sherpa

I wonder if the author of that piece was as forthcoming on "abandonment," when the C-17 left Afghanistan with people hanging on the landing gear. Maybe there will be an opinion piece on the Biden Administration's oft repeated approach to "people paying their fair share" in federal income tax or gun control now that his kid is a known abuser and non law abider in both issues.

The logic here, which as presented by your post, is a compelling argument for not letting women of reproductive age into the military at all. I don't support that, due to need, but the logic is clear. I've done this as an officer. Solving issues with women in the military took up ten times more of my time than men.

Totally agree with other. 20.....Robert James.

Whenever anyone brings the Pope into the conversation, you'll lose me. As a twelve year beneficiary of Catholic education and upbringing, I am quite aware of the tenets of Catholic theology. The Papal office, Mary, and a few other things cause me to leave that faith for more consistent and supported theology. Biden has not only disregarded that view, he has stridently opposed it. Not my issue or care, but suggesting that the Pope likes him and that somehow excuses the contradiction between his activist views that are in direct conflict is not going to win the day, at least not for me. Biden always chooses the politically expedient. Religion doesn't matter. Popes have gotten along or at least coexisted with a lot of nasty folks.

Their ruling is congruent with the Constitution, which is their mandate. Political popularity is another matter.

I have no doubt that it will "remembered at the ballot box," but political outcome is not the purview of the Supreme Court. They have ruled that a Constitutional right didn't exist under a right to privacy. Others have chosen the political goal over their expressed religious affiliation. I can name a guy if you want. Chips fall.

That's why it should be a state issue. The Supreme Court ruled accurately that there is no guarantee in the Constitution of the right to abortion based on a right to privacy issue. That's their mandate. Not on ruling on what is politically popular. Let the states do it with local involvement, as it should be.

No. Flying a drone there would not be a problem.

Perhaps. One of the reasons the Ukrainian counter offensive is so slow is because the Russians had an entire winter to prepare the battlefield, including mines, tank traps with indirect fire, and a host of other things to slow down an advance, Still, unexploded bomblets from cluster munitions are not hidden underground. They simply lay on the ground, clearly visible.

Quick note to Human Rights Watch. All weapons are indiscriminate when they explode. The difference is who is using them, under what rules, what they are using, and how good they are at it. Stop wars and you end the problem.

You have forgotten that she is a "historic figure. “I’m a historic figure and I certainly walk in history every day,” As someone else said, Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Lincoln and Karine Jean-Pierre. At least she got further than the incredibly unqualified Biden Administration nominee for FAA Administrator, who never made through Senate confirmation hearings.

This is absolutely true and the reason I went after Tibs when he first linked the use of cluster bombs with war crimes allegations. Whoever wins does the prosecuting, and people judging have no real idea of the context of their use. We have an all volunteer military, and we have cluster bombs. Subjecting our aviators to possible war crimes for such deployment would be an unforgiveable mistake, unless they intentionally the used them beyond the bounds of rules of engagement. If you are assigned a strike, target is given to you. You may influence the weapons load, but you certainly don't dig into the intel that was used to determine the target. The strike leader would determine tactics, ie strike assets used, weapons, timing and attack headings, but would not be in a position to judge the target selection. So, what you would potentially get is someone being charged with a war crime on a target determined by others. Not a great situation, and not something we want to do.

The use of US sourced cluster munitions by military folks skilled in their use, and with strict ROE and follow up, is not a war crime. Nor do they have high dud rates. The Russian's do. No surprise there. So while my hand is "not up" for war crimes, it is certainly up for deployment of these with the restrictions put in place by the US to a country that is willing to abide and use them on their own dirt. I have no problem with using something that is absolutely necessary to move this catastrophic war to an end.

You have to be living in a separate universe. Hillary was grossly disrespective of the military and even her Secret Service protectors. They despised her. She didn't want military to wear their uniforms in the White House, never conversed with them and generally treated them with disdain. The Secret Service regarded assignment to her as punishment.

Absolute nonsense. Nobody's career is being damaged. And, again, the placing of people in positions they were unqualified for in order to get a quota has resulted in death.

I don't see any discredit of our military, and putting unqualified people in positions to get a quota has resulted in deaths. It has been going on for years, and is not a positive. Biden has his chance now, as the Secretary of Defense has nominated Admiral Paparo to Chief of Naval Operations, while the Beltway favorite is a female Admiral Franchetti. Paparo would be a signal of China concern, as that is his wheelhouse. By the way, his "personal reasons," as you term it is an issue with using military assets to transport military personnel for abortion procedures. Further these appointments are senior positions, not "fine young men and women." They are career officers at flag rank, and it will get done with no negative consequences.

How about starting this tax nonsense with getting his own kid, you know, the one who pleaded guilty to tax evasion, to obey the law. Hunter could have been convicted of a lot more tax evasion, but the Justice Dept. didn't bother to prosecute some charges until the statue of limitations was exceeded. Anybody from this tax criminal family moralizing on tax issues is pathetically hypocritical.

The only path to US direct military involvement is if Russia does something that triggers a NATO response, and our participation would be part of a NATO action.

I'm not sure what your point is by claiming it puts us one step closer..... Sending end of life span munitions has nothing to do with troop deployment, unless there is something I am missing.

Great question, and I am not an expert on the current battlefield situation. In my view, there has never been a conflict that has more BS put out by interested parties, so I really don't know what the current status on the ground is. What I do know is how to win wars, using the US model, which really has worked without any realistic denial. There are a couple of significant issues in this thing. The Russians have significant problems. They are poorly equipped, poorly led and not committed to the end game. The Ukrainians have other problems. They are incapable of achieving air superiority. The status of Russian air defenses, and the Ukrainian air assets tilts to the Russians. If the Ukrainians could achieve air superiority, this thing is over in a month. Specifically to your question, there are weapons we have used that I'm certain have been exploited by other intel orgs. Not good, but they probably had that info anyway. What they don't have, re the US capability, is any knowledge of how we would use our assets. The F-35 and F-22, along with F-18 variants based on aircraft carriers and our jamming capability is not something they have seen, and would be decisive. The US is extremely good at coordinating really good assets. Light years ahead of our NATO allies. That is our unmatched strength; synergistic applications of existing systems. Nobody spends more time at it and nobody is close to our capability. More specifically to your question, I would never advocate the use of chemical or biological weapons. Re-reading your thoughtful post there is really no "path to victory" for the Russians. They will neve successfully occupy land in the Ukraine. They have no system that the Ukrainians will buy into, and they are militarily impotent vis a vis additional land capture. They are screwed, and its just a matter of time

By the way, regarding the cost of these munitions, the Administration, I'm sure on information from DOD, is claiming the cluster munitions are off the shelf supply approaching the end of their shelf life, so they either get used or taken out of inventory. Ergo, no real way to expense them accurately. That is the case with a lot of what we have given them. The media reports the cost, but that's not really an accurate data point for the actual cost. A lot of it has been stuff in our inventory, running out of lifespan. HIMARS and shoulder mounted anti air missiles are the exception. Raytheon has mentioned that issue publicly. By the way, if you look at that picture I provided, notice the yellow bands on each weapon. That means they are real, live weapons. The two yellow bands on the cluster bombs, Rockeye in this case, mean that is is a live weapon and that it has thermal protection inside to lengthen the "cook off" time before they'd explode in case of a fire on the flight deck. The red things on the nose is the protective cover of the fuse, and would be removed by the ordies when on the catapult just prior to launce.

Nope. Not at all. I'm for doing what it takes to get Russia out of Ukraine as fast as possible, using humanitarian means in an ugly war. I fully support using cluster bombs against Russian military personnel and mechanized artillery inside the Ukraine and it should have been done months ago.

Yes that is generally true among civilized nations. Each country has its own rules for its own military. Russia is out of control. They have no control over what their own troops are doing, and certainly none regarding the Wagner group. Cluster munitions are far less dangerous than mine fields. The bomblet "duds" are visible, as they lay on the ground, unburied, unlike land mines. The US munitions have about a 2% dud rate compared with about a 30% rate for the Russian trash. It would be far better if they were delivered by air, rather than artillery, as the accuracy is far better. Given the significant capability of Russian air defense, that doesn't seem realistic, just now. They are extremely effective and just what is needed. If the Ukrainians want to use them and are willing to deal with the risk, on their own land, they should be able to make that decision. It's me, aboard USS Kitty Hawk standing alert 15 in the Indian Ocean.

Here's the US response to using cluster bombs. The cluster bombs are those fat bombs, three, one by his left ear and two at the outboard stations. What he has his arm on is HARM, also discussed in this thread, and on his head is a Sidewinder heater with front quarter capability. The other side of the airplane is similarly armed, so that's six clusters, two Sidewinders and two HARM missiles. Standard alert 15 loadout at sea on a carrier. If there is time, and the threat is known to not require certain weapons, they would be downloaded, time permitting.

She is specially responding to a question regarding the use of cluster bombs against civilians. Go to the 15 second mark of the link. Cluster bombs in known civilian areas is clearly a war crime. That is not the case now presented with the latest weapons promise to Ukraine. If they do deploy them against known civilian targets, it should be judged as a war crime. On a side note, what a difference between this Press Sec. and the moron they are using now.