Thor’s Hall

The phrase of the year (or two), “Unintended Consequences”.  I think we have certainly seen a lot of that out of our current administration.

Today, we see reports of the transfer of significant military hardware within the middle east.  Specifically that Syria has been transferring SCUD missiles to Hezzbolah.  Now, you have to temper this just a bit because the SCUD weapon system is relatively complex and can be difficult to maintain and operate.  On the alarming side of the equation a middle eastern government has provided a mid range ballistic missile system to a terrorist group.  My expectation given the complexity of the system is that it will be employed sooner rather than later.

The hypothesis:

If POTUS had not snubbed Netanyahu recently I do not believe that this transfer would have taken place.

If Nancy Pelosi had not visited Damascus and tried to advance her own foreign policy agenda, this transfer may not have taken place.

It might help if POTUS would stop apologizing for US actions, and stop bowing to every other leader in the world.

Discuss amongst yourselves.

I think I need to check prevailing winds and so forth, you never know what the impact of the radioactive fallout is going to be the rice paddies in SE Asia may not produce anything edible for many years.

All, Unintended Consequences.

Here’s one that got my blood simmering this morning.

It seems that some of the good folks at the University of California at San Diego have determined that the folks who cross our southern border without going through official channels need a bit of survival help.  To that end they have devised a toll to assist them in locating water stations.

Now this is all very humanitarian of these researchers and so forth, and having run across many bands of these folks wandering the deserts and the orange groves down in Yuma, it is a problem.  On the flip side, if these immigrants are to pursue the “American Dream” let them come through the appropriate border crossings.  If they are “political refugees” and are fleeing something specific then let’s put together the appropriate refugee care centers, and get them the care and protection that they need.  While the “crisis” is resolved.

However, the use of government funding to produce a device that aids in illegal border crossings is wrong.  Additionally, it is a symptom of what is failing in this great republic of ours.

Life has been intruding lately and I have been absent from meaningful posting.  Apologies.  Even though it is very near the holidays, and demands on the “spare time” are high, I am working to remedy my absence.

We start with the POTUS address last night.  I will wind up sending you to another blog that has dissected the address more carefully than I have, and brings you many of the same observations that I would.

Here are some of my knee jerk reactions:

1.  West Point, with and audience?  WTF?  Is this a presidential address or a campaign stop.

2.  Did you see the cadets?  Not a lot of enthusiasm from them to be there, or to provide applause.  I think perhaps BHO would have been better with a traditional oval office address.

3.  A TIMELINE??  It is great to have a goal but, to announce a definitive timeline for withdrawl that is just fucked up.  If I were the enemy, I would be celebrating my victory today.  Step 1, ratchet down operations and plays opposum for the next 24 months.  Concentrate on recruitment, training and planning.  December 2011, all hell breaks loose in Afganistan, Pakistan, Europe, and the US.

3a.  Alternatively, if BHO just lied outright and has every intention of fighting this thing to the finish.  Bringing UBL to justice, dismantling Al Qaida and the Taliban, and leaving a politically strong Afghani government in place then my hat is off to him for superb disinformation, deception, and comprehensive strategic approach to one of our greatest security threats.

Given 3 and 3a — which do you think is most likely.

As a leader POTUS is providing direction and leadership.  It has taken too long to make a decision, and in my opinion he has gone for a compromise decision.  The fence sitting decision if you will.  This is a long term “holy war” that has been hot and cold for centuries.  We are again in a hot phase, and have the opportunity to tip the scales and push it back into a cold phase.  It takes determination, fortitude, perseverance to complete this action.  When it is complete, all that will have been accomplished is a return to a colder phase of a centuries old conflict.  Our current course may result in a short term feeling of success but, the rebound from that initial success is going to be extreme and more painful than if we had done the job right the first time.  For the sake of this country, I hope that I am terribly wrong.

Take a few minutes to head over to Cdr. Salamander’s for his reactions.

UPDATE:  An interesting piece over at Hot Air.  I particularly liked this, “…Obama has made opponents more or less irrelevant, since he seems to be opposing himself.”

The scary season of Halloween is rapidly approaching, and all of the little ghouls and goblins are preparing for the event.  The decorations are coming out in the neighborhood, with tombstones, and skeletons rising from the front lawns of suburbia.

In other areas of the world,  folks are looking at an even scarier scenario.  The Belmont Club is a put together a frightening look at what could be in our future.

In 2007 Think Progress happily announced that “a new National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) released today concludes with ‘high confidence’ that ‘in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program.’”  But in 2009 Barack Obama announced to the world that Iran had been secretly operating a nuclear enrichment plant.  What a difference two years makes. Perhaps the better report to read from that vintage year is Anthony Cordesman’s 2007 study for the Center for Strategic and Independent Studies examining the outcomes of a hypothetical nuclear war in the Middle East between Israel and Iran. Cordesman concluded that once a conflict got started it would tend to escalate to where both countries were destroyed.

There are some frighteningly real worst case scenarios that come up.  Even with all of the domestic issues that we currently have, our interests and domestic prosperity is tightly coupled to the events in the middle east.  This is not a peril that we can blithely ignore.

Today we have “journalists” that have been convicted for crimes in North Korea.  Historically our response would probably have been to overtly move a carrier battle group into the area.  Supplement that with some covert activity in North Korean waters, airspace, and some SEAL incursions.  Rattle the sabres a little bit, make some diplomatic moves backed up by the big stick, and eventually work a release of the prisoners.

Today, we are part of the kinder gentler global view.  We take private diplomatic measures, and publicly send messages asking for release, based on humanitarian grounds. (article here)

Officials said the issue of a possible payment to North Korea has not yet been discussed, but they said the United States would not be averse to playing along.

WHAT THE FUCK!!!

Hold the presses,  BREAKING NEWS —-  North Korea is a state that has been on the terrorist list for years.  This is a state that has never complete a peace accord with the US or the UN or South Korea since that little police action in the 50′s.  This is a state that today announced that they have OFFENSIVE NUCLEAR WEAPONS.  The boys and girls in Washington, that we refer to as our National leadership better pull their collective heads out of their idyllic fantasy world and wake up to reality before we wind up in a nuclear exchange with a third world dictatorship.

We successfully survived a cold war with multiple nuclear superpowers.  Evolved through a global evolution of trade and information sciences and we are going to wind up throwing it all away in a nuclear exchange with North Korea?  This can be a pivotal tipping point in the evolution of humanity and in our ability to influence those that do not share the common goals of the industrial world.  If the nuclear genie comes out of the bottle in NK, it will burst forth in Iran, Pakistan, and most likely India as well.   This is not a scenario that the world can afford to have happen.

A lot of attention has been given lately to the piracy taking place in the Gulf of Aden.  Recently a US flagged merchant ship was attacked.  The crew were unarmed and unable to repel borders.  The US Government has taken a very measured approach to the situation with White House advisors indicating that POTUS is following the situation closely.

Hmm… there is something fundamentaly wrong with that message.  I harken back to Theodore Roosevelt and his famous quote, “Speak softly but, carry a big stick”.  It seems the current POTUS speaks loudly (with help of his telepromter (TOTUS)) and carries no stick.

Over at “From my position…On the way“, Chuck breaks down the scenario a bit differently and demostrates that from time to time, it is okay to remind people that there is a big stick that can and should be wielded.  The pertinent part is below.

“President Chuck, Somali pirates just attacked a US-flagged vessel and took American citizens hostage. What should we do?”

Prez Chuck: First, I want an MEU launched in 4 hours to those waters, alert seal team six I want them airborne in two. Park a carrier group off the Somali coast within sight of the coast, with orders to search all non-commercial or suspect vessels. ROE: Any vessel not heaving to- for search will be sunk. No warning shots. Any vessel carrying arms related to pirate activity (RPG, AKs, etc.) will also be sunk. Floaters will not be picked up.

Tell the Somali government they have one hour to affect the release of our citizen, or the port we believe the pirates operate from will be destroyed.

Seal team six is ordered to find and secure the hostage, and eliminate the pirates. All US intelligence assets are available to the Team Commander to accomplish this mission. If the hostage is killed before they arrive, they are to locate the pirates and eliminate the pirates, their friends, families, and acquaintances.

Once all hostages are free, the Carrier Group will escort the relief supplies into the bay where they were to be delivered, and the containers carrying relief supplies will be dumped overboard. Cut a check to the companies that owned the containers. Cut all diplomatic ties to Somalia, place it on the list of countries who don’t do dick about terrorists operating in their borders, pull the credentials from their embassy and UN personnel, and drop them off the Somali coast in a lifeboat.

Submarine and Brown-Water assets will patrol off the coast of Somalia sinking any vessel larger than a canoe that operates within 5 miles of the coast, for the next year.

In my mind, if the world wants the US to be a police force then they need to accept that sometimes we will act swiftly and harshly.  Which is meant as a deterence to others, as well as a direct response to direct action.  In this case, an attack against a US flagged merchant vessel… the gloves come off.  You attack a US Embassy, a US Ship, a US Aircraft, a US Citizen the consequences should be clear, swift, and decisive.

Having young children, I hear “It’s not fair” and awful lot.

Recently, we have heard a lot about proportional responses equating to “fairness”.

I agree with the following sentiments.

There has been a lot of reaction to those that have been watching the events in Central Asia.  Stratfor has done their usual great job of breaking down the facts from the information available.  Others have discussed it being a time to begin dusting off the maps and plans from REFORGER (probably a good idea).

Laughing Wolf has broken it down in his own way. Pay particular attention to the last four paragraphs.  He particularly hits something that has been bouncing around unfocused in the back of my mind:

Also, if you think that the timing of this such that all major world leaders are in China for the Olympics is a coincidence, then I have some land I would like to sell you. I would very much love to know what is being openly and quietly said in Beijing right now, as I am just about willing to bet cash money that the Chinese are backing the Russian play. China has its own reasons to want this, including Taiwan. Fail to back an ally, bad enough. Cut and run, and the world-wide results would be catastrophic.

Ed Morrisey over at Hot Air popped this one up a few days ago.  He nails most of this on the head so I won’t drive too deep into it.  I looked at the headline and the fusion comment puzzled me, I was hoping something had happened in the research recently that I missed.  Alas fusion still seems to be an overly energetic reaction that humans have found out how to initiate but are unable to control.

Go read the post, and the implications of the comment made by the Iranians.  Me thinks some one either intentionally put this out there as a public negotiation ploy, or it’s an oops I said fission not fusion.  No fusion here, move along.

Oil shale… this is something that has been talked about and around since I first started looking into energy when I was a Boy Scout back in the early ’70s. One of my first merit badges was for nuclear energy. Here we are 30+ years later (man am I getting old) and we still have not recognized our ability to exploit this source.

For a second, let’s think about how 5 million barrels a day of domestic production might impact our international trade balance. We could, reduce our dependence on foreign oil sources and be better able to leverage our demand in the foriegn policy arena. Maybe quit using Venezuelan oil? If we increase production, maybe we could be a net exporter of oil… reduce our Chinese trade deficits and have a little more foreign policy leverage in that critical part of the world as well. So many different permutations and options that would be available to the policy makers.

U.S. Oil Shale Resources Are Three Times Larger Than the Current Oil Reserves in Saudi Arabia YET CONGRESS RECENTLY VOTED TO MAKE IT ILLEGAL TO DEVELOP U.S. OIL SHALE RESOURCES

With oil prices at an all-time high, Americans are facing escalating gas, diesel, and aircraft fuel increases. Oil prices are projected to increase further.

Congress, however, has made it illegal to develop vast domestic oil resources in large parts of the United States.

The most startling Congressional prohibition on domestic oil production concerns the recently enacted ban on the development of oil shale resources in parts of Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming in the Green River Formation. According to a Rand Study estimate, this reserve contains over one trillion barrels of oil, with 800 billion barrels fully recoverable, or three times the current oil reserves as Saudi Arabia:

The largest known oil shale deposits in the world are in the Green River Formation, which covers portions of Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming. Estimates of the oil resource in place within the Green River Formation range from 1.5 to 1.8 trillion barrels. Not all resources in place are recoverable. For potentially recoverable oil shale resources, we roughly derive an upper bound of 1.1 trillion barrels of oil and a lower bound of about 500 billion barrels. For policy planning purposes, it is enough to know that any amount in this range is very high. For example, the midpoint in our estimate range, 800 billion barrels, is more than triple the proven oil reserves of Saudi Arabia. Present U.S. demand for petroleum products is about 20 million barrels per day. If oil shale could be used to meet a quarter of that demand, 800 billion barrels of recoverable resources would last for more than 400 years.

(James T. Bartis, et. al., “Oil Shale Development in the United States: Prospects and Policy Issues” (Santa Monica: RAND Corporation, 2005), p. ix. http://rand.org/pubs/monographs/2005/RAND_MG414.pdf) (emphasis added)

The same RAND study indicated that technology exists today that would allow oil shale extraction and that the process would be cost effective once the price of a barrel of oil was $95 (p. x). The price of a barrel of oil today is around $130.

However, Shell Oil has been investing in technology that would make extraction much cheaper than standard pit mining:

Shell Oil Company has successfully conducted small-scale field tests of an insitu process based on slow underground heating via thermal conduction. Larger scale operations are required to establish technical viability, especially with regard to avoiding adverse impacts on groundwater quality. Shell anticipates that, in contrast to the cost estimates for mining and surface retorting, the petroleum products produced by their thermally conductive in-situ method will be competitive at crude oil prices in the mid-$20s per barrel.

(James T. Bartis, et. al., “Oil Shale Development in the United States: Prospects and Policy Issues” (Santa Monica: RAND Corporation, 2005), p. x. http://rand.org/pubs/monographs/2005/RAND_MG414.pdf)

In short, if the Congress removed its prohibition, America could develop a substantial amount of its oil needs from domestic oil shale resources rather than relying on foreign governments.

The Energy Policy Act of 2005 specifically declared that it was the policy of the United States to recognize oil shale as a strategically important domestic resource. Section 369 states:

DECLARATION OF POLICY.—Congress declares that it is the policy of the United States that—

(1) United States oil shale, tar sands, and other unconventional fuels are strategically important domestic resources that should be developed to reduce the growing dependence of the United States on politically and economically unstable sources of foreign oil imports;

(2) the development of oil shale, tar sands, and other strategic unconventional fuels, for research and commercial development, should be conducted in an environmentally sound manner, using practices that minimize impacts; and

(3) development of those strategic unconventional fuels should occur, with an emphasis on sustainability, to benefit the United States while taking into account affected States and communities.

(Energy Policy Act of 2005, http://www.epa.gov/oust/fedlaws/publ_109-058.pdf)

Yet, buried in a Department of Interior appropriations bill passed in December 2007 was an amendment that prevented establishing regulations for leasing land to drill for oil shale. The House passed that amendment, proposed by Rep. Mark Udall of Colorado, on June 27, 2007, by a vote of 219-215.

On May 15, 2008 in a 15-14 vote, the Senate Appropriations Committee rejected an amendment by Sen. Wayne Allard (R-CO) to allow oil shale drilling and overturn the Udall moratorium.

As you can see by the votes on the two issues above, this is an issue that is resulting in a split across the congress folks. We need to get them over the hump on this one.