In conducting an indirect fire mission, once the forward observer has effectively adjusted the impact of the artillery, mortars, etc., onto his target, he will inform the firing agency, “Fire for effect.”
That’s when the arty battery or mortar platoon will transition from firing “adjusting rounds” and next fire multiple rounds from each gun onto the enemy target.
Okay, that was fun to tell you. It really has nothing to do with this article. I just thought that “Friday for Effect” sounded like a cool title. Anyway, this is just a sort of roundup of the week. Some stuff you might know and some that you might not.
I’m gonna try to do this sort of thing more regularly. This week, it’ll mostly be a smattering of post-debate stuff.
Let me begin by acknowledging that my forecast of how the debate would go down was wildly inaccurate. I was horribly wrong, even as I giddily wrote all about how I fully expected that Kamala would totally flame out.
Turns out that the opposite took place, and my streak of failing to predict the outcomes of such events continues.
In fairness, though, I hadn't expected the unprecedented partisan ambush by the two "journalists" posing as moderators.
The motto at the Washington Post is “Democracy Dies in Darkness,” and I’ve always liked the sentiment behind those words.
But what happens when it’s our nation’s media itself that drags us into that darkness? That’s what David Muir and Linsey Davis blatantly attempted to do to us on Tuesday night.
Maybe if I’d done a little research into the contemptible pair, I would’ve been better prepared. Of course, as you might imagine, ABC News is not exactly a major staple in my informational diet.
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Danger Close with Brian O'Leary to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.