The only alternative [to European and Obama-led global chaos] is to address the crisis in Syria and Iraq, and with it the terrorist threat posed by Islamic State. But just as in the 1990s, when Europeans could address the crisis in the Balkans only with the U.S. playing the dominant military role, so again America will have to take the lead, provide the troops, supply the bulk of the air power and pull together those willing and able to join the effort.RTWT.
What would such an effort look like? First, it would require establishing a safe zone in Syria, providing the millions of would-be refugees still in the country a place to stay and the hundreds of thousands who have fled to Europe a place to which to return. To establish such a zone, American military officials estimate, would require not only U.S. air power but ground forces numbering up to 30,000. Once the safe zone was established, many of those troops could be replaced by forces from Europe, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and other Arab states, but the initial force would have to be largely American.
In addition, a further 10,000 to 20,000 U.S. troops would be required to uproot Islamic State from the haven it has created in Syria and to help local forces uproot it in Iraq. Many of those troops could then be replaced by NATO and other international forces to hold the territory and provide a safe zone for rebuilding the areas shattered by Islamic State rule.
At the same time, an internationally negotiated and blessed process of transition in Syria should take place, ushering the bloodstained Mr. Assad from power and establishing a new provisional government to hold nationwide elections. The heretofore immovable Mr. Assad would face an entirely new set of military facts on the ground, with the Syrian opposition now backed by U.S. forces and air power, the Syrian air force grounded and Russian bombing halted. Throughout the transition period, and probably beyond even the first rounds of elections, an international peacekeeping force—made up of French, Turkish, American and other NATO forces as well as Arab troops—would have to remain in Syria until a reasonable level of stability, security and inter-sectarian trust was achieved...
Showing posts with label Iraq War. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Iraq War. Show all posts
Sunday, November 22, 2015
Paris Attacks, Rise of Islamic State, Shake a Weakened Europe — And the International System
A great piece, from Robert Kagan, at the Wall Street Journal, "The Crisis of World Order":
Wednesday, October 28, 2015
The World Will Blame President Obama If Iraq Falls
At National Journal.
Via Instapundit, "NOBEL PEACE PRIZE UPDATE: U.S. ‘Direct Action’ Against the Islamic State."
Read the whole thing, and click around at the links.
Via Instapundit, "NOBEL PEACE PRIZE UPDATE: U.S. ‘Direct Action’ Against the Islamic State."
Yes, I keep repeating this stuff. Because it bears repeating. In Iraq, Obama took a war that we had won at a considerable expense in lives and treasure, and threw it away for the callowest of political reasons. In Syria and Libya, he involved us in wars of choice without Congressional authorization, and proceeded to hand victories to the Islamists. Obama’s policy here has been a debacle of the first order, and the press wants to talk about Bush as a way of protecting him. Whenever you see anyone in the media bringing up 2003, you will know that they are serving as palace guard, not as press.A great post.
Read the whole thing, and click around at the links.
Sunday, October 25, 2015
WATCH: New Video Purportedly Shows U.S.-Kurdish Raid Against Islamic State
I At Instapundit.
And a YouTube clip is here, "The Kurdish regional government in northern Iraq released a video Sunday purportedly showing the joint raid of a prison by U.S. and Kurdish peshmerga forces in which they released 70 hostages held by the Islamic State group."
ADDED: The BBC has the video, which shows some different angles, "'Hostage rescue' footage of US-led raid on IS jail released."
And a YouTube clip is here, "The Kurdish regional government in northern Iraq released a video Sunday purportedly showing the joint raid of a prison by U.S. and Kurdish peshmerga forces in which they released 70 hostages held by the Islamic State group."
ADDED: The BBC has the video, which shows some different angles, "'Hostage rescue' footage of US-led raid on IS jail released."
Labels:
Iraq,
Iraq War,
Obama Administration,
Terrorism,
U.S. Military,
War on Terror
Saturday, October 24, 2015
U.S. Sees Beefed Up Mission in Iraq and Syria
So much for winding down those wars, Democrats.
At WSJ, "U.S. to Increase Raids Against Islamic State":
At WSJ, "U.S. to Increase Raids Against Islamic State":
WASHINGTON—Defense Secretary Ash Carter signaled a new and more muscular policy in Iraq and Syria, saying the U.S. military would mount more raids and provide more active support to groups, including Kurdish fighters, who can counter Islamic State.More.
A day after a dramatic, joint rescue with Kurdish forces near Kirkuk resulted in the first American combat death in Iraq since 2011, Mr. Carter on Friday said there would be more such operations. He also said Americans should gird for a dangerous, complicated fight, but expressed confidence the U.S. would ultimately win.
President Barack Obama has been publicly cautious in his policy against Islamic State, repeatedly saying that American troops wouldn’t participate in combat missions as they battle the extremists across Iraq and Syria.
But while Mr. Carter expressed sorrow for the loss of Master Sgt. Joshua Wheeler in Thursday’s raid, he indicated the beginning of a deeper, more assertive role for American forces there.
“There will be more raids,” Mr. Carter said at the Pentagon. American forces, he said, “will be in harm’s way, there’s no question about it, and I don’t want anybody to be under any illusions about that.”
The U.S. move is designed in part to blunt criticism of White House policy from Capitol Hill, where Mr. Carter and Marine Gen. Joe Dunford, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, will appear next week.
The U.S.-led coalition’s campaign against Islamic State also has faced criticism from some allies, while Russia has expanded its engagement across the Middle East. On Friday Moscow announced an agreement with Jordan, a key U.S. ally, to coordinate military operations in Syria.
Some Iraqi Shiite politicians have invited Moscow to start airstrikes in Iraq as well, although U.S. officials insist they have been assured that Iraq’s leaders don't plan to pursue such plans.
The pledge to step up U.S. participation in military raids against Islamic State also comes as U.S. confidence in its Iraqi partners grows, particularly in Kurdish military units. Gen. Dunford, after visiting Iraq this past week, said it was time to begin to “open the aperture” in military operations there.
“To me, it’s all about capabilities,” he said Tuesday. “It may be as simple as methods and timing, and then it might be different ways of doing what we’re doing.”
Military officials didn’t spell out precisely how the U.S. role in Iraq would change. But Mr. Carter said there would be more operations like the one he authorized this week, in which U.S. special-operations forces teamed with Kurdish units known as Peshmerga to rescue Islamic State prisoners.
The plan, U.S. officials said, was to have the Kurdish forces lead the operation, with American forces providing airlift, airstrike support, intelligence and battlefield advice.
The operation took an unexpected turn, however, when Islamic State militants guarding the prison near Hawija, Iraq, fought back and the Kurdish force became pinned down.
Members of the American unit jumped off their helicopters and entered the fray, resulting in the death of Sgt. Wheeler.
In the end, the joint force didn’t find the Peshmerga captives they went in to get, but rescued 70 other prisoners who were to be executed, U.S. officials said, and killed 15 Islamic State fighters.,,
Labels:
Iraq,
Iraq War,
Obama Administration,
Terrorism,
U.S. Military,
War on Terror
Friday, October 23, 2015
Delta Force Master Sgt. Joshua Wheeler Identified as First American Killed in Iraq Since 2011 (VIDEO)
Following-up on my previous entry, "In the Mail: Sean Naylor's Relentless Strike: The Secret History of Joint Special Operations Command."
Here's the report on Master Sgt. Joshua Wheeler, at CBS This Morning:
Here's the report on Master Sgt. Joshua Wheeler, at CBS This Morning:
Labels:
Amazon Sales,
Books,
Iraq,
Iraq War,
Journalism,
Terrorism,
U.S. Military,
War on Terror
In the Mail: Sean Naylor's Relentless Strike: The Secret History of Joint Special Operations Command
My copy came yesterday, and I'm already enjoying it --- particularly in light of the U.S. commando killed in yesterday's special operations rescue mission in Iraq.
At Amazon, Relentless Strike: The Secret History of Joint Special Operations Command.
At Amazon, Relentless Strike: The Secret History of Joint Special Operations Command.
Labels:
Amazon Sales,
Books,
Iraq,
Iraq War,
Journalism,
Terrorism,
U.S. Military,
War on Terror
Monday, October 5, 2015
Delta Force Secretly Killed Iranian Agents in Iraq — with IEDs
From Sean Naylor, at the New York Post:
I blogged Naylor's book last night, "Sean Naylor's New Book, Relentless Strike: The Secret History of Joint Special Operations Command."
The Iraq war was, in part, a proxy battle between the US and Iran. But fighting it had “political restrictions,” author Sean Naylor writes. In his new book, “Relentless Strike: The Secret History of Joint Special Operations Command,” Naylor reveals that US special operations forces came up with a solution, one that would let them conduct secret assassinations without anyone — even our own FBI — finding out.Keep reading.
By early 2007, some US intelligence estimates held that as many as 150 Iranian operatives were in Iraq. Many were member of the Quds Force, the covert arm of Iran’s Shi’ite theocracy. Their mission was to coordinate the violent campaign being waged against US forces by Iraq’s Shi’ite militias.
“It was 100 percent, ‘Are you willing to kill Americans and are you willing to coordinate attacks?’ ” said an officer who studied the Quds Force’s approach closely. “ ‘If the answer is “yes,” here’s arms, here’s money.’ ”
The Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) set up a new task force, named Task Force 17.
Its mandate was simple: go after “anything that Iran is doing to aid in the destabilization of Iraq,” said a Task Force 17 officer...
I blogged Naylor's book last night, "Sean Naylor's New Book, Relentless Strike: The Secret History of Joint Special Operations Command."
Labels:
Amazon Sales,
Books,
Iran,
Iraq,
Iraq War,
Journalism,
Middle East,
Persian Gulf,
Syria,
Terrorism,
U.S. Military,
War on Terror
Tuesday, September 1, 2015
Dick and Liz Cheney's New Book is Out Today!
I'm looking forward to diving in.
Get your copy, at Amazon, Exceptional: Why the World Needs a Powerful America.
And ICYMI, "Restoring American Exceptionalism."
Get your copy, at Amazon, Exceptional: Why the World Needs a Powerful America.
And ICYMI, "Restoring American Exceptionalism."
Monday, August 31, 2015
Sunday, August 30, 2015
Socialist Bernie Sanders Slams Iraq War as 'One of the Worst Foreign Policy Blunders' in History' (VIDEO)
Well, at least he voted against it.
Hillary voted for it, so if he's going to ramp up attacks on the Iraq war as basically getting us into the mess we're in now in the Middle East, he's going to have to take it to the former senator for New York, who voted along with the rest of her Democrat Party colleagues to approve the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002.
At ABC News, via Memeorandum, "‘This Week’ Transcript: Sen. Bernie Sanders and Gov. Bobby Jindal."
And Martha Raddatz has Sanders on the hot seat a bit here. It doesn't look like the dude has a clear personal criteria for the use of force. Watch:
Hillary voted for it, so if he's going to ramp up attacks on the Iraq war as basically getting us into the mess we're in now in the Middle East, he's going to have to take it to the former senator for New York, who voted along with the rest of her Democrat Party colleagues to approve the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002.
At ABC News, via Memeorandum, "‘This Week’ Transcript: Sen. Bernie Sanders and Gov. Bobby Jindal."
And Martha Raddatz has Sanders on the hot seat a bit here. It doesn't look like the dude has a clear personal criteria for the use of force. Watch:
Thursday, August 20, 2015
Labour Leader Candidate Jeremy Corbyn Compared U.S. Troops to Islamic State on Vladimir Putin's Propaganda Mouthpiece 'Russia Today' in 2014 (VIDEO)
Oh boy, this is going to inflame some passions.
See Louis Mensch on Twitter (for example, here and here).
And at Britain's Channel 4, "Jeremy Corbyn appears to equate Isis and US military actions":
See Louis Mensch on Twitter (for example, here and here).
And at Britain's Channel 4, "Jeremy Corbyn appears to equate Isis and US military actions":
In an appearance on a Russian-owned news channel in 2014, the Labour leadership contender Jeremy Corbyn compared the actions of US forces during the Iraq war to those of Islamic State militants.
Palmyra Archaeologist Refused to Lead Islamic State to Antiquities
Following-up from previously, "Islamic State Beheads 82-Year-Old Antiquities Scholar in Palmyra, Syria."
At the Guardian UK, "Beheaded Syrian scholar refused to lead Isis to hidden Palmyra antiquities":
At the Guardian UK, "Beheaded Syrian scholar refused to lead Isis to hidden Palmyra antiquities":
Khaled al-Asaad, 82, was interrogated by militants for a month before he was murdered in the ancient city.
The brutal murder of Khaled al-Asaad, 82, is the latest atrocity perpetrated by the jihadi group, which has captured a third of Syria and neighbouring Iraq and declared a “caliphate” on the territory it controls. It has also highlighted Isis’s habit of looting and selling antiquities to fund its activities – as well as destroying them.Keep reading.
Syrian state antiquities chief Maamoun Abdulkarim said Asaad’s family had informed him that the scholar, who worked for more than 50 years as head of antiquities in Palmyra, was killed by Isis on Tuesday.
Asaad had been held for more than a month before being murdered. Chris Doyle, director of the Council for Arab-British Understanding, said he had learned from a Syrian source that the archaeologist had been interrogated by Isis about the location of treasures from Palmyra and had been executed when he refused to cooperate.
Isis captured the city from government forces in May but is not known to have damaged its monumental Roman-era ruins despite a reputation for destroying artefacts it views as idolatrous.
“Just imagine that such a scholar who gave such memorable services to the place and to history would be beheaded … and his corpse still hanging from one of the ancient columns in the centre of a square in Palmyra,” Abdulkarim said. “The continued presence of these criminals in this city is a curse and bad omen on [Palmyra] and every column and every archaeological piece in it.”
Wednesday, August 19, 2015
Islamic State Beheads 82-Year-Old Antiquities Scholar in Palmyra, Syria
The guy was 82-years-old?
And he was an archaeologist?
Nothing shocks me anymore. Well, the only thing that's shocking is how far Islamic State has advanced. Glenn Back compares them outright to the Nazis, except saying that ISIS is a hundred times worse.
But hey, O gets to go golfing for Vernon Jordan's 80th birthday with Bill Clinton, so no worries. Everything's under control. Vernon's going see his 81st!
At the Telegraph UK, "Islamic State jihadis 'behead top archaeologist in Palmyra'."
Also at Reuters, "Islamic State militants behead archaeologist in Palmyra: Syrian official":
(Oh, and remember, not talking about it helps the Democrats, kinda like doing nothing about illegal immigration helps the Democrats. Depravity helps the Democrats, because they're the party of depravity, of death, of destruction, and the complete abandonment of anything resembling holy righteousness and the sublime.)
And he was an archaeologist?
Nothing shocks me anymore. Well, the only thing that's shocking is how far Islamic State has advanced. Glenn Back compares them outright to the Nazis, except saying that ISIS is a hundred times worse.
But hey, O gets to go golfing for Vernon Jordan's 80th birthday with Bill Clinton, so no worries. Everything's under control. Vernon's going see his 81st!
At the Telegraph UK, "Islamic State jihadis 'behead top archaeologist in Palmyra'."
Also at Reuters, "Islamic State militants behead archaeologist in Palmyra: Syrian official":
Islamic State (IS) militants beheaded an antiquities scholar in the ancient Syrian city of Palmyra and hung his body on a column in a main square of the historic site, Syria's antiquities chief said on Tuesday.I'd link the video, since we know there's a video of the beheading, but I don't see it posted anywhere, even at the hardcore uncensored jihadi terror porn sites. Maybe it's not out yet. No matter. We're inured to it. ISIS could blow up whole cities with nuclear weapons, major metropolitan areas, and that wouldn't cross any red lines. It's all pretty fucked up.
(Oh, and remember, not talking about it helps the Democrats, kinda like doing nothing about illegal immigration helps the Democrats. Depravity helps the Democrats, because they're the party of depravity, of death, of destruction, and the complete abandonment of anything resembling holy righteousness and the sublime.)
Thursday, August 13, 2015
The Democrats' Great Betrayal on Iraq
At FrontPage Magazine:
Editor's note: GOP presidential primary candidate Jeb Bush is once again boldly telling the truth about the Iraq War and putting the focus on those who sabotaged it: President Obama, Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party. In recent remarks at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library, Bush not only highlighted the Democrats' indefensible abandonment of a once-stabilized Iraq, but explained how this disastrous decision gave rise to a new, formidable terror threat: The Islamic State. In light of Bush's statements, Frontpage is publishing David Horowitz's introduction to his book "The Black Book of the American Left, Vol. III: The Great Betrayal," which lays out the true history of the Iraq War and the Democrats' policy of defeat. Read the introduction below.
*****
The Great Betrayal is the third volume of my collected writings that make up The Black Book of the American Left. Its chapters focus on events beginning with the Islamic attacks of 9/11 and culminating in the Iraq War. They describe what can now be seen as a tragic turn in our nation’s history that has already profoundly and adversely affected its future.
The effort to remove the Saddam regime in Iraq by force was initially supported by both major political parties. But in only the third month of fighting the Democratic Party turned against the war it had authorized for reasons unrelated to events on the battle- field or changes in policy. This political division over the war fractured the home front with crippling implications for the war effort itself and, beyond that, America’s efforts to curtail the terrorist activities of other regimes in the Middle East, most pointedly Syria and Iran. The internal divisions were greater than any the nation had experienced since the Civil War, and the betrayal by the Democrats of a war policy they had supported was without precedent in the history of America’s wars overseas.
The internal divisions at the end of the Vietnam War were not at all commensurate with those over Iraq. The 1972 McGovern presidential campaign, which called for an American retreat from Vietnam, was launched after ten years of fighting with no result, when both parties had already conceded the war could not be won. The conflict between the two major parties was over how to end the war and over what the war had become, not—as in Iraq—over whether the war was illegal and immoral to begin with and should never have been fought. The Democrats’ opposition to a war they had authorized, represented a betrayal of the nation and its men and women in arms that has no equivalent in American history.
The domestic divisions over both wars were initiated by a radical left whose agendas went far beyond the conflicts themselves. In the decades that followed their efforts to bring the Vietnam War to an ignoble end, the left had made ever deeper inroads into the Democratic Party until, in 2008, the party nominated a senator from its anti-war ranks who became the 44th president of the United States. Of far greater significance than the successful candidacy of one anti-war spokesman, however, was the path the entire Democratic Party took in first abandoning a war its leaders had approved, and then conducting a five-year campaign against the war while it was still in progress.
I have written two previous books about this defection and its destructive consequences. The first, Unholy Alliance: Radical Islam And the American Left (2004), documented the emergence of the post-9/11 anti-war movement, its tacit alliance with the jihadist enemy and its malign influence on the Democratic Party’s fateful turn. The second, Party of Defeat: How Democrats and Radicals Undermined America's War on Terror Before and After 9-11 (2008), was written with Ben Johnson and focused on the sabotage of the war effort by leaders of the Democratic Party, by progressive activists and by a left-leaning national media. This chorus of opposition took advantage of American missteps to conduct a no-holds- barred propaganda campaign worthy of an enemy, even going so far as to leak classified information that destroyed vital national secu-rity programs and put all Americans at risk. Political opponents of the war attacked the moral character of the commander-in-chief and the mission both parties had endorsed. This assault on America’s role in the war dealt a devastating blow to American power and influence from which they have yet to recover.
It is customary and natural for human beings to identify with the communities they inhabit, and on whose health and security their lives depend. This is the foundation of all patriotic sentiment. But once individuals become possessed by the idea that political power can be “transformative” and create a fundamentally different human environment, they develop an allegiance to the idea itself and to the parties and entities in which they see it embodied. Such individuals come to feel alienated from the societies they live in but are determined to replace, and finally to see their own country as an enemy because it is the enemy of their progressive dreams. This is how generations of leftists came to identify with the Communist adversary and its cold war against the democracies of the West. When the Communist empire collapsed, I was curious to see whether this progressive reflex would survive the fall. Lacking the real world instantiation of their dreams Soviet Russia had provided, would progressives continue to volunteer as frontier guards for America’s enemies, even the most reprehensible among them? The answer was not long in coming.
On November 9, 1989, the Berlin Wall came down, liberating hundreds of millions of captive people from their Soviet prison. The following August, Iraq’s sadistic dictator ordered his armies into Kuwait and erased that sovereign nation from the political map. Unlike the Soviet rulers who paid lip service to progressive ideals, Saddam Hussein was a self-identified fascist who did not pretend to advance the cause of “social justice” or liberal values. Even by 20th-century standards, Saddam was an exceptionally cruel and bloody tyrant. But he was also an enemy of the United States, and that proved enough to persuade progressives to lend him a helping hand. When America organized an international coalition to reverse Iraq’s aggression, the progressive left opposed the action as though America rather than the Saddam regime were at fault.
At the time, the only reason there were no large protests against the war over Kuwait was because progressives were freshly demoralized by the Soviet debacle and still in disarray. But their mood changed over the course of the next decade. As the millennium approached, leftists began to regroup, organizing a series of large and violent demonstrations against “globalization,” the term with which they re-labeled their old nemesis “international capitalism.” When Islamic fanatics attacked New York and Washing- ton in 2001, leaders of the globalization protests re-positioned their agendas to focus on the new American “imperialism” in Afghanistan and then Iraq. Eventually, millions of leftists at home and abroad participated in protests to prevent America and the coalition it led from removing Saddam Hussein. Without overtly supporting the Saddam regime as they had the Kremlin, progressives resumed their role as frontier guards for the enemies of the United States...
Labels:
Antiwar Left,
David Horowitz,
Democrats,
Hillary Clinton,
Iraq,
Iraq War,
Jeb Bush,
Republican Party,
Treason
Sunday, June 14, 2015
Saturday, June 13, 2015
Obama on Track for Least Successful Foreign Policy Record of Any President, Bar None
From Walter Russell Mead, at the American Interest, "Obama’s Grave Miscalculations":
And flashback to last September, "Foreign Policy Editor David Rothkopf Hammers Obama's Foreign Policy: Says Barack Should Take a Page from George W. Bush's Second Term."
Yeah, well, the Bush years were the good old days. G.W.'s even pining for a return to office, heh.
Obama is in danger of the achieving the least successful record in foreign policy of any president, bar none. http://t.co/QpxQWs9vSS
— Walter Russell Mead (@wrmead) June 12, 2015
Driving residents from their homes, imposing an iron-fisted dictatorship, looting and murder—no, this isn’t ISIS in Iraq. It’s the Shi’a militias backed by Iran and the government that President Obama has a kinda-sorta strategy for working with. The Times of London:Devastating. And there's more at the link.
The Iranian-backed Shia militias used by the embattled Iraqi army to fight Islamic State have looted Tikrit and exiled most of its population, a development that will confirm some of the West’s worst fears.It’s worth noting that President Obama, who inherited two difficult wars in the region, made exactly the wrong strategic decision about both of them. He abandoned Iraq, where victory was won and remained to be consolidated; he doubled down on what he called the war of necessity in Afghanistan, and six years later is no closer to either victory or a safe withdrawal than he was on the day he took the oath of office. (Indeed, new reports indicate that Iran has been increasing its support for the Taliban in Afghanistan—the same people who have led to more than 2,000 dead and more than 20,000 wounded U.S. servicemen in what has become America’s longest-running war.)
Two months after the supposed liberation of the city that once was home to 260,000 people, it has been turned into a ghost town, controlled by the militias who run it with an iron fist.
The city’s mostly Sunni civilian population has not been allowed to return, even though the Baghdad government has promised to protect their rights.
A Sunni official inside Tikrit said that Shia militias, commanded by Iran, maintained total control over the city. A local force of about 1,000 government police and Sunni tribesmen were little more than totemic and were banned from leaving their bases after sunset.
In any case, the people of Iraq, like the people of Syria, face the prospect now of increasingly bitter religious conflict, with escalating atrocities on all sides of the war. The radicalization of Saudi foreign policy, and its growing alienation from the U.S. means that radical Sunnis throughout the region can now count on many more arms with many fewer questions asked than they would have faced if U.S. policy had been more robust and clear-sighted. And of course Iran is on the brink of acquiring billions of dollars in new resources to feed the Shi’a radicals and push the region closer to an even greater catastrophe.
Particularly in his second term, when the consequences of errors made in the quieter years before 2012 have begun to take their toll and the significant misjudgments and missteps made since the election have added to the chaos, President Obama is in danger of the achieving the least successful track record in foreign policy of any American president, bar none. The White House is still hoping, perhaps, that an Iran deal could turn that around, and trade deals could still soften history’s verdict a bit, but with every passing week it looks more and more as if future Democratic presidential candidates will have to persuade the public that they won’t repeat President Obama’s mistakes...
And flashback to last September, "Foreign Policy Editor David Rothkopf Hammers Obama's Foreign Policy: Says Barack Should Take a Page from George W. Bush's Second Term."
Yeah, well, the Bush years were the good old days. G.W.'s even pining for a return to office, heh.
Tuesday, May 26, 2015
Megyn Kelly Eviscerates Obama for Shameful 'No Major Ground Wars' Memorial Day Comments (VIDEO)
Megyn Kelly is the freakin' best!
Background at Gateway Pundit, "In Memorial Day Speech Obama Brags About ‘Ending’ War in Afghanistan … (No One Applauds)."
Watch, "Reaction to President Obama's Memorial Day Remarks - The Kelly File."
Background at Gateway Pundit, "In Memorial Day Speech Obama Brags About ‘Ending’ War in Afghanistan … (No One Applauds)."
Watch, "Reaction to President Obama's Memorial Day Remarks - The Kelly File."
Monday, May 25, 2015
Civilians Increasingly Separated from U.S. Military
This isn't a new story.
Thomas Ricks had a piece on the civil/military divide in the Atlantic back in 1997, and Newsweek had one on the military as a "family business" in 2005. And here's Time from 2011, "An Army Apart: The Widening Military-Civilian Gap."
But the problem isn't just that we have an all-volunteer military (and no draft), as some bloggers are pointing out. We've had wholesale generational changes going on for decades such that a literal microscopic proportion of the American people have any connection to the military and war. In World War Two something like 16 million Americans served in uniform, but beyond that the entire country was a war. It was shared sacrifice for the war effort. From massive wartime rationing to war bonds and victory gardens, the American people went to war. It was a cultural phenomenon that's a distant memory.
In any case, there's a great piece at the Los Angeles Times, "U.S. MILITARY AND CIVILIANS ARE INCREASINGLY DIVIDED" (via Memeorandum):
Thomas Ricks had a piece on the civil/military divide in the Atlantic back in 1997, and Newsweek had one on the military as a "family business" in 2005. And here's Time from 2011, "An Army Apart: The Widening Military-Civilian Gap."
But the problem isn't just that we have an all-volunteer military (and no draft), as some bloggers are pointing out. We've had wholesale generational changes going on for decades such that a literal microscopic proportion of the American people have any connection to the military and war. In World War Two something like 16 million Americans served in uniform, but beyond that the entire country was a war. It was shared sacrifice for the war effort. From massive wartime rationing to war bonds and victory gardens, the American people went to war. It was a cultural phenomenon that's a distant memory.
In any case, there's a great piece at the Los Angeles Times, "U.S. MILITARY AND CIVILIANS ARE INCREASINGLY DIVIDED" (via Memeorandum):
Multi-generational military families like the Graveses form the heart of the all-volunteer Army, which increasingly is drawing its ranks from the relatively small pool of Americans with historic family, cultural or geographic connections to military service.More.
While the U.S. waged a war in Vietnam 50 years ago with 2.7 million men conscripted from every segment of society, less than one-half of 1% of the U.S. population is in the armed services today — the lowest rate since World War II. America's recent wars are authorized by a U.S. Congress whose members have the lowest rate of military service in history, led by three successive commanders in chief who never served on active duty.
Surveys suggest that as many as 80% of those who serve come from a family in which a parent or sibling is also in the military. They often live in relative isolation — behind the gates of military installations such as Ft. Bragg or in the deeply military communities like Fayetteville, N.C., that surround them.
The segregation is so pronounced that it can be traced on a map: Some 49% of the 1.3 million active-duty service members in the U.S. are concentrated in just five states — California, Virginia, Texas, North Carolina and Georgia.
The U.S. military today is gradually becoming a separate warrior class, many analysts say, that is becoming increasingly distinct from the public it is charged with protecting.
As the size of the military shrinks, the connections between military personnel and the broad civilian population appear to be growing more distant, the Pew Research Center concluded after a broad 2012 study of both service members and civilians.
Most of the country has experienced little, if any, personal impact from the longest era of war in U.S. history. But those in uniform have seen their lives upended by repeated deployments to war zones, felt the pain of seeing family members and comrades killed and maimed, and endured psychological trauma that many will carry forever, often invisible to their civilian neighbors....
Jerstin Crosby, a former graduate student at the University of North Carolina who now works as a computer artist, said the only direct encounter with the military he can remember was when he taught a Middle Eastern art course to airmen at Seymour Johnson Air Force Base in Goldsboro, N.C.
He respected the airmen's knowledge of Iraq — some seemed to know it better than he did, for all his education — but was also sometimes baffled by them. Why, he wondered, did everyone on base stop their cars at 5 p.m. and stand at attention? Only later did he learn it was a daily show of respect as the nation's flag was lowered.
"I thought it was some kind of prank they were playing on me," he said.
George Baroff, enjoying an outdoor lunch at an organic food co-op in Carrboro one recent afternoon, said he understood the military quite well: He served three years as a draftee during World War II before eventually becoming a psychology professor in nearby Chapel Hill.
Baroff, 90, finds himself startled when people learn of his war record and say, as Americans often do to soldiers these days, "Thank you for your service."
"You never, ever heard that in World War II. And the reason is, everybody served," he said.
In Baroff's view, today's all-volunteer military has been robbed of the sense of shared sacrifice and national purpose that his generation enjoyed six decades ago. Today's soldiers carry a heavier burden, he said, because the public has been disconnected from the universal responsibility and personal commitment required to fight and win wars.
"For us, the war was over in a few years. The enemy surrendered and were no longer a threat," he said. "For soldiers today, the war is never over; the enemy is never defeated." The result, he added, is "a state of perpetual anxiety that the rest of the country doesn't experience." ...
For decades, young cadets in the Reserve Officers' Training Corps, or ROTC, were able to rub shoulders with civilians on America's college campuses. During the height of the defense buildup under President Reagan, there were 420 Army ROTC units. Today, there are only 275 ROTC programs.
At Stanford University, Kaitlyn Benitez-Strine, a 21-year-old senior, was scribbling notes in the back row of her modern Japanese history class recently, listening as her professor cataloged the misdeeds of the American military in occupied postwar Japan.
"People became increasingly resentful of the U.S. military presence," the professor said. "There were crimes by U.S. Army personnel — rapes and murders."
For Benitez-Strine, due to be commissioned as a U.S. Army lieutenant this summer, it was an uncomfortable moment. Her sister, a Marine, is stationed in Okinawa. Her parents were Army officers, as were many other relatives. She grew up in a military community near West Point. But she rarely discusses her background with other students.
Stanford, one of the nation's elite universities, has more than 6,000 undergraduates. Benitez-Strine is one of only 11 in ROTC.
She sometimes feels uncomfortable wearing her uniform on campus, as ROTC requires two days a week. Students "might think I'm a cop or something," she said. "Or they see me as a badass who can kill them at any time."
A 2013 survey by three West Point professors found that the estrangement between the military and civilian worlds is especially pronounced among young people. Many civilians born between 1980 and 2000 "want no part of military life and want it separate from civilian life," according to sociologist Morten G. Ender, one of the study's authors.
On the other side, military recruits in that age range had become "anti-civilian in some ways," the survey found.
"I am irritated by the apathy, lack of patriotic fervor, and generally anti-military and anti-American sentiment" of other students, an unidentified 20-year-old ROTC cadet told the authors. "I often wonder if my forefathers were as filled with disgust and anger when they thought of the people they were fighting to protect as I am."
Benitez-Strine is not as critical of her fellow students. Indeed, the more time she spends in ROTC, the less certain she is about a career in the military.
Friday, May 22, 2015
Islamic State Bombs Saudi Arabia Mosque, Targeting Shiite Muslims
It's a Shiite mosque.
It's an Islamic civil war fanning across the region, and the Obama administration's inaction fans the flames.
At the New York Times, "ISIS Claims Responsibility for Bombing at Saudi Mosque." (Via Memeorandum.)
Also at the Washington Post, "Islamic State claims responsibility for Shiite mosque blast in Saudi Arabia":
Also at Euronews, "ISIL to blame for Saudi Arabia Shi'ite mosque suicide attack."
And at Reuters, "Suicide bomber strikes Saudi Shi'ite mosque," and Russia Today, "Dozens dead after suicide bomber strikes Shiite mosque in Saudi Arabia."
It's an Islamic civil war fanning across the region, and the Obama administration's inaction fans the flames.
At the New York Times, "ISIS Claims Responsibility for Bombing at Saudi Mosque." (Via Memeorandum.)
Also at the Washington Post, "Islamic State claims responsibility for Shiite mosque blast in Saudi Arabia":
CAIRO — The Islamic State said Friday that it was behind a blast that killed or wounded scores of worshipers at a Shiite mosque in Saudi Arabia, marking the first time the militant group has claimed an attack in the oil-rich kingdom and raising fears of an expanding sectarian conflict in the region.More.
There was no immediate comment from Saudi authorities on the Islamic State’s claim of responsibility, which was carried in both written and audio statements distributed by accounts linked with the Islamic State on Twitter.
The Islamic State communique said that a “martyrdom-seeking brother” set off an explosive belt during a gathering of “impure” Shiites, according to the SITE Intelligence group, which monitors militant postings on social media and elsewhere.
The Sunni extremist group views Shiites as Muslim heretics and opposes the Saudi leadership’s ties with the West. The same statement called the attack a “unique operation” and referred to the group’s newly formed “Najd Province,” which encompasses central Saudi Arabia and includes the Saudi capital, Riyadh. The Saudi monarchy presides over Islam’s two holiest sites, making the kingdom a hugely symbolic target for Islamist militants.
In a statement also posted Friday on Twitter, the Saudi Health Ministry said 21 people were killed and 123 wounded in the blast.
The suicide bomber targeted worshipers at a mosque in the village of Qadeeh in the province of Qatif, part of a mostly Shiite enclave about 240 miles northeast of the capital.
An activist, Naseema al-Sada, told the Associated Press that a suicide bomber detonated explosives as worshipers marked the birth of the 7th century Shiite saint, Imam Hussein. The official Saudi News Agency reported an explosion at the mosque but had no further details. The report said authorities launched an investigation into the attack.
Saudi Arabia’s eastern region, which is the heartland of the kingdom’s Shiite minority, has been the scene of sporadic unrest and violence for years. Shiites, who account for an estimated 12 percent of the Saudi population, say they face widespread discrimination from the kingdom’s Sunni leaders. And Shiite protesters have clashed with Saudi security forces during demonstrations for greater rights in the past...
Also at Euronews, "ISIL to blame for Saudi Arabia Shi'ite mosque suicide attack."
And at Reuters, "Suicide bomber strikes Saudi Shi'ite mosque," and Russia Today, "Dozens dead after suicide bomber strikes Shiite mosque in Saudi Arabia."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)