Perspectives

Pax Americana

The Official Policy of the United States is and has been for decades that we "don't negotiate with terrorists."  It's a great policy, so long as its practiced.   It can be difficult for the families of hostages, who really don't care as much about the long term effects, as they do about getting their loved one back.  For them, it doesn't matter who spends how much to whom, as long as their loved one walks away, as soon, and as unharmed as possible.

The problem is that if hostage takers get their way, it gives them an incentive to take more hostages.  Conversely, if the bad guys realize that hostage taking is a losing proposition, they'll decide against the practice.

I propose (and others have in the past) a policy of Pax Americana. (Pax Britanica for our pals in Britain, and other names for other Nations with the stomach for it.)  The policy is simply: if you're stupid enough to attack American Citizens, we will hunt you down and deliver justice to you.  Sure, we'll activate the professional Hostage Negotiators, whose job it will be to keep you busy long enough for us to send in an HRT.  They will negotiate to the very second that the front door, back door, window, or wall of your lair explodes in their ear.

My message would be clear:

Generals on Duty

The highest Honor one Warrior can give another is not "He's a nice guy," or "He gets things done," but "I'd follow that man into the Gates of Hell," or "I'd trust him to cover my six any day of the week."  It's not about whether they like the person or not. It's not about the rank of the person discussed.  It's about respect earned by his actions.

But as one climbs the rank structure, hopefully for doing the right things, and not as a matter of punching the right tickets, certain duties are no longer required, or expected, of them.  Some call this the "privilege of rank," but reality is that they have other duties that are more important, more stressful, and don't allow for some of the more menial tasks they once conducted on a regular basis.

Still, wise leaders will on occasion return to duties, serving subordinates, on special occasions.  Most notable is a military tradition of the highest ranking serving meals to the lower ranks on Thanksgiving and Christmas.  Even President George W. Bush has done this, in combat zones.  But pulling guard duty?  That's not the norm or tradition, not even on holidays.  Some poor unlucky sap whose number has come up, literally, gets the duty.  But there is a story of one General who did so, on Christmas one year.

Attacking Generals Becomes Big Business

When Michael Yon attacked Generals Menard and McChrystal, his readership soared.  When Michael Hastings of Rolling Stone magazine published disparaging remarks by General McChrystal's staff, their hits peaked at 943,000 the day after, 600% of their norm.  Their American readership soared from 100k to 753k that day. There's no telling how many copies of that issue were sold.  The General was fired within hours for daring to note that the POTUS had hardly given him the time of day.  Hastings got a Polk Award from for taking down the General. Their online revenue likely hit 6x the norm as well.

So, it's little surprise, that Hastings and Rolling Stone have decided to try to replicate those numbers.  This time, they're going after LTG Caldwell IV, and relying on hearsay and "he said, she said," with a zeal reminiscent of the Inquisition.  He's aligned himself with an officer with a bone to pick: LTC Holmes (a married man) was investigated for inappropriate relations with a subordinate and evidently took issue with orders given him by the General, his boss.  Hastings decided to get the hackles of Senators up, by implying they had been played.

Base Motivations of Islamism

(Originally published in Feb 2010, this series still holds true.)

It is a widespread perception that terrorist organizations are independent of each other and compete or aggressive to others.  While this may have held true in times past, one of the key developments of the 90’s were the increasing alliances and unified efforts of  various organizations under umbrella organizations and direction of key state sponsors of terror. 

 

These alliances are designed to further a financial/politico-military goal rather than being purely ideological.  On the international government level, this is most evident in the alliances of ideological opponents in order to further the power of otherwise weak causes.  But it also demonstrates that the ideologies are simple tools of powerful elites who lust for even greater power. 

 

If the Iranian dictator were ideologically pure, would he really have key allies such as Kim Il Jong who propagandizes to his own people that he is a god?  Can a "fundamentalist Muslim" truly be allied with Hugo Chavez, who purports to be a Catholic, while holding the Catholic Church itself as a primary enemy of Islam?  And these are simply the more obvious hypocrisies of the "Islamic Republic of Iran." 

 At the base of this discussion, is the rise to power of Osama bin Laden, and the roots, the mechanisms, and the means of it.  The intent is to dispel myths of his “fundamental” religious beliefs, myths of the Sunni-Shi’a conflict, myths of OBL's piety, as well as dispel what amounts to propaganda initiated by various elements and propagated by political and media organizations for their own gains, even when in conflict with the original purpose of the propaganda itself.

Underreported Terrorist Ties

(Written in November 2009, this still applies.)

Some things really make you wonder.  Perhaps there's some "justification," but it's simply hard to imagine what excuse would make sense why the government joins with the media in ignoring the ties of terrorists.  The documentation is  there and has been to demonstrate the ties between Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, Hezbollah, Hamas, Hizb-i-Islami, Islamic Jihad, the Muslim Brotherhood, just to name a few of  the more well known groups, and other Terrorists.  It is no secret that Osama, Mugniyah, Zawahari, Turabi, are and have been working closely with Iran and The Sudan for decades.

One would hope but sees little evidence, that the intelligence agencies and political leadership of this Nation knows and understands that basically all of the tangled webs of islamist terrorism lead back to Tehran, and many through Khartoum, The Sudan.  While the administration at the time may be forgiven for not knowing in 1993 or 1983 that the battles they fought in Mogadishu and Beirut were against the proxies of Tehran, today's leadership doesn't have the luxury of ignorance that history has removed.

Who Watches the Watchers (Journalists)?

The world of journalism has long portrayed itself "the 4th Estate," the "4th Branch" of Government, and the light that sends corrupt cockroaches of government scurrying for cracks into which to hide.  I have long held that it was once a noble profession, and still maintain that it has an important role, but I haven't had faith in the integrity of the media in many years.  I've stood beside the cameras recording the news, while contrasting the reports to the reality, simply too many times to trust the reports.

"Journalism is the one solitary respectable profession which honors theft (when committed in the pecuniary interest of a journal,) & admires the thief....However, these same journals combat despicable crimes quite valiantly--when committed in other quarters."  Mark Twain in a Letter to W. D. Howells, October 30, 1880

And Twain was not the first to bemoan the ethics of journalism.  A century earlier, some of the Founding Fathers, themselves complained of the conjectures of the news media of their day.  Perhaps then, longing for the good old days, when journalism was honorable is as much an illusion, as hopes that it will return to its ethics.

Still, there is no doubt that a "free press" is crucial to Freedoms we enjoy.  A friend of mine, who works at the edge of the public-private sector, has run into the importance more than once.  Where there is little in the way of journalistic scrutiny, corruption runs rampant.  His work often brings the spotlight of journalism behind it, as it brings jobs to an area and the press follows that development. 

But where are the limits to the "free press?"  Are they beyond the reach of the law?  Do they have a responsibility to withhold information that can cost lives?  Why do they believe themselves beyond reproach?  Do American journalists have an obligation to report the American side of the story?  Or do they have an obligation to "objectively" report the world or opposition view?  Who watches the watchers?

Not All Protests Are Equal

As we have witnessed the popular protests in Tunisia, Egypt, & Elsewhere, many have expressed jubilance for the will of the people overcoming the rulers of people.  In fact, these protests and their results have sparked protests wide and varied against monarchs, Presidents, and dictators elsewhere.  Not only is it too early to know the results in Egypt, but its too early to cheer on these other protests, and not all protests are to be cheered as "the will of the people."

Italy is already having issues.  They've had to ask the European Union for help to handle the flood of refugees from Tunisia.  Why isn't the MSM covering this?  They can claim that there's bigger things afoot, but they equally don't want to admit things are worse now than before they cheered the protests that sparke all others.  They prefer covering the anti-Berlusconi protests than the aftermath of the Tunisian protests.

Columbia University Heckles War Hero; Defund Them

"Peace by persuasion has a pleasant sound, but I think we should not be able to work it. We should have to tame the human race first, and history seems to show that that cannot be done."  Mark Twain in a Letter to William T. Stead, 1/9/1899

While Columbia University has not had a ROTC Office in 4 decades, it does not shy away from weighing in on Military Debates.  Contrary to the Geneva Conventions, one of its professors claimed that the US Constitution, not the Geneva Conventions and International Law were the basis for holding trials and giving unearned rights to terrorists captured on the Battlefield.

Yeah, the same University that invited Ahdimijihadist to speak there bans ROTC from its campus and its students heckle Wounded Warriors that are members of its student body.  The leader of the terrorist world was cheered mere miles from the site of the 9/11 attacks, a place he tried to visit, and was denied by NYC.

Despicable & Questionable "Pro-Troop" Non-Profits

Regardless of the hype, regardless of the marketing, regardless of the reputation or name of a Non-Profit, you need to look at the finances.  Is it right to hire the homeless? Is it right to hire the homeless to collect money for Veterans?  Is it right to give the homeless combat uniforms and give them a third of the booty they collect to pretend to be Veterans while shaking down drivers for that cash?

It is your money and I know you want it to go to the cause you are willing to give it away to.  I cannot stress enough that it is up to you to check their finances, before you fall prey to a worthy cause that isn't.  If they give ONE Dollar to what they claim, legally they can claim to be doing what they're doing, even if they  pay executives millions and spend millions more in marketing to collect the money for their salaries.

A Florida journalist ran down all 121 "Veteran Support" Non-Profits in the state and found some very disturbing information.  One of the bigger "VSO's" got on my permanent bad side when they sent telemarketers after me to sell me trashbags with the US Flag on them.  I learned later they pay those telemarketers 90% of the proceeds.

Sure, there will be administrative costs, and while the BBB has a lower bar than me on what percentage is appropriate, they are a good resource to check, before you give, as is Charity Navigator and others.  Read the article

Reporters Needed; Veterans Should Apply

The Media is hiring reporters to cover military issues.  Who better than a Veteran to report what they know.  See the link above for further description of below jobs

 

 

 Title   Videographer – Alexandria, Va.
 Title     Defense Reporter – Washington, D.C.   Categories     Full-time, Newspaper/wire   Company     The Washington Times   Salary         Location     Washington, D.C. 

    Title     Defense Business Reporter   Categories     Full-time, Newspaper/wire   Company     Gannett Government Media   Salary        Location     Springfield, Va.   

  Title     Military Medicine Reporter   Categories     Full-time, Newspaper/wire   Company     Gannett Government Media   Salary       Location     Springfield, Va.   

 Title     Military affairs reporter – Colorado   Categories     Full-time, Newspaper/wire   Company     Colorado Springs Military Newspaper Group   Location     Colorado Springs, Colo.    
 Title     Military Times Database Reporter   Categories     Full-time, Newspaper/wire   Company     Gannett Government Media   Salary      Location     Springfield, Va.   

  Title     Research Fellow   Categories     Academia   Company     Medill School of Journalism’s National Security Journalism Initiative      Location     Evanston, Ill.   

NOTE: Gannet Corp owns USA Today, the Army Times, Military Times, associated "Service" newspapers, and several regional papers.

How Your #2 Pencil Can Save Afghanistan!

If you could do something to help an Afghan girl learn to read, would you?  If you understood that Afghan literacy is a key to long term peace and prosperity, would that make a difference in whether you gave a little girl a pencil?  While American children want the latest X-Box or the games that go with it, in many parts of the world, children are ecstatic to get a common #2 lead pencil.  They're happy with a piece of hard candy, but as convoys pass or Troops approach, one of the most common signs is an index finger to the palm of the hand, asking for a pencil.

This was the matter of discussion between myself and a teammate more than once.  As the least educated on the team, I was interested on teammates thoughts on the rocks (one guy was a specialist in the things and he hated when I called crushed stone, "gravel," so I did it often), or in this case a PhD candidate's observations on Afghan kids' desire for self-expression. 

He noted that kids everywhere just want to be able to express themselves.  It was certainly better than my niece's use of the walls of the house as her personal canvas to her permanent markers at a young age. I had a ready source for pencils and would get 500 pack boxes of the prize of Afghan kids, every few mail runs.  The phenomenon is discussed in a "Time Machine" article from 2009.

The fact is that something as simple as school supplies can change the future of Afghanistan, as well as improve relations between Afghans and American Troops.  Those old unused school supplies you have, the old backpacks in your closets, can make a positive difference in the lives of kids that have toys no more expensive than the rocks they find in the desert.  And a Senior Master Sergeant in the Air Force teamed up with his Professor wife to start not just a program to help you help Afghan kids, but got Florida College Kids involved in the effort.  I can't even imagine a downside to this program.

2012 Budgets: Lies of Commission

It does not surprise me that politicians play on words, statistics, and time lines in order to sell a theme that is not intellectually true.  It has long been true that politicians confuse the facts with complex language, legislation, and legalese.  Recently, the Secretary of Defense has launched his 3rd proposal for cuts in the DoD Budget and the POTUS has claimed to be cutting Trillions (in a decade) while increasing spending on many programs, "freezing" bloated programs he quadrupled in size previously, and cutting twice as much from the Department of Defense as his annual "deficit cuts" imply.

SecDef Gates is literally calling for old airplanes to be repaired with figurative baling wire while cutting the number of planes of the current generation of fighters.  Instead of comparing DoD budgets to 2009 when the current administration took over, he compares it to 2001, before we were fighting not one war, much less two, much less worldwide operations.  Not only does the SecDef propose cutting the overall budget, but he also proposes shifting remaining funds from war-fighting capabilities and the actual battlefield to education programs and green energy initiatives.

The Abused

“The Abused”
©2007-2008 ARM, All Rights Reserved (republished 2011)

 LTC(ret) Grossman, PhD and psychologist has taken the study of killing, both criminal and legal, and PTSD further than any.  He coined the phrase killology and has a website with the same name http://killology.com .  He gives the analogy which I often repeat: that there are 3 types of people: wolves, sheep and guard dogs.  I’ve added the shepherds, which are the politicians and religious leaders that the sheep follow.  Wolves are the criminals and terrorists which prey on the sheep.  The sheep are your average citizens which cannot or do not protect themselves.  Their lives are concerned with eating and following along with the crowd.  The guard dogs look very much like the wolves but are those that risk their lives to keep the wolves at bay.  The sheep don’t like seeing the guard dog because it reminds them that danger does exist and forces them to move to safer areas to better protect them.

In 2007, in answering a question about ‘war strategy’ which implied that our soldiers were predatory rather than protective and caring, I realized how closely the Iraqi and Afghani people relate to many women I’ve met.  It actually may explain in the context of the above why these particular women pull away from me.

A woman, child or dog that has lived its life in an abusive situation has trouble trusting those that are similar to the abuser.  The wolf and the guard dog, the predator and the protector look very much the same.  While I have the same ability as the criminal to cause destruction and pain, mine is used against those that cause it rather than against those that have been abused.  While I’ve recognized for a long time that women have these unhealthy histories were unlikely to get involved with me, it was only that day that I came up with a why.  I could be wrong, but it’s the only reason I’ve ever come up with.

Present and Future of Egypt

It is far too early to predict what the future of Egypt will be.  But the historical parallels with 1979 Iran present some very scary possibilities.  Egypt has been a target of exportation of Iranian Islamism for decades and Sudan has been the transit point for much of it.  At times, Iran considered Egypt to be the bridge too far, and at others a key to the future Caliphate.

The international political justification for positions on the Egyptian situation are particularly interesting.  Many politicians and many protesters were asking the Egyptian Military to take over from an elected leader, in order to establish democracy.  The same parties that claim we should not impose Western ideals of democracy on Middle Eastern nations were calling for the overthrow of a democracy by the minorities as a means of democracy.  The same parties that so vocally oppose military leaders, even when elected to office, such as Musharraf, were calling for the Military to take over, in Egypt.

Overview of the Michael Yon Saga

"To sin by silence, when they should protest, makes cowards of men." Abraham Lincoln?

I hope with this overview of the Michael Yon Saga, I can wash my hands of him.  I have no doubt he'll try to spark new controversies, and there will always be a question of whether it is better to ignore the attention whore, or to apply the attention his bad behavior warrants.  I didn't undertake this series lightly, but the record had to be corrected.  I will not allow him to dictate my actions via bullying nor threats.

But Yon has an international audience, and by his own standard, he should be debunked.

Yon Publicizes WarPorn

Let me see if I can say this with the appropriate level of tact and candor: War On Terror News CONDEMNS the actions of Michael Yon for publicizing the video and the French Film crew that published the video of an American Soldier's wounding and medevac.   Let me be clear: There is NO excuse for publicizing that video. 

I stand with Chuck Z, a Wounded Warrior.  I have not asked to quote Chuck and if he wants it removed, I will.  I doubt he will:

Chuck Ziegenfuss

"Michael Yon is now into republishing war porn. He has a video up of a wounded, and suffering soldier, who has just had his leg blown off. Of course, he takes the stance that "people need to know this is happening."If anyone in the world doesn't know this happens in war, they are functioanlly retarded.If anyone supports someone who would publish, or republish this, they, too, are functionally retarded."

 

The Yon Conspiracy Over Tarnak

I'm going to start this one with some admissions of ignorance by Yon, in his own words.  I'll then look at how he went from praising General McChrystal, to calling for his head, and examining where Yon's vindictive headhunting took him.

So Yon has been covering the wars for years, and claimed in 2006 that we were losing the War in Afghanistan, but in May of 2010, he still doesn't know who the Taliban even are.  That could be a post of its own.  I don't expect everyone to understand who the Taliban are, but I do expect the expert combat Journalist, who makes a living by asking people to donate money to his time in country, (and his extended vacations in Thailand) to understand who the Taliban are.  I'll bet readers here could educate him.

But Yon also admits he doesn't know what's going on in the bigger picture.  You know, I could give him this one, if it weren't for the fact that he had been prolifically declaring the General who does know is "incompetent."  I've never "blogged" from a combat zone as has Yon, but I've served as a Warrior in more than one. I know that it's difficult to focus on the forest while also seeing the tree.  When you're taking small arms fire, it's hard to care who's watching on the big screen in Bagram, or what they think of how your piece fits into the strategic picture.

Our own reports, at War On Terror News, on Afghanistan need the analysis of putting together the pieces of the puzzle.  We provide the box of pieces, but a search in the upper left will put all the FET (Female Engagement Teams) pieces in one pile, and all the Marjah pieces in another pile, so someone could see the bigger picture.  By clicking on the category "Afghanistan" to the right or above, one can get a daily picture of what's going on today, yesterday and this week.  Or by clicking on the "Hardened Warriors," category to the right one can see that Our Troops are committed to doing good things for unarmed civilians where ever they go: Africa, Afghanistan, Iraq, Thailand, the Philippines, and elsewhere!

And I didn't just take exception to Yon being clueless on the ethnicity that is Arab, I lambasted him for being a writer unable to use a dictionary, or too lazy to look it up.  I can understand that an average American reader might be confused on this, but Yon has been a Journalist and blogger in the Middle East for years, before he finally got a headache trying to figure it out.  It's his bread and butter, literally, to know that.  These may not be simple terms for a reader, but they should be easy definitions for the "expert" that has spent years writing about it.

But what did Yon have to say about General McChrystal before he began the attack on an ally?

Yon OPSEC Violations

 Yon seems ignorant of what OPSEC is or how his actions impact the lives and safety of Our Troops.  Last week, CJ Grisham demonstrated a blatant OPSEC (Operational Security) violation but he didn't compare it to the book answer on it.  CJ's example could not have been a more textbook example and I will use it here, along with other examples.  Yon challenged detractors to demonstrate these examples, but when CJ showed him one, he claimed he was just helping improve security, because changes were made before the enemy had a chance to use it.

Sorry Yon, an OPSEC violation is an OPSEC violation.  What changes this (Yon fans) is that the situation is not what it once was.  The Military, not Yon, changed the situation.  Both Yon and his "source" were at fault in this publication of weaknesses in base defenses.  I can publish this now, because the conditions that made it an OPSEC violation no longer exist.  Note the dates.

OPSEC definition: A systematic and proved process by which the U.S. Government and its supporting contractors can deny to potential adversaries information about capabilities and intentions by identifying, controlling, and protecting generally unclassified evidence of the planning and execution of sensitive Government  activities.

Critical Information Includes (i.e. some of the things we don't want to tell the enemy):
 

The First Scalp of Tarnak?

So, we saw that an irritating attack on the Bridge Over the River Tarnak led to the crusade of an American Journalist to campaign against an allied General, when that General's political masters struck out on a policy the Journalist didn't like.  But did he succeed in getting that General fired?  Or were his later claims as empty as his early allegations? 

Long ago, when I was sitting on a cot in the middle of a hot desert, bored out of my mind, a colleague gave me a book. That book inspired a look into the minds of serial killers, and I crawled inside, reading, analyzing, and learning the things that make a deviant segment of society tick.  I am by no means a "profiler," but I've practiced learning what makes segments do what they do, those that think differently than do I, and others whom I wish to think more like.  I've studied serial killers, terrorists, islamists, drug kingpins, communist propagandists, rapists, the rich, the employed, and now Yon.  This series is the result of crawling into the head of one Journalist, of trying to understand why he says the things he says. 

His own words are the key to that, though I will not express my broader conclusions.  I will tell you that I don't believe his hype of his greatness.  I believe he was mad that Canadian politicians, who had decided that Canada had done her part, and he took it out on a Canadian General, who had nothing to do with the politicians, and nothing to do with the bridge.  I think he tries to be the first with the story, even if he has to quote those that were ahead of him, to prove he was first.  I don't think he has any special access, or ever has, even if he was able to convince some to conduct an interview because he was a Journalist and at one time was well read by those who were craving what no one else was providing.

But the question here is: Did he take down General Menard?  Did he collect his first scalp?

From Tarnak Bridge to Bruhaha

So we've seen that the attack on the Bridge over the River Tarnak was semi-successful, not significantly surprising, and mildly irritating.  So, who broke the story and how did it become an all out international brawl, with allied citizens taking sides, and American Veterans divided?  How did it become the battle cry of a Journalist for the heads of Generals?

From the beginning, the story was distorted and blown out of proportion and claims later would not match the claims of the first days.  The initial report was made by the ABC news, Australia.  It was inaccurate, with Taliban quotes typical of their wild propaganda claims.  It would be days before the closest "war correspondent" would report his findings, but minutes before he looked for a scapegoat.  To the right is the first account I find of Michael Yon's reporting on the bridge attack.  But it's not much of a report from him, so much as a bit of sniping at the ABC report.

The Bridge Over the River Tarnak

On a cold morning of March 1, 2010, a suicide bomber attacked an American Convoy on a bridge in Kandahar Province.  Afghan Security were protecting the bridge and the blast was sufficient to throw a multi-ton Mine Resistant vehicle off the bridge, killing a Soldier and several Afghan Civilians.  It was another day in Afghanistan and this time the enemy had gotten lucky. 

Normally, such a story would get little press, but this one would be different.  The bridge was important, but not as important as the aftermath.  It was clearly a target, as another explosive was found on it, but that one was not exploded by the enemy.  It was a tactical victory by the enemy, but not as big as it became at the hands of an American Journalist.  It caused an international uproar, but the outrage was founded in emotion rather than logic.

Who is the Muslim Brotherhood?

And what is "political islam?"  Well, political islam is islamism, pure and simple, but in a benign way of saying so.  Islamism is a political and economic ideology that wants governments ran by mullahs and ayatollahs, according to "Sharia Law."  There are two branches of islamism: violent and political.  Regardless, their goals are the same though their primary means are different.  Hezbollah, Hamas, and Iran are both violent and political forms of islamism.  Al-Qaeda and the Taliban are violent adherents of islamism.

And who is the Muslim Brotherhood?  It is a secret society established in 1928 and has formed political parties at times to advance its goals.  Members of the Brotherhood are required to keep their membership private and to donate a portion of their incomes to the Brotherhood.  If you know a Muslim, you may know a member of the Brotherhood, but don't expect him to say so.  Several terrorists of different organizations have ties to the Brotherhood.  Its size is unknown.  Its reach extends into London and into the United States.