MOAB...WHAT WAS THAT ABOUT?

As in why waste this type of Bomb on such a backwater, unimportant part of the World?

But first, what exactly does MOAB stand for?

All one reads about is its vernacular title namely, 'Mother Of All Bombs' but its actual name is Massive Ordnance Air Blast.

At 21,000 lbs, it is the largest conventional bomb developed to date.

The MOAB's cost is difficult to pin down but those apparently in the know put a price tag on it of about $16 Million Dollars.

So back to my initial question why use it in a remote gawd-forsaken part of Afghanistan close to the Pakistan border? 

If, as many a pundit state, it was done to 'send a message' to American belligerents, the cruise missile attack on Syria had already accomplished that in a more effective yet subtle way.

In other words...it was overkill...so to speak.

But to answer this question more fully, I would like to rehash an interview I saw on t.v. where Geraldo Rivera provided his thoughts about this event. (Many of you will no doubt be familiar with Mr. Rivera).

First Rivera noted that any time America kills 'bad guys' as in the 36 ISIS fighters killed by the MOAB 'it is a good day for the USA and for freedom loving peoples around the world'. 

But then he correctly went on to say why this attack did not accomplish much if anything:

First he questioned whether the expense of $16 million to kill only 36 ISIS fighters was worth the cost and,

Second he questioned the value in attacking ISIS in this remote, outlaw part of the world when in the scheme of things it accomplishes nothing ...'A hundred years ago the British fought the rebels here, later the Russians did and now the Americans and for the next 100 the fight will continue'.

So I take from Geraldo Rivera that it all comes down to a feel good moment that has little or no practical value either militarily or politically.

To this I will add a couple of further concerns of my own:

To win any war against the Islamic Terrorists, it has to include the populace of the countries affected, joining in the fight.  It cannot be won by outsiders like America and other NATO countries even though their involvement is fundamentally needed.

So if you are going to use such a cutting edge weapon, use it in an area where the chances of success exist such as in the Middle East.

If the enemy did not know about the ...Massive Ordnance Air Blast or Mother of All Bombs, they do now and if and when it is dropped again, it will have less of a psychological impact and could further fuel the drive by bad-guys to acquire nuclear weapons.

My final concern, which I will deal with in a future Blog, is my growing worry that President Donald Trump is letting himself become a Puppet of the Military Establishment. It is far too early to make such an assessment but this week's senseless dropping of the MOAB starts to make me wonder who is calling the shots.

As I see it...

'K.D. Galagher'

  

AMERICA'S UNEMPLOYMENT RATE IS STATED TO BE 4.5 %....IT IS HALF RIGHT...

Half right in that the actual rate is twice that number...more like 9%.

This past week the US Labor Board announced that the country's unemployment rate continues to drop ...and currently stands at 4.5%.

As with Obama, when these numbers come out I always doubled them to account for those who, for whatever reason, have given up trying to get work. 

The numbers of such are growing and are reflected in the declining workforce participation rate.

Bear with me as I run some more numbers by you:

In Obama's two terms the participation rate declined each and every year ...beginning at 66% and ending at 62%.

This may not sound dramatic to you but converting the 4% difference from beginning to end ... this number represents some 8 million people who have entirely ceased looking for work in that relatively short period. 

Add that to the 7.5 million who are still actively seeking employment, you have 15.5 million workers missing from today's eligible workforce...a number that slightly exceeds 9%.

But let's go back to the 62% number being the per-centage of those Americans, eligible to work, who are actually working.  This number is not so bad when you take into the fact that the average of all of the world's countries mirror that exact number.  That is to say, the average of all of the world's workforce participation rate is 62%.  

So at least the US is performing average.

China, the world's second largest economy has a participation rate of 71%.

But Zimbabwe proves that a high participation rate does not necessary mean a country is doing well economically since its rate is a booming 87%.

What I am trying to get at here is that a country's workforce participation rate is a far better gauge on the health of its workforce and despite Zimbabwe's anomaly, the higher the participation rate the better since you have more workers involved in growing their country's economic pie. 

There is one other important issue to take into account when dealing with Unemployment numbers and that concerns the Involuntary Part-timers.  Experts refer to them as the hidden unemployed and their numbers too have been rising since the Great Recession of 2007/08.  Studies show that up to 25% of this Involuntary group live below the poverty line. 

Neither the raw unemployment numbers nor the more accurate participation rate numbers take the Involuntary Unemployed into proper consideration.  Maybe more on this another day?

So just remember, next time you see unemployment rates bandied about.... double them for a clearer picture of where things stand in regard to employment.

As I see it...

'K.D. Galagher'