Troops in Africa: Is this why we have a military?

In March, the United States plans to send elements of the Second Brigade, First Infantry Division, to Africa (under AFRICOM) to conduct over a hundred different missions in 34 nations, such as humanitarian assistance, disaster relief, and training indigenous forces.  (source: Washington Times) The Second Brigade is a heavy brigade equipped with tanks, infantry fighting vehicles, and self-propelled artillery, mind you, not a light infantry brigade or Special Forces unit.  As a result of the deployment, their training on these systems in a wartime scenario will most likely suffer.

We are also a bankrupt nation, yet spending millions deploying portions of our military to areas that are not critical to our national security.  Sounds to me like we may have found a portion of the national budget we can cut if our military has nothing better to do than hand out humanitarian assistance and wait for natural disasters in some far off land.

Our tax dollars need to instead be spent on our military defense, not on ambiguous blanket missions of doing everything except the defense of our nation.  We need to get ourselves out of this recession/depression first before we should even consider doing a mission like that of the 2nd Brigade in Africa.  The national debt is the biggest threat to our national security, not some non-existent disaster in Africa.

We must ask ourselves: Are the Armed Forces of the United States serving as the military force of the United Nations/World Government, or are they protecting America and its citizens?

As an organization, the US military is slowly being forced to reject its original foundation of the Christian faith and in its place accept humanism, as evidenced by the removal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy allowing for open homosexual behavior in the ranks.  Even the mere presence of religion in military organizations is under attack from organizations such as the Military Religious Freedom Foundation who espouse a perverted interpretation of the First Amendment.

A key component of humanism is relativism, where there is no absolute truth.  This has in part led to the development of a manual in Afghanistan that blames our own troops' insensitivity to the Islamic culture for causing the green on blue violence in that nation, rather than blaming the true source--Islamic jihad.

Furthermore, our military is confused as to who the enemy is.  They are attacked by a jihadi at Fort Hood and it is called "workplace violence."  Russian military forces are invited in our borders to participate in "counter-terrorism" exercises.  We are aiding and abetting the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in the Middle East, an organization that intends to re-establish a hostile Caliphate and destroy America.  One of our Ambassadors is slain in North Africa while the military is forbidden from coming to his aid.  We kill al Qaeda operatives in Yemen (for Saudi Arabia?), while supporting them and their allies in Syria and Libya.

Military leadership has been involved in suppressing the First Amendment rights of United States citizens when it comes to speech against Islam, and have publicly humiliated a fellow officer for teaching the threat that Islam presents.  Then they "pivot to the Pacific," however China is not considered a threat but Iran in the Middle East remains so.  Then some in our government talk about unilaterally reducing our nuclear arsenal to below 300 weapons while Russia is modernizing and exercising their nuclear triad.

Who is the enemy???

We need to get our military back on track and fast.  They are all over the world "chasing Indians," disasters, and handing out humanitarian assistance.  They need to be focused on the one thing they need to get right--defending our nation against existential threats.  They need to be preparing for war, and they need a clear vision as to who are the enemies of America.  With the imminent reduction in the military budget, this becomes all the more critical.

--Against All Enemies

Army plans to shift troops to U.S. Africa Command

Aims for quick crisis response

By Kristina Wong - The Washington Times, Sunday, December 23, 2012

U.S. Africa Command, the military’s newest regional force, will have more troops available early next year as the Pentagon winds down from two ground wars over the past decade, Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, Army chief of staff, told The Washington Times.

As part of Gen. Odierno’s Regionally Aligned Forces concept, about 1,200 soldiers will deploy to Africa as early as March in an effort to place troops strategically around the globe to respond quickly to sudden challenges in hot spots such as Libya and to develop ties with the people and officials in host countries.

“It’s about us moving towards a scalable, tailorable capability that helps them to shape the environment they’re working in, doing a variety of tasks from building partner capability to engagement, to multilateral training to bilateral training to actual deployment of forces, if necessary,” Gen. Odierno said in an interview.

Amid budget cuts and with President Obama’s new military strategy downplaying the chances of another major land war, the Army has sought to maintain its relevance among admirals and generals in the Pacific, the Middle East and North Africa — likely places for the next flash point. When terrorists attacked the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, on Sept. 11, no U.S. troops were close enough to help.

[...]

Ready, responsive

Beginning in March, small teams of soldiers from the 2nd Heavy Brigade Combat Team, 1st Infantry Division, based in Fort Riley, Kan., will conduct at least 108 missions in at least 34 countries in Africa through mid-2014.

The missions could include humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, training host-nation forces in marksmanship, first aid and other skills, and conducting military exercises. To prepare for these missions, soldiers are studying the regions and cultures of countries where they will deploy, and learning Arabic, Swahili, French and Portuguese.

Continue Reading (article continues)... 

Connect to AAE
   Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AgainstAllEnemies (Click "Like")
   Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/@AAEnemies ("Follow")
   YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/AAEnemies ("Subscribe")
Disclaimer: These opinions are solely my own, and do not reflect the opinions or official positions of any United States Government agency, organization or department.

Thoughts on the "Fiscal Cliff"

First my apologies, for these comments on the "fiscal cliff" will not be as complete as I would like.

Based on information from a financial advisor, I understand the "fiscal cliff" to consist of the following events:

• Expiration of general tax cuts, which will result in $255 billion revenue
• Expiration of payroll tax cuts, which will result in $112 billion revenue
• Sequestration hits which will cut $55 billion from the military budget (which could continue each year for 10 years), and cut $55 billion from non-defense spending in 2013
• Implementation of an Alternative Minimum Tax patch, which will increase revenues by $38 billion
• Implementation of PPACA (Obamacare) taxes on investments, which will generate $21 billion in revenue

This will result in a total of about $536 billion in additional revenue, or 3.5% of America's GDP, which will result in a negative GDP for early 2013--the "fiscal cliff."

I find it reprehensible that our national "leaders" are posturing as if they are our saviors from the "fiscal cliff" when they are the ones who created this problem.

Our "leaders" involved us in two wars, one (Iraq) most certainly a war of choice, on the cheap, meaning that the American people got tax breaks while the debts from the wars piled up.  It was as if we were being bribed to accept the wars, and now we are paying the price.  Anytime America chooses to go to war, the price of war needs to be immediately felt by the People so that we are more thoughtful about the wars we undertake in the future.  Now we see these wartime tax cuts going away--one component of the "fiscal cliff."

Our "leaders" passed Obamacare, another (unnecessary) component of the "fiscal cliff"...and a threat to our liberties.

Sequestration will happen because the budget supercommittee could not reach an agreement on how to cut $1.2 trillion deficit reduction package as per the Budget Control Act (August 2011). (source)  Another component of the "cliff."

And now we expect our "leaders" to do the right thing.  How can we when their behavior is to the contrary?  For example, the Senate has failed to pass a budget for the past four years.  This is clear dereliction of duty and Congress should either not receive their salaries until they pass a budget, or just go to jail.  And these are the people who will "save" us now?

Our current crisis has been generated by the national "leadership" on both sides of the aisle, not by some alien from another world.  They should be held accountable.  We need to go over this "fiscal cliff" and more so that the American people finally wake up and see our "leadership" for who they are and demand accountability.

It is clear by their actions that the people in all three branches of the government no longer represent We The People, but something else.  This drama being played out over the "fiscal cliff" obscures the real problem which is a true existential threat to our nation: our accelerating national debt.

--Against All Enemies

Connect to AAE
   Blog: http://aaenemies.blogspot.com
   Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AgainstAllEnemies (Click "Like")
   Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/@AAEnemies ("Follow")
   YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/AAEnemies ("Subscribe")
Disclaimer: These opinions are solely my own, and do not reflect the opinions or official positions of any United States Government agency, organization or department.

Understanding The Petrodollar

By reading G. Edward Griffin's "The Creature from Jekyll Island," you gain an excellent understanding of how our nation's monetary supply is controlled by a cartel of banks, which was not the intent of our Founders.  However, the book does not cover the current status of our currency as the Petrodollar.

When the Federal Reserve System was initially created, the dollar was backed by gold.  In 1944 at Bretton Woods, 44 nations of the world agreed to make the US Dollar the world's reserve currency.  During the 1960s, the United States spent more money than it had (Vietnam, the Great Society), and nations around the world began to trade in their US dollars for gold.  President Nixon stopped this in 1971 by abandoning the gold standard, transforming the US Dollar into pure fiat (and a floating) currency.  The United States then struck a deal with Saudi Arabia to defend their nation from attack in return for the Saudis agreeing to only sell their oil in US dollars.  Other oil producing nations signed onto the US Dollar soon afterwards, and the Petrodollar was born.

The United States' continued protection of the dominance of the "Petrodollar" system may best explain why the United States:

(1) Conducts operations in Mideast nations that have significance within the Petrodollar system.  Many times it is because they are not participating in that system.
(2) Maintains a military presence in the Middle East to enforce the Petrodollar system.
(3) Gives the Islamist ideology a pass.  Oil-rich Islamic nations can blackmail us to accept the extremes of their religion in our own country.  If we do not, they will reject the US Dollar as the only accepted currency for the oil trade.
(4) Defers to the United Nations on many issues, and is slowly enforcing UN agendas, such as Agenda 21, in America.  This may be because the rest of the world perceives that we are abusing our responsibility as the stewards of the world's reserve currency to our own advantage at the expense of others.  They therefore pressure on us to reduce our quality of life through veiled socialist schemes like Agenda 21, and our government is slowly complying--most likely to appease other governments.

I highly encourage you to read the following Follow the Money Daily article in four parts that explains the Petrodollar system:
Part 1 Preparing for the Collapse of the Petrodollar System
Part 2 The Rise of the Petrodollar System: "Dollars for Oil"
Part 3 The Petrodollar Wars: The Iraq Petrodollar Connection
Part 4 The War in Afghanistan and The New Great Game

--Against All Enemies

Connect to AAE
   Blog: http://aaenemies.blogspot.com
   Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AgainstAllEnemies (Click "Like")
   Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/@AAEnemies ("Follow")
   YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/AAEnemies ("Subscribe")
Disclaimer: These opinions are solely my own, and do not reflect the opinions or official positions of any United States Government agency, organization or department.

Lara Logan Video: We're Being Lied to About Afghanistan

I highly recommend that you watch all 19 minutes of this exceptional video where Lara Logan discusses how we as the American people are being lied to about the strength of Al Qaeda in Afghanistan.  She makes some very insightful comments throughout, especially when she says that if you do not properly understand your enemy, you cannot possibly devise a proper strategy to defeat him.  Recall that Lara was sexually assaulted in Egypt covering the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood.

AAE Blog: http://aaenemies.blogspot.com
AAE on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AgainstAllEnemies
AAE on Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/@AAEnemies

Disclaimer: These opinions are solely my own, and do not reflect the opinions or official positions of any United States Government agency, organization or department.

Afghanistan A Lost Cause And A Hopeless Case

Afghanistan A Lost Cause And A Hopeless Case
Blissfully ignorant and happy to stay that way
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet


When a country has chosen to isolate itself from the remainder of the world in a Luddite fashion (taken to the "nth" degree) and huddle together in tribes while choosing to live in abject squaller as their ancestors did in the seventh and eighth centuries, plus perceive any offering to help them advance into a modern age as an insult to them and their god of choice, then any one, any country, attempting to help will ultimately find their efforts are utter failures and the people to whom they have offered assistance will return their magnanimous offers with out and out hatred and rage.

Such is the case with the US and Afghanistan today.

The people and the rulers of Afghanistan have shown us they are quite content living their savage, primitive, ignorant, corrupt lives, as the cesspool of the world.  Fine.  Let them.  Afghanistan isn't worth the life of a single American soldier, sailor, Marine, or airman.

It was my understanding, and I believe the understanding of the majority of Americans, that US military forces went into Afghanistan to destroy terrorist training camps, kill as many terrorists AS POSSIBLE, hopefully catch or kill Bin Laden and ... come home.

That didn't happen.

Things called "mission creep"  and ROE or "rules of engagement" prolonged and changed the US military's mission in Afghanistan until neither the Afghanis nor the Americans understood what was going on in that hell hole of a country.

American troops have been in that sludge pit for over ten years now.  Victory is nowhere in sight.  In fact, the entire Pentagon would be hard pressed to define what victory would even look like in Afghanistan.

Many decades ago, while in the US Army, I was taught to kill the enemy.  Not a single one of my trainers, not a single one of the cadre entrusted with turning me and my fellow recruits into soldiers said a cussed thing about "collateral damage."  Not ONE!  We were taught to do one thing and that was ... to kill the enemy.

There were no lawyers in the in the battle planning sessions.  What there were ... were soldiers taught to ... KILL THE ENEMY, period.

Then came Vietnam -- and President Lyndon Johnson and President Richard Nixon, both, decided neither would go down in the history books as the first American President to lose a war.  Added to the mix, the newly imported European philosophy called POLITICAL CORRECTNESS and we had a battle plan for failure in Vietnam.

Unfortunately, our leaders didn't learn a darned thing from the Vietnam experience. They continue to allow political correctness and lawyers to "advise" on war fighting missions and battles -- and even wars -- and we have not won a "WAR" since. 

No, I do not consider the first Iraq invasion a real war.  It was more a prolonged battle, which lasted a few days.  Of course, I side with those of the opinion that had we gone on to Baghdad -- THEN --and took out Saddam Hussein THEN -- we would not have had to go back to Iraq ten years later for a second round that accomplished little short of killing Hussein.

I can remember a time when the American military was taught to war fight much as our Special Forces are today.  That may be because we did not have Special Forces troops then.  But the point is -- maybe we ought to train ALL American fighting men to conduct warfare at the level our Green Berets, Delta Force, SEALS and other Special Operators do.  (I am referring to their focus, skill, and intensity in combat.) Problem is,of course, unless the civilian commanders of the US Military allow them to use those skills to actually win wars, we STILL will not see victory again. 

What a shame!

That brings me full circle back to the Afghanistan problem. 

My friend, Alan Caruba, pointed out in a recent commentary that even Alexander the Great found Afghanistan just as screwed up as it is today and just as hard a nut to crack.  (You may recall that Genghis Khan had the same problem with a place we know today as Vietnam.  In fact  he wrote it off as "unconquerable.")  How little we learn from history -- and yes, it DOES repeat itself.  Different actors, different centuries, same ending to the play.

I ask you to consider if General Douglas MacArthur or General George Patton were commanding the American forces in Afghanistan,  and Afghanistan's leader, Hamid Karzai, publicly defied their orders, as he consistently does the current American commander's orders. How long do you think Mr. Karzai would be President of Afghanistan?  Better yet -- how long do you think there would BE a President of Afghanistan?

My, how times do change.  I'd remind you -- we haven't actually WON a war since the Second World War.  Wonder why???

Unless the United States is prepared to commit genocide in Afghanistan, there is simple no way to win a "war" there.  If we stay another ten years, we will be in no better position, militarily, than we are today.  

So far as democracy in Afghanistan --- the Afghanis are simple not capable of living in a democratic society.  It cannot be forced on them.  They have to want it.  Clearly, they do not.

Conclusion:  Stop pouring American blood and treasure into an. open septic tank.  JUST STOP.  Bring our military out so they can prepare for the coming war with Iran. 

We should turn our backs and shake Afghanistan's dust off our boots -- and never look back.  

Finally, will someone please tell our Presidents to stop giving aid and comfort to our enemies by telling them, months in advance, when American troops will be leaving their country?  Even the dumbest of hill tribesmen understands that all he has to do is conserve his troops and supplies and wait 'til the Americans leave to resume his war.   This is elementary stuff -- and yet -- the civilian leader(s) of the US military cannot grasp this simple, simple, fact.

J. D. Longstreet

The Democrat’s “REAL” War Not So Real After All

The Democrat’s “REAL” War Not So Real After All

A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet 

Americans have been accused of having the shortest collective memory of any people on earth.  Back when I was but a wee lad, I brushed that off.  Common sense told it was what we used to call in the advertising business  “Puffing.”  Puffing is rhetoric that is known to be untrue but is often used to make a point.  Back in the old days even the federal government allowed a limited amount of puffing in advertising.

Note that above I said the “Common sense told me….  .”  Problem is, these days common sense is certainly not common, and those expressing an opinion based on common sense are frowned upon and often mocked.

We have often stated the political left does not understand making war.  They have shown us time and again they do not understand the military, itself, nor how to apply military strength against an enemy of the US.   Their naiveté is such that they cannot grasp the simplest military tactic.  And they totally do not grasp the meaning behind the old saw:  “All’s fair in love and WAR.”

You may recall that we railed against the Obama Regimes’ public announcement of the date US troops would be withdrawn from Iraq.  You may also recall, we predicted that Iraq would slip back in to anarchy and eventually wind up under the control of another “strongman dictatorship” akin to the one headed by Saddam Hussein, which we overthrew at a rather high cost to America.  It was a cost, which Americans paid in blood and treasure.

Hardly had the dust (kicked up by American forces leaving Iraq) settled until the struggle for a new dictatorship was underway.  It is plain to everyone that our effort in Iraq was a total waste of time, effort, treasure, and blood. 

It is universally understood that when at war with a nation or a stateless rag-tag group of irregulars such as the Islamofacists we’ve been fighting for over ten years now, you do not telegraph your next move.  And you certainly do not openly inform them of the date you intend to leave the battlefield.

But Obama did.  Now Iraq is lost … again, and will most likely necessitate another war with Iraq at some point in the future.

That was bad enough.  But now Obama is doing it all again in Afghanistan.  The Taliban has openly boasted they have beaten America and will rebuild their forces and move to take over Afghanistan as soon as American forces are out of the country.  Unlike the Obama Regime, the Taliban is smart.  The Taliban has completely flummoxed the American Commander-in-Chief and, yes, they will have beaten the American military as a result of the catastrophically poor leadership from Obama. 

Obama’s awful leadership as a war commander has unnecessarily cost many lives of American military men and women and will, undoubtedly, cost even more as he compounds his mistakes on the battlefield with his blunders in foreign policy in the Middle East.

At the moment, while a very short fuse is burning on the powder keg in the Middle East, Obama is attempting to “talk” with Iran.

Only a fool would suppose that talks with Iran are anything more that a sham and an instrument to stall America -- AND Israel -- and buy more time for Iran to realize their dream of building an “Islamic Bomb,” (an atomic bomb), which they have every intention of using on both America and Israel.

Obama has proven to be Iran’s best weapon against the non-Islamic world.

The bottom line is this:  America is in deep trouble and needs a replacement for Obama who will deal a crushing blow against the terror nations of the Middle East.  It has been called a “Peace Through Victory” policy.

It is clear that anything less that a resounding victory is a total waste of time when dealing with the masters of hyperbole.  They can, and will, make anything less into a victory for themselves and spoon-feed that propaganda to their followers who will lap it up with gusto.  It will stoke their anger and enmity toward the US. 

As a lad I was taught to say little because it lends importance and gravitas to what you DO say.  For three years we have had a constant stream of talk from Obama, yea, even rivers of rhetoric flowing from our supposed leader.  His continuous talking has lent new meaning to the phrase: “talk is cheap.”

Our new leader must be a man of few words and more action, especially towards America’s enemies.  America is tired of towering talk and flowing phrases. It is past time to stop talking and starting doing.

J. D. Longstreet 

He Died From A Broken Heart

By Findalis of Monkey in the Middle

Just a pair of best friends until one was killed by a road side bomb. Yet the love this dog had for his partner was so great that within the day he joined his master/friend.

Liam and Theo were a team, fast friends doing a dangerous job -- searching out roadside bombs laid by insurgents in Afghanistan.

The jovial British soldier and his irrepressible dog worked and played together for months, and died on the same day. On Thursday they came home, flown back to Britain in a somber repatriation ceremony for the soldier remembered for his empathy with animals and the companion he loved.

Lance Cpl. Liam Tasker, a dog handler with the Royal Army Veterinary Corps, was killed in a firefight with insurgents in Helmand Province on March 1 as he searched for explosives with Theo, a bomb-sniffing springer spaniel mix. The dog suffered a fatal seizure hours later at a British army base, likely brought about by stress.

Military officials won't go so far as to say Theo died of a broken heart -- but that may not be far from the truth.

"I think we often underestimate the grieving process in dogs," said Elaine Pendlebury, a senior veterinarian with animal charity PDSA. "Some dogs react very severely to their partner's loss."

She said it was not uncommon for pets to respond to an owner's death by refusing food and becoming sick -- and the bond between working dogs and their handlers is especially close.

"The bonding that I have seen between soldiers or police and their dogs is fantastic. When you see them working together, it's really one unit."

A military Hercules plane carrying Tasker's body and Theo's ashes touched down Thursday at a Royal Air Force base in southwest England. As the funeral cortege of black vehicles drove slowly away, it was saluted by a long line of military dog handlers, their dogs at their sides. A black Labrador retriever sat quietly beside its handler as the hearse carrying the flag-draped coffin disappeared from view.

At the nearby town of Wootton Bassett, where people line the streets in a mark of respect each time a dead solder is repatriated, dozens stood silently -- some with dogs at their feet -- as Tasker's friends and family laid roses atop the hearse.

The Ministry of Defense said Theo's ashes would be presented to Tasker's family later at a private ceremony.

Tasker, 26, from Kirkcaldy in Scotland, spent six years as an army mechanic before joining the military working dog unit in 2007. He felt he had found his calling.

"I love my job and working together with Theo," Tasker said in a profile of the pair released by the Ministry of Defense before his death. "He has a great character and never tires. He can't wait to get out and do his job and will stop at nothing."

The soldier and the 22-month-old dog had been in Afghanistan for almost six months, uncovering roadside bombs and weapons in a dangerous daily routine.

Theo became a bit of a military celebrity last month after the defense ministry released photos and video of him and Tasker to highlight the lifesaving work of military dogs. The footage, now deeply poignant, shows Theo -- energetic, ears cocked, tail wagging -- alongside Tasker searching a compound for explosives.

The ministry said then that Theo had been so successful -- finding 14 hidden bombs and weapons caches, a record for a team in Afghanistan -- that the dog's tour of duty had been extended by a month.

Tasker was the 358th British soldier to die in Afghanistan since the 2001 U.S.-led invasion. Theo was the sixth British military dog killed in Iraq or Afghanistan since 2001.

There are calls for Theo to receive the Dickin medal, which since 1943 has recognized wartime bravery by animals, from carrier pigeons to a World War II commando collie.

The loyalty of some dogs is legendary, from Greyfriars Bobby, a 19th-century Skye terrier who guarded his master's Edinburgh grave for 14 years, to Hachiko, a Japanese dog who awaited his owner's return at a train station every day for years after the man's death. Both are commemorated with statues.

Tasker's father, Ian, said Theo would have been devastated by Liam's death.

"I truly believe when Theo went back to the kennel, that that would have a big, big impact because Liam wasn't there to comfort him," he told ITV news.

Tasker's mother, Jane Duffy agreed. "I'm not nurse or a vet (but) I would like to believe (Theo) died of a broken heart to be with Liam," she told the broadcaster.

Tasker's colleague's recalled the soldier's bond with his dog and zealous attention to duty in tributes released by the defense ministry.

"A natural with animals, he had an affection for his dog that truly was a window to his soul," said Maj. Alexander Turner, a commander of Tasker's unit.

He "was here to save life, finding explosive devices that kill more farmers than combatants in our area," Turner said. "His fortitude and zeal for that perilous task was humbling; it imbued us all with confidence. He used to joke that Theo was impossible to restrain but I would say the same about Lance Corporal Tasker."

Tasker's uncle, Billy McCord, said the soldier had been due to leave Afghanistan soon and worried about being separated from Theo.

"He actually said at one point that when he finished his tour he was not sure what would happen to his dog and that he could be separated from his dog," McCord told the local Courier newspaper in Scotland. "That was preying on his mind, but they are not separated now."

Full Story

Dogs mourn for the ones they love.  Some deeper than others.  Theo was one of them in which even death could not part him from his beloved master.

I believe both have gone to a better place, a place of beauty, plenty and love. A place where the 2 of them are having the joy of friendship without having to risk their lives on the bombs that took their lives.

Obama's Wars

Obama’s Wars
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet

Remember how Obama continually stated how the war in Iraq was “The Wrong War.”

Remember how Obama remarked that President George W. Bush made a mistake by moving much of our war fighting capability from Afghanistan to Iraq?

Remember how Obama leaned on Bush for concentrating on Iraq instead of Afghanistan… over and over and over, ad infinitum?

Now: Remember how we told you that these wars would become Obama’s wars?

We remind you of all this because, just as we suspected, Obama has no clue how to run a war -- or how to relate neither to his generals nor to the military in general.

I have thought for sometime that the President of the United States, of a necessity, ought to have had military service in one branch, or the other, of the US Military. I still do. I think it ought to be a requirement, one of the qualifications for a would-be candidate seeking the office of the US Presidency.

So few members of the US government, these days, have had military service, of any kind, that there is only a weak connection between the government overall and the military.

When “The Brass,” the generals and admirals, begin to mock, criticize, or correct the Commander-in-Chief, even in public, that is evidence of a serious breakdown between the war fighters and their Commander-in-Chief. That is NEVER good.

When a Commander-in-Chief’s main objective is to withdraw the troops from a war, which is still raging, and concede defeat of the American military, that demonstrates a deep disrespect for the men and women in the ranks, in the foxholes, in the line of fire, in harm’s way. The men and women who have volunteered to put their lives on the line for America’s freedom all around the globe deserve more than that – MUCH more. They deserve a Commander-in-Chief who, even if he does not have their courage, at least respects them FOR their courage and their efforts for their fellow countrymen.

To put it bluntly, the US military deserves a much better Commander-in-Chief than Obama has been, is, or ever will be.

The revelation (in a recent publication) that Obama was seeking a way out of Afghanistan came as no surprise to this scribe. We have a leftist President and that is what leftists do when someone challenges his or her right to be free on a battlefield. They immediately head for the exits. They run.

The left, Obama among them, has no concept of military honor.” Having never served a single day in uniform, he cannot relate to those brave people who protect you and me with their lives. He simple doesn’t understand his soldiers, he doesn’t understand his generals, and he does not understand the war planners and war fighters. At some level, I suspect he fears them.

Obama’s ineptness in foreign affairs, as a whole, is staggering. Obama’s joyful visit with Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, a fellow socialist, told Americans all they needed to know about Obama’s distaste for our constitutional republic. Many conservatives understood immediately that he was on a mission to transform America into another Venezuela.

So what does this have to do with Obama and his wars? Practically everything. He is dealing with a part of the US government that is hugely politically conservative. I have come to believe that Obama fears the US military.

The US Military is filled with conservatives. A whopping portion of the US Military is made up of Southerners who are born with “Warrior” stamped, indelibly, on their heels. An important part of their DNA is “honor.” They don’t have to learn what honor is; they know from birth what is expected of them -- to protect the honor of their family, their country, their fellow soldiers, and finally, themselves. Too, they understand the oath they take when entering the military is a solemn and sacred oath to protect the constitution and everything they love and care from ALL enemies foreign AND DOMESTIC. They also understand there is no expiration date on that oath.

It is no small thing when the leader of those military men and women places their honor in jeopardy by seeking a way to “cut and run” in the face of the enemy!

An army MUST respect its leader. It must trust his leadership. It is his command that may cost a soldier his or her life. When the troops lose respect for their leader it is a sad and a dangerous thing. Oh, they will obey his commands, but they will do so grudgingly. Evidence of that can be seen even in the US military’s top brass today.

When that lack of respect for their leadership infiltrates the troops on the frontlines, casualties begin to go up. We see that today in Afghanistan.

NO SOLDIER WANTS TO BE THE LAST SOLDIER KILLED IN ANY WAR! Now that Obama has set a date for withdrawal of the troops from Afghanistan, the enemy feels emboldened because they know that US troops will psychologically go into a defensive mode. Suddenly, the advantage in the war swings to the enemy’s side. We see that, today in Afghanistan, as well.

Obama’s Wars are not going well. In Iraq, just about everyone outside the Obama White House understands that as soon as US troops finally leave Iraq, it will be taken over by another strongman dictator and revert back to its former repressive totalitarian condition. In Afghanistan, we know the Taliban will move, almost instantly, to re-establish their control of the Afghanis and the drug trade.

Frankly, I do not believe the Obama Regime cares, one way or the other. All the evidence tells us Obama just wants out of both theatres of war. As Commander-in-Chief he is demoralizing our troops. As President, he is emboldening our enemies and demoralizing our allies.

As a wartime president Obama is pitifully lacking. But, then again, that can be said of all other aspects of his presidency, as well. Pitiful.

J. D. Longstreet

The Greatest Generation Should be Ashamed of Us Today

The Greatest Generation Should be Ashamed of Us Today

America No Longer Has the WILL to WIN!

A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet

****************************

As I considered President Obama’s words concerning the war in Afghanistan a few days ago, I found myself embarrassed by them. To realize Obama had no intention of ‘winning” a war in Afghanistan, and that the word victory was never used in his entire speech, it became clear to me that Obama was only concerned with “ending” the war in Afghanistan -- not winning it.

Now, let’s be clear about something. The United States could/can win a war in Afghanistan. The United States could/can win a war anywhere it chose/chooses.

Just nuke ‘em.

No, I am NOT KIDDING. Had we nuked the Tora Bora region of Afghanistan when we were sure Osama bin Laudin was hiding there, we would have been finished with the never ending search for him and we would have sent a powerful message to our enemies -- everywhere -- to attack the US is to bring unimaginable death and destruction down on the attackers and their loved ones. The price is not worth it.

The Commander-in-Chief could have ordered it done -- and -- in my opinion, SHOULD have ordered it done. We had the means and the wherewithal to do it. What we did not have was THE WILL!

Today as I think back to 1941 and the sneak attack by the Japanese on the US Naval Base at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, I thank God that we had men of fortitude in charge of this country. Men of courage stepped forward and offered themselves, their futures, and their very lives to win a total victory over the Japanese and, as it turned out, the Germans, as well.

Today, as the few survivors of that great conflict watch America circle the drain, how sad they must be. They must be deeply depressed to watch the wishy-washy, limp-wristed, leadership of this nation apologize for being the world’s only superpower. To watch a President of the United States actually BOW to a Japanese leader must make them physically sick to their stomachs. To watch the American leader acting more as a naive boy, than a man, on the world stage has to be a bitter pill to swallow for the remnant of the Greatest Generation.

I have a similar reaction. Born just before the US was compelled, by events that took place 68 years ago today, to join the Second World War, my formative years were molded in that worldwide crucible of death and destruction. Yes, like so many of my generation who were mere children during that conflagration, I readily admit that it left me with scars and with definite ideas about freedom’s cost and the necessary sacrifices a nation MUST be prepared to make to preserve her freedom and liberty.

Firebombing the enemy's cities and killing over a hundred thousand men, women, and children to break the enemy's will to fight, was necessary, -- and they did it! Dropping a nuclear bomb on an enemy city to force them to surrender was necessary, and so -- they did it! Dropping a second nuclear bomb on a second enemy city, to drive home the point that we were relentless and had the will to kill as many of the Japanese and/or the Germans as was necessary to compel them to the surrender table was necessary, -- and they did it.

Horrendous? Yes! Necessary? ABSOLUTELY! Did it take courage? YES! More than you or I will ever know-- if we are lucky. But with current events as they are, with Islamofacists seeking the death of every American man, woman, and child, WE, YOU and I, MUST be prepared to take whatever necessary steps are called for to insure they fail. If that requires the use of nuclear weapons to completely wipe out a terrorist nest in the caves and mountains of the Middle East, then WE, YOU and I, MUST BE PREPARED TO USE THEM! I submit to you that the current leadership of the United States is NOT PREPARED to take the steps that may be necessary to insure the continuation of the freedom and the liberty those wonderful men and women of The Greatest Generation offered everything they were -- and everything they ever hoped to be -- to preserve for us.

My personal journey to becoming a conservative began at Pearl Harbor. My philosophy on politics had its birth on the morning of December 7th, 1941.


It was a beautiful Sunday morning in Paradise when ......... ......... .........

Around 8 AM, 68 years ago today, the Japanese swooped in, out of a brilliant blue sky over Hawaii, and bombed the port of Pearl Harbor to smithereens. Much of the muscle of our Navy was destroyed. Two thousand and four hundred US servicemen were killed.

I was seven months old.

In the next four years, as my consciousness grew, I became aware of all the activity around me. I saw soldiers in uniform. I saw my grandmother crying when the telegram came that her baby boy had been "Killed in Action" somewhere in Europe.

And finally, I remember guns being fired into the air, people running through the streets of our little South Carolina town, hugging and kissing each other. I remember folks saying: “It’s over!” And it was. But it left an indelible mark on my family -- including me.

Those first 4 years of my life, the formative years, were experienced under intense stress. I learned the cost of war right from the beginning stages of my life. I lost one uncle, in Belgium (the Ancestral homeland) another was machine gunned through both thighs and lay in a freezing stream in France, all night, until American troops found him the next morning. The icy water of that frozen stream saved his life. He suffered ”shell-shock” (referred to as "Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome" today) the remainder of his life. A summertime thunderstorm became an instant German artillery barrage. He would race for cover. The flashbacks were ever with him.

Others of my family were in the Pacific fighting the Japanese. They, too, came home with stories of Japanese Kamikaze planes hitting their ships and, in one case, finding a woman… yes, I said a woman, pilot in one of them! She was alive. For whatever reason, the plane with the bomb attached, did not explode.

When we could get those veterans to talk, which was not often, I was spellbound by the stories of their experience. I soaked it up like a sponge.

You see, I learned, both from personal experience, and the second hand experience of my family members, who were in the hell of the Second World War, what war really is. And, I learned that you have no choice when the enemy brings the war to your doorstep, you must fight back, and you must prevail, no matter the cost.

Today, we find ourselves in another war, which was brought to our doorstep. In doing so, the enemy killed many more people with their sneak attack than the Japanese did with their sneak attack on Pearl Harbor.

I don’t suffer fools lightly. My generation shares that quality. Today we have people in our government who are advocating a policy of retreat for the United States in our war against terrorist in the Middle East. It does not seem to matter to those folks, that an enemy which has brought war to our shores, will not quit, and go home, just because we do. They will follow us back to our own country and continue to wage war against us here... in our land.

It makes no difference how many medals hang from a man’s uniform or suit jacket. For all the times he was right, represented by those medals, there are times when he is wrong.

Had the United States listened to the “doves” after Pearl Harbor, I would most likely be writing this missive in German rather than English. It was that serious then, and it is that serious now.

So, as we think, today, of the men and women who gave everything they had, including their lives, to insure that you and I would have a free country, let us think of the men and women serving today for the same reason.

On December 7th, 1941 the Japanese, and the Germans, wanted nothing less than the conquest of the world. Today the Islamofacists want the same thing.

You have to ask yourself… as an American… are you going to stand down, ground your weapon, and allow this evil from the deepest, darkest, depths of hell, to take your country? That is the question all Americans must ask themselves. For, understand, they will not stop with America. Once America is out of the way, the remainder of the world will fall to them as easily as dominoes.
The Men and Women (Caps Intentional) of 1941 had to ask themselves the same question. We had better thank Almighty God they answered in the affirmative.

Today, we honor them for it. But they will tell you, those who survive to this day, that there was no real question about what the people of America would do. It was simply understood that freedom was far to precious to allow the forces of evil to take it from us. And so they marched forth to stop it and preserve this country for you and me. And they did!

We can never thank them enough. Not only did they save America, they saved the world!

Are we, as Americans, prepared to give up our freedom today after that generation gave so much of their blood to preserve it for us?

I pray to God that America will finally awaken to the danger that threatens us and take the painful steps, whatever they might be, to preserve this country, and again, the world.

J. D. Longstreet

Giving Thanks ... by J. D. Longstreet

Giving Thanks.
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet
*****************************************
In the spirit of full disclosure allow me to set the record straight: I am part Native American -- as are so many, many, Americans. BOTH my grandmothers were, at the very least, half American Indian... either Eastern Cherokee or Catawba. I suspect Catawba. As a youngster it was not uncommon to have the chief of the local tribe visiting at my grandparent's home. The reservation was just a short distance from my childhood home. A 15 minute drive would put one on reservation soil.

The point is, I did not grow up in an atmosphere in which the American Indian was seen as having been robbed of his land or his country. They were our neighbors and many were our relatives, making them family.

Now that you know the above, you will understand why I do not buy into the bovine scatology the lefties have been selling our kids for the past, oh, nearly two generations.

Yes, the American Indian has been screwed by the US government. That cannot be denied. On the other hand, so have you and I! Promises were made and never kept. Treaties were made -- and broken -- seemingly before the ink was dry on the paper. So, yes, the American Indian got a raw deal from the US government.

Nothing much has changed. Today as the Democrats in Congress ram through a National Healthcare bill they are making copious promises that will never be kept -- and --what is worse, they KNOW they won't be kept because they have no intention of keeping them. It is an attempt to fool just enough people, just long enough, to get the bill passed through Congress and signed into law by the President. So, if you think you have been screwed by the US government please take a number and/or get in line.

Thanksgiving is a time for solemn reflection on the blessings we DID receive. Yes, Obama is probably the worst president in the history of the United States, but it could have been worse. Mrs. Clinton could have easily won and we'd have Bill back in the White House again along with all the embarrassment(s) that follows along after him. So, I will not thank God that Obama won, I will, however, thank God that Mrs. Clinton did not!

Even in the midst of the recession America has so much for which to be thankful. The President's Afghanistan policy, unfortunately, is NOT one of them. Obama is to announce his plans for our military in Afghanistan early next week. Already reports are (I believe some are "trial balloons.") slipping out that the President's Afghanistan plan is a "minefield" for the administration. (As if the Administration even knows what a "minefield" is!) Until you have had your nose 18 inches, or so, from a mine while you delicately dig it from the soil with your bayonet, while trying, unsuccessfully, to keep the trembling in your hands to a minimum, you really are not qualified to refer to a piece of presidential policy as a "minefield." Whatever the President decides, I expect it will lead to a lot of things in Afghanistan, but victory will not be among them. Face it, America. We have won our last war. However, I WILL thank God, this Thanksgiving, that our troops have not been over run, by Taliban forces, while the President dithers around trying to formulate an Afghanistan policy that will make him look good in the eyes of the world.

I will thank God that His people, in Israel, are still standing tall against those nations that would wipe them off the map. I will pray, as well, that the Israelis know that our President's policy toward Israel does not reflect the feelings of the American people toward our only true friend in the Middle East.

And, finally, I will give thanks that we STILL retain the freedom to assemble and petition the government for redress. And -- I will, most earnestly, pray that the American people find their spine and begin to speak out against the godless socialist/communist leanings of our current government and commit themselves to the effort to return this nation to the constitutional representative republic intended by the Founding Fathers.

And allow me to close with this: I don't CARE who attended the first Thanksgiving and I care even less about who brought what to that first Thanksgiving table. I am just happy that representatives of both the races represented in my DNA were seated there in peace.

Happy Thanksgiving!

J. D. Longstreet

Is The Cost of Freedom Too High? Totalitarian Socialism is Much Cheaper!

Is The Cost of Freedom Too High? Totalitarian Socialism is Much Cheaper!
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet
************************************************

I’ve thought about it for a long while now and I have concluded that the US needs to recant its pledge not to be the first to use the atom bomb in a war/conflict. I mean, hey, we did it, already. Two of them, in fact! Perhaps you remember August 1945 and a place called Japan??? I do!

Look, we are allowing ourselves to be tied up in these little brushfire wars in Afghanistan, and Iraq, when both could be ended by a flight of B-2’s and a few nukes.

What about the problem in Iran? Well, Mr. Ahmadinejad wants the atomic bomb? Well, I say give it to him, several, actually, delivered from the bomb bay of a B-2, or B-52 bomber.

Then… the little squirt in North Korea, we could provide a demonstration of what a REAL atomic blast looks like… up close and personal!

For those of you screaming at the computer and pulling your hair out about now, YES, I know it is extreme. But understand this: the whiners and those who bitch, and moan, about the war in Afghanistan going badly, and those who force our armed forces to fight with one, or both, hands tied behind their backs are, quite frequently, the same people. They are quickly pushing the US into a corner. A corner, from which, the only means of escape is to lash out in all directions. The most effective way to do that is with our atomic arsenal.

I hear the “national scolds” complaining that we have now been in Iraq as longer than it took for us to fight the Second World War. Well, actually, that’s true, but we have less KIA’s than we had the day we hit the beach in Normandy!

So, you want to leave win the war, any war? Use the nuke arsenal. It would be quick, efficient, very effective, and there would be no question as to the victor. Leave the offending country a radioactive pile of debris for the next few thousand years.

We have the material, the methods, and the means to take out any country causing trouble for us in the world. I must tell you, those atomic weapons, as costly as they are, would be more cost efficient than placing a couple hundred thousand troops on the ground, in a troublesome region, and supporting those troops while forcing them to fight handicapped. And that is what we are doing, currently!

Hey, I’m tired of all the bellyaching, all the bitching, and moaning, coming from the very people who could not screw up enough courage to defend their own shadow. I’m tired of good, loyal, American men and women spilling their blood and laying down their lives for a whole segment of our society who have no respect, nor love for the country nor their fellow Americans. I’m tired of the useful, idiots our enemies find, in abundance, in the governing bodies in Washington.

What you will, my fellow Americans, but we have become two nations, again, much as this country split in the 1860’s. I’m not talking about a North/South split… I’m talking about a “Love America/Hate America” split. The last presidential election did nothing to bring us closer together. In fact, it appears Obama’s election has driven us even farther apart. We are hopelessly split apart and the Union, though it appears as one on paper, in reality… it no longer exists. Neither side has any interest, at all, in rejoining the other.

The “Hate America” and the “Blame America First” crowds (one and the same) have sapped this country of its will to survive. Any medical practitioner will tell you that when the will to survive is gone… all is lost.

The story is told of a Confederate general, during the darkest days of the America “War Between the States,” sending a dispatch to the Commanding General, Gen Robert E. Lee. In the dispatch, the Southern general is said to report that he and his troops were cut off, vastly outnumbered, the causality rate was extremely high, they were without provisions, and their ammunition was all but gone. In summation that Southern cavalier told Gen. Lee he would do the only thing left for him, and his men, to do. So, he said, they would attack, at dawn, with everything they had at their disposal!

That is the America I was born into. That is the America I grew up in. That is the America for which I wore the uniform of the US Army, and that is the America, which does not exist anymore.

I am frustrated with “mealy-mouthed” Americans who will accept second place. In my America, second place didn’t exist… in anything. Like the US Marine Corp, the improbable we did right away. The impossible took us just a tad longer.

I have been chided for stating that the US losses in Iraq are well within the acceptable range. Look, you don’t go to war if deaths are not acceptable. Rather, you bow your head and bare your neck to the chains of slavery. If you would remain free you must be willing to pay the price. The price for freedom is high. It is paid in the blood of patriots… the men and women of our Armed Forces.

I am heartsick at what this nation has become. America is now a cesspool of deviancy, mediocrity, cowardice, socialism, secularism, hedonism, and, regardless of what Obama says we are without hope.

Somewhere, about the late 1960’s to early 1970’s, Americans, like the shirker, in the Bible, decided to bury our talents for safekeeping rather than risk them in order to have them grow and benefit the country. Now we are paying the price for that reticence to risk everything for each other.

We are growing apart as a people. Our national conversation has grown shrill and vulgar. We can’t communicate with each other. When we try, it turns into a shouting match. We have become course, crass, and without sophistication. Our gentility is gone.

Finally, we have painted ourselves into a corner now. A corner, which threatens to deny us, even our own survival. Only drastic action will save us… and, unfortunately, many Americans do not wish to be saved and those who do are not interested in saving those who don’t. We are feeding upon ourselves.

I began this piece by pointing out where this attitude of mediocrity has gotten America in its war-fighting capability and the cost to recover that capability. Atomic Bombs will certainly win for us on the battlefields, but they will do nothing to salvage our land.

American men and women in uniform are growing tired of sacrificing their blood, limbs, and lives, for fellow Americans who actually want them to lose! And why would they not? They have grown distrustful of their Commander-in-Chief who is plainly dragging hi feet while trying to make a decision on whether oer not to allow those American fighting ment to have the resources they say they need to win the war in Afghanistan. Once before, in Somalia, a President (of the same political party) denied a request from the commanders on the ground and it cost the lives of at least 18 US service men and resulted in the withdrawal of US troops from that troubled land – and -- emboldened America’s enemies to such a degree that they flew plane loads of people into skyscrapers in our greatest city killing thousands of innocent Americans. The trust of many of our service men and women for their fellow Americans has been forever shattered. When the time comes for them to send their young sons and daughters to war for the US … will they do it? Can you blame them?

When a nations vision is forced to dissipate, that nation is doomed. When a nation’s hopes, and dreams, and aspirations, are shelved because social programs, such as socialized medicine, take precedence over that national vision… the death knell has sounded. When a nation sends it’s national treasure, its sons, and daughters, into harm’s way… and abandons them, that nation has lost its soul. Make no mistake about it. Many US troops in Afghanistan are beginning to question if their Commander-in-Chief has abandoned them.

Here are the words of the 35th President of the United States, John F. Kennedy, a man even his own party would seek to impeach today:

“The cost of freedom is always high, but Americans have always paid it. And one path we shall never choose, and that is the path of surrender, or submission.”… Pres. John F. Kennedy

Kennedy also said:

“There are risks and costs to a program of action, but they are far less than the long-range risks and costs of comfortable inaction”

President Harry Truman, the 33rd President of the US, said the following:

“America was not built on fear. America was built on courage, on imagination, and unbeatable determination to do the job at hand.”

Nowadays, the men mentioned above would be accused of insisting on “staying the course”. They would be ridiculed and hounded from office… even by their own Democrat Party.

That, Dear Reader, is how far we have sunk!

J. D. Longstreet

*********************

America+Socialism America+Socialism+Apathy+Obama+Afghanistan+Iraq+Iran+Military+Freedom

How NOT to Make War

How NOT to Make War
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet
*******************************************

The war in Afghanistan is making me nervous. Everyday, as I read the wire reports, and listen, and watch the broadcast news and glean the news from the Internet, and I am detecting many of the same mistakes the US made in Vietnam being made in Afghanistan. Micromanaging the war from Washington has already cost the lives of more US servicemen than is necessary.

The political Left in America has been wishing for a war for sometime now so they can prove their prowess. The little war in what used to be called Yugoslavia was unsatisfying for their public relations people. Dropping bombs on an enemy from so high up the jet engines of your aircraft are laboring for lack of oxygen and your aircraft can’t even be seen, is, somehow, not heroic enough for the 6 o’clock news. No, they need a war that can be splashed across the HDTV screens of Americans in all its bloody gore. They THINK AFGHANISTAN is IT! Once again, they have, as they say, figured wrong!

Liberals/Progressives/socialists/democrats love the very thought of Nation Building. As a conservative I don’t.

The US SUCKS at nation building. I am inclined to believe that democracy is not for everyone. Democracy is a thinking, reasoning person’s form of government.

A republican form of democratic government is even more difficult to set up and sustain. I believe there simply are some countries on this globe not capable, at this point in their history, of setting up and sustaining, a democratic, republican, form of government - such as the one we have in the US. I also believe that forcing them to create such a government is a terrible mistake on our part and will, almost assuredly, backfire on us - and, if we are not very careful we will be at war once again in those countries we have just left, or, are leaving.

As an example, I am convinced that soon after the US and it’s allies leaves Iraq it will revert back to a strongman form of dictator government. If that does, in fact happen, what will the US and it’s coalition partners have won? Not much, it seems to me.

Now, I know it is not the popular thing to say these days, but we won the war in Iraq. We invaded, completely destroyed the military of Iraq, overthrew the government of Iraq, and captured the Iraqi “Dictator-in-Hiding.”

I’m not a Neo-Con. If anything, I’m an old moss-backed Paleo-Con. I do not believe in Nation Building… at all. I’m from the old school in which you invade a country, and destroy it’s military, it’s government, it’s infrastructure and then … you leave. A very important part of the punishment of that enemy country is to leave it a smoking pile of rubble!

This is an important part of any victory. The ability to point to a former enemy’s pile of rubble and say: “hey, you mess with us and you, too, will wind up like that!” It has something to do with the “fear factor.” Scare the living daylights out of any potential enemies.

Granted, it’s not pretty, but it is effective. You see, I’m not into trying to win friends and influence people. Never have been. I’m into winning.

See, I told you it was not pretty.

This Nation Building is costing us treasure and blood. I’m sort of averse to contributing either one!

The US has to make attacking us too costly for any country to even contemplate. To demonstrate that cost, we need to completely obliterate a country, or two, sort of as examples, don’t you see?

But, so long as we go into countries and knock them down, and them help them back up, and rebuild their country, we minimize the cost to them. For example, Iraq will be in better shape when US forces finally DO leave than it has been since, well, I don’t know when.

I think Genghis Khan had it about right. Hit fast, hit hard, destroy everything in sight… and leave!

Did anyone ever ask “ole Genghis” what HIS exit strategy was? Huh? Guess not. You see, everybody knew, already!

No, our politicians are hell-bent on preventing our military from performing the jobs they were trained to do - kill and destroy. Instead, they seem to want our troops to all sit in a circle, hold hands, and sing “cum baya.” It is a scenario straight out of the sixties and it is doomed to eventual defeat.

It’s utter nonsense. It should be as simple as one, two, three:

One: Deploy to the enemy country

Two: Cream the enemy (and his country)

Three: Re-deploy home.

Yes, I KNOW this is simplistic, and NOTHING ever goes this easily. But – you get the idea.

In the meantime, keep the troops razor sharp, and leaning forward, so the next time a troublemaker sticks his head up, he knows what’s coming. You cannot keep the troops militarily sharp when they are building a city’s infrastructure and not training for combat.

Our troops have won the war. Now the politicians, in Washington, are so uncomfortable with victory, they feel this overpowering urge to “kiss and make-up” by rebuilding that which we have just destroyed. Makes no sense to me.

It’s not very diplomatic, I know. But then, again the French are credited with inventing diplomacy. That’s all I need to know about diplomacy!

Yeah, the more I think about it, the more I think “ole Genghis” was on to something there.

J. D. Longstreet

***********************

Conservative+Vietnam+Afghanistan

CIA and Dick Cheney Assassinations

by Maggie at Maggie's Notebook

Democrats in Congress are outraged that the Pentagon and CIA were developing a plan to "assassinate" al Qaeda in Iraq. The assassination teams would be CIA personnel, and not U.S. Military. Especially heinous to Congress is that the Pentagon did not brief appropriate Congressional members about the incomplete and unimplemented plan.

CIA

Americans are no longer shocked to hear that we have not always targeted all al Qaeda members, including leaders...especially leaders...since the war began after 9-11. We are no longer shocked at much we hear, because doing what makes no sense is exactly what Congress always does. Nevertheless, while not shocked, we are surprised, and along with our surprise comes puzzlement. Why would we need a secret program, even assuming Congress is briefed, to kill top al-Qaeda members?

Targeted killing of terrorists is prohibited by presidential orders banning assassinations that date back to the Ford administration. But the president can waive that order, said Vicki Divoll, a former CIA counsel, because there is no specific federal law that bans the practice.

There's also no legal difference, she said, between killing al Qaeda targets with a hit team or with an unmanned drone, because the "intent to kill a targeted person" defines an assassination.

The "air strikes" are what made this never-implemented plan different. According to officials, it was okay to target and kill al Qadea with air strikes, but not okay to target and kill al Qaeda "at close range," - what might include hand-to-hand combat. Killing "at close range" might risk "civilian casualties." For now, the CIA will have to be satisfied with Predator Drones - except that Congress can't keep it's mouth shut about them either. While Pakistan recently complained about Predator drones taking off and landing inside their borders, officials assured Pakistan that only surveillance drones are used inside the country, not the Predator which is capable of launching missiles.

Privately, though, Pakistani officials doubt that claim, especially after the chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Diane Feinstein, (D-CA), suggested 10 days ago that the CIA Predator drones do indeed use Pakistani airfields and not necessarily Afghan airfields, as most assume.

According to an anonymous source at the CIA, Dick Cheney directed the agency not to inform Congress of the specifics of the secret program.

Panetta told the committees there was no indication that there was anything illegal or inappropriate about the effort itself, the official said.

CIA directors since 2001 agreed with Cheney's decision not to inform Congress because the highly classified operation, described as "sporadic" and "embryonic," never managed to turn up the intelligence needed to carry out a kill and was not considered a covert operation, according to a former intelligence official. That official also was not authorized to discuss the program and spoke on condition of anonymity.

Congress has a right to know everything the CIA does, but the president can by law limit those told about covert operations to just the top four members of the House and Senate from the two parties and the senior members of the intelligence committees. Democrats on the House intelligence committee are pushing for a legal provision that would require the president to brief both committees in their entirety more often, but the White House has threatened to veto the move.

DefenseTech.org reminds us of Sandi Berger letting Osama bin Laden escape in Afghanistan, rather than chance civilian casualties: Doesn't this sort of smack of Sandi Berger-esque national security policy?

We know from the 9-11 commission report that Berger got cold feet when he had bin Laden in his sights for a proxy raid in Afghanistan because he was afraid of collateral damage and blowback. Now some of the same national security policy minds are back in the driver's seat so we can cancel a program to kill bad guys using CIA assets.

Here is the directive for how and when the CIA program would have been implemented:

Had it become fully developed, the CIA's aborted plan would have been a covert-action program. At the outset, the potential operation wouldn't have been limited to particular countries. The use of hit teams was in accordance with the authority granted by the 2001 order, said a former national-security official familiar with it.

In the most recent iteration of the project, top CIA leaders instructed officers involved to narrow its focus and report the plans to Congress if they reached a critical point where moving forward would involve activities that, if discovered, could embarrass the U.S., according to a former senior intelligence official.

Among all the punditry on this subject, we've heard little to nothing about the distinction between targeting for air strikes or targeting for "close contact," but surprisingly to me, there is a U.S policy prohibiting the "assassination" of anyone, not just heads of State!

Targeted killing of terrorists is prohibited by presidential orders banning assassinations that date back to the Ford administration. But the president can waive that order, said Vicki Divoll, a former CIA counsel, because there is no specific federal law that bans the practice.

There's also no legal difference, she said, between killing al Qaeda targets with a hit team or with an unmanned drone, because the "intent to kill a targeted person" defines an assassination.

However, that is not the end of the story. The rest of the story involves the Joint special Operations Command (JSOC). The JSOC is a somewhat secret branch of the U.S. Special Operations Command. The Special Operations Command is made-up of "special mission units." Among these units are the Delta Force and Seal Team Six. During the Iraq War other elite groups were known as "Grey Fox," "Capacity Gear" and "Titrant Ranger."

Pulitzer Prize winning investigating "journalist," Sy Hersh has charged that during the Bush-Cheney years the JSOC reported directly to Dick Cheney and no one else. He termed it an "executive assassination ring." The New York Times columnist didn't make the accusations in the NYT, but from podiums on college campuses, at the ACLU and public radio. New York Magazine writer Chris Suellentrop calls Hersh "the runaway mouth of America's premier investigative journalist."Bill Roggio writing for the Weekly Standard Blog says the Hersh claims that the JSOC reports to no one, or only to Cheney during the Bush-Cheney years, is false; they report to the Secretary of Defense and also falls under congressional oversight.

From Marc Ambinder:

JSOC units are very active in Iraq and Afghanistan; in those countries, since the U.S. is formally at war, their conduct can't really be analogized to an extra-legal hit squad....What's objectionable, in theory, is that the President can designate anyone as a terrorist and task JSOC with finding and executing them -- even if the person is not living in the war theatre and has never been charged with a crime. In practice, that's what presidents from Richard Nixon to Ronald Reagan to Bill Clinton have believed (the following from a 2001 report).

Senior intelligence officials confirm that a secret finding recently signed by President Bush, building on an earlier one by President Clinton, grant the CIA legal authority to conduct assassination operations against individuals designated as terrorists. As a result, the CIA is devising strategy and policy to that end, and is developing assets for assassinations within both the CIA and "uniformed military units," as well as foreign agents in Middle Eastern countries.

The outrage is likely a convenient smoke screen designed to take the focus off of Speaker Nancy Pelosi's accusation that the CIA "lies all the time." Target Dick Cheney's so-called assassination plots and the Dems might think they have a winner. Complain that the CIA targets al Qaeda and the Dems might think they have a winner...but maybe not. Just maybe we expect Congress to support every tactic possible to win these wars.