A similar article was in the sidebar the other day.

The XM-25 has been put into experimental/evaluation use in Afghanistan, and the conclusion is: It works.

The bad news, which isn't really so bad, is that their are no confirmed kills by the weapon. But the troops who use it explain that away: Look, the weapon is being used, primarily, to engage at long distances that other weapons can't hit. So we often don't know exactly who it's killing and who it's wounding.

The good news is that it seems to terminate firefights very quickly, as the Taliban quickly abandons its positions and flees. (I think then it should be dubbed "The Terminator.")

Its value then, so far, has mostly been of defensive sort of nature -- stop the bad guys from shooting, get them to flee their positions, end the fight. Without the XM-25, the Taliban would keep firing and hitting troops.

"The XM25 brought the difference to whether they would stay there 15 to 20 minutes shooting (and) taking pot shots or the actual fight ended after using the XM25," said Sgt. 1st Class Carlos Smith, Soldier Requirements Division, Maneuver Center of Excellence, Fort Benning, Ga. "That was due to the defilade capabilities of the XM25 to shoot beyond targets and behind targets."

...

"What our Soldiers have told us is, when we do fire this weapon, it does have a high probability of effect," Lehner said. "The enemy stops firing. They flee. They drag off their casualties. Essentially, a Soldier is very happy when the enemy stops firing at him."

Soldier survivability is also increased with the XM25 because it allows Soldiers to fire on the enemy from protected positions, while the enemy themselves believe they are in protected positions.

"We have increased the survivability of our Soldiers because our Soldiers no longer have to maneuver from their cover position to gain an advantageous firing spot for the enemy," Lehner said. "We are able to stay behind cover, and we welcome (the enemy) to stay behind cover -- because we'll get you."

When an article was posted about this just before it was given to the troops, there was a discussion/argument about whether the enemy would just change tactics due to this weapon (which had been hailed as a "game-changer"). It seems that they are changing tactics; they're abandoning fights much quicker when the XM-25 comes into play.

Of course that makes them less effective offensive combatants. Yes, they can run, but their aren't many ways to kill your opponent when you have your back to him and are running.

Other data indicating it's a hit: The squads designated for evaluating the weapon want to keep it, and men in the squads argue about who had the gun yesterday and who therefore gets it today.

The troops are in the best position to know what works and what doesn't. They seem to think this gun works.

One problem with putting out a lot of these: They're handmade right now. No assembly line. Just gunsmiths knocking each weapon together. Probably something we need to see about.

Thanks to Ogre Gunner.

More Details: At Kit Up!

Posted by: Ace at 09:31 AM | Comments (166)
Post contains 541 words, total size 3 kb.

...resulting in huge costs due to an "invasion" of illegal immigrants.

The lawsuit claims the federal government has failed to protect Arizona from an "invasion" of illegal immigrants. It seeks increased reimbursements and extra safeguards, such as additional border fences.

Brewer's court filing serves as a countersuit in the federal government's legal challenge to Arizona's new enforcement immigration law. The U.S. Justice Department is seeking to invalidate the law.

"Because the federal government has failed to protect the citizens of Arizona, I am left with no other choice," Brewer said as sign-carrying protesters yelled chants at her and at other champions of the immigration law.

Justice Department spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler declined to comment on the filing.

A flack for Obama said the suit was meritless and then, believe it or not, played the Patriotism Card -- he claimed that this suit "belittled" the "good men and women in uniform" on border duty.

Seriously?

I had an idea about that rancher being sued by illegal immigrants -- there's a type of lawsuit called a "reverse eminent domain" suit, where the plaintiff alleges that the government has taken his property without compensation, and without legally recognizing that they've taken it (or, actually, taken away his intangible rights to do with it as he wishes or his right to quiet enjoyment of it), and so sues the state to formally recognize this as a taking and so compensate him fairly under the Fifth Amendment.

The US government, through the courts, stripped this man of his right to quiet enjoyment of his property and to enjoy it solely. They have, essentially, created an easement (a legal right of way trumping the property owner's right) on the property for the use of illegal immigrants.

The government took part of his property for a federal illegal-immigrant throughway easement and he should sue to force them to compensate him.

Posted by: Ace at 08:19 AM | Comments (120)
Post contains 330 words, total size 2 kb.

You can't beat tragedy, especially not when coupled with instant sainthood. This Washington Times article speculates that Giffords would win easily if she runs -- and I have to think that's right. Because voters are dumb.

“If one assumes she’d be healthy enough to run, there’s nobody who could beat her,” said Mr. Merrill [a professor at ASU and a pollster]. “Now she’s got 100 percent name identification and 100 percent sympathy from the public. If she was well enough and she wanted the nomination, I don’t think there’s any question.”

Plus, because the media was determined to claim the conservative movement were co-conspirators in the shooting, we (most of us) rushed to note she was a moderate, not a liberal (and therefore not really the sort of person we nominate for killing at our weekly Murder List meet-ups), so she now has the whole conservative movement, mostly, swearing to her moderation and centrism.

I don't think it's a lost cause, but it's plenty tough.

The other candidate will also have almost 100% name recognition by the time of the election, and sympathy, while potent, doesn't mean you automatically win. But that is the way to bet, isn't it?

Plus, if Giffords enters the race, our best candidates will probably not enter the race, and in that way the prediction winds up making itself true.

So we start the cycle one down. We need five pickups for control.

Posted by: Ace at 07:55 AM | Comments (190)
Post contains 248 words, total size 2 kb.

Above the post update:

The military has fired the cabinet and suspended Parliament.

That sounds bad but from what I'm seeing from Egyptians on TV and Twitter (an admittedly small and skewed sample)...this is what people want. The Parliament and Cabinet were Mubarak lackeys that people wanted cleaned out.

So yes, it's a military coup but the question is what do they do now that they are in...Is it a Turkey/Pakistani thing where they step back a bit after elections or does it become a junta?

Everyone figured the military would have to step in here if Mubarak left. It's the only national structure with anything like popular support and legitimacy. Like everything else the question is what do they do next?

Original Post:
Suliman on state TV moments ago.

Now the real work starts.

I'm not optimistic in the long term about how things are going to work out in Egypt but it's still pretty awesome to see people take control of their lives. I understand the strategic challenges this presents for the US but we simply can't expect 80 million people to live in squalor and tyranny just because it's easier for us. They have the right to try and create something better and we should be as supportive of that as we can be.

It always amazing to see how these regimes, which seem all powerful and permanent often aren't. If someone had said 3 weeks ago that Mubarak would be run out of power by a few weeks work of mostly peaceful protests, they'd have been thought to be nuts. And yet here we are. Freedom is a powerful, powerful weapon.

Interesting note from CNN anchor: Today is the anniversary of the Iranian Revolution. One can only hope this one works out better.

From George W. Bush's Second Inaugural Address.

We are led, by events and common sense, to one conclusion: The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands. The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world.

AmericaÂ’s vital interests and our deepest beliefs are now one. From the day of our Founding, we have proclaimed that every man and woman on this earth has rights, and dignity, and matchless value, because they bear the image of the Maker of Heaven and earth. Across the generations we have proclaimed the imperative of self-government, because no one is fit to be a master, and no one deserves to be a slave. Advancing these ideals is the mission that created our Nation. It is the honorable achievement of our fathers. Now it is the urgent requirement of our nationÂ’s security, and the calling of our time.

So it is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world.

I was never fully on board with the Democracy project because it was too fraught with peril. Of course, backing autocrats indefinitely was fraught with peril too. Given that...might as well give freedom a shot, it's not like we have much of an option anyway.

The people of Egypt are about to find out an important lesson...getting rid of the strongman is tough but not nearly as tough as preventing a new one from stepping in.

Dictator death pool: Who is next to go? Syria? Jordan? Yemen? Round II in Iran? Or God help us...Saudi Arabia?

Jordan may not deserve inclusion in that particular list but because it's one of the less repressive options, it might be the most susceptible to some sort of mass movement.

Democratic Spin: You're welcome!

The situation remains complicated and delicate going forward, but this is a huge affirmation of the President's leadership on the international stage.

Considering this administration has been caught wrong footed at every turn and yesterday's bumbling, the idea that the cool and sure hand of Obama guided events in Egypt is laughable.

Posted by: DrewM at 07:36 AM | Comments (343)
Post contains 699 words, total size 5 kb.

(Now what to do with all those sandworms....)

UPDATE: And as I was typing the junk below, Mubarak's officially gone? So it's reported but given what happened yesterday...trust but verify. Seems to be the case though.

WHOA: Not really an update but this morning Our Man In Iran Mahmoud Ahmadinejad weighed in on the subject:

"TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran's president said Friday that Egypt's popular uprising shows a new Islamic Middle East is emerging, one that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad claims will have no signs of Israel and U.S. "interference."

The Iranian leader spoke as the country marked the 32nd anniversary of its 1979 Islamic Revolution that toppled the pro-U.S. shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi and brought hardline clerics to power."

The statement contained the usual bullshit about the Great Satan and all that (which is a bit of an overstatement as the current administration seems intent on relegating us to Mediocre Satan status, but whatever). But a quick check on the Wikipedia article about the Iranian Revolution brings up this li'l nugget:

"The final collapse of the provisional non-Islamist government came at 2 p.m. February 11 when the Supreme Military Council declared itself "neutral in the current political disputesÂ… in order to prevent further disorder and bloodshed." Revolutionaries took over government buildings, TV and Radio stations, and palaces of Pahlavi dynasty."

Today is also Feb. 11th.

UPDATE: Protesters also climbing on top of Egyptian Army tanks, bouncing up and down. No luck as yet in their efforts to tip one over but the crowds continue their shouts of "Lakers Win! Lakers Win!"

UPDATE: Mubarak, like Elvis, seems to have left the building. Reports have been scattered as to his current location (some put him in the Egyptian Sinai city of Sharm el-Sheikh while others already have him out of the country in transit to the U.A.E), but the various sources seem to be gelling on at least the fact that he's no longer in Cairo.

CNN's running some updates for what it's worth.

Original Post:

From Al Jazeera English.

Say what you want about them but theyÂ’ve been doing a fairly thorough job of covering most angles.

Today it appears that some of the livelier protests are occuring in Alexandria where a large crowd is marching towards one of Mubarak's palaces and just about to reach the so-called "military zone" where the Egyptian Army has formed a perimeter. Other crowds are converging on the state-run media complex and have apparently broken through the perimeter.

After yesterday's non-resignation it may be that the issue is about to be forced and the military is going to have to choose sides. Or maybe not, since that's what everyone's been saying for the past three weeks.

Also, sandworms were sighted on the outskirts of Cairo on The Giza Plateau though it's unknown at this juncture where their loyalties lie.

Updates, bumps, noogies and wedgies as warranted.

Posted by: Genghis at 07:17 AM | Comments (246)
Post contains 516 words, total size 4 kb.

I was pleased to see this excellent article on the GOProud controversy. I was definitely not pleased to see a quote in there of GOProud chairman Chris Barron calling a prominent conservative a "nasty bigot." Because that's what they do, the "Gay Taliban", as Chris calls liberal gay activists. It's the gay equivalent of a liberal yelling "racist" -- an attempt to shame or shock another into silence. And that's not supposed to be what we do.

Chris is a friend and I told him that was a problem. GayPatriot, who serves as GOProud Treasurer also expressed displeasure. To his credit, Chris apologized quickly for the slur.

“For the past six months, we have watched as unfair and untrue attacks have been leveled against our organization, our allies, our friends and sometimes even their families. Everyone has their breaking point and clearly in my interview with Metro Weekly I had reached mine. I shouldn’t have used the language that I did to describe Cleta Mitchell and for that I apologize."

Unfortunately, the damage is done. Incoming ACU chief Al Cardenas says it will be hard to keep the relationship with GOProud.

Incidentally, a writer for American Spectator scolds Chris:

He needs to understand that objections to his group's participation stems from their policy positions and the way they have pushed them -- what they believe and how they act politically, not who they are in private. Going beyond pushing a state recognition of certain contractual rights for homosexuals, all the way to demanding state-approved homosexual marriage, is so obviously a fundamental change in conservatism as to clearly be a cause for serious misgivings.

Of course, gay marriage has never been a GOProud "policy position" (GOProud steers clear of state issues and believes states should be free to chose their own marriage policies). This AmSpec writer either doesn't know that, or doesn't care. Her error is a common one for GOProud detractors; not knowing a thing about the organization certainly doesn't stop them from opining. That's part of what has been driving Chris to use inappropriate language.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 05:07 AM | Comments (144)
Post contains 356 words, total size 3 kb.

Checkov you know anything about a radiation surge?

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 04:30 AM | Comments (88)
Post contains 16 words, total size 1 kb.

A bad day for the US foreign policy and intelligence communities keeps getting worse.

It turns out that when CIA Director Leon Panetta said to the House Intelligence Committee that there was "a strong likelihood" that Mubarak would quit today, he wasn't basing that on secret intelligence but rather...media speculation.

Within minutes, senior aides to Panetta sought to tamp down the impact, saying he was merely referring to media reports. But by then, the comments had ricocheted around the Internet, underscoring U.S. confusion about events unfolding in Egypt, as well as the perils of publicly weighing in on such developments while serving as director of CIA.

...When Panetta was asked later in the session to clarify his comments, he softened his assessment but did not indicate that he was simply relaying what he had read.

"Let me say, just to make very clear here, that I've received reports that possibly Mubarak might do that," Panetta said, referring to the prospect that Egypt's leader would step down. "We are continuing to monitor the situation. We have not gotten specific word that he, in fact, will do that."

When the CIA Director says "I've received reports" it's reasonable to think he's means something other than, 'I've been watching CNN like you have and here's what I heard".

Of course that wasn't the only breakdown today....

At this same hearing, James Clapper, the Director of National Intelligence says an organization which includes the word "Muslim" in its name is "largely secular". His office then has to walk that bit back by saying something even dumber which at least changed the subject.

The President went out and gave a speech more or less celebrating the victory of the anti-government forces in Egypt. One small problem, they didn't win. He was then forced to issue a written statement saying that we really, really hope they win next time and good luck with all of that.

Here's my question....If Panetta was basing his "strong likelihood" of Mubarak resigning language on media conjecture, what was the basis of Obama's remarks in Michigan? Was Panetta passing on his CNN viewing notes to the President as well?

Panetta and Clapper aren't some low level lackeys, they are two of the top intelligence officials in the country and they both beclowned themselves today.

It's a good thing we're not at war or anything serious.

Posted by: DrewM at 07:19 PM | Comments (232)
Post contains 424 words, total size 3 kb.

Hey How Bout Some John Belushi

Who would have turned 63 last week if he hadn't died from a drug overdose back in 1982.

Posted by: Maetenloch at 05:48 PM | Comments (843)
Post contains 766 words, total size 9 kb.

Wow, this has been a bit under the radar but if it's true, it could be a very big deal.

Pakistani officials say President Obama's national security advisor summoned Pakistan's ambassador to the White House Monday evening to deliver a threat from the president: Release Raymond Davis, an American being held in Lahore for killing two Pakistanis, or face the consequences.

National Security Advisor Tom Donilon told Ambassador Husain Haqqani, according to two Pakistani officials involved in negotiations about Davis, that the U.S. will kick Haqqani out of the U.S., close U.S. consulates in Pakistan, and cancel an upcoming visit by Pakistan's president to Washington, if Davis, a U.S. embassy employee, is not released from custody by Friday.

The outlines of the threat were confirmed to ABC News by a senior U.S. official, who was not authorized to speak on the record. A White House spokesperson, Tommy Vietor, declined comment.

Calling Pakistan an "ally" is stretching the term to near the breaking point but clearly it's one of the most important relationships the US has. This would be a step or two short of cutting off official diplomatic relations.

Davis is in Pakistan on a US diplomatic passport and has been held for two weeks following the shooting.

I never would have thought the Obama administration had the stones for this kind of threat. It's not the kind of thing you can bluff at, either this guy is turned over tomorrow or the crap has to hit the fan. Given how deftly the Obama administration has handled the Egyptian crisis, I'm sure everything will be fine.

Added: Interesting discussion about whether or not Davis officially has diplomatic immunity. There's some disagreement about his paperwork and whether he was officially recognized as a diplomat.

It makes you wonder exactly who this guy is. Why would the administration be willing to go to the mattresses for this guy and risk blowing up the relationship with Pakistan?

Posted by: DrewM at 02:37 PM | Comments (372)
Post contains 344 words, total size 2 kb.