January 31, 2008
DAHLGREN, VA. — The Navy set a new world record for the most powerful electromagnetic railgun when it fired a test shot here Thursday morning.The gun fired an aluminum projectile at 10.68 megajoules. A joule is the work needed to produce one watt of energy for one second. A megajoule is 1 million joules.
Guests including Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Gary Roughead and Rear Adm. William Landay, head of the Office of Naval Research, witnessed the shot via a live video feed at the Naval Surface Warfare Center in Dahlgren. The gun was launched from a control center after approximately four minutes of charging the electromagnetic rails. After the charge, the gun fired and witnesses saw a quick burst of flame as the projectile, traveling at 2,500 meters per second, or Mach 7, hit its target.
Damn -- that puts the lie to the old saying that "You can run but you can't hide". I do believe that running wouldn't even be an option, with the target truly being dead before it knew what hit it.
You can watch the video here -- just don't blink.
And I love the quote at the beginning.
"I never, ever, want to see a sailor or Marine in a fair fight."
Adm. Gary Roughead
Chief of Naval Operations
Bravo, Admiral -- and let's extend that wish to the Army and Air Force as well.
OPEN TRACKBACKING AT The Virtuous Republic, Rosemary's Thoughts, The Random Yak, guerrilla radio, Right Truth, Shadowscope, Big Dog's Weblog, Cao's Blog, Leaning Straight Up, The Pet Haven, Conservative Cat, Adeline and Hazel, third world county, Pirate's Cove, The Pink Flamingo, CORSARI D'ITALIA, A Newt One, Right Voices, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Posted by: Greg at
01:36 PM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 302 words, total size 3 kb.
January 27, 2008
In response to a Marine Corps recruiting office established in Berkeley last year, local activists are trying to make it more difficult for future recruiting centers to open in the city.If passed by a majority of Berkeley voters, a proposed initiative would require military recruiting offices and private military companies in Berkeley to first acquire a special use permit.
To obtain this permit, a business must hold public hearings and a public comment period.
If the initiative passes, recruitment offices could not be opened within 600 feet of residential districts, public parks, public health clinics, public libraries, schools or churches.
Currently, a recruiting office is held to the same standards as most other businesses, which do not require a public hearing or have limits on where offices can be established.
The author of the initiative, Berkeley-based lawyer Sharon Adams, modeled the initiative after current zoning law that restricts the location of adult-oriented businesses.
"In the same way that many communities limit the location of pornographic stores, that's the same way we feel about the military recruiting stations," said PhoeBe sorgen, an initiative proponent and a member of the city's Peace and Justice Commission. "Teenagers that really want to find them will be able to seek them out and find them, but we don't want them in our face."
I'm curious -- does the city actually have the legal ability to impose such a restriction upon the location of federal government offices? And if it does actually put such a measure in place, what will be the response of the federal government? Will they withhold federal funds from Berkeley? Perhaps require that all federal offices open in the same zones as the recruiters -- in effect closing all government offices, including post offices, in the city?
But in the end I have to wonder -- has the time come for the United States to secede from Berkeley, and build a border fence around it to keep such undesirables out of the country?
H/T Michelle Malkin
Posted by: Greg at
05:22 AM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 364 words, total size 2 kb.
January 21, 2008
The Pentagon is considering Gen. David H. Petraeus for the top NATO command later this year, a move that would give the general, the top American commander in Iraq, a high-level post during the next administration but that has raised concerns about the practice of rotating war commanders.A senior Pentagon official said that it was weighing “a next assignment for Petraeus” and that the NATO post was a possibility. “He deserves one and that has also always been a highly prestigious position,” the official said. “So he is a candidate for that job, but there have been no final decisions and nothing on the timing.”
The question of General PetraeusÂ’s future comes as the Pentagon is looking at changing several top-level assignments this year. President Bush has been an enthusiastic supporter of General Petraeus, whom he has credited with overseeing a troop increase and counterinsurgency plan credited with reducing the sectarian violence in Iraq, and some officials say the president would want to keep General Petraeus in Iraq as long as possible.
In one approach under discussion, General Petraeus would be nominated and confirmed for the NATO post before the end of September, when Congress is expected to break for the presidential election. He might stay in Iraq for some time after that before moving to the allianceÂ’s headquarters in Brussels, but would take his post before a new president takes office.
And if a Republican wins in November, we are likely to see General Petraeus head the Joint Chiefs of Staff before his career ends. Expect significantly less respect from a Democrat President, given the insults directed towards the general last fall and the accusations of treason from Democrat surrogates.
Posted by: Greg at
06:21 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 298 words, total size 2 kb.
January 09, 2008
But that isnÂ’t enough for at least reporter with the Washington Post.
In contrast to the military's professionalism and restraint, the Bush administration wasted no time falling back on its knee-jerk rules of engagement. President Bush called the incident "a provocative act" and "dangerous situation." Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice continued to play up the Iranian threat. "The United States is going to defend its interests, it's going to defend the interests of its allies," she said defensively. "Iran is the single most important, greatest threat to the kind of Middle East we all want to see. It's a supporter of terrorism in Iraq, in Lebanon, in the Palestinian territories. It has nuclear ambitions."
Yeah, verbally condemning acts of war and pointing out the many misdeeds of Mahmoud the Mad and the Mullahcracy in Iran is irresponsible behavior to this idiot, who previously called our troops overpaid, pampered mercenaries and declared them to be enemies of American liberty. It strikes me that he has never met an American enemy he didnÂ’t like, and that he would have found some reason to condemn the Bush Administration no matter what the outcome of the incident had been.
Show restraint and condemn the provocation -- WRONG.
Show restraint and suffer an attack -- WRONG.
Show restraint and remain silent -- WRONG.
Sink the enemy -- WRONG.
And since Arkin doesn't bless us with his wisdom on what would have been the right course of action, we know that he'll be able to condemn the Administration if they take a different course of action in the future. After all, being a journalist means never having to take a position that makes a real difference in terms of lives and national security.
Maybe he is angling for an endowed chair at Columbia University, so he can join these Islamist-lovers on their pro-jihadi junket.
Posted by: Greg at
12:13 PM
| Comments (11)
| Add Comment
Post contains 369 words, total size 3 kb.
59 queries taking 0.1465 seconds, 169 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
