Terrorismists

ISIS has a problem and it’s not what you think. They aren’t being sought out and destroyed with extreme prejudice. They aren’t being adulated by the world as some almighty threat that needs intense scrutiny and attention. They’ve been marginalized and given dirty looks. Ladies and Gentlemen, they have an inferiority complex and we gave it to them. They want to be treated like a dangerous world power. They want the respect a recognized state would receive when pulling such villainous shenanigans.  They want war, but they just get a talking to and lots of inaction. I think we should give them the satisfaction of getting what they want. Face it, they’re not going to stop. You know how they are. And all these stern denouncements on TV are just firing them up. I can hear them now. For all intents and purposes, Pinky and the Brain are ISIS:

33bgv12

“How many did we kill, Pinky?”

“reports say about 45 right now, Brain”

“What have the Americans said?”

“Stop doing that”

failed-doggy-dna-experiment

WWPATBD? An acronym for what would Pinky and the Brain do. The same thing they always do, try again tomorrow. The motivation doesn’t go away and is hardly weakened by world efforts to quash the persistent acts of war waged on the universe. I’m not mistaken, give them space ships and they will attack aliens. They are the frustrated bunch and you’d think we (USA) would be. But there is seemingly nothing they can do that will make us spring into action like the super power we are… or at least used to be. Perhaps one day soon we won’t take their shit anymore. We don’t even hurt them in any way. In fact, we help them by meddling with the power structure of other nations that have in the past helped to check these militant groups and prevented them from spreading like wildfire. They fight on, we move our military further away from them. It’s actual insanity. We have a few choices and the sooner the US figures it out, the better. We either fight them here or we fight them there. We either bounce around the world cleaning up after they inflict mass casualties or we wipe them out, immediately. I’d pick the proactive route.  Currently, we do nothing. You can impose sanctions on an unrecognized state, but they won’t recognize them. They are not a conventional organization so why do we consider conventional methods of dealing with them? It’s wobbly moral ground we stand on, not wanting to attack them for fear of the innocents. What are the people they attack? Guilty of living?  I could go on and on about how we’ve perpetuated their existence and extended their longevity but that would take ages. The problem right now is that we are not giving them the attention they crave and deserve. They need our military’s attention in a bad way and I say we give it to them.

 

Still Smokin’ : Bikini Military

Apparently there are loads of beautiful women in the many militaries of the world. I am here to prove it, but first I must put it out there that I have a predisposition to love these Israeli soldiers:

Israel

Israel

Because of this:

Israel1 Israel2 Israel3

Girls will be girls. (Thank Goodness)

A while back, I wrote about the Bikini Military and discovered that in Israel, once you hit 18 years of age you have to serve a mandatory 2 years in the military:

Bikini Military

OK. Now here is the best of the rest. In no specific order by hotness:

Bikini Military

Israel

UK

UK

Romania

Romania

Russia

Russia

USA

USA

Australia

Australia

Greece

Greece

Serbia

Serbia

Mexico

Mexico

Poland

Poland

St. Lucia

Saint Lucia

Finland

Finland

Colombia

Colombia

Sweden

Sweden

Pakistan

Pakistan

Palestinian Territories

Palestinian Territories

Indonesia

Indonesia

Compiling these pictures was tough. It’s a dirty job but someone’s gotta do it.

 

No Limit Soldiers of Fortune

pg22ovalofficea110343afw7

A friend of mine got me thinking about the U.S. presidency, more specifically the term limits that come coupled with the office. It sounds great if you just take the concept at face value; we don’t want someone to maintain the position of President of the United States for too long so we give them a 2 term limit. Or at least the 22nd Amendment does. So why was the amendment needed in the first place?

Well if you ask me, it wasn’t. We all know that FDR is the only president to serve more than two terms. Only a handful of other presidents have thought to get elected to a third term (Grant, Cleveland, T. Roosevelt, and Wilson). Over the course of 225 years and 44 presidents, it hasn’t posed much of a problem. In fact, could the lifting of term limit restrictions on the office of the president be exactly what the country ordered?

Obama is not the only person I am talking about, he just happens to be in office now and I had never considered the thought prior to a week ago. You run for office on dreams and promises. What you’ve dreamt up for the future of this great country and the promise of actions that will execute your 8 year plan for success. Your first run is incentive based and lined with boundless opportunity. During your second run you still have that glimmer in the eye and a perceived purposeful resolve. Then you get elected to your second term in office and your actions are no longer incentive based. You don’t have to fight for your job or maintain a glowing image because there is no future for you in the high office you hold. It’s only natural for someone to take their foot off the gas, much like a soldier at war that is going home in 2 weeks. Perhaps you drop back a bit. Maybe you don’t throw yourself in the face of danger and instead, opt to standby cloaked in stoicism. Not so bad, but not so fantastic either. You have an agenda and now that there is no fear of botching an election and becoming a proverbial loser, whatever you personally want to do becomes what happens regardless of the best interests of the country. Bipartisan effort doesn’t mean as much, and if you go far left or far right (whichever you may be) you don’t risk losing anything as long as you don’t do something outlandish that will get you impeached.

But what if that wasn’t the case. What if come year 6, you had to consider your public future as president. What if there existed no red line that you cross then no longer have to worry about an election. Do you try harder? Are you more concerned about keeping the middle thinking portion of the country happy? It’s a big portion. Wouldn’t you be more objective and keep your fire fueled with the same intensity and willingness that landed you in office? I am thinking that might be the case. We are not a country that just sits on its ass and does nothing. Well OK we are, but we have the internets and TVs with 500 channels. This enables us to know more and make our own decisions (if we aren’t being blindly swayed by someone else’s opinion) so the chances of a tyrant getting into office and remaining there indefinitely are slim to none. If someone does remain in office for 3 or possibly 4 terms, you have to reckon they deserve it. You simply can’t be mediocre and march on to a third term. As a country we get fed up with anything and everything. There is no real threat of an office dominance that can be likened to dictatorships or a monarchy. It’s virtually impossible. We vote people out of office, it’s what we do. The average age of a US President entering office is 55 and while I don’t disagree with the current age minimum of 35, I wouldn’t be opposed to raising that minimum to 45 years of age. (I originally had my facts mixed up) A decade of decision making and life experience makes a huge difference. This may raise the average age of incoming presidents and lessen the already rare possibility of a 20 year presidency. Again, in the rare instance that it happens, you have to believe that the person deserves it. Right now the American public thinks 4 years is not enough to do anything, which pretty much mandates a second term. 8 years is a good duration of time to gauge results and decide if a person is heading the country in a certain direction.

This could very well be one of the most asinine things I have ever tried to explain, but for me what it boils down to is incentive. Humans react well to incentive; it’s a driving force that can move mountains. When it’s gone we don’t reach further or try harder, quite the opposite actually and it’s not anyone’s fault… it’s just human nature. I’m eager to hear other people’s opinion about this, especially people that disagree 100%.  I am fully aware of the downside and dangers of not having term limits. I think they should exist, just in different areas of congress. That actually leads me to another crackpot theory that we need limits on the terms of congressman and as an alternate process, let them elect the president. We don’t have to work with the president, they do. We restrict Congress’s powers and keep the people happy by increasing the frequency of elections for the senate, and then put some kind of restriction on consecutive terms. You can be a career politician, but not in a row. Keeping Congress on a tighter leash might keep them honest and as a result, make them the most capable of electing a president they are willing to work with and support.

I am going to try and not go on about politics for at least 6 months. Now that I’ve lost your attention, here is your reward: