Posted on 03/11/2013 8:30:45 AM PDT by LucianOfSamasota
The Denver Post, on February 15th, ran an Associated Press article entitled Homeland Security aims to buy 1.6b rounds of ammo, to far too little notice. It confirmed that the Department of Homeland Security has issued an open purchase order for 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition. As elsewhere reported, much of this purchase order is for rounds forbidden by international law for use in war plus a frightening amount specialized for snipers. Also reported elsewhere, at the height of the Iraq War the Army was expending fewer than 6 million rounds a month. 1.6 billion rounds, therefore, would be enough to sustain a hot war for 20+ years. In America.
Add to this perplexingly outré purchase of ammo, DHS now is showing off its acquisition of heavily armored personnel carriers, repatriated from the Iraqi and Afghani theaters of operation. As observed by “paramilblogger” Ken Jorgustin last September:
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
You did engage. Swing and a miss.
No man is worthless, however. Even I have worth. I show what people should not do with their lives.
Though, must admit, the precepts I read through had some that were very dated.
Hey, I’m an arrogant SOB. Don’t I get a mention?
The coup d’etat is already underway. It's in progress in Congress and state legislatures around the country.
I have had fairly good luck finding .22LR, and a small amount of 5.56 (well, .223 really). Its been .308 that I cannot find for the life of me. Surplus 7.62 has dried up and commercial .308 is either extremely popular, or manufacturers have downgraded production numbers in favor of .223.
Anyone wants to take on Fed forces via gunbattle is committing suicide. The only tactic that has proven effective against US troops is IED. Look how many LAPD cops were involve looking for one rogue cop with guns. Imagine what 100 Dorniers would do to the LAPD and CA LE. If 25 percent of the American people declared war against the Fed gov using assymmetric warfare, the US would be hardpressed to win unless it is willing to be absolutely ruthless. Problem with such reaction is overtime the US gov may end up with more people against her.
Allowing your audience to come to its own conclusions is not a bad story telling device. People tend to believe things more strongly when they figure it out for themselves as opposed to being told what to think.
Every man is absolutely worthless. Maybe, R. Rogers was just goofin’ around. Probably not. No biggie.
Incorrect. For even the quality of being absolutely worthless has a worth: One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject.
Ergo, even the absolutely worthless has worth.
Meaning it is not absolutely worthless.
Making the original premise: "One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject," meaningless.
Meaning that the subject IS in fact worthless.
However, even the quality of being absolutely worthless has a worth: One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject.
Ergo, even the absolutely worthless has worth.
Meaning it is not absolutely worthless.
Making the original premise: "One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject," meaningless.
Meaning that the subject IS in fact worthless.
However, even the quality of being absolutely worthless has a worth: One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject.
Ergo, even the absolutely worthless has worth.
Meaning it is not absolutely worthless.
Making the original premise: "One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject," meaningless.
Meaning that the subject IS in fact worthless.
However, even the quality of being absolutely worthless has a worth: One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject.
Ergo, even the absolutely worthless has worth.
Meaning it is not absolutely worthless.
Making the original premise: "One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject," meaningless.
Meaning that the subject IS in fact worthless.
However, even the quality of being absolutely worthless has a worth: One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject.
Ergo, even the absolutely worthless has worth.
Meaning it is not absolutely worthless.
Making the original premise: "One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject," meaningless.
Meaning that the subject IS in fact worthless.
However, even the quality of being absolutely worthless has a worth: One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject.
Ergo, even the absolutely worthless has worth.
Meaning it is not absolutely worthless.
Making the original premise: "One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject," meaningless.
Meaning that the subject IS in fact worthless.
However, even the quality of being absolutely worthless has a worth: One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject.
Ergo, even the absolutely worthless has worth.
Meaning it is not absolutely worthless.
Making the original premise: "One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject," meaningless.
Meaning that the subject IS in fact worthless.
However, even the quality of being absolutely worthless has a worth: One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject.
Ergo, even the absolutely worthless has worth.
Meaning it is not absolutely worthless.
Making the original premise: "One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject," meaningless.
Meaning that the subject IS in fact worthless.
However, even the quality of being absolutely worthless has a worth: One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject.
Ergo, even the absolutely worthless has worth.
Meaning it is not absolutely worthless.
Making the original premise: "One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject," meaningless.
Meaning that the subject IS in fact worthless.......
On a related note, I read yesterday that supposedly the Regime is slow-walking (is that the phrase for intentionally slowing down work) ammo at US Customs at more than one dock. Not sure if it is true or not.
It was an exacting point. My brothers and I, don’t know much, although we do know this fact- Robert Rogers was well used by Washington, to secure inland, and thus, the coast. This is not a misty history, sir. To tell you the tale, would take more effort than your reading. Which, is sad, since it is exactly, what young men need to hear and apply to their hearts.
That is my reaction as well. I hope it gets picked up elsewhere. I am a little surprised the author quotes “Denver Post” as this is not usually a right leaning paper.
Others have pointed out that the author sidesteps the question of motivation on this purchase.
On the other hand, he did bring up some other questions about this purchase that are very appropriate.
The other thing that bothers conservatives on this is that this administration has repeatedly said things intermittently and consistently acted in a way that indicates their main threat is not terrorism, Iran, China, or North Korea but US conservatives.
Just today
Well jousted, Sir Lazamataz.
WHERE have you found .22LR?
One gun store and outdoor range 20 miles away has boxes of ,22LR 50 for $4.00, equivalent to a brick of 500 for $40.00. Limit 2 boxes of 50 per customer.
I have a brick of 525 with an $8.40 price tag in my supply, bought maybe 5 yrs ago.
There is none at the sporting goods stores and walmarts in the area.
For the Left, all is the “ends justifies the means” even if it means abolishing the Constitution. So, the law-abiding citizen is without self-defense for him and his fellow innocent citizens while the lawless turn this country into the Wild West. I suppose the government is counting on killer drones to make “splashes” on the gang banger killers (IMHO).
Big Government will do what it takes to do all for their dependant citizen.
What you say may well be true, I was commenting on the way that you made your point...
As the old saying goes, you get more flies with honey than vinegar. If you put it a little less abrasively, people might be more inclined to think “Hey, who is this guy, Robert Rogers?” instead of “WTH is this guy doing insulting me on a tangential point to this thread?”
Heck, I was (and am) interested enough to find out more, so it didn’t affect me much. I just thought there was no need to squash someone for that. We can all get more angles on history, none (or very, very few) of us know it all.
Heck, you old Army guys can get crusty but it doesn’t diminish our gratitude and appreciation for your service.
Nothing personal, just an observation...:)
1.) It is a multi-year purchase.
It is for a least 5 years and possibly out to 10. May have been done to lock in price.
2.) Not kept in perspective.
Q.) How much ammunition do we manufacture in the US?
A.) ONE BILLION ROUNDS A WEEK. So in essence, even if it was a one year purchase they would be pulling down less than 2 weeks production. And that doesn't even consider the ammo flooding in from Eastern Europe and Russia (Wolf, Barnaul, Tula, Ulyanovsk et al). DHS may be deliberately stalling the inspections of the ships carrying ammo but that's another issue to investigate. But you can bet your bottom dollar there's unimaginable amounts of ammo on it's way over. Just be patient.
3.) Far and away bulk of the order is for .40 S&W.
Very few non-Federal LEO's shoot that pos round. I can go to a local WalMart this afternoon and they will have no ammo except for some lead-free hunting rifle rounds and a display case full of 40 Short & Weak. The .gov has a huge investment in pistols in that caliber. Most civilian demand is for 45 ACP & 9MM. I suspect DHS may be afraid that if they do not have a contract, most manufacturers will close the 40 S&W lines and switch production from a round they can't give away to the high demand rounds. In that case this order makes some sense.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.