Tag: war

Trump & Tuberville, Pay Attention – Your Pal Putin Is the Problem

Michael Matheron1 Comment

“Under Crooked Joe Biden, the world is in flames, our border is overrun,
inflation is raging, Europe is in total chaos, the Middle East is exploding,
Iran is emboldened, China is on the march, and the worst, most incompetent,
most corrupt president in history is going to drag us into World War III.”
Donald Trump, at a Racine, Wisconsin MAGA rally
June 18, 2024

Donald Trump, Shut Up!

If anything presently on the horizon could ignite a “WWIII” it’s Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, an obvious observation unobserved in Trump’s quote above. If Trump is truly concerned about a worldwide conflict, and not just fear mongering, then a solution to the Ukrainian-Russian war is essential. In that vein, Trump might consider calling for (1) a Russian withdrawal, (2) a Ukrainian surrender, (3) meaningful peace talks, or (4) at the least, a ceasefire. After all, the task would be a snap. He brags about how one phone call to Putin and Zelensky would lead directly to a satisfactory ending based on (Trump’s idea) Ukraine simply surrendering half of its country. Because why? Zelensky will listen to him attentively because . . . Trump’s big brain. As for Putin, he’s a buddy and totally respects Trump’s, well, his big brain. Didn’t Vlad express that respect and bonhomie in 2023?

“We surely hear that Mr. Trump says he will resolve all burning issues within several days, including the Ukrainian crisis. We cannot help but feel happy about it.” Vladimir Putin remark at the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok, Russia, September 2023.

At the time, Trump – stupidly interpreting Putin’s cheekily ironic statement as something more than a glaringly obvious insult – jumped in with both paws, “I like that he said that, because that means what I’m saying is right. I would get him into a room. I’d get Zelensky into a room. Then I’d bring them together. And I’d have a deal worked out.” Zip, zap, zop. Just like that. After all, it’s essentially a real estate deal. Irony aside, in fact, Trump’s magical thinking, hyperbolic personality, and sense of omnipotence are dangerous threats to Ukraine’s survival, and if one needs a WWIII scenario, to the world’s survival.

And then there’s Tommy Tuberville . . .

Tommy Tuberville, Shut Up!

On another madcap front in the MAGA universe, the one where Putin is a good guy, Alabama Senator Tommy Tuberville threw in on this topic a few weeks ago. Appearing on the soon-to-be jailbird Steve Bannon’s War Room podcast, Tuberville, the nation’s stupidest senator, after referring to Volodymyr Zelensky as a “dictator,” spewed forth:

“Putin’s just kind of sitting back, watching what’s going on, wondering when y’all gonna come over and we’ll draw a line here. He doesn’t want Ukraine, he doesn’t want Europe. He’s got enough land of his own. He just wants to make sure that he does not have United States weapons in Ukraine pointing at Moscow.”

Of course, Tuberville is right that Russia doesn’t want “United States weapons in Ukraine pointing at Moscow.” Nonetheless, we can be safe in assuming that Putin knows he already has U.S. weapons pointed at him within Europe. As of April 2024, the United States had the largest number of active military personnel in NATO countries, with almost 1.33 million troops and their accompanying accoutrements like artillery, tanks, and other unpleasant things. Moreover, we have approximately 100 tactical nuclear weapons in NATO countries. And, of course, there are American “weapons pointed at him” in Ukraine because Putin invaded Ukraine, some billions of dollars worth soon to be supplemented by F-16 fighter jets. So, if Putin really doesn’t want weapons in Europe pointed at Moscow, then stop being such a juvenile delinquent; start that transformation by getting the hell out of Ukraine!

As for Tuberville’s comment that Putin “doesn’t want Ukraine, he doesn’t want Europe. He’s got enough land of his own,” the comment is belied by the fact that he has numerous soldiers, a Baltic fleet, and an air force there. So, Tuberville’s comment is not remotely reality based, it’s startlingly stupid, and other demeaning terms. Nevertheless, one part of his asinine comment bears examining, “He’s got enough land of his own.” That, too, is both incorrect and stupid, and also belied by his assault on, and occupation of, the second largest country in Europe. Apparently, Russia’s nearly seven million square miles is, Senator Tuberville, not “enough land.”

Putin desires and needs a geographical border, one that can threaten NATO, and provide an economic influx to aid Russia’s lagging economy. Economic theft was among Putin’s reasons for invading Ukraine, especially when he believed he would achieve an easy victory. Lacking that he seems stuck there for the long haul, between a rock and a hard place. Certainly, Ukraine can provide a significant economic input, for example, in 2014, he stole Crimea and grabbed its famous port city Sevastopol, a prize for his fleet. And certainly, should he own all Ukraine, his defense from NATO would be vastly strengthened, especially since, as a part of Russia, Ukraine would therefore never be a NATO country. In a strong sense, it is all about land, and wanting more, Senator Tuberville.

Trump’s Giant Brain Isn’t Up to the Task

Nevertheless, we ought to be wary of viewing Ukraine as simply a land grab by an empire-hungry Vladimir Putin. Certainly, that is a motivation; I believe his (very) long-term aim is to reform the soviet boundaries. That may, in fact, have been his initial objective, a beginning of the rebirth of a new Russian empire, modeled after the Soviet Union. If so, his failure to quickly defeat all of Ukraine has consequences, both militarily and macroeconomically, both strategically and tactically, both long term and short term. All this is a huge setback to his grand design.

Given the staggering human costs of the nearly two-year war thus far, one can see that Putin’s unmoved by the demand that he withdraw, and he will likely continue in this vein. Human and economic costs, it’s well known, are mammoth, and if the war – win, lose, or draw – were to end tomorrow, long term Russian macroeconomic costs in GDP terms are a huge concern, and these costs unabated by a swift victory, have already injured the welfare of the Russian people (an ongoing internally destabilizing event).

In December 2023, RAND Corporation reported, “As of September 2022, researchers estimated military costs reached $40 billion. Full-year 2022 gross domestic product losses amounted to between $81 billion and $104 billion and full-year financial capital destruction reached $322 billion. Direct military spending may amount to almost $132 billion through 2024.” Statista, on May 3, 2024, reported that Russia’s GDP dropped from $2.27 trillion (2022) to $1.99 trillion for 2023, a ten percent decline accounted for by both Ukraine invasion sanctions and war costs. That’s a very meaningful drop, and Russia, literally, cannot afford it given its lack of export product diversity and the many economic sanctions in place.

Of course, as far as the victim, Ukraine, is concerned, its costs are staggering, both ongoing and long term. Its 2021 its GDP dropped from $200 billion to $160 billion for 2022, a 20% decrease. It’s 2023 GDP, perhaps counterintuitively, increased due to a better harvest, additional government spending, increased defense spending, and improved electricity access (yet, recently, Russia has increased its targeting of Ukraine’s electricity infrastructure). Moreover, according to the Congressional Research Service (CRS), not surprisingly, “Ukraine, however, remains dependent on foreign assistance. According to the [International Monetary Fund] IMF, Ukraine requires in 2023 $3-4 billion in monthly financial assistance from international partners, including the [International Finance Institutions] IFIs, to maintain necessary government functions amidst the ongoing conflict. . . Other programs including the World Bank’s multi donor trust fund (MDTF) which facilitates channeling grant resources from donors. The United States is the largest donor to the MDTF, contributing $10.3 billion. Other donors are Germany ($50 million), Spain ($48 million), Finland ($21 million), Switzerland ($10.5 million), Belgium ($3 million), and Iceland ($1 million).” Foreign assistance enthusiasm may wane in a forever war, and already has in the U.S. given the GOP/MAGA warlike resistance to aiding Ukraine.

Moreover, for both combatants and the world economy, in the end, who will bear the costs of rebuilding a post-war Ukraine? Thus far, as of December 2023, the World Bank Group estimates reconstruction costs at $486 billion over the next ten years. Should Russia prevail or lose, those costs, in a legal and moral sense, ought fall to Russia, yet, if those costs continue for an extended time and reach a trillion dollars or more, Ukraine’s reconstruction will be a worldwide economic challenge, since a trillion dollars is roughly one-half Russia’s present GDP, an unsustainable drag on its economy. In any event, even should major financial institutions, countries, and non governmental organizations like the World Bank chip in, Russia’s economy will be facing large reconstruction costs that will stymie its GDP growth for an extended period. As we say, “It’s the economy, stupid!” and, despite its grievous fault, Russia cannot be allowed to sink into an economic depression, that would be destabilizing on a grand scale, i.e., a cornered bear, an existential threat to Russia, and, thereby, a certifiable World War III scenario.

So, in the end, if Trump does seek to avoid World War III, the war he accused Biden of courting, then his efforts ought to be directed at something he’s intellectually and constitutionally incapable of, for example, sensible solutions. But we know him, his diplomatic skills begin and end in this, “I would get him into a room. I’d get Zelensky into a room. Then I’d bring them together. And I’d have a deal worked out.” That is simply preposterous, the blathering of a dangerous psychopath with no conception of consequences.

About the Antisemitism Awareness Act – MAGA Forgets Its Own Core Antisemitism

Michael Matheron2 Comments

Quick Background

Six years ago, the publication Inside Higher Education ran an article about 2018’s version of the Antisemitism Awareness Act and observed,

“anti-Semitism’s manifestations change over time. There is a robust debate, both inside the Jewish community and among experts on the issue, over the relationship between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism. Sometimes anti-Zionism constitutes anti-Semitism; sometimes it doesn’t.”

Their bifurcation framed antisemitism as a set of definitional issues regarding

  • antisemitism directed against the state of Israel as a state, i.e., a sovereign corporate entity, and thereby a diplomatic issue about which the State Department has its own definition, and
  • in the education sector, antisemitism directed at individuals, i.e., a civil rights issue under the Department of Education Civil Rights Division’s definition of antisemitism to be used to determine schools’ antidiscrimination legal obligations under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI) “to provide all students, including Jewish students, a school environment free from discrimination based on race, color, or national origin, including shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics.” (Note that Title VI does not apply to discrimination based upon religion itself, but applies to race, national origin, and ethnicity which creates confusion in policy. Also note, Title VI applies to institutions which receive federal aid.)

Much comes to mind since the Inside Higher Education article referenced above pointed out the perennial truth that “anti-Semitism’s manifestations change over time.” Today’s manifestation arises from the latest and most vicious war in many years between the state of Israel and Gaza’s Hamas. In the education sphere regulated under Title VI, mass protests grow in intensity and they often mix attacks on Jewish and Palestinian individuals with attacks upon the Jewish state.

How broad or narrow ought antisemitism be defined to maintain reasonable First Amendment free speech rights? And what about the distinction between the diplomatic vs. the personhood definition for federal enforcement purposes? And that definition variance is the rub. What makes this bill so controversial is its reliance on equating anti-Zionism with antisemitism: one is criticism of an entity, the other of a person. Indeed, it’s a categorical error. So, it appears, if the bill passes Senate muster, on-campus criticism of the Jewish state is antisemitic. And the Antisemitism Awareness Act seeks to resolve this by empowering the Education Department to take action against educational institutions that do not sufficiently combat anti-Israel speech on campus where this kind of “diplomatic” free speech ought to be encouraged in order to air out attitudes about countries’ treatment of, for example in Gaza, noncombatant rights.

This round of concern has, of course, arisen as fallout from the ongoing Israel-Palestine war, and the resulting protests roiling campuses. And this is a time of existential crisis for both sides, their disputed homelands up for destruction. The bill, titled the Antisemitism Awareness Act, would mandate that the Education Department adopt a broad definition of antisemitism created by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRM), an intergovernmental group. The group defines antisemitism as a “certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews.” The group adds that “rhetorical and physical manifestations” of antisemitism include such things as calling for the killing or harming of Jews or holding Jews collectively responsible for actions taken by the state of Israel. These manifestations are directed at Jewish individuals and ought to be prevented even to the point of shackling free speech rights.

However, as noted above, importantly, the House-adopted definition of antisemitism arguably includes offenses against the Jewish state, ‘‘[d]enying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor,’’ and ‘‘[d]rawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.’’ This is the substance of the Antisemitism Awareness Act. The scope of this expanded definition makes it illegal in an educational setting to merely claim “that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor,” or, if heavily enforced by DOE, to forbid any criticism of, for example, Israel’s brutal conduct of the present conflict. That goes too far, discussions of the behavior of our allies must be free-flowing, particularly in an educational setting.

An Example That Eats the Rule

Interestingly, and counterintuitively, the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRM) examples of antisemitic behavior adopted by the House-passed bill contain a limitation:
“However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic.” [emphasis added]

Is this the exception that eats the rule? After all, most of the present on-campus criticism of Israel is based upon the international laws of war, and the responsibility for treatment of refugees and noncombatants. And isn’t this the same kind of criticism any other country receives in these circumstances, and therefore, according to the definitional section of the Antisemitism Awareness Act itself “cannot be regarded as antisemitic.” That creates confusion, it does not resolve it. Thus, the Antisemitism Awareness Act which is intended to, in large part, prevent criticism of Israel, the sovereign nation, contains a serious internal contradiction provided by the very IHRM definition it seeks to codify. As such, it needs to be considered carefully by the Senate.

MAGA’s Core Antisemitism

As an aside, but an important one, it’s interesting to note the overwhelming support of Republicans for a measure that supports Israel’s stated right to exist as a state. The GOP has not shown itself to be an avid supporter of Jewish causes, particularly since Jewish voters are largely Democratic party voters. Hardly a day goes by when a Marjory Taylor Greene or the erstwhile Kevin McCarthy pins most of the world’s problems on George Soros, in general, or the Rothschild’s Jewish Space Lasers. How there are Jewish Zionist Republicans I’ll never understand.

The MAGA movement (which is, basically, the Republican party at this point) is riddled with proud nazi sympathizers who openly encourage an end to the Israel and to the Jews themselves. Trump himself doesn’t have a clearly stated policy and recently has used antisemitic rhetoric that directly quotes many classic bits of antisemitism, for example, that Jews support Democrats, that they support Israeli interests over American interests. As has been pointed out often, Trump is a “transactional” political actor, so his position may remain forever unknown, but he does know his supporters are primarily and loudly antisemite, singling out both Israel as a country and Jews as individuals.

So here’s how the GOP/MAGA party acolytes voted. Given their widespread antisemitism, one is reminded that Napoleon once remarked,

“In politics, absurdity is not a handicap.” 

House Roll Call (go here to view each Member’s vote)
MAY 01, 2024, 04:50 PM | 118TH CONGRESS, 2ND SESSION

Republican1872109
Democratic1337009
Independent0000

MAGAs Unite! Did You Know That All Democrats Hate Pies? And They’re on the Warpath!

Michael Matheron1 Comment

Yesterday, Fox News’ Lisa Boothe and Charlie Hurt rightfully and courageously attacked our woeful communist Vice President Kamala Harris for hypocritically baking cornbread with a gas stove, an appliance upon which she and the libs have focused a lion-sized portion of their so-called policy demands. A recent list of their goals for a second Biden presidency highlighted the confiscation of gas stoves as second only to seizing all objects of any kind that might be used as weapons, including Play Dough, cotton candy, and North Carolina barbeque sauce. And the question we ask, endlessly: Why?

Lisa Boothe asked Charlie Hurt, the Washington Times journalist, just that question. Mr. Hurt, who recently took our battle against electric motor scooters to the enemy in his expose, “Saving the planet, one electric scooter death at a time,” had this to say about the Vice President’s sole motivation for the anti-gas stove jihad:

“I think because they hate us, they hate humans, they hate joyfulness, they hate pies, they hate good food. They hate. They want us all to be miserable. They want us to suffer because when we’re not suffering, if we’re not suffering, we are, you know, we’re making things, we’re creating things, we’re joyful, we’re doing wonderful things, everybody is happy, and that drives them crazy. Because they’re all miserable. They want all of America to be as miserable and unhappy and unloved as they are, and we are just not going to go along with it.” [emphasis added for a good reason]

MAGA sisters brutally attacked on church grounds with weaponized pies on Thanksgiving Day!

Mr. Hurt’s words stirred up the usually morally and physically lazy libs. So much were their panties tied in a knot that they, as usual, emerged this morning with violent intent, just two days after Thanksgiving. And, there’s no way to sugarcoat this: This morning the radical left took their seething hatred of pies and good food to the streets. In a series of violent attacks on MAGA patriots in cities across the nation they savagely hurled weaponized pies at any and all MAGA targets, including women, children, and smallish men. They struck, leaving behind hundreds, if not millions, of those injured by whipped cream and large clumps of pie filling. Reports indicate that some victims on a low fat diet cling to life. Many, against their wills, resort to involuntarily ingesting the pie shards to avoid succumbing to sugar poisoning.

And do we wonder why? Do we?

Gleeful Democrat Communist party zombie attacks MAGA dieter at her dear pet’s funeral

On this day, November 25, 2023, a date which will live in infamy, do we wonder why? Their answer lies in their life-or-death struggle to confiscate our gas ovens, a demonic crusade that has transformed our country into a nation of warring camps. And today, in the sneakiest and most cowardly way, they emerged from their filthy communes with sneak attack on their agenda.

News is sketchy, but bad, and sadly we expect worse to come. MAGA bakers’ shops have come under attack as they bravely defend their day’s quota of pies. Communist Socialist Fascist Bakers Unions happily provide ammunition for violent lib rioters, thereby wasting valuable whipped cream and pie crusts; and they say they’re upset about what they call the “food shortage.” Here, at my newsroom our windows are smeared with fruit pie fillings, gelatinous whipped cream, and paper pie plates, dangerously cutting off our air supply. The birds that Democrats love enough to stop the building of a bridge for are stuck to the ground, wings and their tiny feet literally “caked.”

A captured Pie Fight Manual

Until we can marshal our MAGA fighters we are defenseless. If you are brave enough to venture out of your basements, God bless you, the pies are drone powered and highly accurate. Wear full battle gear, carry oxygen bottles, wear military-grade goggles, and do not stand upright; crawl, crawl for all your courage can endure.

We solemnly promise we shall remain here in our newsroom keeping you informed until life returns to normal, should it take a thousand years. Courage. And, above all, stay safe.

What’s The Difference Between Economist Robert J. Samuelson and a Bucket of Spit?

Michael MatheronLeave a comment

July 29, 2011

Older Americans do not intend to ruin America,
but as a group, that’s what they’re about.
Robert J. Samuelson, 
Why are we in this debt fix? It’s the elderly, stupid.
Washington Post, July 28, 2011

Answer: The Bucket.  Mr. Samuelson, a right-wing economist, in yesterday’s Washington Post POSTOPINIONS column didn’t bury the lede: Why are we in this debt fix? It’s the elderly, stupid.  This (unfortunately) memorable title tells you where this is going, and Samuelson does not disappoint, except one does walk away from his screed a bit more disappointed than usual in how right-wingers think. They relish attacking those who live one crisis away from poverty. Samuelson gives those weakened geriatric gray hairs a good beatdown, like Seinfeld‘s Kramer when he thrashed those prepubescent youngsters in the karate dojo, “I’m dominating the dojo. I’m class champion!” Or the man who plotted to throw his mother off a train, but in that case, decided against it. Samuelson did not.

Jihad Grandpas & Grammas

You may not have known that your seemingly sweet Granny and Gramps were on a jihad bent on burying you and their other children and grandkids under mountains of nationalized debt. I would’ve never suspected my own grandparents, they were always good for a hug and a cookie. (There are exceptions, however. My Aunt Ruth, for example, for my ninth birthday, gave me the 670 page 1955 edition of Emily Post’s Etiquette: The Blue Book of Social Usage. Obviously, by that act alone, she proved that she’d do anything to anyone. Thus, she, now at 89 years, remains suspect of burying us all under mountains of public debt.) 

Samuelson’s point is obvious, a lot of those rampaging elders are gaming the system, many do not need the benefits they receive, especially from Social Security and Medicare. He ignores the fact that a national social welfare program ought to embrace all the elderly; after all, well-off elders may, during their retirement, lose everything. (And don’t be fooled, Samuelson believes that poor Americans in any age group don’t deserve their benefits either.) Statistics show that the majority of elders need social security to live any kind of decent life at all. Medicare to live a healthy life at all.

Of course, Obama and the Democrats are Samuelson’s villains de jour, but he includes his own companions:

“the shunning [of even discussing entitlement cuts] is bipartisan. Tea Party advocates broadly deplore government spending without acknowledging that most of it goes for popular Social Security and Medicare.”

Thus he proves that he is worse than Tea Partiers. He forgets that the vast majority of retirement aged Tea Partiers collect Social Security and Medicare, (rightfully) believe they earned it, are therefore “entitled” to it, and would smack you with their canes should you try to even discuss cutting benefits. Of course, they also believe that other groups of elderly persons do not deserve what they have; funny how that works, eh? Samuelson doesn’t understand politics very well, doe he?

It’s the Social Contract

The social contract which we have includes income and health security, and yet does not eviscerate free enterprise. It’s benefits are for all citizens. Samuelson is no friend of our social contract:

“By now, it’s obvious that we need to rewrite the social contract that, over the past half-century, has transformed the federal government’s main task into transferring income from workers to retirees.”

To him, and the GOP/TP when it suits them, the federal government ought to have few mandates, i.e., foreign relations, border protection, building a national armed forces, and, most of all, cutting taxes paid by those who, by and large, are already doing quite well. For people like Samuelson, doing well is always the best revenge on those whose paths through life are rocky and dangerous. Tea Partiers, in particular, detest those they consider lazy welfare queens and kings, despite the fact that many Tea Partiers collect what the call “welfare,” within which they have been known to include Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. When this wrongheaded enmity is pressed against the elderly, especially those who rely upon those programs, on those who have lived long enough to achieve old age, it’s akin to saying to them, “Thanks for your hard work, and drop dead.”

Robert Samuelson’s Why are we in this debt fix? It’s the elderly, stupid proves he’s comfortable warring on the nation’s elderly. Period. Paragraph. Throw him off a train . . .

Sarah Palin Commemorates [the Nearly] 100th Anniversary of D-Day

Michael MatheronLeave a comment

June 7, 2011

Sarah Palin took some time off from her One Nation bus tour today to commemorate “the one hundredth anniversary of the American invasion of Normandy beach during World War Two exactly one hundred years ago in our past history.”  At 11:00 am today, the former governor of Alaska looked eastward from Normandy Beach NJ and reflected to a New Jersey beach resort crowd:

“Today, June 7th, 2011, will always be rememberanced as the day when God fearing America planted its staff on this beach to warn the German Nazis that we were on our way, and that they better skedaddle away fast. By golly, they did. America was once again free of Nazis who then captured the country France, like that was a surprise. Today, as I look out at New Jersey’s beautiful Normandy Beach, now a gorgeous place of sun and fun, I thank God for those brave Americans who pushed Nazis into the nearby East River. And I thank those entrepreneurial Americans who rebuilt this lovely God-fearing beach into the top tourist destination it is today.” 

Air Force Requests Rustic Village for Bombardment By 105mm Howitzers

Michael MatheronLeave a comment

January 21, 2011

My team is teeming with ideas!!!

Next, They Want One That Looks Like San Francisco. Washington Post Staff Writer Al Kamen reported a nifty opportunity for a construction company willing to see its project immediately blown up by shells from a 105 mm howitzer. Mr. Kamen wrote:

The Haqqani clan and other Taliban types in North Waziristan and in the rugged Afghanistan mountains may think those Predator attacks are a major problem. But things may be getting worse for them soon, judging from a recent Air Force solicitation notice. Cannon Air Force Base, just west of Clovis, N.M., is looking for a contractor to build a “rustic village which reflects the likeness of an Afghanistan village.” The base, pretty much in the middle of nowhere near the Texas-New Mexico border, warns that the “site is remote, and located on Melrose Firing Range.” What’s more, “with exception of non-potable well-water, there are no utilities available,” the notice says, so bring your own generator, water, porta-facilities and so forth. Definitely rustic.

HMMMM . . . My brother-In-Law Has A Backhoe. And I have a hammer. So, excitedly, I sought out the Air Force’s offer, and found it at FedBizOpps.com. In case you’re interested, here it is (I highlighted the best parts):

Mountain Village and Caves Construction Solicitation Number: FA4855-11-R-0004

Agency: Department of the Air Force

Air Force Special Operations Command

Location: 27 SOCONS

Solicitation Number: FA4855-11-R-0004
Notice Type: Sources Sought

Synopsis: Added: January 12, 2011 

Cannon Air Force Base, located 10 miles west of Clovis, NM , is conducting a market survey with the intent of determining the interest, capabilities and qualifications of potential small businesses in performing construction of a Mountain Village and Caves as a PRIME contractor for a potential firm fixed-price ( to include economic price adjustment FAR Clause 52.216-4). A firm requirement has not yet been established. Upon review of industry response to this Sources Sought Synopsis, the Government will determine whether a set-aside acquisition in lieu of full and open competition is in the Government’s best interest.

The contractor shall be required to provide all labor, materials, tools, and equipment in order to perform all excavation and concrete work or similar for construction work to build a rustic village which reflects the likeness of an Afghanistan village. The site is remote, and located on Melrose Firing Range. With exception of non-potable well water, there are no utilities available. In addition to the Mountain Village construction, this project will incorporate four caves to be composed of, at minimum, 36″ thick, 5000 psi reinforced concrete, to withstand repeated 105mm target practice rounds and 40mm armor piercing rounds. Necessary site work for site build-up may include, but not limited to: clearing and grubbing where applicable, and providing of own means of electricity for construction.

Hell, I’ll do it for nothing! Here’s the site proposal I submitted. Copyrighted.

Small village with tulips, traditional dutch windmills and houses reminiscent of Kandahar Province, Eastern Afghanistan