Interdicter

AC-130 GUNSHIP

The AC-130H Spectre and the AC-130U Spooky primary missions are close air support, air interdiction and armed reconnaissance.
The Italian Flub

As most casual WWII historians and enthusiasts know, the Allied campaign in Italy was one of the more poorly conducted operations. In fact no other theater of war saw more casualties for the Western Allies than Italy. But had the British and Americans properly used their air and naval superiority early on, the entire campaign would have been considerably shortened and the final disaster of the Third Reich may have taken place a year earlier than it did. 

The first mistake was poor containment of Sicily. The Germans were able to extricate a great bulk of their forces from the island, which would later be used to great effect in Italy (above). Though to be fair to the Allies, the straits of Messina were covered by some significant coastal artillery that would have made naval interdiction difficult. But perhaps the casualties suffered in a more intense naval operation against the evacuating forces would have been worth the lives saved on Italy, lost to the surviving forces of Sicily. 

The second mistake came from poor utilization of the full extent of Allied naval and air power. The Allied invasion of Italy came earlier than the Germans had expected. Which wouldn’t have been too terrible had not the Italians declared an armistice with the Allies the same day. This created a critical situation for the Germans. If the Italians were to blow the Alpine tunnels and passes, the Germans would have no way of reinforcement or supply. But the Italians failed to act. 

For a day or two following the invasion, the situation for the German forces in central and southern Italy was extremely perilous. Five Italian divisions faced two German divisions in the vicinity of Rome. If the powerful Allied invasion fleet, which appeared off Naples on September 8, moved north and landed near the capital along with a simultaneous reinforcement by parachute troops seizing the airfields, as General Kesselring (above, second from right) had expected, an almost untenable situation would have arisen. Kesselring later contended that on the evening of the eighth, Hitler and the OKW had “wrote off” Kesselring’s entire force of eight divisions as irretrievably lost. Two days later, Hitler told Goebbels that southern Italy was lost and that a new line of defense would be established north of Rome on the Apennines.  

But the Allies bungled. Allied Command did not take advantage of its complete command of the seas, which allowed them to land all along Italy’s substantial coast line. Nor did the Allied Command exploit its overwhelming air superiority as the Germans had feared. Moreover, no effort seems to have been made by Eisenhower’s command to try and utilize the five Italian divisions near Rome in conjunction with his own. Had Eisenhower done so - as least such was the contention of Kesselring and his chief of staff, General Siegfried Westphal, later - the predicament of the Germans would have become hopeless. It was simply beyond their powers, they declared, to fight off Montgomery’s army up the peninsula from the “boot,” throw back General Mark Clark’s invasion force, wherever it landed and deal with large Italian formations in their midst and in their rear (German tactical situation, above).* 

Thus, both generals breathed a sigh of relief when the American Fifth Army landed not near Rome but south of Naples, at Salerno (above), and when the anticipated parachutist failed to appear over Rome’s airfields. Their relief was all the greater when the Italian divisions surrendered almost completely without a shot being fired and were disarmed. It meant the Germans could easily hold Rome and, for the time being, even Naples. This gave Kesselring possession of nearly two-thirds of Italy, including the industrial north, whose factories were put to work churning out German arms. Almost miraculously, Hitler and his regime had received a new lease on life. The fighting in Italy would be slow and grinding, sometimes devolving into trench warfare. Italy’s terrain overwhelmingly favored the defender, and impeded the movement of Allied vehicles. It would be one hard slog to Rome (below, bombing of the town of Cassino).

It wasn’t until June 4, 1944 that the Allies entered Rome, while the German Tenth Army was allowed to get away (Mark Clark had an almost obsession to be the first in Rome, enough for him to make poor tactical decisions so he’d get there faster) and therefore in the next few weeks, were responsible for doubling the Allied casualties in the next few months. Clark was hailed as a hero in the United States. But General Clark was soon eclipsed by more momentous events in Europe; Operation Overlord. As one Allied soldier in Italy complained, “They wouldn’t even let us have the front page for a day.” (below)

*According to Captain Harry C. Butcher, Eisenhower’s naval aide, both the British and American chiefs of staff complained that Eisenhower was not showing sufficient initiative in pressing forward in Italy. Butcher points out, in defense of a his chief that insufficient landing craft limited Eisenhower’s plans and that to have launched a seaborne invasion as far north as Rome would have put the operation beyond the range of Allied air power. Eisenhower himself points out they after the capture of Sicily, he was ordered to return seven divisions, four American and three British, to England in preparation for Overlord. This left Eisenhower woefully short on troops. Butcher also states that a paradrop on Rome’s airfields had been considered and even planned, but at the last moment, Marshal Badoglio begged this operation to be “suspended temporarily.” General Maxwell Taylor, who at great personal risk has secretly gone to Rome to confer with Badoglio, ruefully reported that the Italians were in no moral or emotional state to fight.

percyhastings  asked:

Are nonbinary people welcome in the sisterhood too roberta

If Your Lesbian Then You Join Lesbian Task Force Sisterhood But If Not You Got Blenty Of Other Option’s Such As:
- Bisexual Artillery Batallion
- Nonbinary Air Force
- Gay Mens Chorus
- Pansexual Paratrooper Platoon
- Trans Folks Heavy Interdiction Cadre

THE INTERDICTION AFTER APRIL

I.

Month in which I am forbidden
to pick the fruit that fell from me:
insufferable, sweet.

II.

It is no longer April, I am reminded.
Now I can do as I wish with my hands and teeth.
I can kill and lick the sheen of blood off the blade
or even go as far as to peacefully sleep.

III.

    The difficulty arises at the point of intersection
    of memory and living. You are the butterfly

    whose wing got caught in the light, hooked
    to a beam, torn and disabled. I am the 

    one who is watching. How?– if it is over.
    I want to know. How and who, what, please.

IV.

Inside the dream is another dream,
inside which: another. I could sink into that pool
of thought and let it consume me. I could
drown and put an end to this. I could
wait for the water to save me.

I return to hope. It glares at me, threatening.
Again? Yes. I am bravely a woman. I choose
to take the least convenient path. I want to
keep living, keep: living, keep the hot pulse
of living jammed between my bones and
their shivering. I use the excuse of water
to save me; I accomplish life in my waiting.

V.

Yes, I am. Bravely: a woman.
Convinced of my cause.

I want to birthe a daughter;
I want to write an impeccable poem.

VI.

Month in which I am
forbidden to make any other decision:

I survive April
with only moderate difficulty.

I can choose what I want to eat.

unpoissonrouge  asked:

Je viens d'un pauvre lycée de campagne qui faisait du ramassage scolaire dans des patelins à une heure du lycée où il y avait parfois pas plus de dix baraques. Il y avait toujours une alternative à la viande à la cantine ( généralement du poisson, des oeufs parfois ). Alors qu'ils ne me fassent pas croire que c'est compliqué ou cher à se procurer des menus halal/casher ( quand c'est casher, c'est halal ) ou végétariens.

Casher n’est pas exactement équivalent à halal non ? Il y a des différences, même s’il y a des points communs. Un menu casher peut être halal, mais l’inverse n’est pas forcément vrai, casher, c’est au-delà de la viande, il y a l’interdiction de mélanger produits laitiers et viandes aussi. J’imagine que viande casher = viande halal par contre oui ? Je me trompe peut-être, mais je me souviens d’avoir lu un truc comme ça ! N’hésitez pas à me corriger. 

Mais oui de toute façon, des menus végétariens marcheraient pour tout le monde, c’est carrément possible.

Ayup ahma figgerin'

People say ridiculous things like “If there’s intelligent life out there in the universe, why hasn’t it contacted us?”

Well, maybe cuz we’re not the special little flowers we think we are? Maybe because WE aren’t considered intelligent life? Could it be we’re the inbred trailer trash of the universe? It could.

Let’s ignore the fact that we just figured out flying a little more than a hundred years ago, and haven’t travelled in space beyond our own moon. Let’s ignore the fact that our “science” capable of looking for signals from elsewhere is barely fifty years old. Let’s also ignore the long history of flying craft and inhuman visitors that appear in cultures around the world. Let’s just focus on us…

I can imagine the counter argument to proposed contact..
“Okay look. They’re not really all that smart. It took them 18,000 years to just figure out steel. When they FINALLY figured out powered flight, within 15 years they were using it to blow themselves up. They’ve made NUCLEAR weapons! Lot’s of them!They use poison in warfare. And warfare! They can’t stop fighting! And it’s crazy! They kill those who don’t look like them, they kill those who do look like them! They kill those who pray to different gods, they kill those who pray to the same god! They spend far more on weapons than they do trying to heal the sick, so if necessary they just make up new reasons to kill over. They have agriculture and more than enough food but some of them still STARVE! TO DEATH! They haven’t mastered interstellar or interdimensional travel, and yet they’re destroying their ecosystem and biosphere. And arguing as it happens! Have you seen their “entertainment”? They glorify death and violence! And…and the arrogance! They think the rest of us fear them? Or would? Their self appraisal is so flawed it’s laughable. Smart, adaptable, dangerous and tough? They haven’t encountered anyone or anything, but they believe this. They’re like infants but without the capacity to develop. Contact? Contact. Okay. We’ll give them contact. Let’s remove the interdiction and interference ban. Just for one year of their time. Let’s see how cocky they are after one year of reality. All in favor?“

Face it folks. We have absolutely nothing to offer to a race capable of interstellar travel. Other than a sad laugh or two at our self destructive nature.

Off Limits (Skam - Chris x OC) Part 8

Pairing: Chris x OC

Synopsis: Mara Magnusson has always had everything she ever wanted in her life, except for one thing. The boyish charm of her brother’s childhood friend had wrecked her poor heart and ruined her for any other guy – you can trust her, she has tried. She could see the way he looked at her, though she knew there were rules about not hitting on your best friend’s little sister. Luckily for her, there were no restrictions when it was the other way around.

Word count: 1.3k

Warning: significant lack of Chris (sorry)

A/N: This one is short, but I feel like it was necessary to write a Will/Mara focused chapter. I didn’t think it would turn out this long, I first planned on making this the first part of a chapter and then have a Mara/Chris scene. But then I would have to cut the next scene in two, which I don’t want to do. Besides, I haven’t posted anything yesterday (a big thank you to all those who took the time to write me when I was feeling down) so I really wanted to post a little something today.

MASTERLIST

Part 7 <<<< >>> Part 9

By the time William came back with dinner, Mara had showered, dried her hair, changed into something she wold have worn if she had actually been to the cinema, and watched three times the trailer of a movie that played today. She was covered, no matter what. The only sign of her extra-curricular activities was the hickey on her collarbone, but she fixed this problem with a turtle neck.

William looked like he was seriously questioning if Mara was worth the whole trip downtown just to buy sushi, but then she smiled and brought the plates and the drinks to the living room, while he slouched down on the couch, seemingly exhausted.

Keep reading

Un moment faut arrêter de croire à tous ce que disent les autres. C'est trop simple de dire sur une personne qu'elle est trop ceci ou pas assez comme cela. Et c'est trop facile de croire à ces choses la.
C'est à nous d'avoir notre propre avis sur telle ou telle personne. On ne doit pas se laisser influencer par quelques cons immatures. Aimer une personne différente n'est pas une interdiction.

What message did Beatrice fail to deliver to Lemony?

Lemony Snicket’s break-up with Beatrice Baudelaire is intrinsically wrought to another problem: his incapacity to communicate with her, along with his pressing need to impart her with an important message. He is, indeed, forbidden by Jacques to attempt any sort of contact with Beatrice. Lemony, however, braves this interdiction no less than three times:

  • Beatrice aks Lemony in her famous 200-pages break-up letter whether he read a coded sonnet she sent him one night. In his response, he admits he never got this message and aks her whether she thinks her co-star is a traitor. Because he had to flee the country, Lemony never got a response to either answer and it is possible his letter was never even delivered.
  • Lemony tries to communicate important communication in her congratulation letter prior to Violet’s birth, but the telegram gets cut before he can dive into this sensitive topic.
  • Lemony endeavours to inform Beatrice of something regarding Olaf at the Duchess of Winnipeg’s ball.

The question is doubly folded: what did Beatrice fail to say to Lemony before he left the country, and what did Lemony fail to tell Beatrice before she died? Are these two problems related? More on that after the cut.

NOTE TO READERS: The following essay assumes Bertrand Baudelaire was Beatrice’s co-star. We recommand you read the theory related the co-star before diving into this one.

Keep reading

The California’s neutralization fire was meant to keep enemy gunners from shooting at the UDT, and also to interdict Japanese troop movements down from Garapan. But even after rehearsing with real live ships at Kaho'olawe, Kauffman wasn’t prepared for this. When he saw splashes in the lagoon landing perilously close to his men, both ahead of and behind them, he thought the Navy needed work on its marksmanship. He radioed his executive officer, Johnny DeBold, and said, ‘Blow Pistol, this is Blow Gun. For God’s sake, tell the support ships they’re firing short.’
Slowly and calmly, DeBold answered, 'Skipper those aren’t shorts, they’re overs. They’re not ours!’
Kauffman’s reply fell flatly from his mouth. 'Oh.’
—  James D. Hornfischer, “The Fleet at Flood Tide”
The Utter and Egregious Fallacy of “That Was Just What Happened In Medieval Times”

Right, so. I’m angry all over again and I’m going to be angry for a while, because if I see one more idiot defending the rape scene over the fact that “that was just what happened in medieval times,” I am going to put a brick through my computer screen. This won’t be as long or as in-depth as I want it to be, since I have to go to work soon, but my medieval historian buttons have been pushed to a sufficient degree that I have to make some response to all this. So without further ado:

  • Legislation to protect women and children was an idea as far back as the seventh goddamn century (and before), but it certainly appeared in the western Christian/Latin legal canon with Adamnan of Iona’s “Law of the Innocents.” Christianity itself modified existing Greco-Roman social codes to give women (who had no rights at all in antiquity) a surprising amount of protection and recognition in marriage and society. Was this always followed? Of course not. But you can bet your ass it was a thing, and one of the reasons early Christianity was so suspiciously received, due to its lenient treatment of women, slaves, the poor, the leprous, and other outcasts.
  • On that note, we call them “the Dark Ages” because we are a bunch of Eurocentric assholes who figure all of civilization collapsed when Rome fell. Yes, Western Europe wasn’t doing so hot, but everywhere else was flourishing – socially, culturally, religiously, artistically.
  • The Vikings were forward-thinking as hell with their legal treatment of women (so, for that matter, were the Welsh). Both cultures allowed a wife to separate from her husband with no penalty if he was abusing her, and in the Vikings’ case, he would be shamed and socially ridiculed for being such a low-down tool as to mistreat a woman. The Vikings did not fuck around. And among the Welsh, maternal inheritance and property rights counted just as much as paternal.
  • Rape was physically and brutally punishable in England from at least the 11th century on. Prior to the Norman Conquest, it was treated as an offense for which one had to pay weregild – literally “man money” – the same as when someone was murdered. Post-Norman Conquest, you got your goddamn dick chopped off, the same as thieves lost a hand and oathbreakers lost tongues. You see the pattern? It was a serious crime. People weren’t just out raping all and sundry. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (otherwise not fond of William) eulogized him as a “violent but very wise” man, and praised him for making England so safe that an unarmed man or maiden girl could travel the roads without fear of robbery or molestation.
  • If you were a dude that everyone hated, you got accused of rape and mistreatment of women. It wasn’t cool.
  • Due to the teachings of the third century Roman physician Galen, it was believed that a woman could not conceive if she didn’t have an orgasm. No, this does not mean that medieval couples were trying positions from the Kama Sutra every night (the Church still had strict guidelines on when and where and how you were supposed to do the do) but it also doesn’t mean that women’s pleasure was some completely mystical and/or unthinkable idea.
  • Likewise, early consummation DID happen (Margaret Beaufort, Eleanor of Castile) but it was frowned on. The Church imposed penalties on husbands who consummated their marriage too early, and while noble girls were generally married around 14-16, commoner girls were about the same age as today (early-mid twenties) and could often marry for love, depending on their social station.
  • While marital rape and abuse was not legally recognized or classified as a crime, that didn’t mean it went unpunished. Since most noble marriages were business transactions, that meant the wife was an investment of some value, and a sure way to piss off her menfolk (and the Pope) was to mistreat and abuse her. King Philip II of France spent years under interdict and excommunication for his appalling treatment of his second wife, Ingeborg, and was ultimately forced to capitulate and take her back. The Pope would in fact often champion the causes of mistreated noble wives (usually to force concessions out of her husband, but still). Annulment and separation, while unusual, were not completely impossible, and did happen – one of the chief grounds for it being granted was mistreatment and abuse.
  • Furthermore, the code of chivalry specified honorable treatment for noblewomen. Of course, this did not mean it was lived out in practice, and common women were fair game, but there was in fact an existing and well-known legal framework for how you were supposed to treat your womenfolk – Ramsay would have been as reviled in the medieval era as he is to our modern sensibilities. Medieval people weren’t different from us and out rape rape rapin the livelong day. In fact, I would hazard a guess that it’s gotten MORE common now that we, you know, no longer chop the goddamn dicks off people and they generally skate with no consequence.
  • Besides, the “the medieval era was dark and barbaric” attitude relies on the mistaken narrative of “progress,” i.e. things were terrible back then and have been constantly evolving to this point in time, where we no longer do the gross things they did. DING DONG YOU ARE WRONG! This is a historiographical fallacy to excuse our own atrocities and act like the cost of the modern world was “necessary” for “developing” us to who we are now, and that all the bloodshed, death, colonialism, world wars, etc can’t possibly be as bad as what they did Back In The Day. Saying “people got raped back then!” is implicitly saying “and they don’t get raped today, because Progress.” It’s incredibly stupid and hypocritical. So don’t even start that shit with me.
  • Last, these are not real events magically happening outside anyone’s control. This is a television show written by 21st century people. They have repeatedly used rape as a clumsy plot device in the past. They continued to do so and twisted it this time to happen to a beloved major character purely for the self-admitted purpose of shock value. They planned it since season 2 and waited for Sophie Turner to come of age so they could shoot it legally. So acting like GoT is this pseudo “medieval world” where nobody had any control over the fact that Sansa was put in a position to be violated by Ramsay is again, laughably facetious. They manipulated the story, characters, and narrative to be sure that this happened. They made a writing choice. Hence we are going to criticize that writing choice. We have as much right to do that as they do to create it in the first place. It’s called consequences. “Free speech” does not mean you get to say whatever you want and no one can challenge or correct you. It means the government can’t put you in jail or otherwise legally harass you with the mechanisms of the state for it. Someone else using their free speech to call you a fucking idiot is perfectly legal.
  • In conclusion: No, the medieval era was not some beacon of rights and happiness for women. Terrible things could and did happen. But they excited just as much public outrage as they did today, and were oftentimes more harshly punished (at least if you were noble born, because CLASSISM! Take a shot). Every bit of development and progress we HAVE made was extremely hard won. But quit acting like it was just an inevitable, normal, and necessary fact of life in medieval times. Because you know nothing, Jon Snow.
Since Nixon’s anticrime push in the early 1970s, the courts had interpreted the Posse Comitatus Act as to allow the military to provide “indirect” assistance to federal law enforcement. Generally, that meant allowing the Navy to tip off the Coast Guard when it spotted vessels that fit the profile of those used by drug smugglers. The amended law encouraged the Pentagon to go further and give local, state, and federal police access to military intelligence and research. It also encouraged the opening up of access to military bases and equipment, and explicitly authorized the military to train civilian police in the use of military equipment. The law essentially permitted the military to work with drug cops on all aspects of drug interdiction short of making arrests and conducting searches.
The next year Reagan pushed for more. He wanted the Posse Comitatus Act amended yet again, this time to allow soldiers to both arrest and conduct searches of US citizens. He also made official his desire to repeal the Exclusionary Rule, which would essentially free police to violate the Fourth Amendment at will. Republican senator Strom Thurmond of South Caroline introduced a bill to accomplish both of these goals, in addition to other items on the White House wish list, such as expanded wiretapping powers. Reagan also wanted to expand asset forgeiture power to make it even easier for the government to take property away from people who had never been charged with a crime. The 1978 law had exempted real estate from the types of property that could be seized. Reagan wanted that distinction removed. He also wanted the stanard of proof for confiscation lowered to a mere “suspicion” that the property had been used in a drug crime, and to permit the government to take property before even issuing an indictment. The aggressive legal minds at DOJ also invented a new tupe of forfeiture called ‘substitue assets’. This would allow prosecutors to estimate the amount of money a suspect had made inthe drug trade, then confifscate a portion of his property equal in value to their estimate, even if they couldn’t meet the already low standard for showing that the specific property they were eyeying was connected to any crime.
Unfortunately for the Americans who would later be victimized by these new crime-fighting techniques, there were no Sam Ervins left in Congress to protect them. The Democrats were eager to eliminate the perception that they were softer on crime than the Republicans. Senator Joe Biden, for example, preempted the White House-sponsored bill with a bill of his own, which gave Reagan everything he wanted on asset forfeiture.
On September 30, 1982, the crime bill loaded up with most of the provisions Reagan wanted passed the Seante 95-1.
— 

Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America’s Police Forces by Radley Balko

“but in a socialist society the government would be able to just take your property, monitor you at all times, and ignore the individual’s rights!”

anonymous asked:

What would likely happen if western countries put a moratorium on immigration or reintroduced quotas? would countries really engage in trade wars or threaten sanctions against us? It seems really unlikely but than I remember how the elite reacted to Trump's travel ban and I start to think they'd do anything necessary to keep this shit operation going.

My instincts is that they couldn’t get away with it but Macron is already talking about sanctions on Poland for literally just having a national conservative party in power, so I don’t know.

My hope is that something interdicts this shit in between now and the turn of the decade, but who knows.

Weather Modification and Monsanto

Think twice before you say weather control is just a conspiracy theory. Then ask yourself why Monsanto‬ owns patents in Geo-engineering. Weather undeniably affects food access and food costs. One glance at maps across the globe reveals that food production areas are being especially hard hit, and we are seeing prices rise accordingly. These natural events can be exploited both by speculators and governments. However, with the introduction of weather modification, invested in by those such as Bill Gates and openly promoted by elite globalist think tanks, concerns have been raised over the possibility that governments could use weather as a deliberate weapon to create food wars. Accusations have already been leveled charging exactly that. While some might dismiss the various possibilities of “steering the weather” for malevolent purposes as conspiracy, it is much more difficult to ignore the 1996 document presented to the Air Force titled Owning the Weather 2025 (PDF), which explicitly states as a heading on page 10: Applying Weather-modification to Military Operations. One key section states that weather control could be virtual, as well as literal:

Offensive abilities could provide spoofing options to create virtual weather in the enemy’s sensory and information systems, making it more likely for them to make decisions producing results of our choosing rather than theirs. It would also allow for the capability to mask or disguise our weather-modification activities….Also key to the feasibility of such a system is the ability to model the extremely complex nonlinear system of global weather in ways that can accurately predict the outcome of changes in the influencing variables….Conceivably, with enough lead time and the right conditions, you could get “made-to-order” weather. This would certainly be the ultimate endgame for anyone wishing to use food as a weapon of control and profit. This possibility should not be easily dismissed, but rather it warrants open-minded investigation and research.
”If you control the food supply, you control the people” Henry Kissinger

Vietnam War Weather Modification – Operation Popeye

Geophysical Warfare — “Rainmakers.” During the Vietnam Conflict, our warfighters needed a way to interdict enemy traffic on the Ho Chi Minh Trail. “Project Popeye” helped answer the call. China Lake adapted its cloud seeding technologies to enhance rainfall thereby significantly deterring enemy activity on the trail. This highly successful China Lake technology was also used in hurricane abatement, fog control, and drought relief.

Architecture is the expression of every society’s very being. But only the ideal being of society, the one that issues orders and interdictions with authority, is expressed in architectural compositions in the strict sense of the word. Thus great monuments rise up like levees, opposing the logic of majesty and authority to any confusion: Church and State in the form of cathedrals and palaces speak to the multitudes, or silence them. It is obvious that monuments inspire social good behaviour in societies and often even real fear. The storming of the Bastille is symbolic of this state of affairs: it is hard to explain this mass movement other than through the people’s animosity against the monuments that are its real masters.
—  Georges Bataille, ‘Architecture’.