Home / Robert Farley / Franklin Graham: Airpower Can Re-Grout My Shower

Franklin Graham: Airpower Can Re-Grout My Shower

Comments
/
/
/
75 Views

I know what will solve this problem: Airpower!

In the Bible, Jesus gave us an example in Luke Chapter 10 about a man who was beaten, robbed and left for dead on the side of the road. Leaders passed by and saw that the man desperately needed help. But they continued on their journey, looking the other way. Then a Samaritan came along and had compassion. He bandaged the man’s wounds, put the man on his own animal and took the man to an inn to care for him. America historically has been that good Samaritan: defending the weak, standing up against the strong and providing liberty and justice for all.

Now I am asking him and his administration to do something that may sound unusual for a preacher of the Gospel. I am asking him to use our Air Force to destroy Mr. Bashir’s airstrips – the airstrips his military uses to launch bombers that carry out daily attacks in the Nuba Mountains. The Nuba people don’t want American soldiers – they can fight for themselves. They just want to be free. But they have no defense against bombs dropping from the sky on their villages, schools and hospitals.

As a pilot with 40 years of experience, I can assure you that an airplane doesn’t do well with holes in the runway. I certainly am not asking the president to kill anyone, just to break up some concrete to prevent the bombers from taking off. I think that by destroying those runways, we can force Mr. Bashir to the negotiating table.

Let’s see…

Overrate the importance of aerial bombing to state repression: Check
Praise the antiseptic nature of aerial bombing: Check
Underestimate the ability of the enemy to resist or change tactics: Check
Underestimate the ancillary demands of an air campaign: Check
Ignore the broader political implications of the use of force: Check
Implicitly analogize the Good Samaritan to the F-15E Strike Eagle: Double Plus Check

FacebookTwitterGoogle+Share
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Linkedin
  • Pinterest
  • ChristianPinko

    Central to the Good Samaritan parable is the fact that the Samaritans were despised by the Jewish community of Jesus’ day. The point is that those who were considered to be unclean turned out to be the vehicles of God’s righteousness. This is NOT the same thing as the self-proclamations of a neo-imperial superpower that its exercise of military might is benevolent and selfless.

    • JREinATL

      Exactly. Even if you stipluate that:

      America historically has been … defending the weak, standing up against the strong and providing liberty and justice for all….

      that’s not what the story of the Good Samaritan is about.

      • LosGatosCA

        Which brings up an excellent point – who confiscated the guns that allowed that man to be robbed, beaten and left for dead.

        And don’t give me any liberal crap about guns hadn’t been invented yet.

    • Ian

      That would make it a closer parallel if it was the Cuban air force that was supposed to be bombing Syria.

  • c u n d gulag

    Franklin, instead of Obama – have God do it!

    Your Daddy always said he talked to God.

    If God doesn’t answer your pleas, talk to Dad and have him ask.

    According to your version of The Bible, God liked smiting – no reason to think he forgot how, is there?

  • mike in dc

    There’s that little problem of the USAF doctrine requiring them to bomb the heck out of all air defense infrastructure first, before targeting so much as a lamp post besides. Hundreds to thousands of potential Syrian casualties.

    I still say the Turks will get directly involved if this thing goes on long enough.

    • Robert Farley

      In fairness, Graham is advocating the bombing of Syria.

      • rea

        I thought he was advocating the bombing of Sudan–Omar al Bashir, not Bashar al Assad, and also the Nuba people

        • rea

          Indeed, I suspect that Prof. Farley’s comment lost a “not”.

          • Robert Farley

            Damn. Blast. Damn. Sudan Sudan Sudan!

            Actually kinda rhymes…

            • mike in dc

              D’oh! Bashir, Bashar. I thought there was something off about that.
              I suppose the Turks might not get involved after all.

              • njorl

                Bashir, Bashar, Ahmad, Assad
                Let’s call the whole thing off!

                • Or bomb them both.

                • rea

                  . . . after all, lots of people on the right were as prepared to bomb obama as Osama . . .

        • Pith Helmet

          I think he’s advocating the bombing of CNN host Martin Bashir, although he’s about the only reputable thing on CNN these days.

          • M.B. is on MSNBC. (Mighty Sorry, No Body Cares.)

          • John (not McCain)

            I assumed he was speaking of the genetically enhanced Julian Bashir. Kill all augments!

  • SpiderBat

    Overrate the importance of aerial bombing to state repression: Check

    Or, alternatively:

    Cynically hope that mission creep will turn a SEAD and anti-runway mission into a CAS mission: Check

    Then again, that does sound a little involved for an airpower advocate. They do tend to start their F-15s one engine at a time.

  • Roadie

    Those TV preachers always reduce it down to the 1950’s tv reality.
    Whether it’s the if we can just take out this bridge, we’ll win the war, to the
    way it was family and culture of beaver and father knows best.

  • Aigin

    Uh, didn’t we find in WWII that dropping bombs to put “holes in the runway” is a really ineffective way of shutting down airpower, what with repairs being possible with, well, a shovel and a bucket of gravel? I can recall repeated instances where airfields were heavily bombed, only to be back in action the next day. So add “Overestimate the damage done by aerial bombing, and underestimate the ability to make quick repairs: Check.”

    • Kurzleg

      Does this calculation change at all with the advent of jet aircraft? Isn’t the jet engine susceptible to damage that a propeller-driven plane isn’t?

      • BigHank53

        Depends on the jet engine. The Russians built at least a few fighters that were rated for gravel runways, so they could injest a fair amount of dirt.

        • rea

          It looks like the Sudanese “bombers” are old Russian cargo planes–barrels of explosives are rolled out the doors . . .

          • Tcaalaw

            I’m not saying that’s wrong, but it is rather weird. The Wikipedia (yes, I know) entry for the Sudanese air force shows that they have almost 30 SU-25 fighterbombers, most of which were acquired within the past 5 years, so I’d think they would still be airworthy. That kind of “bombing” would explain why the South Sudanese casualties from air attacks are so light though.

  • Well, if airpower won’t work, getting rid of the capital gains tax ought to do the trick.

    • hickes01

      Not if we IMPOSE the Death Tax – On Them!

  • America historically has been that good Samaritan: defending the weak, standing up against the strong and providing liberty and justice for all.

    Please tell us three times that are not WW2 when we did that. Bonus chutzpah if you use Latin America policy under Reagan for any or all of your examples.

    • dave3544

      Korea, Vietnam, Grenada.

      Pretty easy.

      Oh, and Gulf War I.

      And Israel.

      • dave3544

        Oops, I forgot for a moment that we “lost” in Vietnam. Damn hippies!

      • Furious Jorge

        I’m not so sure Gulf War I counts as “standing up against the strong.”

        • SpiderBat

          Grenada obviously does, though.

        • firefall

          And Liberty and Justice didnt exactly abound in 1950s South Korea or 1960s South Vietnam

          • DrDick

            Shhhh! Everybody knows propping up despotic rightwing dictators is the heart and soul of supporting democracy.

      • Korea, Vietnam, Grenada.

        Poe’s Law strikes again.

    • ajay

      Little Rock, 1955? The might of the US Army’s airborne forces standing up for the weak against the strong.

      “We don’t want to have the 82nd Airborne escorting children to school” – Condoleezza Rice, 1999.

      • Okay, that’s one.

        • joe from Lowell

          Libya.

          Somalia.

    • Patrick

      The Civil War? Although I guess that counts as both for and against since you said America and not just the United States of.

  • Tcaalaw

    This demand for action against the Sudanese air force seems particularly silly given that even the most breathless reporting in the past couple weeks about Sudan’s “air campaign” against South Sudan makes pretty clear that the air power involved is inconsequential.

    • SpiderBat

      Airpower can never be inconsequential. Because Airpower.

      • joe from Lowell

        It’s right there in the name: air power.

  • DrDick

    I thought Franklin Graham claimed God would solve all your problems. Why does he need airplanes and bombs? Can’t he just pray away these problems?

  • mds

    So … He means we need to use airstrikes to “defend” only those Nuba who are Christians, right? Not the Muslims or animists? Given that he’s gone all-in on “global Islam’s war on Christians,” I’d figure he wouldn’t give a fuck about the heathen ones. Or the Christian ones, for that matter, except as political props. I’ll bet this sanctimonious barf bag couldn’t even find Sudan on a map before it turned into something to flog the pro-Islam foreign-born occupant of the White House with. Hell, he probably still can’t.

    Still, I shouldn’t go so overboard about this blasphemous pigfucking ghoul. He might only care about Christians being violently persecuted by non-Christians, but at least he applies it consistently. After all, he’s roundly criticized Israel for its attacks on the Palestinian Christian population. Oh, wait, that’s right, it’s okay if Palestinian Christians “have no defense against bombs dropping from the sky on their villages, schools and hospitals,” because Franklin Graham is a vicious hypocritical shitstain.

    • Uncle Kvetch

      Still, I shouldn’t go so overboard about this blasphemous pigfucking ghoul.

      That is the best sentence I’ve read all week.

  • cpinva

    really? just, really?

  • Ken

    First, I didn’t know that Martin Bashir had his own airfield(s).

    It might be more appropriate for the Bundeswehr Luftwaffe to be making potholes, emblazoned with Maltese Crosses and such.

    Has Franklin, Son of William, thought of using Redstone/Pershing missles instead? I’m guessing we may have some mothballed for just this use.

  • Gus

    Now I am asking him and his administration to do something that may sound unusual for a preacher of the Gospel.

    What’s unusual about a preacher of the Gospel advocating violence?

    • wengler

      Blood on the ground makes baby Jesus smile.

      Onward Christian soldiers!

  • wengler

    The real question is why is Graham not telling our military to rise up against their apostate Muslim leader?

    I agree plenty of bombing needs doing, but not with Hussein Obama in charge.

  • LosGatosCA

    He’s a good holy man.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPQhdyHjQ5M

    That graphic is insane – it just screams salvation.

    Purity of Essence.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/multimedia/enlarge/image/b1grahamlgjpg/?iframe=true&width=830&height=800

    • LosGatosCA

      The graphic is on the Washington Times story at left.

    • njorl

      Purity of Essence.

      Definitely the Rumour’s best album without Graham Parker.

  • Pith Helmet

    America historically has been that good Samaritan: defending the weak, standing up against the strong and providing liberty and justice for all.

    I don’t even know where to begin to start with the stupid in that statement.

    • Ken

      Franny forgot to end it with an ‘amen’.

  • Ralph Hitchens

    Against these Third World air forces the USAF can in fact do quite a bit — but as noted above, this involves a very heavy political decision to BOMB SYRIA. As also noted above our first step would be to take down the Syrian air defence C3 infrastructure, which I believe (contrary to the above) would not involve a lot of civilian casualties. Then it would be a combination of runway disruption and bunker-busting, which would probably curtail serious SAF flight ops in short order.

    We might subcontract all this to the Israelis, who undoubtedly have the most up-to-date target folders (although I’d bet we’re close to being on the same page by now).

It is main inner container footer text