No, JC, not currently military, tho I did spend some time back in 73-75 turning some lights out as an ordnance specialist in places the govt said we were never in. Today I turn lights on.
I sold my company back in 2009, because I was tired of jumping through govt hoops for the honor of making sure I had 100 + employees working to pay Federal taxes, and getting taxed (to death) myself. Hence my Galt name.
I spent a year after buying a section of undeveloped land in the Texas Hill country building a Gulch when 5 of my ex employees, 3 EE's, 1 ME, and 1 geologist asked me to consider going into partnerships with them. Which I did. We have a contracting firm that specializes in providing alt e all over the globe. From solar panel arrays in Tel Aviv, to geothermal in South America, to 1.5 MW Vestas V90 wind turbines in North Dakota, we provide energy in places where there is not any. And as an equal partner instead of an employer, I have a lot more freedom to produce than I did as a govt tax collector, aka, administrator of a shackled for profit business responsible for employees, at the point of a gun or prison. Apparently, what I did is growing rapidly, as for the first time in collected US history, there are more business going out of business than there are start ups. When I say business, I'm talking about conventional, brick and mortar and regulated employee firms.
We have done well and most of my team have achieved our goals, and ready to retire. I have two young firepissers in their 30's however wanting to carry on, one Electrical, one Mechanical, engineer. They signed a multi million watt solar contract near Cape Town, South Africa. Good for them.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, I could care less if the grid goes down. I produce more than enough wind, solar, and NG energy than I need. And with 5 solar powered water wells, I don't worry much about going thirsty either.

And yes, K Halling, I have been to Antartica. Tis a target rich environment for those few souls who want to live there and still have the comforts of home, energy wise ;-))

Existageright,
I enjoyed this narrative greatly. But I have to ask: Antarctica too?

Exitstageright: I really enjoyed reading your narrative. I have lived in Italy for more than 32 years (I now go back and forth). I too have experienced the comments about the US political scene, though I think they are more cynical now than say 15 years ago and rightly deserved.

Well now, I am curious to know what you do... When you said you might not make it back to finish your Gulch if the SHTF, I thought- military. Did I get it?
Beware of feisty Hondurans...
Keep in touch.

It was refreshing to see a politician NOT use a tele-
prompter, and Bibi is a master at the pause moments between pages to make his points. I did not get to see the speech live, but me and my crew did get to review it in a bar in Oslo, Norway. The vast majority of the planet, and I get to see, in my profession, a large part of terra firma, see's the US as divisive and insecure, without viable leadership. What I observed watching Netanyahu's speech was the reactions of the people in the bar looking at US leadership in Congress. I heard a myriad of comments (and admittedly the average age in the establishment of several hundred was under 30) about how old and toothless US leadership was. Now, at almost 60, I am no spring chicken, but looking at these slobbering fools in wheel chairs made me long for a stud like Putin. It was embarrassing for me and my American crew to hear the laughter at how inept, at not only the advanced years, but even the slack jaws and blank stares of the younger members, looked. And without exception, Reid, Pelosi, Boehner, are laughing stocks where ever I go. Who votes for these people? I find it hard to believe that welfare recipients on the take from "the Great Society' votes, so I suspect it is a combination of the uninformed and the unengaged.

In 2014 I was on every continent on the planet, but I retire May of this year, a tad under my 60th birthday. My greatest fear is that before I can get back home the SHTF and all my work on building my Gulch will be for naught, at least for me, as I will not be able to make it home to Texas (it's a long swim). But at least my bride can enjoy the fruits of my labor. Speaking of, I have a good friend who owns a ranch next to mine. I have a green card Honduran that works the ranch when I'm gone. My friend tells me, "you know, your hand calls your wife Senora Patroness when you are home, but when you are gone, he call's her Babe."

Which reminds me to put a top knot on my buddies noggin when I get back.

Stay safe. Stay Sovereign.

It's not a military threat, and a scud can't lift the weight of a non-miniaturized warhead. Crude early generation atomic bombs weigh around 7,000+ lbs. Iran is struggling for the Manhattan Project, we're not talking fusion era... They are a century or more from that.
The blast radius on something like that is about a mile, it would probably kill someone, but it would take a lot of luck to hit anything in Israel without wiping out their buddies in Hamas...

I think Obama is under reacting, and Bibi is 2 weeks from elections and is a wartime prime minister.

If I recall, those V2 rockets did a significant amount of damage. Also, I understand that a SCUD missile could hit within 5 miles of a target, 300 miles away. In other words, a nuclear SCUD (with NO internal guidance system), launched from Seattle, could feasibly take Spokane out in a single attack.

I would consider that a legitimate threat.

I have long admired Netanyahu. But that we had such a leader. The dignity and intelligence, with a true love of his country. How sad he had to say he had respect for our leader, whom most of us cannot even respect, much less trust.
I doubt Obama would attack Iran if they attacked our own mainland, might upset some Muslims somewhere. Valerie Jarret would not stand for that.

Thats for certain.

America has lost her way.

Pettiness has become our face to the world, demonstrated by the White House in every action.

Great Nations are not petty.

I recall that we denied them fly-over for Iraq.

We have generally better intelligence than they do, we don't give them everything. We have been watching - definitely, Iran recovered that MQ Reaper spy drone in their desert a couple of years ago. We can tell how well they are doing on nuclear refinement by testing air & soil samples.

I'm sure we have fully infiltrated their government computer systems as well, we probably see their own testing results to know exactly where they are.

If the Islamic world really wanted Iran to have a bomb, Pakistan would have given it to them.

I really think Iran is all bluster and not a lot of substance, we are probably getting assurances as well that the Ayatollah is old and when he passes things will change in the regime. They have been under heavy sanction for decades, like Cuba, they are pretty much still stuck in the 80's technologically. You don't see a lot of innovation or scientific advancement coming out of the Islamic world.. the madrassas are not known for creating independent thinkers or inventors.

What is frightening to me is that all that you indicate is possible...we may see it happen in the not distant future. America is potentially a great force for stability in the world and we might be able to keep the lid on WWIII, but the people in charge are petty, interested in self aggrandizement, and not to be trusted. The inmates are running the asylum.

Jan

This administration has been at best feckless and at worst actively hostile to all of our existing allies.

Israel has been in a category of its own as far as being despised by this White House.

Yes Jan, they will fight in any way they are able. Iron Dome will protect against missiles, and if they get close enough, aircraft. Those are not the only two ways to deliver a warhead though.

You are right, a whole lot of us in the US would be pissed if Israel is attacked.

The big question is who strikes first, Israel or someone else. WMDs getting through to locations in Israel would set off a major conflict in the region assuming Israel is able to retaliate afterward.

WMDs would be required by the other players in the region, Israel can hold their own in a conventional conflict. As they have demonstrated more than once already.

Another thing to keep in mind, WMDs come in a variety of forms. Nuclear weapons are only one category, Biologicals and Chemicals could also be used. Tougher to deploy effectively of course, but still something to consider.

“Much to learn we still have… This is just the beginning!”

I think you're right - his speech showed the difference between someone who is a leader and someone who is a pretender.

Anti-capitalist in many respects, but he has already said that it is OK to take arms against people who are killing Christians (ISIS). Francis is the most genuine pope we have had in a while, and probably ditto for world leader. I do not agree with his religion and philosophy, but he is pretty forthright. I think he has integrity.

It is my opinion that he would tell Catholics to take up the sword were Israel attacked with nuclear weapons.

Jan

Technocracy - Stockholm thinks that Israel has about 80 nuclear warheads; other folks think more than that. Israel doesn't admit to having any and will not sign the nuclear NPT. If warheads were launched at Israel, the Iron Dome would respond and take out as many incoming as they could, and menawhile, Israeli nuclear warheads would respond (while Iranian missiles were still en route).

It might end up with a hang-grenades in a closet scenario, but my bet would be on Israel. Between the Iron Dome, better targeting, better defense and better infrastructure (with a war-knowledgeable population) I think that they would come through in shape that would allow them to continue to fight.

And, whatever the politicians in the US said, a lot of the people in the US would be p!ssed.

Jan

kh is blankly staring at her computer right now trying to comprehend homo sapiens who quote Skywalker when confronting questions of national sovereignty.
She does not understand the sci-fi fire in our belly.
*Mimi shakes head*

Lol.

Supposedly they were going to take out a reactor last year and we told them we would shoot down their planes. Mind you, I did read this story quickly a couple days ago online and didn’t have time to vett the story.

Who cares about disrespecting Obama really. There are real issues that are more important than not allowing the likes of an Obama to display his arrogance. Who the hell IS he anyway?

The scuds were a terror weapon, not a legitimate threat. Their accuracy is like Hitler throwing this V2's across the English Channel... couldn't hit the broad side of a barn from inside the thing.

We did start taking out mobile scud launchers after it started, I was there, we devoted a pretty significant percentage (about 40%) of sorties to mobile scud search & destroy. The attempt by Iraq was never to start a war with Israel, they were hoping to widen the war and provoke the Palestinians and Lebanese into the fight against Israel. When that didn't happen, it really only reaffirmed what I've always believed.. the Palestinians and the Persians are really the dogs of the Arab World. When it comes down to it, none of the other Arab countries care much for them, they like to take up the Islamic torch and rhetoric as a public relations piece, but they don't want Palestinian refugees in their own countries either... they are pretty happy to let Israel deal with it and just keep their mouths shut.

I think that's the only avenue Israel has. Although they have also proven in the past that they won't allow Iran to actually get that far, if they are not signatories to the treaty, they have every right to take out Iranian infrastructure if it gets too close.

(5) that Netanyahu looked and sounded way more like a statesman and a leader than O=0 never ever came close to being.

A little smaller than... New Jersey. Tony Soprano would have been proud... --giggles-- "Hey, Meshugga, fergeddaboudit."

Nice to hear a true leader who 'gets it' after six years of anti-American poppycock by our resident phony.

No, would never happen under the current one, I would agree.

Under John Paul II, the equation obviously changes a little.

We're also not talking about something that happens tomorrow. I'm saying that over time, if the West doesn't act, I don't think its out of the question for the Vatican to consider it.