SUA Sends Assistance to Chris Wallace, Shepherd Smith and CNN


The U.S. Navy Drone surveying the ocean. Looking for the NextWave. Wu Hu!

Hey Wray let’s make it easy fore U. CTO EE. It’s so much more than the Tsin Tsin Road.

SMILE! Find Judge Advocate. Find Affirmed.


“Everybody’s gone surf in’…Surf in’ USA…”

CNN: Two Fox News hosts question Trump’s comments about Iran: ‘This just doesn’t add up’.

ANSWER IS: Shure it does.

And the $240 million dollar bill which includes all the upgrades needs to go to…WHO knows…

“Poor Shep and Chris. They walked right into it. Such a thing. GO figure. &.”
– The Shark and Sparky the Clown

Trump Hits FOX News at PA Rally: “Something Very Strange Is Going On”

– Donald Trump, President of The United States of America

Mueller, Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Wray…This is your Fools Brought In fore a reason…still Not Sure Dunno.

It is truly amazing when a significant piece of intel given to DHS, the FBI, and the Intel community, and after nothing was done, it winds up on a jihadi website and in perfect english. How could it be…WHO knows…Now back to that airplane hanger at Ft. Hood. U.O.

What is the DOJ, the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, the Intel Community, the Department of State, and Congress hiding?

SUA has proprietary intel concerning the greatest crimes ever committed against the American people.

 

By Jackie WattlesCNN Business

New York (CNN)Fox News hosts Chris Wallace and Shep Smith challenged President Donald Trump’s comments about when and why he decided to call off a strike against Iran.

Trump said Friday that the military was “cocked and loaded” to fire on Iran in retaliation for shooting down a US drone earlier this week. But he reversed course “10 minutes before the strike” when he learned 150 people could die in the attack, the president said in a series of tweets.
Smith said Fox News’ reporting found that Trump would have been given a casualty estimate at a briefing hours before that.
“Something’s wrong there,” Smith said about the president’s comments.
Smith then questioned Trump’s decision to “tweet out the whole thought process of American foreign policy and intervention.”
“That’s an observation,” he added. “Not a critique.”
Trump has a cozy relationship with Fox News. He’s hired a number of former employees from the network to posts within his administration.
The president also reportedly corresponds directly with Fox News hosts like Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity, conservative firebrands who currently host evening programs that routinely praise the president.
Smith, who hosts daytime news coverage, and Wallace, the anchor of Fox News Sunday, have stood apart from Fox’s opinion-oriented colleagues. Smith and Wallace have previously questioned or criticized actions by Trump or his administration.

 

Article

How The U.S. Could Respond After Iran Shoots Down A $240 Million U.S. Drone

By Mark Cancian

Tensions continue to escalate in the Persian Gulf as the Iranians down one U.S. drone, shoot at another and, likely, sponsor attacks on tankers and a Saudi airport. Let’s take a look at the most recent incidents and what they might mean for the future. Will there be a war?

What happened? Early Thursday the Iranians used a surface to air missile to shoot down a U.S. drone just outside the Straits of Hormuz. The Iranians posted a video that purported to show the shootdown, and the United States acknowledged that it had lost a Broad Area Maritime Surveillance drone (BAMS-D). The Iranians claimed it was in their territorial airspace while the United States claimed it was in international airspace. Under international law, it’s a critical question, and, eventually, there will be an answer. The United States will likely salvage the wreckage, as it has with recent aircraft crashes, and the location will show where the drone actually was. However, that will take many weeks and likely be of historical interest, rather than helpful in resolving the current crisis.

What is this BAMS-D drone? This is a Navy prototype version of the Air Force RQ-4 Global Hawk. The Navy’s fully developed version is called the MQ-4C Triton and is just entering production. These are very large unmanned aircraft. The wingspan is 132 feet, comparable to a civilian airliner. (For comparison, a Boeing 757 has a wingspan of 124 feet.) The drone is designed for intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR), the Pentagon term meaning that it has sensors to find things on the earth surface. The Navy’s version focuses on the sea, whereas the Air Force version focuses on land. Here’s how DOD describes the Navy version: “The MQ-4C will provide the Navy with a persistent maritime ISR capability. Mission systems include inverse Synthetic Aperture Radar, Electro-optical/Infra-red Full Motion Video, maritime moving target detection, Electronic Support Measures, Automatic Identification System, a basic communications relay capability, and Link-16.” Because of their size, BAMS-D and Triton are land based.

BAMS-D is not stealthy, is unarmed, flies relatively slowly, and has essentially no defensive systems. Its only defense is to fly high, at 60,000 feet. Because of its vulnerability, it is not designed to operate in a contested area. Its great advantage is that it can fly for over 32 hours continuously, far longer than any human crew could endure.

So, what was it doing there? Although the Pentagon has not stated what the mission was, one presumes that it was watching for more tanker attacks. Four ships were attacked in May and two more last week. If the U.S. could catch whoever was doing the attacks, presumedly Iran, then it might be able to thwart future attacks and have the evidence needed to convince domestic and international audiences of Iran’s culpability.

Does this thing really cost $240 million? Yes…and no. Because DOD weapons are custom-built, they don’t have price tags like equipment does in the civilian world. Systems have many possible costs depending on what is included and what the number is used for. Thus, different commentators have cited different costs for this aircraft, for example, $120 million or $180 million.

Since BAMS-D is a version of the Air Force RQ-4, we can use the RQ-4’s official acquisition report, called the Selected Acquisition Report, to calculate a cost for BAMS-D. This report shows an average procurement cost over the whole program of $122 million in FY 2015 dollars or about $130 million in FY 2019 dollars. That excludes the research and development costs, which are mostly sunk at the beginning of the program. If those were included, the cost per aircraft would increase to about $240 million (FY 2019 dollars). To make things even more complicated, there is something called the “flyaway cost,” which is the cost of a system coming out of the factory without some of the support elements in the “procurement” cost. The “flyaway cost” of a new MQ-4C replacement for the lost BAMS-D is a bargain, at $102 million (FY 2019 dollars).

No matter which cost you pick, however, this was an expensive system. It is a very large aircraft with many sophisticated sensors on it.

What were these other attacks? Apparently, Iranians also shot at another drone last week, an MQ-9 Reaper (replacement for the legendary MQ-1 Predator), but missed. That it missed is likely because Reapers are much smaller than the MQ-4C and thus harder to hit. They are also much less expensive, costing about $30 million. The Reaper drone, like the MQ-4C that was shot down, was likely looking for perpetrators of the tanker attacks and was probably the source of the video about Iranians removing mines from the attacked tankers.

Also last week a group of Iranian back Yemeni rebels attacked a Saudi airport with cruise missiles, one of a series of such attacks. The bottom line is that these drone and tanker attacks are not isolated incidents but part of the campaign by Iran to put pressure on its major enemies, the United States and Saudi Arabia, and, indirectly, on the Europeans, Japanese and others to get relief from U.S. sanctions.

What’s going to happen next? The Iranians are signaling that they will not accept the U.S. imposed sanctions passively. They are striking back as they always have: asymmetrically and in the “gray zone.” Asymmetrically means they are not meeting U.S. strength head-on and the gray zone means they are maneuvering in the space between war and peace. Likely, the Iranians will continue to initiate “incidents.” By maintaining some deniability and not injuring human beings, the Iranians have been very clever in keeping these incidents below the level where the United States would respond with force.

At some point, the Iranians may cross these lines either by injuring an American or by being caught red-handed in conducting an attack. Then, the United States would almost certainly respond with force. This happened in the 1980s when the United States caught the Iranians laying sea mines in the Persian Gulf and retaliated by sinking half of the Iranian Navy.

The U.S. has the capability in theater now to conduct a retaliatory strike, likely against the air defense battery that shot down the drone. According to the New York Times, an attack on Iranian radar and missile batteries was prepared for Thursday, but the operation was cancelled. Strikes could also be directed against Iranian naval capabilities that might have carried out the tanker attacks. The U.S. does not have enough assets in theater to conduct an extended air-naval campaign, even with the additional thousand troops being sent. It certainly does not have the capability to conduct any ground campaign against Iran.

More likely, however, is something non-kinetic. The president is reluctant to get into a shooting war, having campaigned against such involvements. Instead, the United States might take some covert action like the cyber-attack that was allegedly recently conducted against Russia. It might start escorting ships and aircraft through the Straits of Hormuz. The NATO allies and Japan might be willing to support such an action.

Unfortunately, the situation is not stable. Most likely, there will be additional incidents within a week with each carrying the risk of escalation. Last August, I wrote a piece looking at indicators of a possible conflict (Is The US Going To War With Iran? Five Indicators To Watch For). Three have occurred (“increased naval activity,” “Iranian complaints about reconnaissance flights,” and “increased security at regional U.S. bases”).

Article

China hacked US Army transport orgs TWENTY TIMES in ONE YEAR

FBI et al knew of nine hacks – but didn’t tell TRANSCOM

Article

 

U.S. Attacks Iran With Cyber Not Missiles — A Game Changer, Not A Backtrack

Article

From 2014 and earlier…OOOPS…It is re levant.

China targets own operating system to take on likes of Microsoft, Google


Article

“I think we missed the BAMS-D thing and finding Omar…”

 

Now back to MAR-A-LAG-O. All along the watchtower. It’s not the Hawaiian but it will do.

 

Progressive – the re-branding of Communism/Scocialism

Editor’s Note – Progressives – the re-branding of Communists. Plain and simple, and we all know it. Changing names is the tactic of those who wish to hide something. They want to hide it because it is that nefarious and they know it. At SUA, we like to remind people that when Lemmings jump off the cliff, they are progressing from one place to another – where are we progressing?

The “Progressive” brand — for what does it stand?

Posted by  at Legal Insurrection

Allen West appears with Soledad O'Brien on CNN

Yesterday we learned that Representative Allen West (R-FL) was disinvited from an NAACP fundraiser in his home state of Florida. Last week, West had commented that “I believe there’s about 78 to 81 members of the Democratic Party that are members of the Communist Party.”

West, who came under fire for his controversial comments, responded by penning a piece inThe Hill:

My colleagues in the Congressional Progressive Caucus have taken umbrage with my equation of their ideals with those of communists. Why? Why shouldn’t we have this discussion? What part of their agenda are they trying to hide?

We must be able to openly discuss how our fundamental freedoms are being slowly chipped away by an over-reaching nanny state that has bit by bit slipped its tentacles into every aspect of our lives, from the types of light bulbs we can use to the size of our toilet tanks.

In a follow-up interview with TheStreetTV, West commented that “…when you look at the history of the Communist Party, when it came to the United States of America, back at the turn of the century, they rebranded themselves and called themselves ‘Progressives’”:

Allen West Interview:

In response, elements of the Left from Rep. Barney Frank to Rolling Stone Magazine and the Progressive Caucus wrote off his comments as “McCarthyite” and worse than McCarthy.Soledad O’Brien–the CNN host who notably fumbled over the definition of Critical Race Theoryapplied her now-signature sarcastic style to her coverage.

Does West’s assertion that today’s Progressive brand is simply an evolution of yesterday’s Communist label hold up? It helps to take a look at the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

The Progressive Caucus includes Democratic party luminaries like Rep. Charlie Rangel, Rep. Dennis Kucinich, Rep. Jared Polis, Sen. Bernie Sanders, Rep. Jan Schakowsky, Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr., and Rep. Danny Davis. The Progressive Caucus also shares several board members in common with Progressive Democrats of America (PDAmerica), which has explicitly stated its support for Occupy Wall Street becoming a permanent encampment.

Progressive Caucus member Schakowsky, profiled in 2011 on Progressive.org, has repeatedly come under fire from her Jewish constituents for her connection with the Progressive Caucus and the Progressive Democrats of America, which supported the Hamas-led flotilla into Gaza. The Progressive brand supports this action against Israel, and for a member of the Caucus it is difficult to walk the line between defending Israel and being affiliated with Hamas’s flotilla.

Danny Davis, who sits on the House Homeland Security Committee, was recently exposed receiving a lifetime achievement award from the Communist Party USA headquarters in Chicago. This is the same congressman whom President Barack Obama had introduced by saying “he shares our values.”

While Allen West’s assertion may have been met with derision and some uneasiness on both the Left and the Right, his questions as to the origins of the Progressive brand and whether members of the Progressive Caucus share values with communism is worth exploring.

West writes:

When I was studying for my two master’s degrees in political science at Kansas State University and at the U.S. Army Command and General Staff Officer College, the very best professors were those who would begin each lecture with a challenging assertion. It engaged discussion and analysis, and was the best way to uncover the essence of the particular subject of the day.

Time for some due diligence.