Images | Commentary | Digital Scrapbook
The 1968 Tet Offensive resulted in an increase in fighting along the DMZ. A bitter clash started 30 April and ran through 3 May between 2/4 and 320th NVA Division (8,000 to 10,000 soldiers) that broke out northeast of Đông Hà. To protect the base and also the 3rd Marine Division headquarters, 2/4 reinforced by B/1/3 was moved forward to seize the fortified village and area around Dai Do. After three days of bloody fighting the cost was very high for both sides. The enemy lost nearly 1500 killed, while 2/4 suffered 81 dead and 397 wounded. The battalion commanding officer Lt. Col. William Weise received the Navy Cross and two company commanders, Captain James E. Livingston (E Co.) and Captain Jay R. Vargas (G Co.) were awarded the Medal of Honor for their bravery and leadership. By 15 May the NVA were driven back north across the DMZ. Total losses for the Marines were 233 killed and 821 wounded. The NVA’s losses were put at 2945 killed and 47 POW’s.
I highly recommend this documentary. 500 marines stumble into an NVA division and battle it out for 4 days. In the end, the NVA leave a fortified attack base and retreat north of the DMZ. A film crew was on site for the last day of the battle. The crew interviewed the commander Lt. Col. William Weise while he was on a stretcher about to be evacuated because of wounds. The Colonel said, “we hurt ’em bad, but they hurt us, too.”
I love these men.
Ned Ryun:
“…What a world we live in. A confidential asset of a hyper-political CIA director, likely handpicked by the director to spy on the Trump White House, is now called a “whistleblower.” The son of a former vice-president and a current Democrat nominee was apparently eyeball-deep in corruption in Ukraine, and the Left screams that the president—for daring to broach the issue with Ukraine—should be impeached. Political pygmies, otherwise known as the Democrat 2020 field, prance about the country offering up program ideas tallying up to over $200 trillion in the first ten years of operation (against the roughly $44 trillion the government would bring in over the same time). Such programs would cost us millions of jobs, among other bad consequences. Yet we are expected to believe these are serious people…”
Hat tip to Glenn Reynolds
These headlines tells you everything you need to know about the guy
STEPHEN KRUISER:
“…The Great Republican Splintering of 2016 quickly evolved into three camps once President Trump got into office.
One was filled with those who were on the Trump train from the beginning. These were people who were probably on their third MAGA hat by the time the election rolled around.
Then there were the Never Trumpers. The harbingers of doom who linked arms with the Democrats to assure us that Donald Trump posed an existential threat to the United States of America.
The third group may be the largest of the three: These are people who were initially Trump skeptics but have been willing to praise the good and shake their heads at the bad. I’m in this group. One of the things we have in common is that we are surprised at how much there has been to praise.
Trump’s greatest legacy will be his reshaping of the judiciary, which Tyler wrote about yesterday. POTUS himself is rightfully proud of his accomplishments with the judiciary:
Liberal judges are activist judges. They seek to accomplish via judicial fiat what Democrats can’t achieve legislatively. They’ve been a plague for years, just like the late Robert Bork warned us they would be in his book Slouching Towards Gomorrah.
Trump’s infusion of constitutionalist judges into the federal judiciary is a wall of sorts, a barrier keeping activist judges from reshaping American society according to the whims of fringe progressives. It may end up providing more security for America than the border wall, at least for a generation.
This issue has been what is causing the ever-worsening divide between people like me and Republicans — or former Republicans — who are still avowed Never Trumpers. They blather on about their principles, continually disparaging Trump because he doesn’t fit their constipated Capitol Hill Club image of a president.
The reality is that, in overhauling the federal judiciary, Trump has done more in three years for conservatives and Republicans than Bush 41 and Bush 43 did in twelve.
But hey, they were nice guys.
A quality I’ve never cared about in a president…”
VICTORIA TOENSING: You are going to see it, Lou. but I am not predicting so much from anonymous sources… But I can tell you this, we have darn good sources for this. It’s going to be very bad for the people in the Obama administration. My source said to me, it’s going to be worse than you can imagine.
DOBBS: That’s a heck of a tease, Victoria. I’m already chomping at the bit to get the thing. Joe, your thoughts on that Horowitz report. It doesn’t sound like it’s going to be a tepid matter. Explosive, would you would say?
JOE DIGENOVA: I would say explosive and I would say for people at the highest levels of the FBI and at the highest levels at the Justice Department, more important the Justice Department, it’s going to be devastating. It’s going to ruin careers. It’s going to make people have bar problems…
Because what’s clear now we know is that the senior levels of the Obama Justice Department were complicit in knowingly submitting materially false applications to the FISA court for an illegitimate counterintelligence purpose, not for a legitimate purpose but to spy on Americans for political purposes. It really will end up being the beginning of the greatest political scandal in history. And it’s being held up partially because of John Durham’s new grand jury which by the way exists for one reason and one reason only because people are going to be indicted.
I&I Editorial:
“…The global warming true believers are convinced of their moral superiority. In their minds, they’re just better people. But better people don’t advocate thinning of the human population. The alarmists do.
A group of “more than 11,000 scientist signatories from around the world” has declared “clearly and unequivocally that planet Earth is facing a climate emergency,” and recommends leaving fossil fuels “in the ground,” replaced by low-carbon renewable energy sources.
Nothing new there. Crackpots have been predicting the end of the world for probably as long as man has existed.
This group, though, also believes that because the global population is “still increasing by roughly 80 million people per year, or more than 200,000 per day,” it “must be stabilized — and, ideally, gradually reduced — within a framework that ensures social integrity.”
By what authority do these scientists believe they have the right to reduce the number of humans? And through what mechanism do they propose to use to reach their goal?
Henry I. Miller, a physician, molecular biologist, and Pacific Research Institute senior fellow, as well as a contributing editor on these pages, says “the scientists’ assumption of a ‘climate emergency’ requiring policymakers imminently to introduce not only radical changes to energy, food, and economic policies but also population control, verges on the hysterical.”
Others have already crossed that line…”