And now a roundup of stories about new advancements in technology that make science fiction fact.
A examination of politics with the help of superheroes, as well as other cool things
Showing posts with label Defense. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Defense. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 29, 2013
Wednesday, January 23, 2013
Wednesday, January 2, 2013
US Air Force Developing Real-Life "Superhero" Tech
The US Air Force has publicly revealed its BATMAN (Battlefield Air Targeting Man-Aided
kNowledge) program, which aims to outfit Special Forces soldiers in superhero inspired gear like power armor, mobile frames, sophisticated communication gear, built-in tactical computers, helmet displays and a Remote Auxiliary Power
System or "Bat Hook," which allows soldiers to draw power directly from
power lines. More information can be read here.
Friday, October 5, 2012
Superheroes and National Security
And now, the superheroes shall comment on the candidates' National Security platforms, and give a point for Obama, Romney or Undecided. Once again, some of these statements are direct or expanded quotes. Try to figure out which ones in the comments!
"Increasing military strength without considering negotiations will just provoke others to seek more strength for themselves. And then the resulting fight will level all those caught in the cross-fire."
Point for: Obama
"I'm a man love liberty, and would die for freedom, but we must not mistake compassion for weakness. People are suffering due to the past actions and inactions of our country. If we can prevent any suffering through talk rather than force, then we must take that path before any others. Of course, we also have to be able to use force when it is required. So I support Obama, who quickly dealt with bin Laden when it became apparent that some Pakistani forces were protecting him, and risking a confrontation with them."
Point for: Obama
"Romney, dude, don't you know that parading around with the biggest guns is the best way to get shot at?"
Point for: Obama
Point for: Obama
"I'm here to protect you people, but having big guns only helps when you have big enemies, so unless Romney wants to take on China or Russia, or becomes the world, there aren't enemies big enough for what Romney wants to do."
Point for: Obama
"So Romney, you say you'll institute greater competition at all levels of the procurement process? Does that mean you're going to try to outsource stuff again?"
Point for: Obama
Point for: Obama
"Boy, I have no idea who to go with here."
Point for: Undecided
"Poor Mister Romney. He doesn't understand you solve bullying through words, not violence."
Point for: Obama
"Being able to defend yourself doesn't just mean being able to weld weapons. It also means being smart enough to keep things from getting to that point."
Point for: Obama
"You don't need an invitation to protect people. We need the power to keep protecting people."
Point for: Romney
"If Mitt Romney considers bringing troops home tragic, then I consider a vote for him tragic."
Point for: Obama
"The force Romney wants to create will create many people seeking vengeance if it's ever used irresponsibly, like the last president did."
Point for: Obama
"Romney shouldn't be insulting our closest allies. We need to work together if we want to keep the world safe."
Point for: Obama
Point for: Obama
"We need to work together with our allies to help keep the world safe. Despite what Romney thinks, it's not just us that want to see the world. We can't keep acting like we're the world police."
Point for: Obama
"Romney keeps bouncing around, saying the Military should get more money one second and the less the next. I'm not sure he really knows what he wants."
Point for: Obama
"Romney, do you know why it takes more people to make a single ship these days? Because today's ships are bigger, more complicated, and have way components that anything from WWII did."
Point for: Obama
"I can't believe Romney doesn't think going after the big bad is worth it."
Point for: Obama
“Believe me when I say I wish that violence wasn’t necessary. But violence is the price we pay to accomplish a greater good. As heroes, we choose to protect that good with our lives. Obama is trying to accomplish thinks with as little violence as possible, and everyday he tries makes violence a little less necessary.”
Point for: Obama
Conclusion
| Issue | Obama/Biden | Undecided | Romney/Ryan |
|---|---|---|---|
Well look at that, Romney got a point this round. I wonder if Bob's wife Helen wouldn't object to that when she find out though. Do any of you agree with the superheroes' comments? If you think any of the heroes have been misrepresented, let me know in the comments!
~James
Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Presidential National Security
For this week's issue, we'll look at candidates' platforms on National Security. Once again, all information and videos are taken directly from the candidates' websites, either in part or in whole, unless otherwise noted, with minimal alteration to clarify and streamline information.
Barack Obama
Summarized from Obama's Website
- President Obama kept his promise to end the war in Iraq and bring our troops home.
- President Obama is drawing down our troops in Afghanistan as we transition security responsibility to the Afghan people, and is on track to responsibly end the war there in 2014.
- President Obama made the bold decision to order a raid on Osama bin Laden’s compound in Pakistan, eliminating the man responsible for the 9/11 attacks and the only leader al Qaeda had ever known.
- In 2010, President Obama announced an international effort to secure all vulnerable nuclear materials in four years, and has worked to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons in Iran and North Korea.
- President Obama has strengthened our alliances around the world with friends like Israel, our NATO allies, and our partners in Asia and Latin America. And he has brought together international coalitions to confront shared challenges, such as Iran’s nuclear program.
Summarized from Romney's Website
- President Obama has repeatedly sought to slash funds for our fighting men and women, and over the next ten years nearly $1 trillion will be cut from the core defense budget. This budget cutting enterprise is proceeding while American troops are in combat in Afghanistan, returning from their mission in Iraq, and fighting the remnants of al Qaeda worldwide. The Obama administration’s cuts have left us with a military inventory largely composed of weapons designed forty to fifty years ago. The average age of our tanker aircraft is 47 years, of strategic bombers 34 years. The U.S. Navy has only 284 ships today, the lowest level since 1916, and our naval planners indicate we need 328 ships to fulfill the Navy’s role of global presence and power projection in defense of American security. Our Air Force, which had 82 fighter squadrons at the end of the Cold War, has been reduced to 39 today. President Obama has cut funding for national missile defense.
- The Obama administration is seeking to reap a “peace dividend” when we are not at peace and when the dangers to our security are mounting. This flies directly in the face of conclusions from the bipartisan Perry-Hadley Commission set up by Congress in 2010. Even before Congress had adopted its latest round of cuts and even before President Obama had proposed yet deeper cuts, the Commission warned that: “[t]he aging of the inventories and equipment used by the services, the decline in the size of the Navy, escalating personnel entitlements, overhead and procurement costs, and the growing stress on the force means that a train wreck is coming in the areas of personnel, acquisition, and force structure.”
- It is unconscionable that the men and women of America’s military must fly in airplanes that are old and unreliable, must sail in ships that have cracked hulls, or must ride in vehicles that are urgently in need of replacement — all because their government has had neither the vision to plan for their needs or the simple common sense to manage its own budget.
Summarized from Romney's Website
- As Commander-in-Chief, Mitt Romney will keep faith with the men and women who defend us just as he will ensure that our military capabilities are matched to the interests we need to protect.
- Romney will put our Navy on the path to increase its shipbuilding rate from nine per year to approximately fifteen per year. He will also modernize and replace the aging inventories of the Air Force, Army, and Marines, and selectively strengthen our force structure. And he will fully commit to a robust, multi-layered national ballistic-missile defense system to deter and defend against nuclear attacks on our homeland and our allies.
- Romney believes we cannot rebuild our military strength without paying for it. Mitt will begin by reversing Obama-era defense cuts and return to the budget baseline established by Secretary Robert Gates in 2010, with the goal of setting core defense spending — meaning funds devoted to the fundamental military components of personnel, operations and maintenance, procurement, and research and development — at a floor of 4 percent of GDP.
- Mitt will also find efficiencies throughout the Department of Defense budget that can be reinvested into the force. The Department’s bureaucracy is bloated to the point of dysfunction and is ripe for being pared. In the years since 2000, the Pentagon’s civilian staff grew by 20 percent while our active duty fighting force grew by only 3.4 percent. That imbalance needs to be rectified.
- During World War II the United States built 1,000 ships per year with 1,000 people employed in the Bureau of Ships, as the purchasing department of the Department of the Navy was then called. By the 1980s, we were building seventeen ships per year, with 4,000 people in purchasing. Today, when we are building only nine ships a year, the Pentagon manages the shipbuilding process with some 25,000 people. That kind of excess must be brought to an end along with the byzantine rules and wasteful practices that riddle the military procurement process.
- The measures Mitt Romney will take include establishing clear lines of authority and accountability for each weapons system so they remain on time and on budget. He will institute shorter design and delivery cycles for weapons systems to eliminate the current practice of relying on yet-to-be-developed technologies, which creates delays and cost overruns. This will foster more realistic planning, get equipment into the field at a faster pace, and save the cost of having to keep older weapons systems in circulation.
- Romney will institute greater competition at all levels of the procurement process. And he will work with Congress to pass budgets on time — something the Obama administration has habitually failed to do — to allow the Department of Defense and defense contractors to properly plan multi-year projects without delay and disruption. These and other reforms will ensure a functioning procurement system that redirects savings into the defense of our nation
(Summarized from Obama's Website)
- Mitt Romney called the decision to bring our troops home from Iraq “tragic.”
- Mitt Romney has no plan to withdraw our troops from Afghanistan.
- Mitt Romney once said, “It’s not worth moving heaven and earth spending billions of dollars just trying to catch one person.”
- Mitt Romney has made reckless, unfounded claims but has not outlined any detailed policies for these issues.
- On a foreign trip, Mitt Romney insulted one of our closest allies—the British—right before their Olympics. And he’s spent months on the campaign trail criticizing our allies and partners around the world.
So in summary, Obama wants to use more diplomacy and less force to increase stability, while Romney wants to shift military spending from support personnel to front line hardware.
Turn in Friday for the Superhero opinions.
~James
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)