“Iran is no Match for Israel” – says Patriot missile operator

Someone posted this on ronpaulforums in response to a question I had. What he says is very important, and explains precisely why this whole “Iran will nuke Israel” thing is nonsense. That is not to say we don’t need to attack them for threatening us. We do. But we have little to fear from these bunch of Jew haters.

Having been a PATRIOT operator and someone whose trained exclusively against Iran for 2 years, I want to reiterate the most important facts in regards to Iran’s ACTUAL capabilities:

1) They have absolutely no missile that can reach America. None. It is a complete non-issue.
2) Their missile arsenal predominately consists of Shahab-1 through Shahab-5 missiles, Scud-B and Scud-C. Most of these are IRBMs (Intermediate Range) and none are ICBMs (Inter-Continental).
3) We have sold PATRIOT missile defense systems to Taiwan, Egypt, Germany, South Korea, Greece, Israel, Japan, Kuwait, Netherlands, Saudi Arabia, and United Arab Emirates.
4) In order for Iran to launch any nuclear payload at Israel, they would have to first defeat the missile defense systems in Iraq, UAE, Jordan, Kuwait, and Israel. Just look at line of sight from Iran to Israel and you’ll see it’s a foolish argument. Since there is no way for Iran to defeat these systems, their only option would be to overwhelm them. In order to do that, they’d likely have to launch their entire arsenal of missiles, which is essentially impossible due to the amount of logistics that would involve, without clearly setting of early warning WORLDWIDE.
5) We have great early warning systems that would allow us to send in our Air Force to take out most launch locations, prior to launch. Further, any missiles that do launch would then immediately identify launch locations we miss, so it is unlikely they could fire more than one volly from each location. This means that logistically, they not only have to beat our early warning systems, but they’d also have to launch from multiple thousands of locations.
6) Every nuclear payload launched from Iran has a 9/10 probability of being shot down over their own country and would cause widespread nuclear fallout for IRAN itself.

Ultimately, the conclusion is that it’s a complete non-issue, unless Iran wants to destroy itself with no guarantee of a mutual-assured destruction of Israel. It would be complete suicide with no achievement

Keynes vs Mises: When the Golden Moose come Home to Roost

A few posts ago I believe I mentioned the size, numerically, of the Keynesian bubble the world is currently in. The gross domestic product of the entire planet is something like $65 trillion. That’s enough for a nice-sized moose farm, assuming all said moose on farm are solid gold and there are a lot of them.

I kid, but the value of the world-wide derivatives market, which means money that people assume they are owed and that is coming to them, is something around $1 quadrillion. A quadrillion is a thousand trillion. Let’s look at it numerically:

1,000,000,000,000,000

The problem is the discrepancy. That is, say some bank owns a Greek bond, and Greece owes that bank $1,000. Bank gets to write on sheet that bank has $1,000. But really bank does not, because Greece cannot pay bank. So bank loses $1,000. Those dollars never, in fact, existed. They were just assumed to exist.

The same is the case with every dollar over $65 trillion that exists in the worldwide derivatives market, because there’s no mathematical way that a quadrillion dollars in value exists on the planet when planetary GDP is only $65 trillion.

So the difference between those numbers is the size of the bubble in real numeric terms. And when that bubble bursts, everything goes back to zero. Like a planetary jubilee, debt slaves released.

The cause of this bubble is governmental bailouts and handouts and payouts in virtually every western country that can never be repaid. It started at the level of individuals, and went up the money chain from there. The progression is like so:

  1. Federal Reserve prints money and loans it to bank
  2. Bank loans it to Bob, an individual, bank being coerced by some government initiative to give Bob stuff he can’t afford
  3. Bob can’t pay back bank, Bob loses house
  4. Bank can’t sell house, loses loan
  5. Bank asks government to bail it out, so debt goes up the money chain from individual (Bob) to bank.
  6. Federal Reserve prints money and loans it to government
  7. Government bails out bank
  8. Bob loses home and the value of whatever dollars he does have goes way way down.
  9. Bob can’t spend money because he’s broke
  10. GDP, which is 70% consumer spending, goes down
  11. In a panic, Federal Reserve prints up more money so government can give it to Bob so he can spend it.
  12. Government goes into debt, the final level in the money chain.
  13. No one can bail out government, so bubble bursts.

It’s a dollar bubble. It keeps getting printed and printed at every step of the way. And it’s going to burst.

Keynes maintained that by intervening in the economic cycle, i.e. giving Bob money he couldn’t pay back, the government could paper over recessions and only have growth. Where Keynes went wrong was that he didn’t understand that once government has the power to create money out of nothing, that power, like any absolute power, gets abused. Soon, the government isn’t papering over mild recessions by handing out money. They’re furiously handing out money to keep the entire global economy from collapsing.

Think trillion dollar stimulus bills, $700 billion bailouts, $2 tillion European bailout funds, and God knows how many dollars the Fed is printing. Really, only God knows because they don’t have to tell anyone. And Herman Cain thinks this is fine.

But the more they hand out, the bigger the quadrillion dollar bubble grows. And the time until it finally bursts gets closer and closer.

In the end its all about Hubris. Keynes thought he could outsmart human nature by giving the government the right to print money backed by nothing. He thought he could stabilize the world through a simple tactic.

Mises knew better when he said that you can’t have your cake and eat it too. You can’t have growth without recessions, and if you try to, then all you’ll get is one big recession (read: crash) when the golden moose finally come home to roost, or whatever sound they make.

The Terror of Obama; the Humility of Ron Paul

Not too long ago my brother and I were discussing a purely Jewish/Israeli issue. That is, what is Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s greatest fear? This was around the time that Moshe Feiglin was duking it out with Netanyahu for power in the ruling Likud Party. Feiglin was about to close in on taking control of the party’s central committee and force Netanyahu literally out of the party when Netanyahu was able to secure a court order allowing him to retroactively change the party’s charter and cancel internal party elections, knowing he would lose to Feiglin.

Anyway, I told my brother that Feiglin was and is Netanyahu’s greatest fear. My brother responded with a bit of verve and said something like, “There’s one man that strikes fear in Netanyahu’s heart, and that man is Barack Obama.”

I’ve only now come to realize that my brother was right, and that this fear is the essence of what is wrong with the American Presidency. Not with Obama as a person, though I don’t have much positive to say about him, but the office of the Presidency itself. No leader should ever “fear” an American president unless they are actually at war (DECLARED by Congress) with America. They should respect him. The office has gotten so distorted and tyrannical to the world at large that America can no longer serve as an example to the world, but rather as a big global bully that thinks it runs the place.

The presidency should be an office respected by the world, occupied by a man (or woman) who is humble enough to know he is just a man, and has no authority to interfere in the affairs of other nations at a whim.

This twisting of the office of the Presidency has gone so far that the American public now thinks that it’s necessary for other countries to “fear” the President of the USA in order to maintain global order and peace. Global order and peace has come to mean wars on every continent. This is sad, dangerous, and unsustainable.

“If so-and-so Republican is elected, then Ahmadinejad won’t dare do anything stupid because he’ll fear so-and-so!” Or some such logic. I used to think like this.

If Ron Paul is elected president, would anyone “fear” him? I seriously doubt it. He would pretty much mind his own business and simply try to trade and do business with other countries. Not wave money around (borrowed from China) and threaten to bomb places that don’t cooperate.

President Ron Paul wouldn’t “threaten” Netanyahu with anything. Israel would go about its business, and unlike America who only bombs places for reasons that are at most only tangentially connected to the concept of national security as an excuse to expand American ego, Israel bombs people who actually bomb its cities.

Everyone knew that Obama had a really big ego before he was elected, and still does. So did Bush, so did Clinton, so did the other Bush. Some people thought this would be a good thing. But what we really need is someone who is humble. In the real sense of the word. Humility.

Humility doesn’t mean someone who’s constantly down on himself. It means someone who has an accurate picture of who he really is in the grander scheme of things.

The purpose of American government is to preserve the freedom and rights of Americans. The office of the Presidency is meant to preside over that function, not push people around globally.

When Ron Paul, or someone like him, is president, America will have earned the respect it deserves as the best country in the world by example, not by force. Force will only come if America is truly threatened.

And when Moshe Feiglin, or someone like him, is the leader of the Jews, the Jewish people will have earned its place in the world as the spiritual brain of humanity.

In the meantime, King Obama will continue to flaunt his borrowed Chinese and Fed printing-press money in an attempt to force the economy to worship his Presidential will.

And Netanyahu who is also a man full of himself up the wazoo, will continue to fear both Obama and Feiglin, who may yet take over the Likud party on January 31.

 

Ron Paul Supporters: A Guide to Arguing with Neocons 101 – Iraq and Afghanistan

Until a few months ago I was a neocon, hoping that Mike Huckabee would run for president so I could vote for him. Until I started listening to Ron Paul and a paradigm shift snapped my brain nearly off the stem. To Ron Paul supporters trying to court the neocon vote, here’s what you need to understand about the neocon mentality. Please use this guide to speak with them on their terms in order to convince them to come to our side.

Rule Number 1 in the neocon brain: America is a fundamentally good country and most of the rest of the world is evil.

I understand that this may seem a bit childish to believe, but it is extremely deeply rooted in the neocon mentality. You won’t get through to them if you deny this principle. We are in Iraq and everywhere else because we are good and we sincerely want freedom for all Iraqis. We bombed Lybia to save lives. Iran really is a threat to the world. They really, truly believe this. They’re being sincere. It’s not a game to get oil or power or control of the world. It has nothing to do with “empire” in their heads. Empires bring to mind the Emperor in Star Wars and crazy people like Caligula. Not the United States. They can’t bare to think that America is anything resembling an evil empire. Once you even hint that, they’ll stop listening entirely.

Given that, how do you work around the goop?

Work with them. Agree where you can. Avoid sensitive words and terminology. The truth is, and all Paul supporters would agree, America really is a force for good in the world, or at least it can and should be. Agree on that. You must make it clear to them that you believe this. The only question is “how” to be a force for good in the world. Don’t say things like “we’re in Iraq for the oil”. Say that you, too, want freedom for all Iraqis. Don’t you? Yes, you just don’t believe that we have to station troops there to do it, or spend a dollar enforcing it.

From there, you’ve got to curve it around. Tell them you’d support the Iraq war if war were declared by Congress with a clearly defined goal. But every undeclared war America has ever fought without a clear goal has been lost. Talk like a person interested in American victory. Korea, Vietnam, now Iraq and Afghanistan have all been lost causes. Neocons understand victory and defeat. They want to win, and they don’t want to lose. So tell them that if we want to win, we have to have Congress declare a war and declare a clearly defined goal. Until then, our troops will continue to die to no end and you can’t stand defeat. So in the meantime, we HAVE to pull them out until Congress can get its act together and stop letting them die for nothing.

And you care about America too much to let them keep dying for nothing.

Tell them you would support any just war that the Congress declares. Tell them you want victory as much as they do. That’s rule number 1.

Don’t use the word “constitution”. It just doesn’t interest them. I know that’s hard to accept, but it’s the truth. It means very little to them in a practical sense, so just talk in the language of victory and defeat.