North Korean Rocket Launch

North Korea and weapons of mass destruction (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I was sitting here tonight with my son watching Wheel of Fortune on television when ABC News broke in to announce that North Korea had attempted to launch a rocket into orbit today.  It is not sure at this time whether or not the launch was successful or not.  It is news that gives me great concern.

North Korea states that the rocket is needed to launch a weather satellite into orbit.  One report I read on CNN stated that many view the launch as cover for a ballistic missile testing.  Many in the international community had warned North Korea not to go through with the rocket launch.

You might be wondering why I would have concern for North Korea developing rockets when countries are launching various satellites into orbit on a regular basis.  The main reason is that North Korea also has nuclear weapons, and let's face it, North Korea doesn't exactly have the best reputation among countries out there.

The combination of a rocket and nuclear weaponry is the perfect combination for a rogue country such as North Korea to launch an electromagnetic pulse attack against the United States or another country.  An EMP attack could have a devastating effect on our country.

For those not aware of what would be involved in an EMP attack, the scenario would be as follows.  A nuclear weapon would be launched into orbit.  It would then be detonated above the United States.  With the detonation above the atmosphere, there would be no danger of nuclear fallout.  However, the electromagnetic pulse from the explosion would essentially fry our electrical grid.

The potential exists that the country could be without electricity for not just days, but potentially months.  With so much of our existence tied into having reliable electricity, most Americans would not be prepared for such a catastrophe.  Pandemonium would reign supreme throughout the land.  It would be devastating.

A couple years ago, I read a book by William Fortschen called "One Second After" that painted one potential scenario if the US were to be attacked by an EMP attack.  It was frightening to say the least. I also recently downloaded another book for my Kindle called "77 Days in September" by Ray Gorham which I will be reading after I finish the current book I am reading.

In 2001, the government created the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States From Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack.  In that same year, we were attacked in the 9/11 attacks.  Much of our attention has been towards protecting us from other such attacks.  However, we also have to be keenly aware of any other potential threats that could be on the horizon.

We need to be prepared for the very real threat of an EMP attack.  There are steps that need to be taken to harden our electrical grid to protect us from the vulnerability that exists.  Instead of the usual political bickering, this is one area that should be addressed by both sides of the political aisle.  We can not afford to wait until after an attack to address the issue.

Related articles

• N. Korea's Planned Rocket Launch Has SE Asia on Edge (abcnews.go.com) 
• North Korea Rocket Launch Envisioned! (rightways.wordpress.com)
• North Korea up to its dangerous trickery again (markosun.wordpress.com)
• Is North Korea lying about its upcoming rocket launch? An... (shortformblog.com)

CNN Western Republican Debate

Image by DonkeyHotey via FlickrLast night, like 5.5 million other Americans, I watched the CNN Western Republican Debate.  In my posting from yesterday, I stated that I was fully expecting to see Herman Cain's 999 plan come under a lot of debate.  Boy did it ever.

The first question asked was from an audience member regarding where each candidate stood on replacing the income tax with a national sales tax.  It allowed moderator Anderson Cooper to direct the question to each candidate to give them the opportunity to attack Cain's plan.  With the exception of Newt Gingrich, each took their turns attacking the 999 plan

For the most part, I think Cain did a decent job in trying to defend the plan given the intricacies of his proposal and the fact that he was only given 30 seconds to give a rebuttal every time one of the other candidates brought it up.  Gingrich was the only one who acknowledged that fact.  Quite frankly, I do not think most of the other candidates have a clue as to the entirety of the Cain plan nor do they understand it.

That opening salvo of attacks on Cain set the stage for the balance of the evening.  Most of the remaining attacks the balance of the evening were directed at Mitt Romney.  In fact, there was so much bickering on stage, particularly between Romney and Rick Perry, that it was rather distasteful.  At one point during a heated exchange, Anderson Cooper looked absolutely giddy about the heated discussion, as if that was his goal the entire night.

Perry looked like somebody who finally realized that any chance he had to get the nomination was slipping away fast.  While you could say it was his best performance in a debate thus far, the constant sniping with Romney was a major turnoff, at least for me.  At one point I tweeted, "The next debate should be a steel cage match.  The last man or woman standing gets the nominations."

Romney was pretty much Romney, able to talk around most of the questions without really answering.  After the initial rounds of attacks on the 999 plan, Romney took much of the attacks the rest of the night, primarily from Perry and Rick Santorum.  It was the first time that he took a lot of attacks, and there were a couple of instances where he seemed to get a bit flustered.

I have never been a big Ron Paul fan because of his stance of defense.  There were a few times when I though he sounded like a doddering old fool.  Santorum had a couple of decent answers during the debate, but for the most part came across as just an angry guy.  Neither one of them did much to help themselves.

Michele Bachmann had, I think, one of her better performances in a while.  Other than erroneously referring to the 999 plan as a VAT tax, she stayed above the fray and focused on defeating Obama in 2012. She also was able to talk about something other than repealing Obamacare.  While I do think it was one of her better performances, I have to disagree with what she (or her campaign) to her Facebook feed, "After tonight's debate, it is even more abundantly clear that I am best equipped to defeat Barack Obama and put Americans back to work."

Ultimately, I thought Newt Gingrich performed the best of all the candidates on stage.  He stayed away from the sniping and bickering, put forth ideas, acted as a peacemaker, and appeared to be the most presidential.  I also felt that Cain held his own, though I would like to see him bone up a bit on foreign policy and do a better job defending his ideas. I still have about six months until the Maryland primary in April, so I will continue watching to see how things shake out.

Related articles

• CNN debate scores large audience (politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com)
• Did CNN Sabotage the GOP Debate? (rogueoperator.wordpress.com)
• John Baer: More bickering than debate in GOP's Vegas showdown (philly.com)

Republican Debates

Image via WikipediaI make no bones about the fact that I do not like the policies of the current President of the United States.  There has been very little that he has done since entering office that I have agreed with.  Consequently, I have had a great deal of interest in following those members of the Republican Party who have declared themselves candidates for the Republican nomination for President.

There is a bit about each of the potential candidates that I like.  While there is a bit that I like about each of them, each has their own individual flaws.  I do not feel like I know enough about any of the candidates yet to make a decision one way or the other for any of them.  I do know that I know enough about Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman that I can't bring myself to vote for either of them come primary time.

It is for that reason that I have been watching all of the Republican debates.  It has been my hope that I would be able to see enough of the remaining candidates that I could make an informed decision when the primary elections roll around.  Unfortunately, the debates themselves have been a disappointment in trying to learn more about all of the candidates.

The two debates that have taken place since Texas Governor Rick Perry entered the race have been a bit of a disappointment.  The one that was broadcast on MSNBC was absolutely awful for learning about all of the candidates.  That was Perry's first debate, and the questioning was primarily directed at the two candidates that were polling the highest, Perry and Mitt Romney.

Last night's debate on CNN was a little better.  Wolf Blitzer was able to get a little more air time for some of the other candidates, but it was still mostly the Perry and Romney show.  Michele Bachmann also got a good bit more time to speak than in the MSNBC debate the week before.  Unfortunately, there still was not enough from Rick Santorum, Herman Cain, and Newt Gingrich.

During the last two debates, I spent a good bit of time on Twitter following tweets there along with the actual debates.  I even exchanged a couple of tweets with syndicated columnist Mychal Massie about the lack of face time for some of the lower polling candidates, especially Herman Cain.

It just seems that the media that are moderating these debates is stacking the cards in favor of the front runners.  If Perry and Romney are getting the majority of the face time during the debate, those will be the names that a lot of folks will choose between.   Everything I have heard from Cain and Santorum I have liked, but if they do not get the opportunity to express those ideas, then how can we decide who is the best choice for the GOP?   

Related articles

• GOP CNN/Tea Party Debate: Nirvana Reference Edition (reason.com)

New Hampshire Republican Debate

Image by DonkeyHotey via FlickrLast night, I watched the Republican Debate on CNN.  I was a little late for the start of the event because I had a hard time finding the channel, so I missed some of the candidates introducing themselves.  Actually, my channel guide showed that the debate was going to be on CNN International, but it wasn't.  I eventually found the regular CNN station, but that should give you an indication of how frequently I watch the channel; not at all.

It is still really early in my mind to try to narrow down a choice for the Republican nominee, but I had a great interest in watching the debate.  The candidates that were participating in the debate were Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Tim Pawenty, Michele Bachman, Rick Santorem, Herman Cain, and Newt Gingrich. 

One of the things that I was particularly interested in seeing was whether or not Gingrich could recover from the majority of his campaign staff quitting on him last week.  When Gingrich announced that he was running, I was excited because if nothing else, Newt gives ideas.  Unfortunately the last few weeks have been tough on the former Speaker.  He had a couple of nice moments, but not enough to set him apart from the rest of the field.

There were not a whole lot of bombshells throughout the evening, with the possible exception of Michele Bachmann announcing that she would officially be throwing her hat into the ring to run for the presidency.  None of the candidates did anything that really made me change my viewpoint on any of them.  There are aspects of each candidate that I like, and each has their individual flaws.

That being said, I really like Herman Cain.  Michele Bachmann is a solid conservative, and as much as I like Sarah Palin, to compare Bachmann to Palin as the media will do, is not fair to Bachmann.  Tim Pawlenty and Rick Santorum each have characteristics that I admire. Newt has some good ideas and made some good points, and I hope he can contribute to the race.  Those would be my favorites, in no particular order, but all of the participants would be an improvement over the current resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Osama bin Laden Death Photos

Image via WikipediaSince the news broke late Sunday night that US Special Ops forces had broken into a compound and killed Osama bin Laden, the speculation has been whether or not the Obama administration would release photos of the SOB's corpse to prove that bin Laden was dead.  Word came from the administration today that the photos will not be released.

Due to the military burying his body at sea in accordance with Islamic tradition, there are those that are apt to subscribe to conspiracy theories who will not believe that bin Laden is dead without seeing photos of the body.  Of course those that subscribe to conspiracy theories could also argue that any released photos were photoshopped.

The administration, for their part said that they do not want to release the photos because they are graphic and gruesome.  Their feeling is that by releasing the photos that it could inflame the passions of the Islamic extremists and lead to action on their part.  The counterargument to that would be that putting a bullet through his brain would also incite them.

I am an avowed conservative.  I listen to talk radio.  One of the programs that I usually listen to is Sean Hannity's because it is on during my commute home.  Most of the time, I find my self in agreement with his positions.  Today, during the hour I drove home, Hannity basically decried the decision by the President's decision to not release the photos, and the decision to bury bin Laden at sea in accordance with Islamic tradition.

It is not so much Hannity's position that the photos should be released that I disagree with, but rather my view that he is being somewhat hypocritical in regards to his position regarding "inciting the radical Islamists."  Previously, he had interviewed Pastor Terry Jones who held a Koran burning.  Hannity criticized Jones because he had burned the Koran despite the warnings from General David Petreaus that such actions would incite the extremists to vengeance.

Meanwhile, he criticizes the Obama administration because they are not releasing photos of bin Laden for that very same reason.  I understand that General Petreaus is a hero to conservatives like Hannity and to myself.  For the most part, there has been precious little that Barack Obama has done as President that I and most conservatives agree with.  For me it has been the killing of bin Laden, and the killing of a fly during an interview. It just seems inconsistent to me to support Pereaus in this case and not Obama.

I personally have no desire to see the photos.  I tend not to subscribe to conspiracies.  I understand the desire of some to see them.  There are high profile conservatives that do not think the photos should be released, and those that think they should.  Which side of the fence do you fall on in regards to the decision to not release the photos? Do you think that Sean Hannity's position is inconsistent, and is he just looking to find any fault with President Obama? 

Related articles

• Obama Will Not Be Releasing Osama Bin Laden Death Photos (sayanythingblog.com)
• Nine goofiest conspiracy theories about Osama bin Laden's alleged death (chicagonow.com)
• Osama Bin Laden Resistance: The White House says Osama Bin Laden "resisted" capture. What does that mean? (slate.com)