James R. Rummel

I am a self defense instructor who lives in Columbus, Ohio.

Look! Up in the Sky!

by

Space enthusiasts have known about the concept of solar sails for decades. Use vast silver wings to accelerate a spacecraft using only the pressure from sunlight.

Now a satellite has been launched into orbit which will test the concept. The craft will unfurl it’s sails on June 25, 2005 and try to catch a solar breeze. If it works, the satellite will gain velocity and climb to an ever-higher orbit.

This isn’t going to happen quickly, and it’s not going to be flashy. There won’t be any news for a few weeks, and then the gains (if any) will be modest. Something tells me that the news of success will be a minor item at best. Luckily the Planetary Society has a blog where we can keep track of developments.

What I fond rather interesting is that the satellite was launched into orbit from a Russian ballistic submarine. That’s a pretty good use for those old doomsday weapons that are now rusting away from lack of maintenance.

Not Optimistic

by

Long time readers of this blog know that I’m not very happy with the United Nations. I think that it’s a corrupt, money hungry organization that routinely fails to live up to it’s promises or hype. Nothing would make me happier to live long enough to witness it’s end.

Supporters claim that it provides a great service to the majority of the world’s population and governments. The voices and concerns of smaller nations would remain unaired and unheard without the forum that the UN provides. If this is the case then I think the world can do it cheaper and more efficiently. Tear down the UN and replace it with something that’s not impotent with a bloated bureaucracy, doesn’t pander to despots and murderous dictators, and isn’t reflexively anti-American.

Considering all that, it should be a surprise that I wasn’t very enthused when I read this news item. (Hat tip to Sondra K.) It seems that the US House of Representatives has passed a bill that will require the UN to reform in order to avoid a serious reduction in contributions from the United States. The purpose is to force reform and reduce corruption.

The reason why I don’t support this move is because it allows the UN to hedge it’s bets. They can lurch along for decades on a reduced cash flow from the US, while cutting them off completely might just cause a total collapse. Token attempts at reform will allow supporters to claim that the United Nations has become a new organization, and that the US should start paying 100% again. (Any similarity between this fanciful scenario and how Saddam’s supporters actually tried to get sanctions against Iraq lifted is completely intended.)

Bottom line is that I think the US should sit back and allow the UN enough rope to hang itself. Link continued payments to reforms and unelected bureaucrats will be motivated to keep their hands out of the cookie jar. Let them operate as usual and eventually they won’t be able to cover up the corruption and incompetence.

Survey Says!

by

I just read a surprisingly candid and well balanced news item from Reuters. The article discusses a recent survey which showed that trust between France and the US is at a record low.

The level of distrust is higher in France than in the US. 70% of the French respondents claimed that America wasn’t a “loyal ally”, while 56% of people questioned in the US said that France wasn’t a “reliable partner”.

I’m not conversant in French myself, so I can’t be sure if this is a reliable translation of the questions that were actually used. If they are then I see a distinct difference in attitudes between the 2 countries just through the words ally and partner.

The author goes on to point out that the rejection of the European Union constitution by French voters was mainly driven by the French political Left, who are suspicious of American free market capitalism. This section of French society is also the most hostile to America. Considering the historical track record of the Socialist systems that they seem to favor, they’re only going to get more angry as their economy gets dragged further into the toilet by the welfare state they’ve created.

But putting all of that aside, I think it’s telling that many more French citizens are suspicious of the US than Americans are of the French. This indicates to me that France is going to be more unreasonable and resistant to any efforts to repair the rift.

I’m rather glad that the two countries are having problems right now. Conflict destroys false impressions and lets everyone know where they stand. We now find ourselves in the midst of a war, a global struggle against religious fanatics bent on our destruction. It’s always best to know who your friends are before you’re forced to rely on them.

Differing Priorities

by

I was reading the July, 2005 issue of Popular Mechanics when I saw an item about a laptop computer that could be manufactured for $100 USD. The laptop was designed by the brains at MIT, and the idea is to market the ultra cheap computers in the 3rd World in an attempt to narrow the digital divide. The author of the piece was quick to point out that these computers wouldn’t be sold in the United States.

I doubt very many people would want one if they could afford something better. The C-note laptops have a rather flimsy 12” projection screen, 1GB of DRAM and flash memory, and (maybe) a 500-MHz microprocessor. The machine will also feature a hand crank to recharge the batteries, 4 USB ports, and Wi-Fi hardware.

Read more

It Isn’t a Cruise Ship

by

There’s this old joke that the crews manning US Navy submarines keep repeating. It goes “There are only two types of ships in the modern Navy: those that are under the water and those that soon will be.”

I remember some of the criticism that was leveled against the Reagan administration over defense budgets. One big issue was the role of aircraft carriers. Critics said that they were too big, too expensive, too vulnerable. They were outmoded technology, sure to be sunk in an instant if hostilities ever flared up between the superpowers. Anecdotes about pictures taken through attack sub periscopes of oblivious carriers were presented as proof that a flattop’s time had come and gone. I even read a paper authored by a defense analyst that said the only reason more carriers were being built, the sole justification for spending all of that taxpayer money, was so retiring admirals could command a big ship before they trotted off to pasture.

There’s no way to sugarcoat it. The critics were wrong.

Read more