Target Centermass

Month: April 2005

  • Second Interview – Hammertime

    Hammertime of Team Hammer’s Musings has stepped up to be my second interview subject. The rules are here. I’ll ask him six questions, even though he only has to answer five and can opt not to answer any one of them:

    1. You started your blog with the following:

    By my reckoning, the most important aspect of a succesful blog is not humor, character, comunication, logic, entertainment value, technical issues, or even decency. It is discipline – the discipline to regularly update the blog. We’ll see if we have it…

    Now, as time has passed, do you still feel that way? If not, what then is the most important aspect of a successful blog? For that matter, how would you define a “successful” blog?

    2. You went to USMA. I spent a week there for an academic (e.g. recruiting) workshop before my senior year of high school. One morning I saw a doe outside the dorm window, on a hillside not even thirty feet away. What is a moment from your time there that will always remind you of the natural beauty of the Hudson Highlands?

    3. You’re an athletic, sports-loving video-game nut. What are your favorite sports to play personally, to watch live, to watch on television and to play on a video game? If there are discrepancies between the four, explain briefly why?

    4. Army has a planned home-and-home football schedule with my alma mater Texas A&M in ’06 and ’08. During your time as an officer in the Army, you certainly had some degree of interaction with Aggies. What is your honest impression of them and do you have any interest in attending a game at A&M? If not, why not? If so, has any particular Aggie tradition caught your interest?

    5. Name the top three people that lived during your lifetime that you would consider heroic. What other person living today could make this list and what would that person have to do to bump one of the three?

    6. (Blatantly lifting from my interview by TexasBestGrok) What got you into blogging? If you had to write a mission statement for your blog, what would it be? Do you have any conscious role models for or influences in your blogging?

    I will link link to the answers when posted.

  • First Interview – Eric

    Eric of Eric’s Grumbles Before the Grave has answered the call to be my first interview subject. The rules are here. I’ll ask Eric six questions, even though he only has to answer five so that he can opt not to answer one of them:

    1. You’re a fan of the works of Robert Heinlein and familiar with the concept of T.A.N.S.T.A.A.F.L. Please explain what the concept means and how you feel it applies to your life.

    2. As a veteran of the active-duty Army, what was your view of the reserve components prior to the ’91 Gulf War? Did you have any interaction with reservists during the Gulf War and, if so, what effect did this have on your view? Has the performance of reservists during the current Afghanistan and Iraq campaigns changed that view any?

    3. Any character from The Moon is a Harsh Mistress and the character Lazarus Long are excluded as possible answers from the following: please name a major Heinlein character that you associate with and why that is so.

    4. As a libertarian living in California, can you give me five adjectives to describe the current political climate of your state? Can you give me five different adjectives to decribe how you expect it to be in twenty years?

    5. You have to serve in an American conflict prior to the age of tanks. What conflict, branch and position would you choose and why?

    6. (Blatantly lifting from my interview by TexasBestGrok) What got you into blogging? If you had to write a mission statement for your blog, what would it be? Do you have any conscious role models for or influences in your blogging?

    Thank you in advance for your answers. I’ll provide a link to them when they’re posted.

  • NBA Calls Possible Halt to Target Centermass

    There may be no blogging tonight, as I have tickets to the Rockets-Mavs game two.

  • Syria Troops End 29 Years in Lebanon

    It wasn’t UN pressure. It was the demands of the Lebanese people that killed the beast of the lengthy Syrian occupation.

    Syrian troops burned documents and dismantled military posts before they finished their effective withdrawal from Lebanon on Sunday, ending 29 years of military presence in the country.

    A few score Syrian troops are to remain in Lebanon for a farewell ceremony that the Lebanese Army plans to hold Tuesday in Rayak, a few kilometers from the Syrian border.

    At Syria’s last major garrison in Lebanon, 15 tanks rolled on to flatbed trucks, ready for the drive home on Sunday. Soldiers burned papers, knocked down walls and loaded ammunition on to trucks at the base outside the town of Deir el-Ahmar in the Bekaa Valley.

    In Damascus, the Syrian capital, a government official said: “Within the next few hours, all the troops will be out of Lebanon.”

    “What will be left are those who will take part in the official farewell” on Tuesday, the official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity.

    Syria had vowed to pull out of Lebanon by April 30, in line with a United Nations Security Council resolution, but its forces will be out about four days early.

    The Syrians entered Lebanon in 1976, ostensibly as peacekeepers in the year-old civil war. After the war ended in 1990, 40,000 Syrian troops remained in Lebanon, giving Damascus the decisive say in Lebanese politics.

    Syria began withdrawing from Lebanon last month following international and Lebanese pressure in the wake of the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri on Feb. 14.

    Make no mistake — Syrian intrusion in Lebanon is by no means over.

  • My Interview by TexasBestGrok

    It’s a meme. JohnL at TexasBestGrok subjected himself, and now it’s my turn.

    He asked the questions. I’ll give the answers. To perpetuate the meme, leave a comment saying you want to be interviewed. The first five doing so will be asked six questions, of which you can choose to answer five. You will update your blog/site with the answers to the questions. You will include this explanation and an offer to interview others in the same post. I’ll provide a link to your answers.

    Here are John’s questions and my responses:

    1. For anyone new to your blog, why did you choose the name Target Centermass?

    After I decided to start a blog, my first step was to come up with a name. I anticipated correctly that a great deal of my content would be related to military matters and I’d decided to blog anonymously (no longer the case) under the name Gunner, which I’d already been using for years on an Aggie discussion forum and which was my last position as a tanker.

    So I thought. And thought. I actually found my list of ideas:

    • Centermass — where Gunners are taught to aim
    • GunnerSabotTank — the fire command issued by the tank commander
    • Dinotanker — a tribute to my start on the old M60-A3 at a time when the active Army was already through with the old beasts
    • Jeditanker — as a nod to my M1 and M1-A1 time, dubbed so because of the tech jump from the M60
    • Blue Six Golf — the radio call sign for my last position, gunner on 3rd Platoon Leader’s vehicle

    Finally I chose Target Centermass, describing a perfectly placed hit on the target. Still, I liked Blue Six Golf, so my blog took the TCm name and started at bluesixgolf.blogspot.com.

    2. While a student at Texas A&M, did you get to help build any of the bonfires? Any memorable anecdotes? (For the benefit of any non-Aggie/non-Longhorn/non-Texan readers you might want to give a short explanation about the Aggie bonfire tradition).

    Alas! No, and it’s one of my greatest regrets. I’ve seen several burn, but I never could be bothered to chip in on the labor. It was only later that I realized the camaraderie that I missed.

    As to those unfamiliar with the tradition that dates to 1909, the Bonfire symbolizes the burning desire in Texas Aggies to beat the hell out of the University of Texas, or t.u. in Aggie jargon. As the world’s biggest bonfire, it once reached a height of 110 feet in the ’70s before being constrained to a more modest 55 feet. The Bonfire has not burned since the tragic collapse in 1999 that cost the lives of twelve Aggies.

    3. What do you think about the current long term force “transformation” policy of the DoD, i.e., the “modular” Army based on swappable brigades like the new Stryker brigades? (On that note, what do you think about the Stryker vehicle? Competitor or complement to heavy armor?)

    I like the transformation, to a degree. Rummy drove for it before the current state of events made it seem obvious; it was well past time we branched from Cold War doctrine. I’ve blogged before about the traps of always preparing for the previous fight. My concern is that it may go too far, sapping us in potential conflicts with China or North Korea.

    As to the Stryker, I have no experience with the vehicle but I know the troopers serving on it sure like them. They certainly have a value in urban warfare, something never really expected of heavy armor. I view it more as a complement to the main battle tank and a competitor to the Bradley. Certainly not a competitor to the M1 in mass armor engagement.

    4. What’s your favorite Tex-Mex place in the Dallas area? Do you normally order the same thing, or something different each time? Favorite dish/drink?

    I’ve always felt the best Tex-Mex could never be found in a chain place — not that I won’t eat at those, just the better food seems to be at the small hole-in-the-wall type places. In the Dallas area, I’d say I’d pick El Paso Cafe on Central in Plano. Fast, cheap and delicious (and close to work). I’d say about 80 percent of the time I’ll order the tacos al carbon or the carne asada.

    Now, the best Tex-Mex place I’ve ever frequented would be Las Nortenos in old downtown Bryan, Texas. However, I’m always open to trying new places. Any suggestions? Also, here’s a tip: there is no good Tex-Mex in Washington, D.C.

    5. While you were in the Army, what was the most exotic posting you had? Any fun stories related to that specific location?

    I don’t know. Do you consider Ft. Knox, Ky., or Killeen, Texas, to be exotic? Yeah, me neither.

    6. What got you into blogging? If you had to write a mission statement for your blog, whoat would it be? Do you have any conscious role models for or influences in your blogging?

    My love of journalism and my disgust at how it is currently practiced.

    As long as I can remember, I have been a newspaper junkie. I took the first jounalism course I was able, joining my high school newspaper staff my freshman year. I went on to be editor of that paper, at the time one of the most respected and awarded high school rags in the state of Texas.

    My journalistic strength was always in straight newswriting, something that seems to be lacking in today’s media stalwarts. At some point in time, I stumbled across Eject! Eject! Eject! and admired the amazing content. After that, I found similar enjoyment at USS Clueless. Those were my introduction to blogs. I’d been posting for years on an internet forum, putting forth my views and spouting occasional drunken rants. An occasional poster there also happened to be a blogger, elgato at the Swanky Conservative. I figured, hey, two plus two equals five, given large values of two. Maybe, just maybe, I could do this blogging thing.

    A mission statement? I’ll go bland:

    Postings, meandering thoughts and rants from a former-Libertarian-again-Republican, hawkish Texan. Whatever I want, whenever I want.

    Role models or influences? A little more than the brevity of your typical Instapundit post. A touch of the Fat Guy when he’s angry. Heck, I’m still trying to find my sea legs. I don’t think I’ve yet settled into my final blogging style. In the real world, I’ve a far more sarcastic and dry wit than I typically use on Target Centermass. I mean far, far more. Oh yeah, my sense of humor on matters of a sexual nature suspended maturing at about the age of fifteen. Sooner or later, this will come out on the blog. I’ll keep plugging and see how things develop; I’m no essayist, but the site could probably use an occasional drunken rant. We’ll see.

  • Gallipoli Dead Remembered at Dawn

    Ninety years ago tomorrow, one of the bloodiest blunders in military history began. At dawn, the World War I star-crossed campaign of Gallipoli will be honored.

    The bloody World War I landing of Australian and New Zealand troops in Gallipoli will be remembered at a solemn dawn ceremony on Monday.

    Australian Prime Minister John Howard, his New Zealand counterpart Helen Clark and Britain’s Prince Charles will make the pilgrimage to the Turkish bay.

    The campaign was aimed at capturing Istanbul and providing a supply line to Russia 90 years ago.

    But more than 100,000, including 20,000 Irish and British, never returned home.

    The site of the down service is named Anzac cove after the Australian and New Zealand Army Corps who landed there on 25 April 1915.

    Thousands of visitors from the two countries are expected to attend the largest gathering ever at the site.

    The campaign ended eight months later, when the Allied Forces abandoned the peninsula.

    “To walk on the battlefields of Gallipoli is to walk on ground where so much blood was shed it has become almost sacred soil,” Helen Clark said at a ceremony to honour Turkey’s fallen troops on Sunday.

    “For New Zealand as for Australia it was at Gallipoli that our young nations came of age.”

    Go read for much more on the tragic campaign. I would also recommend the Mel Gibson flick of the same name.

    I, for one, will mark the day with the haunting tune “The Band Played Waltzing Matilda” by the Pogues.

    But the band played Waltzing Matilda
    As we stopped to bury our slain
    We buried ours and the Turks buried theirs
    Then we started all over again

    Full lyrics can be found here.

  • Quote of the Week, 24 APR 05

    I don’t know what the hell this “logistics” is that Marshall is always talking about, but I want some of it.

    —Admiral Ernest Joseph King, 1942

  • Oui or Non, EU Constitution Will Persist

    Even if the French vote down the European Union’s proposed constitution, which may well happen next month and would theoretically doom the proposal, its supporters in the EU have a plan to carry on with the ratification process.

    The key to their “Plan B” is to insist that countries due to hold votes later this year – or even next year, like Britain – carry on regardless of the result in France until all 25 member states have been given a chance to ratify the treaty.

    On the surface, there is no basis for holding further referendums if the French vote No. The draft European Union constitution must be ratified by all member states, and a French No should effectively kill the treaty.

    However, the EU was not built by letting details like No votes sway its founding fathers from their mission. After the Maastricht Treaty was voted down in Denmark and Ireland, both countries were invited to vote again, and finally voted Yes.

    “No means no” has no meaning to the EU. Instead it means keep plying the subject with drinks until the subject slurs yes or passes out. Either is taken as acquiescence and means that the EU can have its way and then proceed to its next target.

    Faced with 21 consecutive opinion polls showing the No camp ahead in France, pro-constitution EU leaders have begun asserting that there is a moral, political and even a legal obligation to carry on voting – an argument aimed squarely at Britain.

    Reversing his previous categorical assurances that a referendum would be held in Britain come what may, Tony Blair is now hinting at a change of course. He said on Monday that if France were to reject the constitutional treaty on May 29 there might be nothing for the British electorate to vote on.

    Jean-Claude Juncker, the prime minister of Luxembourg, whose tiny nation holds the rotating presidency of the European Union, said: “The French vote is important but I don’t believe it should stop the ratification process under way in other countries.”

    A vote that should, in theory, derail the constitution is “important but” not enough to stop the process. Trust me, in the eyes of the EU supporters, no votes in all 25 countries would be a “hurdle but” nothing that couldn’t be overcome.

    Senior eurocrats have started murmuring that Britain and other waverers are obliged to continue the ratification process.

    Their argument is founded on an obscure declaration tacked on to the end of the draft constitution that says that if, by December 2006, four fifths of the 25 states have ratified the treaty but “one of more member states have encountered difficulties in proceeding with ratification”, then “the matter will be referred” to a summit of EU heads of state and government.

    Ah yes, the little-known codicil that will allow them to place non-ratifying countries on double-secret probation.

    Françoise le Bail, the chief spokesman of the commission, yesterday insisted that such a summit could only gauge the true depth of EU support for the constitution if voting continued, making that clause “the tangible element, if you will, that seems to suggest that the process of ratification should continue to the end”.

    Her analysis is not shared by all EU governments. One EU diplomat said: “It’s obvious that if the French vote No there will be an immediate discussion between the governments. If President Chirac says the French won’t vote twice, then the idea that other countries are going to go on to ratify is laughable. For one thing, how exactly do you go about winning a Yes campaign in another country, if the French have made clear they are going to veto the constitution at the end?”

    It is my opinion that this diplomat has not read the writing on the wall. This constitution will, one way or another, be ratified in its current or a very slightly modified form. The national referendums are only a formality, one especially easily overcome if the EU can get 20 yes votes by December 2006.

    This is not exactly without precedent. The United States’ Articles of Confederation required approval by all states for amendment. However, the Constitution set is own lower barrier for acceptance, declaring the Articles moot and itself the supreme law of the land at the approval of only nine of the thirteen states. The EU’s proposed constitution has set itself up for a similar maneuver, though I don’t expect the reward to be anywhere near as great for following generations who will live under its law.

  • Watsamadder with Kids These Days?

    Well, nothing really, generally speaking. It’s a question that has been bemoaned for generations and will be for generations to come. Still, that doesn’t mean there isn’t some occasional jackassery that needs questioning.

    Should women love their vaginas? Yes, especially if the women in question are hot. Should high school girls wear buttons advertising said love in school? Hell no. And Guy over at Snugg Harbor also doesn’t think so. And with conviction (don’t just skip over the beginning stuff about the hosed state of math instruction).

    There are two female high schoolers in Winona, Minnesota. Both are excelling in their studies, and up to now, were exemplary in their standings in school.

    Well, it seems one of the two, had seen the theatrical production of “The Vagina Monologues”. She came away with a very positive feeling about the play’s message, and in talking to her friend, passed those positive feelings on to her. In fact, they were both so positive about the event, they chose to wear buttons to school which said “I Love (big red heart) My Vagina”.

    There was one school official, who worked in the schools administration, took strong exception to the buttons, and reported same. There was also a teacher of one of the girls who would not let the young lady into class should she be wearing the button. The bottom line is both were told they faced suspension should they continue to wear the buttons. They have continued to do so, and countered with the administrations actions being in violation of, you guessed it, their “constitutional right to free speech.”

    It seems the ACLU has also started to take an interest in this, which should send red flags (no pun intended) up about what should be the correct way to deal with this.

    In my perfect world, here is what should be done. (And would have been, done in real life, 40-50 years ago.)

    Guy goes on to explain and justify his ideal solution to the matter. The weakness of Guy’s stance is that it’s based upon real-life experience, tried-and-true educational practices and common sense. These are all things viewed as mere impediments to be overcome by the ACLU and, unfortunately, many of today’s judicial rulings. Go read and feel free to chime in on his comments.

    But, hey, enough about kids at school. How about those afterschool video game sessions? Well, lucky for them there’s the game Narc, wherein they can learn that doing drugs can assist in fighting crime.

    In the first-person video game “Narc,” published by Midway, you play an undercover police officer busting drug dealers.

    Except in this game, your cop character can take the drugs he confiscates — and the illicit substances can enhance performance.

    Narc’s publishers at Midway say the game is all about choices, and the consequences of those choices. The following is an excerpt of a statement released to CNN by the company’s chief marketing officer, Steve Allison:

    “The drugs in Narc affect game play — addiction, and crime and punishment are predominant themes in the story. Ultimately, the players who choose to take drugs will face consequences; they will experience the highs and lows of this culture, but following this path will ultimately lead to failure.”

    […]

    “I would normally say ‘just say no’ to drugs, except in this case they’ve been replaced for power-ups. If you were playing Super Mario Bros., a ‘magic mushroom’ would make you bigger and more powerful. Here, it’s kind of the same theory,” says video game reviewer Scott Steinberg.

    Marijuana, as you light a virtual joint and take a long drag, causes the screen to become a hazy green. The drug slows time for criminals in the game, allowing your cop character to chase down and arrest them easier.

    LSD helps differentiate friend from foe, so your character knows whom to confront; allies grow wacky court jester heads, and enemies become devil-headed cartoons. Trippy music and psychedelic colors accompany your computer-generated acid trip.

    Other drugs in Narc include speed, ecstasy and crack. Crack, after the distinct sound of someone huffing on a pipe, gives players a one-shot-one-kill skill. Your crackhead cop character suddenly becomes an expert marksman.

    Drug use may give you super powers in the game, but abuse can cause addiction. Protodone — the game’s version of methodone, can curb your cravings. Otherwise, addiction can lead to withdrawal.

    But unlike real-life, you can kick your virtual habit after a few skillful clicks on the game controller.

    Great lesson. I guess it’s a good thing an M-rating will keep all kids from playing this beauty. Wait, the M-rating is actually just an enticement, but we won’t deal with that reality.

    As an aside, today’s video games may seem more real and graphically far superior to the old-school games of my youth, but they really do seem to lack a key element the old games possessed — fun.

  • Courts Take on Terrorists

    Moussaoui Pleads Guilty, Says bin Laden Chose Him for Attacks

    Zacarias Moussaoui pleaded guilty today to conspiring with the September Eleventh hijackers to kill Americans and declared that he was personally chosen by Osama bin Laden to fly a plane into the White House during a later attack.
    Moussaoui admitted guilt in front of a packed courtroom only a few miles from where one of the four hijacked planes crashed into the Pentagon in 2001.

    He pleaded to six counts, four of which could bring the death penalty, and said he had not been promised a lighter sentence for his pleas and expected no leniency.

    The judge accepted the plea, making the French citizen the lone person convicted in a U.S. court in connection with the attacks that killed nearly three thousand.

    Moussaoui will have his sentence determined at a later date.

    Chad at In the Bullpen notes that Moussaoui expects no leniency in his sentencing. Chad then goes on to take the court to task.

    In my view this trial took completely too long […] Moussaoui should have served as a lesson to terrorists around the world that the American justice system will react harshly when this country is attacked, but it did not.

    You may also find the case’s Statement of Facts an interesting read.

    13 Years for Shoe Bomb Plotter

    A British Muslim who took part in a “shoe bomb” plot to blow up two transatlantic airliners was jailed for 13 years yesterday.

    Saajid Badat, 25, an Islamic scholar whose anger at the treatment of Muslims led him to become a potential “courier of death” after attending Taliban training camps in Afghanistan, would have faced a 50-year sentence had he not backed out of the conspiracy.

    His fellow potential shoe bomber, Richard Reid, a former Brixton street criminal who converted to Islam and became a follower of the al-Qa’eda leader Osama bin Laden, tried and failed to detonate his footwear on a Paris-Miami flight just months after the September 11 attacks on New York. Reid has been jailed for life in the US.

    Badat, however, threw away his shoe and hid an amount of explosive at his family home in Gloucester in December 2001. Like Reid’s device it would have been capable of blowing a hole in the fuselage of an aircraft, almost certainly bringing it down.

    At the Old Bailey yesterday Mr Justice Fulford told Badat, who had admitted conspiring to blow up an airliner at a hearing in February, “that the plot was truly appalling”.

    ”Your joint objective was the murder of hundreds of unsuspecting men, women and children who happened by chance and bad luck to be travelling on the airliner selected by the conspiracy.”

    Badat had remained in the plot, which involved him and Reid blowing themselves up on flights from Europe to America, shortly before Christmas 2001, until “very late in its evolution”, the court heard. His continued participation may have encouraged Reid. However, in the end Badat turned his back on the plan and tried to return to a normal life and hoped the affair would “go away”.

    […]

    [Michael Mansfield, QC, defending,] said: “It was his faith which in a sense took him to the brink of disaster and at the same time it was his faith in the end which pulled him back.” Badat, he added, wanted to send a message to those minded to use force, that “they should have the courage to turn away”.

    Was it faith that stopped him? Not the faith of a man who would would travel to Afghanistan for terrorist training under bin Laden. No, I’d say it was more likely cowardice. Badat and Reid, coward and incompetent. Talk about your pair of jokers.

    Missile Accused a Clown, Says Lawyer

    A Briton charged with selling a shoulder-launched missile to terrorists for use in the US was described by his lawyer today as “a joke, a clown”, who was strung along by undercover agents in a case of entrapment.

    Defence lawyer Henry Klingeman portrayed Hemant Lakhani, 69, a British citizen born in India, as a failed businessman who “couldn’t finish a deal if his life depended on it”.

    Mr Lakhani, arrested in August 2003 after a two-year international sting operation, was charged with trying to provide material support to terrorists, unlawful arms sales, smuggling and money laundering. He could face 25 years in prison.

    US District Judge Katharine Hayden scheduled the New Jersey jury to begin deliberations on Tuesday.

    […]

    While the prosecution depicted him as an enthusiastic broker eager to supply a terrorist group, the defence said he was a victim of the Government’s overzealous law enforcement in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks.

    “He may be a fool, a charlatan, but he’s no arms dealer,” said Mr Klingeman, who said there was nothing in Lakhani’s background to suggest involvement with terrorists and no criminal record of that sort.

    The defence lawyer said Mr Lakhani was a failed businessman who had declared bankruptcy, owed taxes on his house, was evicted from the office where he ran his clothing business, and owed money on bounced cheques.

    Prosecutor Stuart Rabner countered that Mr Lakhani had freely offered to arrange the sale of 50 more missiles.

    “There was no coercion. No threats, no guns to the defendant’s head,” said Mr Rabner. “You don’t have to be sophisticated to be a criminal. You can be a dumb criminal.”

    The prosecution produced hours of videotapes and taped telephone conversations of Mr Lakhani allegedly making the deal with an undercover FBI informant posing as an Islamic militant, and evidence of negotiations with Russian law enforcement officers posing as Ukrainian arms suppliers.

    An interesting strategy there by the defense. It might have been effective had Lakhani been charged with being a genius. Unfortunately, willfully trying to aid terrorists is a bit more serious matter. It’s also something idiots are quite capable of doing. Since we can’t kill him, I hope the jury locks him away for the max. Maybe others behind bars can complete the justice Lakhani deserves.

    As an aside, isn’t that just a craptastic headline?