Friends, a career in law enforcement was never the "easy" choice in life. Far from it. Conditions under which police officers labor have only gotten worse in the past several years, however, particularly in the wake of the "defund the police" movement. Few cities disbanded or even substantially reduced funding for their police forces, but almost everywhere public and political support for the boys in blue sagged, with mass retirements and general demoralization the result, not to mention "depolicing", the decision by police to pull back from crime-infested neighborhoods because of their fear that aggressive efforts to enforce the law would only yield more public scorn. We know that this pernicious trend has led to thousands of additional murders, mostly in our biggest urban conglomerations, and now we're hearing that more and more police officers are falling in the line of duty, quite a few of them to ambush attacks. The Dems, for their part, have largely stopped kicking the police in the teeth, but they're a long way from giving them the support and encouragement they need. And who, I ask you, would want these days to be a police officer in New York City, or LA, or Chicago, or Philadelphia? Not me, that's for sure! One wonders how bad the problem needs to get before the Dems stop howling about "equity" and start demanding...law and order.
According to the media, war between Russia and Ukraine gets a little closer every day. Of course, the media doesn't have a great track record, so we'll see about that. One reason that Russia may ultimately decide to pull the trigger is the dissension within NATO and the mixed signals coming from major Western powers like Germany. Germany says, in effect, "all options are on the table" in the case of a Russian invasion. Well, one of those options is "wag your finger and otherwise do nothing". If I were Putin, that's the one I'd bet on.
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/germany-us/2022/02/06/id/1055706/
Russia invading The Ukraine means tons and tons of MONEY for U.S. Contractors. They certainly made huge bucks in Afghanistan, so they are looking for new wars. War is big business.
ReplyDeleteDr.Waddy from Jack: For 20 years, ending in 2003, I worked very closely with corrections officers, the police of the state prisons I worked in. The COs, even then, were facing much of the shameful injustice the police face today! And that I saw at very close hand in leftist NY state. Examples ( which were myriad and served no constructive purpose ): By mandate of leftists in the NY Dept. of Corrections,a book entitled Police Misconduct was made available to inmates in all NYprison libraries. It was published by the Marxist National Lawyers Guild and its preface stated "the purpose of the police is to harass all who are different". Its theme was the encouragement of convicted criminals to direct enervating legal hazard to the police(and again, in prison, the COs WERE the police)! The taxpayers paid for this screed and so did the COs, undeservedly.
ReplyDeleteDr.Waddy from Jack: All NY prisons, including the older ones who knew what folly this would be, were burdened with an Inmate Grievance system which was, (surprise, surprise) used by the inmates in consummate bad faith. Why of course they did; they are criminals and have contempt for the give and take which legitimates a principled greivance system! The mostly detached and often leftists (who see criminals solely as victims)Corrections Central Office in the state capitol who supervised this compromised process, were well aware of this reality. It was obvious to COs so charged; you were guilty upon accusation but you might gain excuse if properly contrite or if understandably (since you faced a system stacked against you) you lied like hell!
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy from Jack: Then came being sued by inmates, which they did using VERY OVERSTOCKED law libraries, the collections and policies of which were mandated by leftist CentralOffice bureaucrats, touchy feely devotees of "prisoners' rights" (and TO HELL with victims' rights; believe me, I've heard them emote "victims deserve it, they are oppressors)!! Well gee, COs, like most us, work in order to finance positive living, yes? And a lawsuit can really gum that up. Well, inmates know that and use the threat of lawsuits to attempt to intimidate those who would hold them responsible for their negative behavior. Why, just imagine that!
ReplyDeleteDr.Waddy from Jack: There are so many more examples of injustice toward those who protect us from those who would willingly make the shit run down the leg of any of us. Believe it of them( I've heard them giggle about that very phenomenom!) The counterproductive outrages directed toward the COs I worked with are recognizably congruent with those the police experience today. And they are contemptible and supremely ungrateful. Why do the police endure it? Because they are gutsy guys and gals determined not to let the thugs prevail. If we don't support them against such as the Squad or the criminal lovers, let us abandon any pretense of gratitude or even civilization!
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy from Jack: When a person is seriously injured they often must relearn fundamentals such as walking or using a fork. Our country has been terribly injured since far too much of my boomer generation welcomed the American far left. Common sense has been discredited by reflexively counterintuitive dreamers of the worst sort. That the police are vital and honorable is of course. . . COMMON SENSE, an ability our purposefully wounded culture must relearn. Oh, it can be done: we see increasing evidence that it has returned to our Supreme Court; Mayor Guiliani restored it in law enforcement in one of the most intractable settings ever only to have the dreamers take over with a vengeance. A reestablishment inthe American mind of the certainty that common sense exists and is vital would be the key to disarming the disdainful and dictatorial rump which still seeks to force unneeded and unwanted change. But it will take the political will to mobilize common sense and restore it to its essential role in positive living. Failing this, the detestable leftist tasking of our police will become a maxim and a model.
ReplyDeleteDr.Waddy from Jack: I think its very simple: Putin is saying, with a reasonable view of Russian history ahd geography to back him: "Nato , assure us you will stay out of Ukraine. We are not seeing of you any assurance of that just now. Therefore we are preparing to assure ourselves that Nato will not go beyond very proximate borders we have tolerated without apparent appreciation of this concession on our part, from you. Would you rather we wait until you induct Ukraine into Nato? Then you would force us to fight Nato itself. We don't want that and neither should you!" He is not bluffing, I think. His back is to a wall any Russian leader would face now. Let us use common sense; our backs are not to a wall in Eastern Europe.
ReplyDeleteDr.Waddy from Jack : An article I read today said that any country proposed for Nato must be approved by all Nato members. It suggested that Putin may need only then "secure " the backing of a very few Nato countries to achieve his goal, which is ever "No Nato in Ukraine". It also suggested that Ukraine could say that it is postponing an application to Nato. But it also says that 60% of the Ukrainian population wants membership in Nato. Who could blame them? The sour fact is though, that Russia would never countenance it! Are we willing to fight Russia itself over Ukraine? God help them but we cannot hazard that certainty and some "regard" for Russia's apparent intransigence might preserve some measure of Ukrainian independence. The article maintains that American reinforcement in Poland and Romania should give Russia to know that its ehh, "request" that Nato retreat out of Eastern Europe, will be unrequited. It was only Putin's opening high ball anyway, I think. Ukraine is all.
ReplyDeleteDr.Waddy from Jack: Perhaps the reinforcement of Nato in Eastern Europe is a way of saying to Russia: "whatever you may do in Ukraine, DO NOT violate any Nato border !That WE would not suffer!" It could save ethnic Ukrainian Ukraine since Russia might not the hazard a fully wartime mobilized approach to Nato borders! Why ever would it risk war with Nato, other than an unendurable Ukraine incursion?! It has never hazarded it: not in Germany in 1961 or in Cuba in 1962!
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy from Jack: One other thought, which ought to be in all Western policy makers' minds: Russia KNOWS war in all its indescribable hideousness!
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy from Jack: I think it was one reason they backed down in '62. I don't think they would hazard war with a power as puissant as Nato without having been presented with what they might see a consummate affront and threat, both political, military and geographical. We have already sorely tested their tolerance, as the Cold War bade us do. But we have gone far enough to secure ourselves. Let us not needlessly present them such a dilemna!
ReplyDeleteRay, war could mean big profits, yes, but it would help if the war lasted longer than five minutes -- and if we were directly involved in it. I don't see a Russia-Ukraine war as meeting either of those requirements...
ReplyDeleteJack, as little as the public understands the travails of the police, I'm sure they understand the challenges and abuse faced by corrections officers even less. Sadly, what goes on in our prisons is invisible to most ordinary citizens. It's a pity. Maybe everyone should be required to visit a prison and get to know some of those poor "oppressed" and misunderstood convicts? Heck, spend the night locked in a cell with one. Imagine the opportunities for enlightenment!
Can common sense be relearned? Sure. The question is...how adverse must conditions become before the public is jarred awake?
Jack, my guess is that we are sending troops to Poland and Romania PRECISELY BECAUSE we know there isn't a chance in hell that Russia will invade those countries. We might as well send tin soldiers for all the good they'll do. I suppose they may reassure Eastern European NATO members, but they won't give any effective protection to Ukraine. Protecting Ukraine would involve DEESCALATING the crisis, not making it worse. And I wholeheartedly agree that sometimes the best way to keep your sovereignty is, ironically, to give part of it away. Ukraine, by forswearing NATO membership, could probably assure its own right to self-government in perpetuity. And is it worth risking Russian occupation and maybe even annexation just on the off chance that NATO might someday let you into their club? No! No doubt about it.
Nick,
ReplyDeleteIf not The Ukraine, the contracting mob will find some place for us to get involved in a war, and directly. It's just a matter of time, and place.
Dr. Waddy from Jack: The Finns ,faced with the reality of overwhelming Soviet power in the 194O, made humiliating concessions which did save them from onerus Great Russian rule. A very canny Finnish administration managed to convince Stalin that he had no need to occupy them. It was a neat trick because they had for a time allied themselves withthe Boche.
ReplyDeleteRay, I'm sure you're right that the hawks will drag us into a melee sooner or later. One can't rule out the possibility that "President" Biden would precipitate such a conflict simply to change the subject before the midterms. I doubt he would pick on Russia, but maybe some smaller, weaker prey?
ReplyDeleteJack, Finland's survival was indeed a small miracle, since Russia whipped them good twice in five years. For that matter, Norway was lucky it didn't fall under Stalinist occupation too.
Dr.Wardy fromJack: You are right, the Soviets did overwhelm the Finns. But those Finns fought hard, very hard! I've owned a 1940s Finnish rifle and it was superior to anything the brutish Rus had.
ReplyDelete