Stuff flows downhill, swiftly

Lessons from history.  Hitler came to power in Germany in 1933.  In 1936 he re occupies the Rhineland.  This was a stretch of German territory bordering Belgium and Holland.  The treaty of Versailles, which ended WWI, declared that the Rhineland must be demilitarized, no soldiers, fortifications, no so much as a foxhole.  A mere three years after taking power, Hitler felt strong enough to defy the Versailles treaty and send the German army into the Rhineland. 
   What should have happened,  didn't.  The British and the French had ten times Hitler's troop strength in 1936.  They should have moved troops into the Rhineland, arrested or shot any German in uniform, and restored order, the Versailles way.  If the Americans had supported the British and French (which we did not) it would have worked.  Hitler would have lost enormous amounts of prestige, and might well have lost his office and his life.  And that would have prevented WWII.  But we did nothing, the British and the French did nothing, and WWII broke out 3 years later.
   In 1938, Hitler "absorbed" Austria. A sizable territorial gain, Austria is maybe 10% the size of Grmany, kind of like California is to the rest of the United States.  Austria was the Germany speaking part of the old Austro Hungarian empire, the part that used to run said empire.  They had been trimmed back from Great Power status to third class European power status and they wanted to join the successful Nazi juggernaut, rather than be a footnote to history.  With this kind of popular support for Anschluss, there wasn't much anyone could have done.  But if the Rhineland reoccupation had been crushed two years before, the Anschluss probably would not have happened. 
  Later the same year, Hitler demanded the German speaking parts of Czechoslovakia be turned over to him.  Hitler threatened war if he didn't get his way.  The British and the French came to the infamous Munich conference, and joined hands with Hitler in browbeating the Czechoslovakians into yielding to Hitler's demands.  The Americans stayed out of Munich.  What should have happened.  The British and the French declare war on Germany then and there and launch an invasion thru Germany's western border.  This would have been trickier than the Rhineland, 'cause the German army was a lot stronger in 1938 than in 1936.  But it wasn't yet strong enough to grab Czechoslovakia and fend off an Anglo French invasion at the same time. 
  Next year, 1939, Hitler managed to start up a Czechoslovakia Nazi party and take over the rest of the country by "legal" political subversion.  By summer of 1939 Hitler decided to take over Poland.  To his surprise, the British and the French had grown a pair between them and told the Poles they were 1000% behind them.  Poland refused Hitler's demands. Hitler invaded in September of 1939, France and  Britain declared war on Germany and WWII was off and running. 
   Moral of the story.  Let a bad guy get away with just one little thing, and the whole world can slide down the tubes. 
   So far we have let Assad stay in power in Syria, let Libya dissolve into chaos, pulled our troops out of Iraq  letting ISIS take over, let Putin grab big chunks of Ukraine. For our next smooth move we pull our troops out of Afghanistan.   That's more than just one little thing.

This is America

We take care of our own. We do not allow fellow Americans to die in African jungles of a loathsome disease.  We bring them home, care for them, and pray for their recovery. 
  Voices have been heard saying Ebola is so dangerous that we dare not bring the victims home.  To hell with that.  America will take care of its own.  We will bring them home, care for them, and with God's help, cure them.  That's the way America does things. 

Guardians of the Galaxy. Good Flick

Saw it last night.  It's doing well, the Jax was pretty full and it's been playing up here for 3 days already.  It's a pure space opera. Think of the first Star Wars.  That kinda good.  Best flick out of Hollywood this year.  The cast are all new names to me. 
   It's live action (with a fair amount of CGI) rather than a cartoon.  We have a handsome hero, a deadly fast samurai chick, a three foot tall raccoon who plans jailbreaks, Grout, a strange half plant half man who doesn't talk much, and a big beefy bruiser with a bald head and a big grudge.  Over the course of the movie they go from wanting to kill each other to that good old three musketeers "One for all, all for one" spirit.  Lots of combat.  Nasty villains.  Decent score, old but good pop music from the '90s.  There is a plot, the action mostly follows it, I could mostly follow it.  It's too complicated to explain here.  The good guys win in the end. 
   You oughta go see it.  Take the kids, they will love it. 

The Economist thinks Hamas is winning against Israel

The Economist thinks Hamas is gathering international support every time the MSM show another clip of wounded Gazans being hauled off to hospitals on US TV.  They call for Israel to enter into a ceasefire, because it will look good to world (actually European) public opinion.  According to the Economist Europe's anti Semitism is rising, and stands about where it did in 1938 (Kristallnacht). 
  There is probably something to this.  Even though the Palestinians have asked for it, time and time again, I cannot feel good about seeing crummy buildings blown to bits, and young people killed and wounded.  On the other hand, when Hamas violates a ceasefire only 90 minutes after it begins, it shows how tough it can be. Hamas clearly wants to keep on fighting.  We care more about casualties in Gaza than they do.
   I fear the best the Israelis can do is clear out some tunnels, blow up some rockets, and take some prisoners.  The Israelis ought to have a list of undesirables, Hamas people ought to be on that list, and they ought to be arresting them.  I don't think anything will change the minds of the people in Gaza.  They want to drive the Jews into the sea.  There ain't no compromise in that position.  No hardship that the Israelis can lay on Gaza is gonna change those minds.
   Bebi's choices seem to be, call it off, or keep on kicking ass.  I don't know which choice will be better for Israel.  The Economist may think they know it all, but I have my doubts.  

Congress didn't pass enough laws this year.

So said the newsies on Meet the Press this morning.  They thought it was terrible that Congress only passed 143 laws this year.  Gridlock was blamed.  None of 'em admitted that neither party has the votes to jam it's program thru. 
  Actually, I like gridlock.  Most laws Congress passes do bad things to me. They raise my taxes, they forbid me to do harmless things,  they give handouts to corporations,  they throw people out of work, they raise prices, and they waste money on boondoggles.  Bridges to nowhere, wind farms, resurfacing I93 again.  We citizens are better off when Congress doesn't pass more laws. 
  And, the Republican controlled House has passed all, or most, of the appropriations bills needed to fund the government next year.  The Democrat controlled Senate has passed none.  This will cause another one of those "continuing resolutions" to keep the government's doors open.  "Continuing resolutions" are bad for tax payers.  They read "You, government agency, may keep on spending as much as you did last year."   Facing a $5 trillion deficit, we ought to be making some cuts somewhere.  There ain't no cut in a "continuing resolution"  Democrats love that. 

The Education Major

Departments of Education exist in the belief that there is some art or science or magic required to teach children, apart from a sound knowledge of the subject being taught.  A LOT of students take an Ed major.  I still remember registration at U of Delaware years ago.  The line to register for Ed courses ran around the gym a couple of times, whereas the lines for everything else (English, history, math, chemistry, physics etc) were only a dozen students or so. 
   Unfortunately, there is no art or science of teaching.  Effective teachers use interpersonal skills, such as leadership,  concern for their students, love of their subject, to maintain classroom order and get teaching accomplished.  As an example, some of the best teachers I ever had where in the Air Force.  We took sergeants right off the flight line and set them down to teach in the Field Training Detachments (FTD).  I took a number of FTD courses.  Those young sergeants were very good teachers, as good as any I'd ever had.  Their classes were all 19 year old airmen, full of energy and short on patience, ready to give the teacher a hard time.  No problem, these guys got their student's full attention, they even got them to do their home work, and they came out of the course knowing more than when they entered.  No ed courses required.
   Should you take an Ed major?  It does give you instant access to public school teaching positions.  The entire public school hierarchy is composed of Ed majors,  they only hand out teacher's certificates to fellow Ed majors.  It is possible to break into public school teaching without an Ed major, but it is very hard. 
   The down side to an Ed major is terminal boredom while in college.  The subject matter is zilch, and you have to suffer thru a dozen courses that hash over the same nothingness, over and over.  If you can stand the endless drivel, it's easy to ace an Ed course, all you have to do is stay awake in class and take a few notes. 
   For those who really do want to teach, major in English or history or mathematics.  Look for a job in private or parochial schools, they are less infested with Ed majors and are apt to hire you after a successful job interview.  After a couple of years teaching you can apply for a public school job (which usually pay better) and they will assume anyone who survived a couple of years of classroom teaching can teach.

Slick Willie tells a whopper

And the newsies fall for it, hook, line, and sinker.  A bit of elderly video came to light yesterday, where in Bill Clinton says "I could have bagged Osama Bin Laden in Kandahar except it would have caused 300 Afghan casualities." 
   The "300 casualties" is pure BS.   That's might happen if you had USAF carpet bomb the place.  Which is the wrong thing to do. You will likely miss him, and you never know if you got him or not. Instead load some infantry into helicopters, fly in, surround the place, and go thru it house by house.  The only casualties will be among the locals stupid enough to fire on the Americans.  Bring some interpreters, interrogate the locals, and you will get him.  In fact that's how we finally did nail him in Pakistan many years  later.
  The newsies, even Fox, lapped up the "300 casualties" line and never questioned it.