing the means by which people protect themselves, their families and their communities - and thereby protect their rights to self-determination."
Self-determination is the crux of the problem. Many so-called leaders (including many of our own) don't believe in self-determination. They believe it's best (especially for them) that they curb our pesky independent leanings.
I beg to differ. It's time we re-assert some independence.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by cutbait
