Category Archives: War
The post-Christian, post-modern man will not fight to defend himself.
He is psychologically emasculated and saturated with self-loathing.
Further, war will never be formally declared. You will not see the U.K. (whatever is left of it), France, Germany or the U.S. declare war on anyone, ever. That’s all over. For the U.S., that ended with World War 2. You all know that the U.S. never declared war in Korea, Vietnam, or anywhere else since World War 2, right? Additionally, while World War 3 grinds its way forward through time, and as millions upon millions die, the media will continually state that THERE IS NO WAR, and anyone who says that there is a war is just a loon. And the people will nod their heads, and the body count will rise, but it won’t be WAR you understand, because everything’s fine.
From AD: http://americandigest.org/
Europeans and their colonial descendants may pen laws of war, but only they are constrained by them.
In the real world outside the dinner parties of Washington D.C. and Brussels, there are no laws in war.
Islamic law which has regulations for which foot to use when entering a bathroom (the left foot) and which side to sleep on (the right) has very few laws of war that cannot be nullified by necessity or even whim. On the battlefield, Islamic jurisprudence is boiled down to, Do what thou wilt in the cause of Allah, that is the whole of the law.
From AD: http://americandigest.org/
In our modern age, things no longer exist to perform their function. Washing machines aren’t designed to clean clothes, but to save water and energy. Food isn’t there to be eaten, but not eaten. And armies aren’t there to win wars, but to be moral. And the truly moral army never fights a war. When it must fight a war, then it fights it as proportionately as possible, slowing down when it’s winning so that the enemy has a chance to catch up and inflict a completely proportional number of casualties on them.
Forget charging up a hill. Armies charge up the slippery slope of the moral high ground and they don’t try to capture it from the enemy, because that would be the surest way to lose the moral high ground, instead they claim the moral high ground by refusing to try and capture it, to establish their moral claim to the moral high ground, which they can’t have because they refuse to fight for it.
Israel has been engaged in a long drawn out struggle for the moral high ground. The moral high ground is to the modern Israeli what the land of Israel was to their pioneer ancestors who drained swamps, built roads and shot bandits. Then some of the bandits were discovered to be the oppressed peoples of the region, fresh from Syria or Jordan, who then got busy retroactively protesting the settlements built on that stretch of swamp that had been set aside in their revisionist history as belonging to their great-grandparents while dangling oversized house keys to the swamp.
Sadly the only way to win the moral high ground is by losing. Just look at the massive Arab armies who repeatedly invaded Israel, did their best to overwhelm it with the best Soviet iron that the frozen factories of the Ural could turn out, and lost the bid to drive the Jews into the sea, but won the moral high ground. Then their terrorist catspaws spent decades winning the moral high ground by hijacking airplanes full of civilians, murdering Olympic athletes and pushing old men in wheelchairs from the decks of cruise ships.
All these killing sprees accomplished absolutely nothing useful, aside from the killing of Jews, which to a certain sort of mind is a useful thing in and of itself, but that failure won the terrorist catspaws the moral high ground. Their failure to win a war by hijacking buses full of women and taking the children of a school hostage conclusively established their moral superiority and nobility of spirit.
The world was deeply moved when Arafat waddled up to the UN podium, with his gun, wearing a mismatched cotton rag on his head that would decades hence become the modish apparel of every third hipster standing in line with a can of 20 dollar fair trade Lima beans at Whole Foods, because his commitment to killing people in a failed cause that even he didn’t believe in, in exchange for money from his backers in the Muslim world showed his deep commitment to the moral high ground.
In the seventies, after Israel had won a few too many wars, Henry “Woodcutter” Kissinger, suggested that it lose a war to gain the sympathy of the world. Golda wasn’t too enthusiastic about the idea, but with the old woodcutter in charge of handing out the axes, there wasn’t much choice about it. Israel came close to being destroyed in ’73, but just when it might have won the sympathy of the world, its armies of young men dashing from synagogues into overcrowded taxis to get to the front lines, turned the tide. Israel won. The woodcutter of Washington lost and Israeli scrapyards filled up with piles of Soviet steel, which was good news for the big sweaty guys who ran them, but bad news for those pining for the lofty fjords of the moral high ground.
In ’91 the Israelis went nuclear and decided to beat Arafat at his own game. Rabin and Peres talked the old terrorist out of retirement and down to Washington D.C. where they surrendered to him in an official ceremony at the Rose Garden overseen by a beaming Bill Clinton. Finally Israel had won the moral high ground. And the United States had carved off a chunk of that delicious moral high ground, even though Clinton was forced to fidget in his chair at Oslo when his Nobel Peace Prize went to the greasy terrorist, though perhaps he should have considered that defeat to be another victory of the moral high ground.
But the moral high ground proved notoriously elusive for the Jewish State. There was a brief lull when it seemed that the original sin of kicking ass had been atoned for in the Rose Garden, but then the terrorists started killing Israelis again and the Israelis insisted on fighting back. In no time at all the moral high ground was roped off with a special reserved section for terrorists and a sign reading, “No Israelis Will Be Admitted Unless They Renounce Their Government, Zionism and the Right of Self-Defense.”
Peace was the last best hope of the new Israeli Hatikvah, not to be a free people in their own land, but to be a moral people in a land that didn’t really belong to anyone in particular, but that they were optimistic everyone could live in harmony in.
But peace with terrorists meant not fighting back and there was a limit to what the 70 percent of the country that didn’t go to sleep fantasizing about peace would accept in the name of peace.
And so, terrorists killed Israelis, Israelis killed terrorists, that part of the world located in an ugly modernist building overlooking Turtle Bay, which the turtles would like to have back, condemned Israel and demanded that it resolve things peacefully by surrendering more land to the terrorists in order to build up their confidence in Israel’s commitment to a peaceful solution.
The terrorists were not expected to reciprocate and build up Israel’s confidence in their commitment to a peaceful solution because they already had the moral high ground by way of losing the last thirty engagements with the IDF, including the battle of the school they set up snipers in, the church they took over and the hospital that they used as an ammo dump.
The great quandary for Israeli leaders is how to win a war without losing the moral high ground. This is a tricky matter because it requires winning the war and winning the peace. And you can’t do both at the same time.
Israel’s solution has been to fight limited wars while remaining absolutely committed to peace. No sooner does a war begin, then it is pressed to accept a ceasefire. To show its commitment to peace, Israel is expected to accept the ceasefire. At which point Hamas will begin shooting rockets again and the whole dance will begin all over again. But Israel has trouble refusing a ceasefire because its leaders still believe that they can get at the moral high ground by showing that they are more committed to peace than the other side.
The peace is however unwinnable. It’s not even survivable in the long term. Peace either exists as a given condition or it is maintained by strong armies and ready deterrence. Peace cannot be found on the moral high ground, only the mountains of the graves of the dead.
Seeking the moral high ground is a fool’s quest. Wars cannot be fought without hurting someone and trumpeting your morality makes it all too easy for your enemies to charge you with hypocrisy. The man who spends the most time vociferously protesting that he isn’t a thief, that he has never touched a penny that belonged to anyone else and that he will swear on a floor-to-ceilling stack of bibles to that effect, looks far guiltier than the man who scowls and tells his accusers to mind their own business. The more Israel defends its own morality, the more it winds the chains of the accusers around its own neck.
Refining its warfighting with the object of fighting a truly moral war leads to refined techniques that kill terrorists but still cause some collateral damage, and to soldiers that are more afraid of shooting than of being shot at. And all this painstaking effort goes for naught since it really makes very little difference to Israel’s enemies whether they have one photo of a dead Muslim civilian to brandish or a thousand. Either one makes for the same manner of indictment. In aiming to win the peace, Israel instead, like all modern states, loses the war.
The father of an Israeli soldier told his son after he was called up for duty that he would rather visit him in prison than visit him in the cemetery. “If you are fired on, fire back.” That is good advice not just for that young man, but for his entire country, and for the civilized world. It is better to fire than be fired upon. It is better to be thought a criminal, than mourned in Holocaust museums. It is better to leave the moral high ground to those who worship the romance of endless bloodshed and defeat. It is better to lose the peace and win the war.
“Beyond victory in the First Terrorist War is a greater goal. What we must seek is not merely the “control” and “containment” of terror, for terror in this guise cannot be controlled or contained. We must come to the deeper understanding that only a complete victory over the global Radical Islamic forces can prevent the onset of a confrontation more terrible than the current war.” — AD, 2003
[Originally published @ American Digest in it's first year, October, 2003 ]
Sections of “The First Terrorist War”
1. Calling the War By the Right Name. 2. Not Process But Victory Restores Freedom 3. Playing for Time is Playing to Lose 4. The Goal of Radical Islam is Our Destruction 5. The War of Two Religions 6. The Unspoken Role of the Ballistic Missile Submarines 7. Avoiding the Islamic War by Winning the Terrorist War
“[Arabs] were incorrigibly children of the idea, feckless and colour-blind, to whom body and spirit were for ever and inevitably opposed. Their mind was strange and dark, full of depressions and exaltations, lacking in rule, but with more of ardour and more fertile in belief than any other in the world. They were a people of starts, for whom the abstract was the strongest motive, the process of infinite courage and variety, and the end nothing. They were as unstable as water, and like water would perhaps finally prevail.” — T. E. Lawrence, Seven Pillars of Wisdom
1. Calling the War By the Right Name. In a war, “Know your enemy” is one of the first axioms in formulating a strategy for victory. It is an axiom the United States has ignored for over
two seven years. Instead we’ve seen a host of euphemisms and slogans thrown up in the belief that, having had many decades of a life where ugly things are given pretty or neutral names, Americans can no longer “bear very much reality.” In the years between September 2001 and today, the public has had little asked of it and seen nothing happen on our soil that alarms it. All is quiet on the western front. [Update April 2013. This is no longer true.]
Foggy thinking, attractive in politics, means defeat in war. War requires “a mind of winter;” a mind that is precise, cold, and unrelenting. War requires that we call things what they are and cease to skirt issues that make us, “uncomfortable.” Vague names create fluffy policies, hamstrung strategies, and wishful thinking. This is where we are drifting.
To say we are “involved” in a “war on terror” extends our infatuation with euphemism and obfuscation into dangerous territory. The phrase lulls us into a state where all dangers seem unclear and distant. The “war on terror” joins an expanding list of “wars on…” such as drugs, poverty, or profuse paperwork in government. The “war on terror” implies a “process” rather than a campaign; an indeterminate series of unresolved encounters rather than decisive actions that lead to an end, to peace.
Peace is the goal of war. To accept a perpetual “war on terror” is to accept a plan for mere “management” rather than victory. The failure to plan for victory is the construction of a plan for defeat.
To those with a clear vision of this war and a knowledge of history, it is a lie that we are “involved in a war on terror.” Our presidents, pundits and policy wonks may prefer it that way, but war is not the same as being “involved in a business slump” or “involved in a troubled relationship.”
Wishful souls in the West may see the war as a “process;” as an exercise in supply chain management. Our many millions of avowed enemies do not. Our enemies have no truck with vague thinking and phrases front-loaded with vacillation and pusillanimous wishing. Their thinking is driven by an ancient religious doctrine designed to manipulate, exploit and harness societies into servitude.
Our enemies commitment to our destruction is adamantine. It is no accident that many of their spiritual leaders speaking from the centers of their faith call for the death of the “Crusaders.” Obfuscation has no place in their plans except as if creates confusion and doubt among us. Our enemies’ goals are the same goals they have held for more than 500 years. They are the goals announced several times a week in tens of thousands of mosques throughout the world. For our enemies, the wars of the Crusades and the wars surrounding the rise and fall of the Ottoman Empire were merely prologues to this war.
One such wave (and not the least) I raised and rolled before the breath of an idea, till it reached its crest, and toppled over and fell at Damascus. The wash of that wave, thrown back by the resistance of vested things, will provide the matter of the following wave, when in fullness of time the sea shall be raised once more.” – T. E. Lawrence, Seven Pillars of Wisdom
Our present reality, brought home to us in the cataclysm of September 11 (and last week in Mumbai), is that we are now fighting The First Terrorist War. We had best know it by that name. When we persist in calling it the “war on terror” our implied goal is control and containment; a “management problem”. This is a lethal illusion.
In war the only acceptable outcome is complete victory. A negotiation does not end a war – - as Oslo shows. A partition does not end a war – - as we learned in Vietnam. A cease-fire does not end a war — as we saw in the Gulf War. The Cold War taught us that a wall does not end a war. Only victory, clear and decisive, ends war and creates peace. To date, we have failed to learn this lesson. In life, when a lesson is not learned, it is repeated.
In war, language is a strategic asset. Indeed, we see daily how language,here and abroad, is used to weaken the resolve of the United States. The central problem in calling The First Terrorist War the “war on terror’ is that the phrase soothes us into accepting less than victory; makes us accept war-without-end as a new deal; a new normality where terror is accepted as the status quo. This is the state in which Israel has existed for decades as terrorist violence becomes the scrim screen against which that nation’s life lurches on. Although our present foreign policy may impose this on Israel, a garrison state may, over time, prove less popular here at home. We are not yet the kind of country that easily accepts “The Forever War.”
2. Not Process But Victory Restores Freedom An open-ended “war on terror,” like a ‘war on drugs” invites a continuing erosion of small liberties. As this persists, once rare infringements on liberty become the norm. If it is to be the case that the shoes of all air travelers are to be inspected from now until the last ding-dong of doom, we will all be wearing sandals on airlines for the rest of our days. In this, many are correct to be wary of the long term effects of The Patriot Act. Short of military conquest, a free society does not lose its freedom. Rather, freedom is lost through small infringements on liberty and dignity in the name of security. A perfectly safe state is a state without freedom. As our policies look to sustain rather than defeat our enemies, we are to that degree held hostage to both our policies and our enemies. When war is reduced to a process, that process becomes a self-renewing system in the same way that the “war on drugs” has become institutionalized in our lives; a normal part of the background noise that defines our days. A strategy based on “management,” on diplomacy rather than victory, leads only to the establishment of internal organizations dedicated to their own perpetuation.
During the Civil War and the World Wars of the last century certain freedoms were, at times, curtailed, infringed or suspended. Following victory in 1945 these freedoms not only returned but even greater states of equality and liberty emerged. Had the Second World War ended in a negotiated stand-off at the Rhine and Okinawa, a state of war would have continued for an unknowable time and, in such a state, a less-free United States would have been a certainty. Only the destruction of the Axis powers yielded a peace out of which freedom surged, not only in America but in the lands of her former enemies as well. Victory yields freedom in peace. An armed process yields only stasis.
3. Playing for Time is Playing to Lose Our enemies (many of whom have studied and lived or now live among us) know us better than we are prepared to know either them or ourselves. In order to reform, rearm and launch future attacks they depend upon our belief that we are effectively managing the “war on terror.” At the same time they know that, absent any large attacks, we will grow weary with small but constant losses tallied daily by our “caring and sensitive” media. They depend upon us being lulled back into the state of slumber we enjoyed on September 10th. And we grant their wishes. If they are as wise as they are ruthless, our enemies will continue with their strategies of constant attrition and small, distant attacks. They will, for the present, avoid large shocks to the nation in hopes that the ambitions of our political factions and the intellectual lassitude of our major media will result in the defeat of the present administration in the coming elections.[Check... ] The goal of this strategy is the expectation of a more somnambulant administration less invested in war and more inclined towards the failed policies of appeasement, negotiation and payoff. [... and double check.]
When that happens our present “war on terror” will become even softer; will be said sotto voce if said at all. It will be supplanted by something resembling “a diplomatic initiative to ameliorate terrorism.” In effect we shall find ourselves, as we have so often in the past under liberal guidance, trying to buy out way out of the “war on terror.” Our error will be believing that we are dealing with reasonable extortionists rather than blood enemies. And the measure of our leaders’ cowardice will be how deeply they promote this belief and the false hope it engenders.
4. The Goal of Radical Islam is Our Destruction The consequences of a political and military stand-down would be to allow our enemies the time, basing and mobility to grow in numbers, advance in training, achieve greater tactical position within and about our borders, and acquire ever more sophisticated and powerful weapons. Once they have advanced to the next level of lethality they will strike us again with an effect on our lives, liberties, property and economy more extreme than 9/11. The goals of the Radical Islamic forces arrayed against us are the same as their factotums, the Palestinians, have for Israel. In the jihad against Israel we can see what the Islamic forces have in mind for us: the complete destruction of our systems, the occupation of our land, the usurpation of our government, and the death or conversion of all our citizens. These are the goals of Radical Islam as understood by their fundamentalists and as tolerated by the vast majority of believers.
Much has been written about these goals. Most of our scholars conclude they are only fantasies. A nuclear weapon detonated in Seattle does not care if a fantasy set it off.
Whether the goals of Radical Islam can be achieved is a matter for history to determine. It is the belief that they can be achieved that brings the First Terrorist War upon us. To the extent that we fail to recognize the intensity and commitment of our enemies in this war; to the extent we fail to match their passion for our destruction with our passion for victory; to the extent we cast our lot with our “process” as they cast their lot with their god, we weaken our ability to decisively defeat them.
Ours is a “war on terror” while theirs is a “Jihad.” Our efforts are a process. Theirs are directed by divine mandate. Whether you are of a secular or religious persuasion, it is well to remember that if you go to war you’d best have God on your side.
It is time to put away the feeble designation of our actions as the “war on terror” for it is not “terror” that shooting wars engage. Wars engage combatants, armies, populations, institutions, nations and religions. It is unpopular, almost unsayable, to designate the First Terrorist War as a religious war, yet all serious people know that this is the case and that this, in the end, is what it shall come to.
5. The War of Two Religions Through the violent attacks of a Radical Islam, two religions have been brought into conflict. The first is that of Islam, a faith that at its core requires absolute submission from its adherents, and looks towards the subjugation of the world as its ultimate apotheosis. As the youngest of the monotheistic religions, Islam is at a point in its development that Christianity passed through centuries ago. And it is not with Christianity that Islam is currently at war. Islam is saving that for the mopping up phase of its current campaign. The religion that Islam has engaged is a much younger one, the religion of Freedom. As a religion Freedom has been gaining converts since the success of the American Revolution enabled it to go forth and be preached to the world. Freedom is easily the most popular of the new religions and historically converts nearly 100% of all populations in which it is allowed to take firm root. This is the religion which we have lately brought to Iraq.
The genius of the religion of Freedom is that it allows all other religions, from the venerable to the trivial, to exist without fear of censure or destruction. Indeed, the only thing that the religion of Freedom firmly forbids is the destruction of Freedom itself. “Thou shalt not destroy Freedom” is Freedom’s single commandment. And Freedom has been shown to resist efforts to destroy it in the most ferocious way. It’s enemies would do well to ponder the fate of previous attempts to do so.
On September 11, the agents of Radical Islam began their attempt to destroy Freedom by attacking it at its core. The reaction of Freedom to this assault has been, once you consider the destructive power of the weapons systems it possesses, measured, deliberate and cautious. This is because Freedom, although sorely wounded, does not yet feel that its very existence is threatened. A more serious attack at any time in the future will put paid to that specious notion.
Following a second attack at a level equal to or exceeding September 11, any political opposition to pursuing our enemies with all means at our disposal will be swept off the table. The First Terrorist War will begin in earnest and it will not be a series of small wars with long lead times and a careful consultation of allies. The war will become, virtually overnight, a global war of violent preemption and merciless attack towards the spiritual and geographic centers of our enemy. Arguments revolving around the true meaning of ‘imminent’ will be seen as they are — so much factional prattle. Due to the nature of the enemy, the First Terrorist War will be fought here and there and everywhere. It does not matter when or where the second serious strike on the American homeland takes place, it only matters that on the day after this country will be at war far beyond the current level of conflict.
6. The Unspoken Role of the Ballistic Missile Submarines Since 9/11 there is one element of our strategic forces that has not been discussed. Indeed, you seldom hear a question asked about its status. That element is our fleet of ballistic missile submarines. We currently possess 18 of these “ships,” but a ballistic missile submarine is known not as a ship, but as a “strategic asset.” Each submarine has 24 missile tubes. Each tube holds one missile with from 5-8 nuclear warheads. Each warhead can be targeted separately from the others. The range of these missiles is classified but is thought to be in excess of 6000 nautical miles. The total number of warheads is approximately 50% of US strategic warheads. In sum, any single one of these strategic assets can create the end of a significant portion of the world. At present roughly 40% of this fleet is deployed at unknown and unknowable locations throughout the world’s oceans.
Originally built in order to deter, these strategic assets now assume a more aggressive role in the First Terrorist War. Because of the religious nature of the war, our enemy is unlikely to be deterred by the threat of obliteration. He will view that as highly unlikely since it would, of necessity, involve us in the deaths of large number of civilians in countries known to harbor or be friendly to Islamic terrorists. He believes we would not employ these weapons. This misunderstanding of the history of Western democracies under arms and in a state of total war invites global tragedy.
Nevertheless, the character and goals of our enemy are as fixed as the words of the Koran and he is not to be dissuaded by the threat of annihilation. Only actual annihilation will, in the end, suffice and yield victory. In attempting to achieve this annihilation we can only hope that the political and military situation does not evolve to a level where the submarines would have to play a role.
7. Avoiding the Islamic War by Winning the Terrorist War Because we are large, lumbering, impatient and somnambulant our enemy depends on these factors to defeat us. He uses the opportunities of Freedom in order to make war upon it. He is able to infiltrate our society and institutions. He is able to be infinitely patient. He plans for the decades while we can barely manage to plan from one fiscal quarter to the next. This is a war that will play out over years and will not be resolved in months. In order to gain victory and defeat our enemy we must put in place policies and strategies that cannot easily be altered by reports, polls, or election cycles. In order to achieve this we must be, as we were in the Second World War, united in purpose. It is, sadly, the nature of our society today that September 11th’s unity was fleeting. To find this unity we must suffer through one more horrendous attack the nature and timing of which will not be of our choosing.
Still, as surely as the next attack will come, so will the unity that it creates in its wake and at that point the full power of Freedom’s Arsenal will at last be used to defend it. This is the social and political conundrum that confronts us in the First Terrorist War. And this is why the war must be divorced from ‘process’ and the goal of victory be cut into the stone of the American soul.
During the Second World War, our system, with few alterations, brought us through to a peace in which there were greater freedoms than before the war. Victory validated our way of life. Not only were our freedoms intact in 1945 but they were poised, with the economy, for a great expansion throughout the rest of the century and into this. If you had proposed, in the summer of 1946, that within 50 years all minorities would be fully enfranchised, that women would be fully liberated, that homosexuals would be a dominant force with their enfranchisement only a moment away, and that an African-American could be elected President, you would have been dismissed as a socialist dreamer. And yet, here we are.
The same situation can also be envisioned as the result of our victory in the First Terrorist War at the end of a less-clear but no less threatening passage of arms. But this will only happen if we remain clear about the real nature of the First Terrorist War, and committed to unequivocal victory regardless of the costs in lives and treasure. Only by matching the determination of our enemy to destroy us will we prevail. The only thing that can defeat us are a dull reliance on management, a fascination with process rather than victory and the reluctance to believe the extent to which our enemy desires our annihilation.
Beyond victory in the First Terrorist War is a greater goal. What we must seek is not merely the “control” and “containment” of terror, for terror in this guise cannot be controlled or contained. We must come to the deeper understanding that only a complete victory over the global Radical Islamic forces can prevent the onset of a confrontation more terrible than the current war.
What we must press for in the Terrorist War is a victory so decisive that we can, in the end, avoid the larger war lurking on the not-so-distant horizon – - a true war between civilizations. That war, should it come, will not take the name of The Terrorist War, but of The Islamic War.
The Terrorist War is still a struggle that can be fought and won with conventional means. An Islamic War, should it come, would engulf the world and be anything but conventional.
“Some of the evil of my tale may have been inherent in our circumstances.”T. E. Lawrence, Seven Pillars of Wisdom
“The trouble with Afghanistan is it is full Afghans. The trouble with Iraq is there are not enough Iraqis.”
Arab culture is not like Western culture so their way of making war is different from that of the West. “War without battle” is the preferred mode in the Arab world. That means insurgencies, terrorism and social disruption are where Arabs excel. This makes perfect sense for a culture where blood relations trump all else. Kin based societies are low-trust societies. It is trust and altruism that enable societies to engage in large scale projects like fielding large armies.
Arab societies are low trust societies, which is why they have never been good at the civilization stuff that requires large scale organization. If you can only truly count on blood relatives, scaling beyond 100 or so hands is nearly impossible. Even when you expand the circle of trust beyond second cousins, you limit the number of people capable of working as a unit to a few hundred.
It is why Arab countries are authoritarian. The people will never willingly go along with the leader, if he is not at least from their tribe. That means coercion is the only way to rule. You never hear Arab leaders talking about “their people” with any degree of pride, like you hear in the West. They don’t even have the concept down. Instead, “us” is almost always defined by blood.
The other interesting thing is all of this was predictable. The American military spent billions designing and training a military for Iraq along western lines. The trouble is they left an Arab culture that is still an Arab culture. Eventually you end up with the same old half-assed Arab army with a bunch of American gear they can barely operate. A guy named Norvell B. De Atkine wrote about this 15 years ago in a paper called Why Arabs Lose Wars. While he tried hard to inoculate himself, the author can’t help but notice the reason Arab countries are as we find them is they are full of Arabs. The Z Blog › Ruminations on Iraq
Found at AD: http://americandigest.org/
The Ukraine — Monday Noon Update:
• The Kiev regime announces general mobilization; only 1% to 1.5% of conscripts bother to turn up
• A dozen major cities—pretty much everything southeast of the line that runs from Kharkov to Odessa—are flying the Russian tricolor
• Ukraine’s naval flagship is flying Russia’s naval flag
• The newly appointed head of Ukrainian navy has defected to the Russian side in Crimea within a few hours of being appointed
• Most of the Ukrainian military units in Crimea have gone over to the Russian side voluntarily, without a single shot fired
• Ukrainian troops from Kirov have been ordered to march on Crimea, but have refused to obey (illegal) orders from Kiev
• During the last two weeks of February 143,000 Ukrainian citizens have requested asylum in Russia. - – ol remus and the woodpile report
From AD: http://americandigest.org/
Michael Totten: “Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine Was Easy to Predict”
Crimea has its own flag. It hosts the Russian navy’s Black Sea fleet.
It defiantly refuses to place itself within the Ukrainian time zone. Though it’s dead south of Kiev, it uses the more easterly Moscow time zone instead.,,,, What Moscow cares about in Crimea very much is Sevastopol. That’s where Russia’s Black Sea fleet makes its home. Neither Sean nor I dared take any photographs of it, not even discreetly from the car as we drove past. It’s not a good idea to take pictures of military installations anywhere in the world, especially not Russian military installations. – - Totten @ World Affairs Journal
From AD: http://americandigest.org/
Why is Putin Doing This?
Because he can. That’s it, that’s all you need to know. The situation in Kiev
— in which people representing one half of the country (the Ukrainian-speaking west) took power to some extent at the expense of the Russian-speaking east — created the perfect opportunity for Moscow to divide and conquer. As soon as the revolution in Kiev happened, there was an unhappy rumbling in the Crimea, which has a large Russian population and is home to the Russian Black Sea Fleet. It was a small rumbling, but just big enough for Russia to exploit. And when such an opportunity presents itself, one would be foolish not to take it, especially if one’s name is Vladimir Putin. Putin Declares War on Ukraine. The Why and What Next | New Republic
From AD: http://americandigest.org/
Remember December 7th 1941 – The Attack on Pearl Harbor. A day That Must Live on in Our Collective Memory.
Image from AD: http://americandigest.org/
Image from MM: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/
Image from MM: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/
Image from MM: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/
From MM: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/
The pilot glanced outside his cockpit and froze. He blinked hard and looked again, hoping it was just a mirage. But his co-pilot stared at the same horrible vision.
“My God, this is a nightmare,” the co-pilot said.
“He’s going to destroy us,” the pilot agreed.
The men were looking at a gray German Messerschmitt fighter hovering just three feet off their wingtip. It was five days before Christmas 1943, and the fighter had closed in on their crippled American B-17 bomber for the kill.
The B-17 pilot, Charles Brown, was a 21-year-old West Virginia farm boy on his first combat mission. His bomber had been shot to pieces by swarming fighters, and his plane was alone in the skies above Germany. Half his crew was wounded, and the tail gunner was dead, his blood frozen in icicles over the machine guns.
But when Brown and his co-pilot, Spencer “Pinky” Luke, looked at the fighter pilot again, something odd happened. The German didn’t pull the trigger. He nodded at Brown instead. What happened next was one of the most remarkable acts of chivalry recorded during World War II. Years later, Brown would track down his would-be executioner for a reunion that reduced both men to tears.
Aware that they had no idea where they were going, Franz waved at Charlie to turn 180 degrees. Franz escorted and guided the stricken plane to, and slightly over, the North Sea towards England. He then saluted Charlie Brown and turned away, back to Europe. When Franz landed he told the CO that the plane had been shot down over the sea, and never told the truth to anybody. Charlie Brown and the remains of his crew told all at their briefing, but were ordered never to talk about it.
More than 40 years later, Charlie Brown wanted to find the Luftwaffe pilot who saved the crew. After years of research, Franz was found. He had never talked about the incident, not even at post-war reunions.
They met in the USA at a 379th Bomber Group reunion, together with 25 people who are alive now – all because Franz never fired his guns that day.
When asked why he didn’t shoot them down, Stigler later said, “I didn’t have the heart to finish those brave men. I flew beside them for a long time. They were trying desperately to get home and I was going to let them do that. I could not have shot at them. It would have been the same as shooting at a man in a parachute.”
Both men died in 2008.
90 year old veterans storm the Barrycades
Ethel C. Fenig
The large World War ll Memorial on Washington’s National Mall is a series of outdoor groupings; not encased in a building, it is open in all kinds of weather 24/7/365 for the many tourists, especially the remaining veterans of that devastating war which ended nearly 70 years ago.
The Mall itself has police and some other security, both visible and disguised, but at the beginning of the government shut down the President of the United States, Barack Obama (D), whose own grandfather fought in World War ll, ordered Barrycades and guards around the Memorial, forbidding access. Indeed, there were more guards protecting the Memorial from the aged–and apparently extremely dangerous–veterans than protecting Americans at the presumed peaceful American compound in Benghazi, Libya according to a report in the Washington Examiner.
At the World War II Memorial on The Mall in Washington, where veterans have been staging protests to keep it open, Washington Examiner’s Charlie Spiering reports that at least seven officials were dispatched Wednesday morning to set up a ring of barricades to block tourists from the memorial. That is two more than the State Department had in Benghazi a year ago on the night of the terrorist attack that killed four, including the U.S. ambassador.
However the World War ll veterans, many of whom arrive at the Memorial on Honor Flights, complimentary flights from across the country paid for by grateful citizens, ignored the Barrycades. Having endured the horrors of freezing European winters while bombarded by German soldiers or survived the terrors of a Japanese prison camp in their youth, the now 90 year old plus veterans weren’t about to surrender to a petty Commander in Chief. Leo Shane lll of Stars and Stripes describes their brave resistance.
Wheelchair-bound elderly veterans pushed aside barricades to tour the World War II Memorial Tuesday morning, in defiance of the government shutdown which closed all of the memorials in the nation’s capital.
The four bus loads of veterans — visiting from Mississippi as part of a once-in-a-lifetime Honor Flight tour — ignored National Park Police instructions not to enter the site as lawmakers and tourists cheered them on.
“We didn’t come this far not to get in,” one veteran proclaimed.
The scene was both emotional and comical at once. After it was clear they had lost control of the situation, Park Police officials stood aside, telling press that they had “asked for guidance on how to respond” to the breach of security.
As 80-something veterans slowly walked around the massive war memorial, Park Police stood quietly to the side, advising other tourists that the site was technically still closed. But they made no moves to stop the wishes of the war heroes.
The Republican National Committee has offered to pay for guarding and protecting the Memorial from the vandalizing senior citizen veterans during the government shut down; the Democrats predictably dismissed this as a publicity stunt.
The RNC said that, “when the House Republicans proposed legislation to keep open the nation’s parks and monuments, President Obama promised to veto it.” Here is Chairman Priebus’ statement from the memorial:
“The Obama administration has decided they want to make the government shutdown as painful as possible, even taking the unnecessary step of keeping the Greatest Generation away from a monument built in their honor,” said Chairman Priebus. “That’s not right, and it’s not fair. So the RNC has put aside enough money to hire five security personnel to keep this memorial open to veterans and visitors. Ideally, I’d hope to hire furloughed employees for this job. “Seeing that the DNC has bragged about fundraising off of the government shutdown, I’d invite my counterpart, Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, to join with us in keeping this memorial open. “These brave Americans have sacrificed so much for our country. House Republicans have acted to keep parks and monuments open; Democrats are standing in the way. We want to do what we can, in the face of the intransigence from the White House, to support our veterans. “If the White House complains that such action is not permitted, I’d simply remind them that their unilateral action to give exemptions from Obamacare to big business and their political allies wouldn’t seem permissible either. If they can go to such lengths to protect their political interests, surely they can do something to support the interests of those who fought in World War II.”
Benefiting from the veterans’ sacrifices, another group of people, ostensibly furloughed federal government employees, added to the surreal scene. Patrick Poole of PJ Tatler discovered some interesting information about these alleged protesters.
After about an hour, about 20 protesters arrived on the scene chanting “Boehner, get us back to work” and claiming they were federal employees furloughed because of the shutdown.
In the video below these protesters were marching towards the press gaggle and I was asking them to show their federal IDs to prove they were in fact federal workers. No one wore their federal ID and none would provide it to prove their claim
UPDATE: Huffington Post reporter Arthur Delaney states that the protest was organized by a group called “Good Jobs Nation,” not SEIU as I previously reported, and that, remarkably, the protesters weren’t even federal employees at all but individuals who WORK in federal buildings affected by the shutdown..
Then, remarkably, a guy carrying a sign passed by wearing a McDonald’s employee shirt, which I noted. I then began asking them how much they had been paid to protest, at which point the guy wearing the McDonald’s shirt came back and admitted he had been paid $15.
About a minute later a protest organizer ran up to me telling me that the man in question is a contractor working at the McDonald’s in a Smithsonian Museum — a claim she made no effort to prove. The same story was told to Jake Tapper at CNN who was on the scene and made the same inquiry.
And yet that doesn’t explain why he was paid $15 to attend a protest targeting our nation’s honored military veterans.
Hmmm, $15 an hour is well above the minimum wage. So perhaps the government shut down is helping private businesses.
As of now, the government remains shut down, many people still can’t get the Obamacare they’re forced to purchase and yet, somehow, the sun still rose over Washington DC this morning.
Egypt Doing What United States and Europe Won’t Do – Crush Political islam (Actually political and religious islam are the same)
CAIRO (Reuters) – Egyptian authorities will bar 55,000 unlicensed clerics from preaching in mosques in the latest move against sympathisers of deposed Islamist President Mohamed Mursi, the minister of religious endowments said on Tuesday.
Egyptian authorities have been cracking down on Mursi’s Muslim Brotherhood since the army toppled him on July 3 following mass protests against his rule.
Minister of Endowments Mohamed Mokhtar Gomaa said the clerics lack licenses to preach and were considered to be fundamentalist and a threat to the Egypt’s security.
The ban will mainly target small unlicensed mosques or random praying areas. The idea is to spread a moderate message of Islam and keep Egyptians away from radical ideas.
“The decision is only meant to legalise the preaching process during Fridays’ mass prayers and make only those authorised to do it, do it, Gomaa told Reuters.
Authorities moved to crush the Brotherhood following the overthrow of Mursi, Egypt’s first democratically leader. More than 2,000 Islamist activists have been arrested and most of the Brotherhood’s leaders, including Mursi, jailed on charges of inciting or taking part in violence. Some have also been accused of terrorism or murder.
From WZ: http://weaselzippers.us/
In order to understand things in the Middle East, it is necessary to look back in time . . . a VERY long way back in time. I once pointed out to a group of Arabs, “Your people are still fighting the Crusades.” Yes, of course, they all agreed. “In America, people don’t even know what the Crusades ARE!”
Let us study the three key pieces to the puzzle that is the Middle East;
Egypt, Iraq and Syria.
Egypt is the most populous of the Arab countries, and the most cosmopolitan. Egypt has had extensive interaction with the West since before the days of the Roman Empire. Cleopatra was actually the last of the Greek Ptolemaic dynasty, which ruled over Egypt for 275 years, from 305 BC to 30 BC. Egypt was the bread basket of the Roman Empire.
Cairo, Soliman Pasha Square, circa 1941
Modern Egyptians are well aware of their heritage, and they regard the oil-rich Gulf Arabs a bunch of hick hayseeds. The fact that these provincials are sitting on top of a giant underground puddle of oil just adds to the Egyptians ire.
Iraq is the seat of the ancient Arab Caliphate. The city of Baghdad was a center of learning during the Islamic Golden Age, 8th to 9th centuries. Back when London was still a swamp, Arab intellectuals in Baghdad were developing the sciences of astronomy, mathematics and the foundations of modern medicine.
The first operation using anaesthetic was performed by an Arab. While our ancestors were burning libraries during the mass-hysteria that was the Dark Ages, it was the Arabs who preserved the writings of Aristotle, Thucydides, Homer, Virgil, Ovid, and countless others.
Syria is the traditional center of the Arab culture; the essence of Syrian society is a complex geometric Arabesque pattern of interwoven of sects and tribes and philosophies and arts and cults. Syria is strategically located between Turkey, Lebanon, Israel and Iraq.
Damascus, circa 1511
Damascus is the oldest continually inhabited city in the world, situated across ancient trade routes and roads that radiate out from it like the spokes of a wagon wheel. The Apostle Paul had his vision on the road to Damascus. Jesus was crucified at the base of a hill in Jerusalem – Golgotha, which means The Skull – at a crossroads on the Damascus Road, directly across the street from what is now Jerusalem’s Damascus Gate.
The Modern Era
During World War I, the successful campaign to topple the Ottoman Turks involved Field Marshall Allenby’s push up through the Holy Land to take Damascus. Once he held Damascus, he owned the Middle East and all the oil in it.
Following the downfall of the Ottoman Empire, the English and the French carved up the Middle East. The English got Iraq and all its oil, while the French established the Mandate of Syria. Following the Roman tradition of ‘Divide and Conquer’ the French showed favor to the minority Alawite tribe in their colonial administration and the armed forces.
French Foreign Legion soldiers at their outpost at Homs, Syria, 1940
The Alawites were able to hold on to this unbalanced power. Since Hafez al-Assad took power in 1970, Alawite Assad family has dominated the government. During the Islamic uprising in Syria in the ’70s and ’80s, this establishment came under tremendous pressure. The conflict continues today as a function of the Syrian civil war.
In the 1950s a charismatic leader emerged in Egypt; Gamal Abdul Nasser. He threw out the decadent King Farouk, and began an effort to modernize Arab society. Nasser’s vision included a united Arab nation, a United States of Arabs, as it were. What he accomplished was the United Arab Republic (UAR; Arabic: الجمهورية العربية المتحدة al-Ǧumhūriyyah al-ʿArabiyyah al-Muttaḥidah) a short-lived political union between Egypt and Syria that began in 1958 and existed until 1961, when Syria seceded from the union. Egypt continued to be known officially as the “United Arab Republic” until 1971. The UAR flag was horizontal red, white, and black bands with two stars to represent the two parts.
This continues to be the flag of Syria. In 1963, Iraq adopted a flag that was similar but with three stars, representing the hope that Iraq would join the UAR.
The three countries collaborated in strategic planning against Israel resulting in the Six Day War, a decisive victory for Israel due to Israel’s pre-emptive strikes against Egypt and Syria. As previously discussed, the Arabs view Israel as the modern incarnation of the old Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem and Crusader holdings Antioch and Tripoli – Western footholds in their lands. They eventually crushed the Crusaders and ran them into the sea, and it is their intent to do the same thing to the modern State of Israel.
The Post-Modern Era
Israeli Paratroopers on the Temple Mount during the Liberation of Jerusalem, June 1967
This epoch of the Middle East is punctuated by the Six Day War of Israel versus the forces of Egypt, Syria, Iraq and Jordan. Decisive win: Israel. Subsequent campaigns of this conflict include the ’73 Yom Kippur War – another decisive Israeli win – the First Gulf War that featured the liberation of Kuwait and limited excursion into Iraq; a brief but deadly adventure in Somalia; numerous terrorist atrocities in Israel, terrorist operations against our forces in Lebanon ’83, Saudi Arabia ’96 and USS Cole October in Yemen ’00.
When we toppled Saddam Hussein in ’03 what many feared has come to be; Saddam’s secular Ba’athist regime in Iraq was a stabilizing factor in a powder keg neighborhood. Hindsight is twenty-twenty; it seems Saddam played a shell game with the West regarding the weapons of mass destruction issue. It was critical to his hold on power that his enemies – notably the Iranians – believed he had chemical weapons. At one point he did; we know this because he used them on the Kurds, but by the time we showed up they were for the most part gone.
Where did Saddam’s chemical weapons go? It’s not easy to dispose of chemical weapons and there certainly is no evidence of a disposal program in Iraq. The obvious answer is to look to Syria; Iraq’s Ba’athist co-regime.
What if Al-Qaeda set off the chemical weapons on their own people? Think about it. Why would Basher Assad gas his own people? What’s in it for him? On the other hand, al Qaeda nerve gasses their own people to create exactly what is happening; the U.S. ends up mobilizing against Assad, in other words on the same side as “the rebels”.
Think about it. Last summer the Syrian rebels overran and controlled a government base that had chemical weapons. Leon Panetta admitted that chemical weapons may have fallen into the hands of rebel forces i.e. Al-Qaeda.
“If Barack Obama decides to attack the Syrian regime, he has ensured – for the very first time in history – that the United States will be on the same side as Al-Qaeda.” Journalist Robert Fisk
This penultimate statement summarizes the current dilemma; Assad is a pig and a bloodsoaked dictator thug, but the rebels that oppose him are co-opted by Islamic Fundamentalist terrorists of the worst kind: al Qaeda. If we are to make missile strikes against Assad, we will essentially be siding with al Qaeda – politics makes strange bedfellows but this is beyond ridiculous.
In the quickening march to madness for military action in Syria, have we heard anything about a possible objective, or perhaps a mission statement? And has anybody at the highest levels given any consideration whatsoever to the international lineup out there? On the one hand we have the United States AND . . . nobody else. No Brits, no French, no Germans, no Spaniards, no Italians, no Canadians, no Australians, no “Coalition of the Willing” . . . nobody.
On the other hand, Assad has the Russians, the Chinese, the Iranians and Hezbollah on his side. He has at least 200 Scuds – which we must assume are chemical-tipped – and he has stated that if he is attacked by the United States he will launch them on Israel. The Iranians have their missile forces and they are willing to follow suit. The Israelis will not wait for this to happen – they will take preemptive action.
To me this sounds like a Major League shitstorm waiting to happen. We are already stretched to the breaking point, in debt up to our eyeballs, and there is nothing to be gained – certainly no threat to our national security – by engaging in a totally pointless, unnecessary military adventure. Assad knows we cannot take him out without “boots on the ground”, and nobody believes Obama is willing to go that far.
Choose your battles – that’s Sun Tzu 101, People . . .
Slouching towards Armageddon
I see the Obama “reset” is going so swimmingly that the president is now threatening to go to war against a dictator who gassed his own people. Don’t worry, this isn’t anything like the dictator who gassed his own people that the discredited warmonger Bush spent 2002 and early 2003 staggering ever more punchily around the country inveighing against. The 2003 dictator who gassed his own people was the leader of the Baath Party of Iraq. The 2013 dictator who gassed his own people is the leader of the Baath Party of Syria. Whole other ball of wax. The administration’s ingenious plan is to lose this war in far less time than we usually take. In the unimprovable formulation of an unnamed official speaking to the Los Angeles Times, the White House is carefully calibrating a military action “just muscular enough not to get mocked.”
The problem with the American way of war is that, technologically, it can’t lose, but, in every other sense, it can’t win. No one in his right mind wants to get into a tank battle or a naval bombardment with the guys responsible for over 40 percent of the planet’s military expenditures. Which is why these days there aren’t a lot of tank battles. The consummate interventionist Robert Kagan wrote in his recent book that the American military “remains unmatched.” It’s unmatched in the sense that the only guy in town with a tennis racket isn’t going to be playing a lot of tennis matches. But the object of war, in Liddell Hart’s famous distillation, is not to destroy the enemy’s tanks (or Russian helicopters) but his will. And on that front America loses, always. The “unmatched” superpower cannot impose its will on Kabul kleptocrats, Pashtun goatherds, Egyptian generals, or Benghazi militia. There is no reason to believe Syria would be an exception to this rule. America’s inability to win ought to be a burning national question, but it’s not even being asked.
Making it even more complicated is that with Syria, we don’t even know what our “will” is. All we really know is that, as usual, pResident Gutsy Call no doubt feels it’s something that we need to be apologizing for.
It does mark another historic first for him, though: this will be the first time the country has been dragged into war merely to keep the Dimwit In Chief from looking bad because he couldn’t stop his big mouth from writing checks his dumb ass couldn’t cash.
What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.
What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income — to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression. That’s what I’m opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics. Now let me be clear — I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity. He’s a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.
But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history. I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaida. I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars.
Just one of many such quotes popping up all over from various double-dealing, opportunistic, fork-tongued liberals. And lest we forget:
Remember how Barack Obama was going to unite the world and build coalitions and finally respect the authority of the UN?
Remember how going it alone in matters of war used to be a bad thing, even when you went it alone in a coalition of 40 countries?
Well, hey, why should they? How does that help them do their job, which is propping up their stumbling, bumbling Dreamy Dreamy Dreamboat?
From Cold Fury: http://coldfury.com/2013/08/31/slouching-towards-armageddon/
SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 1, 2013
The death and destruction of the Syrian Civil War is beyond disturbing. There is a humanitarian crisis of Biblical proportions happening on all sides of the Syrian borders as combat drives hundreds of thousands of refugees into sprawling camps in Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey. International intervention – whether in the name of peacekeeping or peace enforcement – or even a simple no-fly zone such as we imposed in Libya during the toppling of Ghaddafi, is challenging due to the fact that there are no good guys here, and Assad’s anti-aircraft defenses are formidible.
On the one hand we have Assad, who despite Liberal endorsement has shown himself to be a ruthless thug dictator, a butcher.
Democrats never met a dictator they didn’t fall in love with.
As recently as February 2011, at the cusp of the Arab Spring, Vogue magazine published an article which was no less than a slobbering tongue-bath of admiration for the Assad family focusing on the wife of the Butcher of Damascus.
And on the other hand there are the Syrian rebels, co-opted by the Muslim Brotherhood and al Qaeda. They have proven willing to conduct ruthless war crimes to further their agenda.
In order to understand the conflict in Syria, it is necessary to understand the nature of tribal war. As the traditional center of Arab culture, Syria is of course a tribal society, led by the Assad family of the Alawite tribe. When a tribal society devolves into civil war, the ruling tribe will fight tooth and nail to remain in place, because the alternative is genocide.
This explains the savagery we are seeing in Syria. Assad and his side are fighting for more than to just remain in power; they are fighting for their families lives, the lives of their extended families, their towns, villages, farms and land holdings, and for the very existence of the Alawite way of life.
The humanitarian crisis alone is reason for some kind of international role. On top of that, the stability of the region is at risk. If Syria falls to al Qaeda, Jordan is next. And yet the dilemma remains; whose side to take? In other words, there simply are no good guys in this mess.
Out of some kind of desperate sentiment to impose constraint on Assad, President Obama pronounced his famous “red line”: the use of chemical weapons would be the trigger for US military intervention against the Assad regime. The rebels heard him say it, of course. In the wake of the Damascus chemical attacks of 21 August, there remains uncertainty regarding who actually conducted the attacks.
In other words, are the rebels capable of releasing chemical weapons on their own people, in order to bring international military force against the dictator Assad’s forces?
Secretary of State John Kerry referenced the above photograph when making his speech yesterday, trying to drive home how awful the Syrian chemical attack was as he tried to convince us why we should go to war. One problem. The picture isn’t even from Syria. It’s from Iraq in 2003. The photographer, Marco di Lauro, said he nearly “fell off his chair” when he saw it was being used to promote a war in Syria.
The rules of carrying a firearm include: you NEVER draw the weapon unless you fully intend to use deadly force. Obama displayed his weaponry when he tossed his “red line” out there. Somebody called him on it, and now it looks like the President of the United States has been called on a bluff.
Planning 101 demands that for any endeavor, there should be a quantifiable objective. So far I haven’t heard discussion of any possible objectives in Syria. Apparently there are NO objectives to an internationalist military intervention in Syria – or that any desirable outcome would be extremely costly – our usual allies the British and the French are in no hurry to wade into this briar patch.
The foundation of US foreign policy is Teddy Roosevelt’s doctrine: “Walk softly and carry a big stick,” not “Shoot your mouth off and then back down when the bad guys call you out.” That’s three big mistakes by Mr. Barack Hussein Obama.
Amateur hour, if you ask me.
- STORMBRINGER SENDS at: http://seanlinnane.blogspot.com/
NoisyRoom.net By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton
Knowing that we would wind up here does not take a crystal ball. Many have predicted just this scenario, including myself. War is the ultimate solution of leaders who find themselves in a variety of rock and hard place situations. And Barack Obama has stuffed America in the hardest place of all, sealed us in with nuclear weapons and has lit a very short fuse.
Let’s start with the coming race war that the progressives at home are stoking for all they are worth. You saw the ginned up fiasco of the Zimmerman case where Obama claimed that Trayvon Martin could have been his son and then claimed he actually could have been Trayvon Martin — thereby personalizing the racial conflict out of a non-existent racial confrontation. Then we had the Australian, Chris Lane, being shot in the back while jogging last week by three teenagers – 2 black, one mixed. We had a WWII vet named Shorty (88 years-old) beaten to death with flashlights by 2 young black men in Spokane, Washington. Someone was set on fire in a parking lot in Memphis, Tennessee. A young white boy was savagely beaten on a school bus by several black kids and the list goes on and on. This doesn’t begin to list what has been happening for a while now with black on white crime. All of this can be laid directly at the feet of Barack Obama, Eric Holder, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Oprah Winfrey and a whole raft of race baiters who have an agenda that envisions race riots in the streets and a new order being born in America.
An employee named Ayo Kimathi, who is the Acquisitions Officer at ICE for the Department of Homeland Security, has a hate-filled, racially motivated site named War on the Horizon that talks about the coming race war. His handle is ‘Irritated Genie.’ The site had to be approved by DHS and the employee has been with the government agency since 2009. He is now on paid leave, which means nothing. It means at some point they will quietly bring this evil race monger back like nothing ever happened. The best part is that this person is the one who ordered ammo and guns for the DHS.
According to reports, this guy is unstable and everyone in the office is afraid of him. He calls President Obama a “treasonous mulatto scum dweller” and rants about whites and their ”effeminization of the black male.”
From The Blaze:
“The 21st century will either mark the return of Black resistance to white domination or global white-on-Black genocide leading to our complete extinction,” the website declares. “Warfare is eminent, and in order for Black people to survive the 21st century, we are going to have to kill a lot of whites – more than our christian hearts can possibly count.”
On its main page, War on the Horizon says preparing for racial warfare includes “intellectual, spiritual, psychological, and physical preparation for a global clash that will mean the end of white rule on this planet or the end of the Black Race as we know it. ”
And there is a lot more hate on this site to go around:
Under the June 2010 article “Goodbye Uncle Tom,” the website lists Rev. Al Sharpton, a “sadistic political white-sex offender…who advocates ‘homosexuality’ among Black people”; Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and former Secretary of State Colin (spelled “Colon”) Powell who will “indirectly assist in the genocide of Black people; Oprah Winfrey, a “wealthy lesbian mammy” who does “everything in her power to assist whites in destroying strong Black manhood; as well as “all rappers,” “all political homos” and “all promoters and supporters of interracial dating/marriage/sex.”
“We must become militant, hostile, violent, and deadly to those individuals and groups in our community who don’t comply to Black decency and Race First standards. We cannot continue to be Black people with white behavior. – Black Afrikans Only!” the website states. “…Once we have largely purged our Race of its Race traitors, war with our natural enemy, the white Race, will intensify and become the single most powerful motivating force in the lives of Afrikan people worldwide.”
Why would you knowingly have someone like this in a government agency with the responsibility and power this guy had? He has been with them four years and the site was approved — so regardless of what they claim, they knew of his inclinations. I would put forth that this is just the kind of individual they want around — one who is extreme and wants violence. One who hates America in general. The fact that he hates most African Americans as well is just a minor annoyance or a contrivance. This is what we have controlling our country now. We have radical Islamists, black power racists, progressives, Marxists, communists and every imaginable corrupt, evil recruit they can find. America has gone to the dark side and we are fighting in the shade. War is coming to America’s streets and neighborhoods and our leaders are the delivery boys.
On to the war abroad…
By now everyone has heard of the supposed chemical attack by Assad in Syria on his own people. I have seen reports of up to 355 dead with 3600 sickened — many being women and children. If true, that is horrific. But there is serious doubt about it being true. The last reported chemical attack turned out to be false and numerous experts claim this one is too.
I have no love of Assad — he’s an evil man, heading an evil regime. But the rebels are composed of al Qaida and the Muslim Brotherhood and are every bit as evil. Much the same can be said of our current government as well. They want this war; it creates worldwide chaos that they desperately need to reset a looted and plundered monetary system and to reform governments closer to their heart’s desire. I’m not the only one who sees this either. From Michael Rivero:
1. Why would Syria’s Assad invite United Nations chemical weapons inspectors to Syria, then launch a chemical weapons attack against women and children on the very day they arrive, just miles from where they are staying?
2. If Assad were going to use chemical weapons, wouldn’t he use them against the hired mercenary army trying to oust him? What does he gain attacking women and children? Nothing! The gain is all on the side of the US Government desperate to get the war agenda going again.
As I type these words, US trained and equipped forces are already across the border into Syria, and US naval forces are sailing into position to launch a massive cruise missile attack into Syria that will surely kill more Syrians than were claimed to have died in the chemical attack.
And he is right. I would suggest there is a strong possibility here of a set-up and an agenda for a much needed war. I would not put it past Assad to use chemical weapons, but it looks too pat and doesn’t make sense. I have seen on the web many, many pictures of dead children from the chemical attacks playing on the sympathies of the world. This is an old, tried and true technique of garnering sympathy in order to do unspeakable things.
Just to be clear, these are the rebels we are backing — from The Blaze (warning: graphic):
Make no mistake, employing the Doctrine of Responsibility to Protect, we are readying for an attack on Syria. Samantha Power, who missed the last UN meeting, was resting up for the conflict ahead. We are moving our warships closer to Syria in preparation for missile attacks when Obama gives his blessing.
Iran and Syria are warning that if we attack Syria, it will set the whole Middle East on fire. I fear that is true. Should we attack Syria, by proxy, we will be attacking Iran and Russia. Qatar and Saudi Arabia will back the US, but only so far and for so long. Hello all-out World War III. China will either wait to pick up the pieces or back Russia. Obama has gutted and severely weakened our military — a full-scale war will cause a further financial collapse in the US and the odds of us prevailing are very poor. Americans overwhelmingly oppose attacking Syria, not that it matters to our Islamist-in-Chief.
Now Britain and France are beating the war drums along with the US. They believe intervening in the Middle East and setting it on fire will cure the world’s economic woes. They have severely underestimated the Jihadists and the plans that Russia has set in motion. Russia must be over the moon with this because it gives them leeway to further their capture of the Middle Eastern territories for land, power, wealth and resources. And as an added bennie, they think they may rid themselves of the Jews and America. Maybe America, never the Jews. Russia is rising in the Middle East and making alliances in the void of leadership America is leaving behind. Already they have wooed Egypt — China is doing the same thing across the planet. Obama wants this — he can destroy America while credibly denying and blaming others. It’s the progressive way.
This all has the feel of the amateur video used as an excuse for Benghazi — it doesn’t pass the smell test. It’s the same players and the same board. Do you think our leaders really give a crap about 355 people supposedly dead in Syria? Come on! Thousands have died. It is way too convenient an excuse to go to war. So, while we point the finger at Assad and ready for war, Americans are besieged from every side with chaos and evil at home, so much so they don’t know what to do or what to think. Just the way Obama wants it.
If this war unfolds (as it will almost assuredly do), tighten your belts. Forget $10 a gallon gas, you’ll be lucky to get gas. And food? I hope you have some. Please prepare now. Things are about to get very interesting in a bad way. Israel has their finger on the ‘trigger’ and they won’t hesitate to defend themselves. We better get ready to defend ourselves as well. A pale horse brings war at home and abroad.
Update: Note — Michael Rivero’s views are not ones I would normally agree with. It has been brought to my attention that he is a Truther and a propagandist for Iran. I do not know if that is correct, but if it is, those are views I ardently oppose. I stand by his points though in this case – they are legitimate.
From Trevor Loudon: http://www.trevorloudon.com/
Deputy Press Secretary Cracks Joke About Obama’s Muslim Brotherhood Allies Burning Churches in Egypt
Press secretary Josh Earnest was asked by Fox News’ correspondent, Ed Henry, if President Barack Obama has a “red line” beyond which he would act against Muslim attacks on Egyptian Christians.
“Well, I didn’t bring my red pen out with me today,” Earnest joked.
Earnest. Even their names are straight out of Orwell.
After making his joke, Earnest said the administration is “outraged… and concerned” about the Muslim attacks on almost 100 churches, monasteries, orphanages and other marked Christian sites. Many Christians’ shops and homes have also been looted and burned by mobs.
But Earnest didn’t name or criticize the attackers, even though he did charge the military with perpetrating “violence… against peaceful protestors.”
The military is of course the enemy of the Islamic maniacs (a.k.a. “peaceful protesters”) who have been burning the churches and who are favored by our nakedly malevolent leftist government.
On tips from Byron, Clingtomyguns, and St. Gilbert.
From Moonbattery: http://moonbattery.com/
World War II in Pictures. Impressive collection of pictures from 20 different phases of World War II.
Find them all here:
Russia schooling the West on jihad. It would be comical if it weren’t so tragic and deadly.
He is right. They have the same ideology, the same belief system, the same goals. Obama must know this. And he must not care. “Vladimir Putin tells Cameron at G8: ‘Syrian rebels are the same as those who killed Lee Rigby,’” by Joe Churcher for the Belfast Telegraph, June 18:
Arming the Syrian rebels could deliver weapons into the hands of the sort of people who killed Drummer Lee Rigby, Vladimir Putin warned.The Russian president drew a direct parallel with the “violent assassination” of the soldier in Woolwich as he set out his hostility to Western efforts to aid the opposition to Bashar Assad’s regime.
Mr Putin spoke out at a press conference marking the close of the G8 summit in Northern Ireland which produced a joint position from world leaders that could pave the way for a peace conference to find a way out of the deadly struggle for control of the Middle Eastern country.
Resistance from Russia meant the final statement made no reference to Assad’s future.
But Mr Putin insisted that he had not been isolated in the talks with the other seven leaders – claiming that some agreed with him that there was not yet proof the regime had used chemical weapons.
It was the discovery of what the US said was convincing evidence that led President Barack Obama to say Washington could arm the rebels.
Britain and France – both in the G8 – led efforts to lift an EU arms embargo but Prime Minister David Cameron insists no decision to do so has been taken amid a political backlash at Westminster against any such escalation of British involvement.
Asked about the issue, Mr Putin, speaking through an interpreter, defended his decision to continue supplying weapons to the regime, which he said was no more than completing legal contracts.
And in a direct message to Mr Cameron, he added: “Recently the British people suffered a huge loss. It was a tragedy next to his barracks on the streets of London. A violent assassination, a very brutal killing of a British serviceman.
“Clearly the opposition is not composed all of this but many of them are exactly the same as the ones who perpetrated the killing in London.
“If we equip these people, if we arm them what is going to control and verify who is going to have these weapons, including in Europe as well.
“So we call all our partners, before making this dangerous step, think about it very carefully.”
No chance of that.
From Atlas Shrugs: http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/
CAIR cries Islamophobia in 3… 2… 1.
Via The Hill:
Former GOP vice presidential candidate and Alaska governor Sarah Palin told a Washington audience Saturday that the U.S. should not get involved in the Syrian civil war.
Palin argued that the U.S. should not intervene in any Middle East conflict as long as President Obama remains in office.
“Until we have a commander in chief who knows what he is doing….let Allah sort it out!” she told the Faith and Freedom Coalition.
The statement shows how far Palin has drifted from former running mate Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who is the chief Senate proponent of U.S. military action to help the Syrian rebels.
This week, the White House announced it had concluded that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad had used chemical weapons against the rebels, thereby crossing a “red line.” Obama has now decided to arm select elements of the Syrian rebellion.
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
FORT STEWART, Ga. – The bond between a military police and his military working dog is very special. This bond is built upon a high level of trust and companionship. When joined together, they become a working team that stretch beyond the battlefield.
KHanrahan (h/t Savage) When an MP loses the other half of his working team on the battlefield, it can be very hard to deal with.
On March 11, Staff Sgt. Bak, a military working dog, along with his handler, Sgt. Marel Molina, both assigned to the 93rd Military Working Dog Detachment, 385th Military Police Battalion, 16th Military Police Brigade, were injured by enemy gunfire in a blue-on-green attack. Bak passed later that day during surgery from wounds he received.
On May 14, the Fort Stewart community paid tribute to Bak at a Memorial Ceremony held at the MWD Kennels at Wright Army Airfield.
There was nothing better than seeing those Afghan mountain peaks slowly turning from brown to white. It seemed that, as the snow melted away, US Army Sergeant Marel Molina and his Military Working Dog Bak’s time remaining in Afghanistan withered away day by day.
But Sergeant Molina couldn’t think about going home today, even though he was a short two months away. He had work to do.
No, that wasn’t right. He and MWD Bak had work to do.
Keeping his Green Beret team alive was hard work.
Sergeant Molina listened intently as Captain Pedersen, his Green Beret Alpha Team leader, discussed that day’s mission with the Afghan local policemen. But Molina barely understood a word of their exchange.
He was always impressed that many of these Green Berets could speak Pashtun, one of the predominant languages in Afghanistan.
Looking over his shoulder he spied the 100-pound working dog lying in the back of the Razor, his thick mahogany coat with black tipping made him a picture-perfect German shepherd, fit for the movies. The dog dozed in and out of wakefulness, but Sergeant Molina knew in a snap of his fingers MWD Bak would be focused on one thing—finding buried explosives.
The Green Beret team knew this as well. MWD Bak had already used his extraordinary explosive-sniffing skills to unearth six improvised explosives that surely would have wiped out the entire team by now.
His Majesty MWD Bak could lounge anywhere he wanted. It didn’t matter when, where, or with whom. The three-year-old shepherd was always ready for duty.
Sergeant Molina scanned the group of Afghan local policemen and thought he recognized a few of them. The Green Berets frequently patrolled with the local men, trained with them, and tried to assist them in policing their country. But it was hard to keep them all straight with their constant turnover.
The Afghan men were a ragtag bunch with look-alike uniforms in varying states, pockets and pouches stuffed with who knew what, in gear strapped to their chests that included an American AK-47.
Today for patrol, their motley crew consisted of a squad on infantry from the 3rd Infantry Division, a handful of Green Berets, Sergeant Molina, and MWD Bak. Captain Pedersen shook the hand of the Afghan local policemen’s leader and turned to brief the Americans. Then all hell broke loose. Gunfire, screaming, and pleas for help filled the air.
An Afghan local policeman turned his AK-47 on the group and shot wildly into the group of Americans. Sergeant Molina felt something slice through the left side of his neck. He dropped to the ground next to Captain Pedersen.
Pedersenwas lifeless, shot through the head. The man never stood a chance. The same bullet that had ripped through Pedersen’s head was the one that ripped through Sergeant Molina’s neck. It was ironic to think that being shot through the neck was lucky. But in Afghanistan everything is relative.
In seconds the shooting was over and the rogue Afghan local policeman was gunned down by a Green Beret. But not before the policeman had injured a handful of American soldiers, killed Pedersen, and members of the infantry squad participating in that day’s mission.
Blood flowed from Sergeant Molina’s neck, but he couldn’t feel the pain yet. He stood up and his knee felt like he had hit it on a rock or gotten a “charlie horse.” Then he saw blood dripping from his right knee and a hole in his pants.
Adrenaline rushed through his body as he wobbled over to a fallen comrade and began to conduct first aide on the fallen man. The soldier was a lot worse than Molina. He would be lucky to make it.
Once a medic relieved him, Molina pulled security on the other Afghan policeman and then assisted in disarming them. With the threat neutralized and the adrenaline subsiding, Sergeant Molina realized he hadn’t heard from MWD Bak.
Initially when Molina had dropped to the ground he had seen Bak lying calmly on the Razorvehicle. The dog had nerves of steel; he had been hit before with shrapnel from a rocket-propelled grenade and barely whimpered. “Bak, come here boy.” A spike of fear shot through his body when Bak didn’t move.
He rushed to his dog and panic ripped through him as he realized Bak’s once mahogany hind legs were wet and dark with his own blood.
“Medic,” screamed Molina as he ripped open a box of field bandages and tried to locate the entrance wound. As he touched Bak, the dog’s eyes fluttered and Molina knew he was losing consciousness. He would go into shock next. The medic arrived and handed a catheter to Molina who inserted it into Bak’s leg. The dog needed fluids immediately.
“It’s all right buddy, Daddy is right here, pal. You’re going to be fine,” said Molina as he watched his battle buddy gasp for air. Molina knew the dog had internal bleeding. Molina wondered what that bullet had ripped through inside Bak.
The MEDVAC chopper landed and loaded them all. Molina lay by Bak’s side the entire time. Sometime during the flight Molina began losing consciousness, but he kept an arm around Bak, reassuring him that everything would be all right, praying that everything would be all right. But it wasn’t.
As Molina lay in a hospital bed at Bagram Airbase awaiting surgery, the veterinarian came in with a somber face. Tears streamed down Molina’s cheeks. He already knew what was the veterinarian was going to say. “I’m sorry, Sergeant, but Bak bled out internally. He’s left us.” They had been so close to going home. Now only one would go.
Sergeant Marel Molina received lifesaving surgery at Bagram Airbase Afghanistan, was evavced to Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany and then to Walter Reed Hospital in Washington, DC. He has moved from crutches, to a cane, to walking on his own. He has high hopes for being completely off aids soon and is very close to a full recovery.
Physically he will heal, but mentally he will never be the same. He will never forget his battle buddy Military Working Dog Bak and the images of him lying on that chopper, bleeding out, and Molina powerless to help him.
Bak wasn’t a piece of equipment, and he wasn’t just a dog, Military Working Dog Bak was a fellow soldier, who died fighting for this country. Sergeant Molina and many other soldiers are alive today because of their fellow soldier, Military Working Dog Bak.
As a country we celebrate Memorial Day to remember the men and women who fought and died for this country. But for those that fought beside them, we also think of our four-legged soldiers who made the ultimate sacrifice.
Please remember Military Working Dog Bak and the others like him who made the ultimate sacrifice for our freedom.
Obama Ignores That This War Between Civilized People and Barbaric islam Has Been Going on For Centuries
By Alan Caruba
“More than dumping the war of words, the White House signed off on a new counterterrorism strategy that amounted to running away from Iraq and Afghanistan as quickly as possible and limiting the offensive campaign to whacking top-level al Qaeda with drone strikes”, noting that “The new strategy was bound to fail, fighting the last war while al Qaeda evolved into a global insurgency that has spread from Pakistan to Nigeria.”