USS Texas (SSN 775), that is.

The Navy debuted its newest nuclear-powered submarine Friday in an Atlantic Ocean swing off the Florida coast, the second in the latest fast-attack class that marks a broad departure from the Cold War-era deterrence boats.

The Texas, which will officially earn a "USS" designator in a commissioning ceremony in two weeks, weighs 7,800 tons, measures 377 feet long and can remain submerged on covert surveillance up to three months. It travels faster than 25 knots underwater and dives farther than 800 feet.

"It's much more effective than any ship I've been on before," said Capt. John Litherland, who has been on more than 50. "It's not the fastest, but the difference is that it's quiet even at its top speed."

Perhaps the biggest improvement is the ability to travel with a small special forces submarine, nine commandos and their gear. Previous subs would have carried only three Navy SEALS.

The second of the so-called Virginia boats, following the USS Virginia, the Texas also features advanced navigation and computer systems that only require two sailors piloting. The periscope is fiberoptic, useful for two reasons: there is no longer a vulnerable hatch on top to telescope into and out of, and its images can be projected to everyone in the control room.

God bless Texas!

Posted by: Greg at 12:41 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 243 words, total size 2 kb.

Some on the Left call it a "backdoor draft" -- but it isn't. Then again, their mischaracterization of the truth is one more demonstration that the Left cannot be trusted with the security of our nation.

Spc. Chris Carlson had been out of the U.S. Army for two years and was working at Costco in California when he received notice that he was being called back into service.

The 24-year-old is one of thousands of soldiers and Marines who have been deployed to Iraq under a policy that allows military leaders to recall troops who have left the service but still have time left on their contract.

"I thought it was crazy," said Carlson, who has found himself protecting convoys on Iraq's dangerous roads as part of a New Jersey National Guard unit. "Never in a million years did I think they would call me back."

Although troops are allowed to leave active duty after a few years of service, they generally still have time left on their contract with the military that is known as "inactive ready reserve" status, or IRR. During that time, they have to let their service know their current address, but they don't train, draw a paycheck or associate in any other way with the military.

But with active duty units already completing multiple tours in Iraq, the
Pentagon has employed the rarely used tactic of calling people back from IRR status, a policy sometimes referred to as a "backdoor draft."

But it isn't any sort of draft -- as noted above, it is holding individuals who volunteered for service to the terms of their contract. It is something which they are told about up front, and which they know to expect.

Take this soldier, for example.

Anthony Breaux, 24, from La Place, La., said he had a feeling that eventually he would be recalled to service after hearing of so many other soldiers who were pulled from IRR status. Breaux, who left active duty in September 2002, said he knew it was part of the bargain when he joined the army.

"Well, I signed up. I signed the papers. So you know what? I got to do what I got to do," Breaux said, before getting ready for a reconnaissance patrol around Camp Anaconda.

Got that -- they knew what they were signing up for when they signed their contracts. They are not draftees being plucked from the streets -- they are members of our nations military reserves being called to fulfill the duty they volunteered for.

And anyone who claims differently is simply a liar, and more concerned with trashing the Bush Administration than protecting the United States from its enemies.

Posted by: Greg at 04:17 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 456 words, total size 3 kb.

After all, these are OLD chemical weapons -- weapons dating back to the Cold War and therefore clearly old enough that they must be degraded beyond use and not a threat to anyone.

The Army has begun draining and incinerating thousands of containers of mustard gas held in storage at a facility in the Utah desert.

The project at the Deseret Chemical Depot, begun Friday, will last six to 10 years. It involves burning about 6,200 tons of liquid blister agent and is complicated by the presence of an estimated 800 pounds of toxic mercury.

At one time, the depot housed more chemical weapons than any other U.S. storage site. To comply with the international Chemical Weapons Convention, the U.S. government began weapons destruction there in 1996.

The destruction of the mustard gas is the final phase in the project.

Mustard gas, which is a liquid at room temperature, causes severe blisters, internal and external bleeding, and strips mucous membranes from airways.

Workers will first drain and incinerate the 1-ton mustard gas containers, depot spokeswoman Alaine Southworth said. They will also design and install filters to scrub mercury from the exhaust, she said.

So would someone explain to me why American chemical weapons must be disposed of so carefully? Are these some sort of super-weapons that contain speacial chemicals not bound by the same laws of physics that operate in Iraq? Is this program simply a government boodoggle, putting an expensive piece of pork in someone's home state?

Or is it perhaps teh case that these weapons are still dangerous WMDs -- and that the ones found in Iraq are ALSO live, dangerous WMDs that prove that Saddam Hussein was not in compliance with his UN obligations?

Posted by: Greg at 12:45 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 303 words, total size 2 kb.

I really have to wonder what world the editors of the NY Times live in. It is certainly a very different one than I do.

Look at this bizarre statement at the end of today's editorial.

The Geneva Conventions protect Americans. If this country changes the rules, itÂ’s changing the rules for Americans taken prisoner abroad. That is far too high a price to pay so this administration can hang on to its misbegotten policies.

Let's look at this, shall we.

Since the end of WWII, Americans have not received the protections afforded under the Geneva Conventions in any conflict.

In Korea, our prisoners were subject to brainwashing and deprivation. Ask John McCain about the respect for the Geneva Conventions in Vietnam -- torture and degrading treatment were the norm there. Not only is one American POW still unaccounted for follwoing the Gulf War in 1991, but it is also known that female POWs were subject to rape. And in Iraq and Afghanistan today, those who our courts grant the protections of the Geneva Conventions (incorrectly, according to the clear language of the treaties) subject captive Americans to beheading. Not one perpetrator of such abuses against Americans has ever been brought to justice by either US, national, or international courts.

Would you care to explain to me again how Americans are protected by the Geneva Conventions?

Posted by: Greg at 06:38 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 238 words, total size 2 kb.

I've never made a secret of the fact that I find "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" to be a flawed policy, and the ban on homosexuals serving to be equally flawed. But this argument in support of it is particularly dumb.

Even its supporters acknowledge that don't ask, don't tell isn't perfect.

"It's like what Churchill said about democracy -- it's the worst system possible, except for all the other ones," said Charles Moskos, a military sociologist at Northwestern University who helped craft the policy.

But, Mr. Moskos said, allowing openly homosexual service members would hurt the morale of the military rank and file and make many recruits uncomfortable.

"There are few situations in life where you're forced to live in intimate circumstances not of your choosing," he said.

I cannot help but point out the flaw in Moskos' position on the issue.

First, we have an all volunteer military. Nobody is "forced" to be a part of it. Individuals voluntarily chose to submit themselves to military discipline and military policies.

If anything, Moskos' argument is much more suited to arguing that the desegregation of the military by Harry Truman was unwise and inappropriate. After all, that happened during the days of the military draft, when there wre thousands of American men involuntarily serving and being forced to live in circumstances not of their choosing. Many of them, especially those born and raised in the segregated South, had no desire to live and work as equals with blacks -- much less find themselves under the command authority of those they had been raised to view as "niggers" who were inferior to any white man. Truman ordered desegregation to happen, and made it clear that those who could not accept the policy should be prepared to leave the military. And it worked.

Ending the ban on homosexuals serving in the military would create no more serious problem -- and those who find themselves unable or unwilling to serve with their fellow Americans on an equal basis should be prepared to leave teh military under less than honorable circumstances.

Posted by: Greg at 11:14 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 360 words, total size 2 kb.

An American sailor with a distinctly Jewish name is in the brig accused of spying -- for Russia.

A sailor facing espionage and desertion charges has been held at a Norfolk, Virginia, brig since March, the U.S. Navy said Wednesday.

Ariel Weinmann, 21, is suspected of having worked on behalf of Russia, said military sources close to the case.

He was likely to have had access to technical manuals and other material on submarine systems, Navy sources said. No one else in the Navy is suspected of having worked with Weinmann, they said.

The fire control technician third class, assigned to the submarine USS Albuquerque, attempted on three occasions to pass classified information to foreign agents, the charges against him state.

Those incidents occurred in March 2005 in Bahrain; October 2005 in Vienna, Austria; and March 2006 in Mexico City, Mexico, according to the charges.

In addition to the espionage allegations, Weinmann also faces desertion charges, which could result in the death penalty. He is accused of deserting in July 2005 during his first tour of duty.

A customs agent took Weinmann into custody March 26 at Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport when he tried to re-enter the United States.

The case is the second involving allegations of military spying by Russia. The Defense Department has said it suspects Russia collected information about American intelligence in Iraq from U.S. Central Command in Doha, Qatar, in 2003.

That didn't stop the Arab press from reporting the story very differently, according to the Jerusalem Post.

A US Navy sailor, Ariel J. Weinmann, is suspected of spying for Israel and has been held in prison for four months, according to an article published Monday in the Saudi daily Al-Watan. It reported that Weinmann is being held at a military base in Virginia on suspicion of espionage and desertion.

According to the navy, Weinmann was apprehended on March 26 "after it was learned that he had been listed as a deserter by his command." Though initial information released by the navy makes no mention of it, Al-Watan reported that he was returning from an undisclosed "foreign country." American sources close to the Defense Department told Al-Watan that Israel was the country in question.

Given the lack of a free press in Saudi Arabia, it is clear that this was an attempt at misinformation and propaganda to drive a wedge between the US and Israel at a crucial time for both nations. Are we really sure that the Saudis are partners in the war on terrorism -- or are they out to see to it that the terrorists succeed in eliminating Israel -- and her Jews -- from the face of the earth?

Posted by: Greg at 01:32 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 455 words, total size 3 kb.