Search results for strategy in iraq

America is fed up with Obama’s lies: America puts boots on ground in Syria as predicted by LMS

It should come as no shock to our readers that the Third Iraq War President Obama initiated has already faltered.  As predicted, the strategy (or lack thereof see: http://www.blackboxwire.com/2014/10/11/islamic-extremism-and-what-lies-ahead-part-ii-the-war-on-isis-and-syria/) did not achieve the desired results so now the Department of Defense (DoD), no doubt testing the waters for the White House, is requesting boots on the ground.  As we warned, mission creep is a dangerous thing and would plague this operation.  What started with just a handful of “advisors,” grew into airstrikes in Iraq and then Syria, then over a thousand troops “on the ground,” and now US troop levels in Iraq will soon reach 3,000.  When this new batch of advisors fails to stop the growth of ISIL, expect Obama to retract another “promise” and have “no choice,” but to commit US combat personnel to the fight in Iraq.  Soon, just like in Vietnam, Obama will be steadily sucked into another full blown war in Iraq that the US will neither win nor be able to afford.

This introductory paragraph could have been snatched from today’s headlines detailing how President Obama walked back his repeated promises not to put American “boots on the ground” in Iraq. However, it is a verbatim cut and paste from an article I wrote just over a year ago predicting EXACTLY what is occurring.  See: http://www.lastminutesurvival.com/2014/11/18/update-on-the-third-iraq-war-against-isilisisisaqsyriaetc/#more-768  Not so ironically, you didn’t hear the radio and talk show hosts and other “enlightened” pundits detailing this foreseeable reality a year ago because they are hacks.  However, today the airwaves have been alive with people taking notice.  Savage, Hannity, Beck, Wilkow, O’Reilly, etc. all have been detailing how the President lied and how the strategy they supported to bomb ISIL has not worked.  I say better late than never to the party, but American’s need to wake up now. Read more

Global Updates: May 29, 2015

-Seismic activity has markedly increased globally over the last few months and 2015 may prove to be an above average year.  Major quakes have struck the Pacific Ring to include the disastrous quake in Nepal.  Just yesterday evening a large quake struck northern Alaska.  Further and I believe most likely related, volcanic activity is spiking globally.   Just this week a volcano in Southern Japan literally exploded while volcanoes from Chile to Hawaii are again spewing lava and ash.  These events tend to go in cycles as fault lines unzip and pressure is released.  One can reasonable expect more events in the coming months and should be on high alert if they live near/on a fault line, near an active volcano, or along a coast vulnerable to tsunamis.  Further, sustained volcanic activity will affect weather patterns and could lead to cooler than normal temperatures for months after the eruption.  Currently, this is not an issue, but if other major eruptions occur this year and are sustained, this will certainly alter the Earth’s weather because the ash gets swept up into the high atmosphere where it spreads globally and reflects sunlight.

http://www.volcanodiscovery.com/erupting_volcanoes.html

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/

http://www.livescience.com/46576-more-earthquakes-still-random-process.html

-ISIL still holds Ramadi contrary to US Secretary of State John Kerry’s stupid predictions last week.   ISIL has now likely outmaneuvered the Iraqi counter attack claiming to have encircled “on 3 sides” the terrorist army.  I am not sure how that translates to “encircled,” but whether or not there was a problem with the Arabic translation, in plain English that means ISIL has a flank wide open to reinforce or retreat through and they likely exploited this gap.  The fact that we haven’t seen an outright retreat of ISIL from Ramadi, which the Iraqi government would quickly publicize, tells you everything you need to know about the facts on the ground.  Further, as the Iraqi Army bears down on Ramadi, ISIL will no doubt maneuver its main element to attack where the Iraqi Army is not in strength.  I would rate it highly likely that Fallujah, Hit, and areas of Baghdad will be attacked whether or not ISIL conducts a tactical withdrawal from Ramadi.  This tactic has already demonstrated it is effective against the slow and unwieldy government forces.  It wears them down, attrits their forces, and demoralizes the government.  The war will only intensify and if ISIL is not dislodged from Ramadi within the next week, it will likely solidify and hold its gains making any future attempts to dislodge them extremely costly for the Iraqi military.

http://www.newindianexpress.com/world/Isil-Sends-Top-Cleric-to-Show-off-Control-over-Ramadi/2015/05/29/article2838802.ece

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/11639414/Isil-targets-Sunni-families-in-Ramadi-with-revenge-killings.html

http://www.thenational.ae/world/middle-east/15-killed-in-baghdad-hotel-bombings

-The US admits Obama’s ISL “strategy” is not working.  Reports also are trickling out of major dissent within the Pentagon.  Further, as predicted, airstrikes have proved of limited value and now the military is saying it needs to commit more troops.  I warned of this predictable escalation back to a full scale war in the Middle East.  Humility truly is a virtue so I take no please in saying once again, “I told you so.”  In fact, last year, I was so disgusted with even the mere use of the term “strategy,” that I wrote an entire piece blasting the Administration and its completely idiotic, non-strategy, that was predestined to failure.  If you truly want to understand why we are failing and Iraq and why it will only get worse as I verbatim described in my analysis, you need to read and share: http://www.blackboxwire.com/2014/10/11/islamic-extremism-and-what-lies-ahead-part-ii-the-war-on-isis-and-syria/.  You can then read the short follow-up to the above article at:

http://www.lastminutesurvival.com/2014/11/18/update-on-the-third-iraq-war-against-isilisisisaqsyriaetc/.

The five minutes you spend reading these two articles will serve as one of the best primers to understanding the escalating crisis in Iraq and the greater Middle East and why we are getting it wrong.  Rather than just calling out incompetents/incompetence in the government, I am going to simply name key individuals that have legitimate influence and ask them to take notes.  Perhaps 99% will never see the article or read it, but if even 1% takes the time to skim the article, progress is being made.  Today, I want to challenge @Phil_Gaskin, who most likely finds my anti-leftist statements blasphemy, but I want to give him the benefit of the doubt.  Perhaps he is the sole voice of reason in the Administration…I don’t know.  What I do know is he is smart enough to read my articles and understand that by adopting what I am recommending would save everyone a lot of heartache and inject some professionalism into what, to date, has been a never ending policy amateur hour of disaster after disaster.  So to you Phil Gaskin, I challenge you to have a sit down discussion about what a real ISIL strategy should be.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/may/28/hillary-clinton-tied-think-tank-bashes-obamas-isis/?page=all

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/05/29/team-obama-shrugs-at-isis-victories.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/rift-widens-between-obama-us-military-over-strategy-to-fight-islamic-state/2014/09/18/ebdb422e-3f5c-11e4-b03f-de718edeb92f_story.html

-The draconian anti-“Patriot Act” is due to sunset this weekend.  Americans that still value their civil liberties would celebrate this law expiring, but have little optimism anything will change.  In fact, it is likely that President Obama will illegally continue the unconstitutional domestic spy programs with or without faux legal authority.  Not only is this extremely hypocritical of a president that ran on returning our civil liberties and ending the spy state, but it will prove just how lawless our nation has become.  Even after the courts and anyone with basic sense determined that what the Patriot Act was being used to justify was utterly unconstitutional; (Specifically, total collection of electronic records without probable cause or a search warrant.) power hungry and/or bought politicians still are trying to make a case for why this law is needed.  I would immediately point out to anyone to be on guard for the “all or nothing” spin.  The Administration is trying to scare people into believing if the illegal data collection is stopped, we will suddenly become vulnerable.  This is absurd.  First of all, NSA’s domestic collection has to date stopped zero terrorists.  Second, if the Administration was actually worried about US security, they would immediately stop importing Muslims to the US from around the world and particularly, from places like Somalia where everyone and their brother seems to be connected to Al Shabaab.  Finally, NSA will continue to operate in its legitimate mission to protect Americans by returning to foreign collection.  It isn’t as if NSA will cease to function and not have a job if they are no longer targeting Americans.  In fact, they may actually become more effective, efficient, and actually gain some victories over foreign enemies of the state.

Global Updates: May 21, 2015

ISIL holds Ramadi: The White House, Defense Department, and Secretary of State have all down played the fall of Ramadi as a small “target of opportunity” and mild “setback.”  However, in reality, the fall of Ramadi was very foreseeable and a massive military disaster for the Iraqi government.  As I forecasted, Mosul would not be retaken anytime soon and the Obama strategy…or lack thereof, would be a total disaster.  See http://www.lastminutesurvival.com/2014/10/01/islamic-extremism-and-what-lies-ahead-part-ii-the-war-on-isis-and-syria/#more-699 Rather than being beat back, it is now highly likely that ISIL will continue to press its attack while the Iraqi Army is trying to regroup and capture large parts if not all of Fallujah.  If Fallujah falls, Baghdad will finally be seriously threatened by ISIL.

Sirte falls, ISIL takes 3rd major city in 48 hours:  In what is proving to be another example of Obama’s Foreign Policy disaster initiated under Secretary Clinton and amplified under Secretary Kerry, another major city has fallen to ISIL.  However, it is not in Syria or Iraq.  The city is in Libya.  Yes, the country Obama, Rice, Clinton, and Power “liberated” has now had the western city of Sirte overrun by radical Islamists loyal to ISIL.  According to my count that makes the score in just the last 48 hours 3 ISIL: 0 USA.  Ramadi, Palmyra, and now Sirte all have been overrun.  Even if ISIL can’t hold the ground, the fact they took down three major cities in just days is telling of how “successful” the US strategy to combat ISIL has been.  In fact, Obama’s “strategy” has been such a disaster, one would conclude that he couldn’t possibly have been that stupid and the only way this could be occurring was if it was his intent all along.  It is either amateur hour and Obama desperately needs to read some alternative news and hire new NSC advisors or the man is a traitor.

Russia no longer allowing NATO supplies to move across its borders to Afghanistan:  In another foreign policy disaster that has completely escaped the government media complex, Russia has now halted NATO supplies crossing its borders to Afghanistan.  I verbatim warned of this on March 23, 2014 saying the Russians could play this card in retaliation for NATO escalation in the Ukraine and make it extremely painful to maintain our troops in Afghanistan. http://www.lastminutesurvival.com/?s=russia+will+cut+supply+lines Now the US has only one supply route for its forces.  The unreliable and costly southern supply route begins in the Port of Karachi and runs north through Pakistan and into Afghanistan through extremely dangerous Taliban controlled provinces.  Each convoy that is allowed to pass through these areas pays a heavy toll, which in turn is then used to fund Taliban operations.  Further, Pakistan now has gained significant political leverage over Washington to extort any amount of money it wishes to allow passage of critical NATO supplies.  http://rt.com/news/259809-russia-stops-nato-afghanistan-cargo/

FBI making house calls to people concerned about Jade Helm 15:  In what could be viewed as a major escalation bolstering concerns amongst the public over the upcoming Jade Helm 15 exercise, FBI special agents have apparently begun making house calls to concerned citizens that have raised questions publicly.  http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/video-fbi-now-going-door-to-door-interrogating-americans-about-jade-helm-military-exercises-we-follow-pp-with-anything-like-that_05212015 Although, the special agents appear very polite and almost embarrassed to be performing the house calls, the fact they are knocking on doors is chilling.  Ironically, if the intent was to quell fears and concerns as the agents suggest, they are clearly having the exact opposite effect.  I doubt the special agents are so dumb that can’t figure this out, but why they are not speaking out about how ridiculous and counterproductive these visits are is disturbing.  Common sense tells you their real intent is to gauge the subject’s political views and whether or not to deem him a threat.  As agents, they should be well aware that people are allowed to have distrust of the government, dissent, and openly question authority especially, when it is launching an exercise designed to target American citizens in the US.  Whether the intent is to intimidate or not, it is clear field offices have been spun up to believe citizens that simply want the rule of law respected are now the threat.  This has been so hyped by DHS and the DOJ, it is coming at the expense of legitimate threats like MS13 and New Black Panther Party members publicly calling for the execution of police and making good on those threats.  The Justice Department will certainly spin this to say it is just doing its “due diligence” to make sure things are peaceful and safe, but anyone with half a brain sees the biased political motivations forcing agents out to conduct house calls on people that pose zero threat to anyone following the law and respecting the US Constitution.

China and US escalate tensions:  Recent moves by China to exclude airspace to US military aircraft has led to an increase in tensions.  However, this really has nothing to do with some small dots of islands, territorial integrity, or military development.  The deeper issue arising is that China has risen to a peer competitor level status with the US threatening the post-Bretton Woods financial establishment.  Historically, when the bankers were threatened it led directly to war and I doubt this will end differently.  Specifically, China has established a counter balance to the IMF that Washington desperately tried to stop and utterly failed to prevent.  This single act has broken the IMF/World Bank monopoly and the major banking families intend to make China pay for its actions.  Further, China has also been concluding multi-billion dollar oil/gas deals with Russia, which has undermined any ability Washington thought it had to isolate and strong-arm Russia.  In short, China is now seen as a real threat, but not to America, but rather, to the elites of the Western financial monopoly.  As such, you can bet you will see a strong shift toward painting China as a bigger and bigger existential military threat that very well could lead to the outbreak of war.

Peace with Iran will lead to war: Part 2

Hardened Iranian Nuclear Facility at Fordo(w)

Hardened Iranian Nuclear Facility at Fordo(w)

Last week I discussed why peace with Iran was the preferred option.  I outlined a number of salient points uninformed talking heads in the media and well paid Israel lobbyists such as the former US Ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, will never bring up.  In short, the costs of a war with Iran will far outweigh the costs of accepting a turbulent peace.  Even a successful war against Iran will be a Pyric victory and cause an economic collapse in the US.  Further, even if Iran did test a nuclear weapon, we would still have plenty of time to exercise the war option should it be necessary.  Unfortunately, even if the US does manage to broker a peace deal with Iran, war is now close to a certainty.  In the event of a war with Iran, there will be dire implications for the US.  Today I will discuss why war is now imminent, how it will likely be initiated, and the catastrophic effects on the US you must prepare to endure. Read more

The US defeat in Afghanistan and its inevitable consequences

   From the beginning, we considered Afghanistan the more difficult war…it will be so even after we retreat.  The longest war in American history is coming to a close as an indecisive strategic defeat for the US and NATO just as I predicted over a decade ago.  The war was fought against an enemy with an extremely low level of capability, but our generals refused to recognize the critical importance of stopping the enemy’s movement to and from its cross-border sanctuary even when presented with overwhelming analyses.  Specifically, the failure of border security to be made a priority in the overall counterinsurgency strategy all but guaranteed the inevitable exhaustion and defeat of the occupation force.  Embarrassingly, the hard truth is the “most powerful” and certainly the most expensive military in history failed to decisively defeat the Taliban and Al Qaeda.  The US/NATO defeat was not for lack of manpower or firepower, it was a defeat born of intellectual incompetence and utter dereliction by our senior leadership.  Importantly, the critical failure responsible for the US/NATO defeat remains at the senior echelons within the US military and White House, is systemic, and remains uncorrected.  Now, just like in Iraq, we are told by President Obama and his appointees that Afghans will take over operations and complete the mission.  The chances of the Afghans defeating the Taliban are zero and we must be prepared for the inevitable consequences.

   First, I want to support my certainty that most of Afghanistan will be overrun by the Taliban.  To do this we need only to look at the current status of the war.  To date, the combined power of the US and NATO has after 14 years proved unable to defeat the Taliban.  However, we are told to believe by Obama and his generals that the Afghans, with a relative few Americans in support, will be capable of cleaning up the mess and decisively defeating the Taliban.  The result of this is another easily predictable, preordained defeat.  Afghanistan’s new president, Ashraf Ghani, simply will not be able to hold on to Kabul, much less the whole of Afghanistan, and will likely meet the same fate as his earlier predecessor Mohammad Najibullah Ahmadzai at the hands of the Taliban.  Further, it is appearing more likely that this will not just be a Taliban victory, but may be completed under the unified banner of ISIL. Read more

Why No One Should Serve in the US Military: Your leaders are incompetent and your next Secretary of Defense is no exception.

The face of your next wartime leader...really?

The face of your next wartime leader…really?

As a combat veteran of the wars in both Afghanistan and Iraq, I am going to be very blunt.  Lives depend on being direct and the need for military personnel to come forward and tell the truth.  In fact, it is chilling that no one has called out the insanity taking place before our very eyes within the ranks of the military.  The senior military leadership is incompetent to lead.  Our failures in both Iraq and Afghanistan bare this out.  Today’s testimony by the soon to be next Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter should make it blatantly clear that no one should consider joining our military.  For current active duty and reserve members, run for the door and get the hell out as soon as your obligations allow. Read more

NATO Declares War in Afghanistan Over!…But forgets to inform the Taliban

After over a decade of fighting, the Afghan War ends in strategic defeat for the US and NATO

After over a decade of fighting, the Afghan War ends in strategic defeat for the US and NATO

On December 28, 2014, the US and NATO declared an end to the mission and therefore the war in Afghanistan. A Taliban statement from Zabihullah Mujahidon, a Taliban spokesman, left no doubt to how it was interpreted according to Reuters.

“ISAF rolled up its flag in an atmosphere of failure and disappointment without having achieved anything substantial or tangible.”

Washington may not like the statement and downplay it, but it doesn’t change the reality that the statement is accurate.  Not so ironically, the US and NATO have been mute over the success of the war.  No celebrations, no parades, no victory speeches…the absence of all of this should signal that our leaders know it was a failure.  In fact, not only did the combined force of NATO and the US not achieve a decisive victory over the Taliban, they suffered a strategic defeat.  Read more

Islamic extremism and what lies ahead? Part II: The War on ISIL and Syria

Airstrikes in Iraq

Airstrikes in Iraq

President Obama and his top military advisors have learned nothing and have made a grave mistake starting a war with Syria using ISIL as the pretext.  Just as I was confident and proven correct that this situation would materialize, I am equally confident in my analysis that this new war will lead to America’s greatest foreign policy disaster to date.  Neither war with Syrian nor ISIL will be decisive, successful, or lead to greater security for the American people.  However, the war may indeed turn out to lead to America’s unwinding as the world’s sole superpower and economic bankruptcy.  This post will continue my analysis on the on-going crisis unfolding in the Middle East respective of Obama’s newest war. Read more

Putin vs Obama Part III: Why Russia will win

Putin speaks during his visit to the Crimean port of Sevastopol.

Putin speaks during his visit to the Crimean port of Sevastopol.

Former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger wrote: “For the West, the demonization of Vladimir Putin is not a policy; it is an alibi for the absence of one.”  Kissinger, like him or not, is spot on in his succinct assessment of Obama’s policy for Russia.  As the West descends into another reckless and disastrous war in the Middle East, Putin must be quietly laughing knowing that very soon the US will soon have its Soviet moment of collapse.  In fact, to strategically defeat the US, all Russia must do is wait for the utter mismanagement of our nation to bring about its implosion.  In this third and final installment of our exclusive analysis of the conflicting Russo-American policies, it is clear that in the first major post-Cold War struggle between Russia and the US, it will be Russia that scores a victory in the Ukraine crisis. Read more

Putin versus Obama Part II: Who is the better leader?

US President Barack Obama (L) holds a bilateral meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin during the G8 summit at the Lough Erne resort near Enniskillen in Northern Ireland, on June 17, 2013. The conflict in Syria was set to dominate the G8 summit starting in Northern Ireland on Monday, with Western leaders upping pressure on Russia to back away from its support for President Bashar al-Assad.  AFP PHOTO / JEWEL SAMAD        (Photo credit should read JEWEL SAMAD/AFP/Getty Images)

US President Barack Obama (L) holds a bilateral meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin during the G8 summit at the Lough Erne resort near Enniskillen in Northern Ireland, on June 17, 2013. The conflict in Syria was set to dominate the G8 summit starting in Northern Ireland on Monday, with Western leaders upping pressure on Russia to back away from its support for President Bashar al-Assad. AFP PHOTO / JEWEL SAMAD (Photo credit should read JEWEL SAMAD/AFP/Getty Images)

In my on-going series analyzing the growing rift between the US and Russia, it is important to evaluate a nation’s leadership.  Specifically, let’s look at the qualifications and performance to date of Presidents Putin and Obama.  Before we go any further, it is necessary to lay down a few ground rules of the debate.  First of all, I want to dispel the myth that a person can be of mediocre intellect, but a good president as long as they have a good staff.  This oft stated notion is a ridiculous excuse used by political parties to mitigate criticism that their brainless candidate is not up to the task.  Further, it is true that no one man has total control of a government, but to say that the leaders of Russia and the US have their hands tied and do not have real power would be a poorly informed lie.  In fact, both presidents have substantial power and influence over both foreign and domestic affairs and craft geopolitical strategy that affects the world.  If there wasn’t truth to this, then why would we ascribe so much prestige upon leaders like Thatcher, Reagan, Lincoln, and Washington?  Due to the real power and influence presidents wield, it is important to assess who has demonstrated the ability to more effectively lead and use that power.  Based on that evaluation, you are better able to analyze and predict the actions and ultimate outcomes of any potential or on-going political conflicts between the US and Russia. Read more

Putin versus Obama Part I: Are they really so different?

obama-putinMuch of the rhetoric behind the push to create a new Cold War centers on Russian President Vladimir Putin.  The complicit media and the Obama Administration have pulled no punches in smearing President Putin and casting him as the most evil of tyrants and a political thug imprisoning opposition, seizing assets, enriching himself on the government’s dime, and intimidating reporters and political dissidents.  In fact, much of this is probably true; however, before we cast the first stone and judge Putin as evil incarnate and start World War III, perhaps some national retrospection of our own actions and character would be in order.  Let’s step back and evaluate America’s actions and consider whether or not we may have lost the moral high ground and then,…just perhaps, should rethink our policy, attitudes, and actions toward Russia. Read more

The O’Reilly “Fiction:” Setting the Factor Straight

Against my better judgment, I decided to watch a segment of “The O’Reilly Factor” on Fox News to hear his points on the latest developments in Iraq. In O’Reilly’s defense, he has been a brilliant talk show host and highly successful writer and businessman. However, at the end of the day, O’Reilly is still a journalist with limited real world expertise on many of the topics he provides commentary on. Specifically, O’Reilly poses as an expert, but is totally lacking in experience when it comes to matters of military application and foreign affairs. O’Reilly has never served in combat, is not an intelligence analyst, and so far has not demonstrated himself as a policy maker. So to no surprise, when I tuned in, O’Reilly was expounding his usual pompous, ill informed, bomb them all rhetoric with respect to the Islamic extremist army dubbed ISIL or ISIS. Within thirty seconds of listening to O’Reilly’s poorly informed diatribe, I remembered why I had stopped watching Fox. As such, I feel as though Fox News and Bill O’Reilly needed some better informed input to ensure Fox lives up to its “fair and balanced” moniker and openly challenge O’Reilly to a debate on Iraq policy.
First of all, I want to make it clear we lost in Iraq. Bill O’Reilly is still grasping to a false reality and believes we actually accomplished strategic objectives (won) in Iraq before our retreat. The fact the US was defeated is tough to deal with, but nonetheless fact. It in no way diminishes the honor of our veterans. Suggesting otherwise to those that cannot dissect honor from the success or failure of an army in battle is ridiculous. The notion that loss in battle or war dishonors our troops is no more logical than suggesting soldiers of losing armies across thousands of years of recorded history had no honor. For example, the many British army units fought with the utmost honor in the American Revolution, soldiers fighting for the Confederate Army during the American Civil War fought with great honor, and Rommel’s Afrika Corps has been distinguished again and again for its honor by historians, but all of the above armies ultimately lost their respective wars. In fact, honor is not hinged upon whether one wins or loses, but in how one conducts himself in combat. Iraq was never pacified and never made safe for Americans, but we maintained our honor. The US certainly isn’t calling the shots across the nation now. The end state achieved was a strategic setback for US interests across the region by strengthening our foes. No matter how much the Obama Administration whitewashes our retreat from Iraq, the enemy was still fighting and still holding ground when we left.
For those of you who did not fight in Iraq and have not visited Iraq since our retreat, you should know that Mosul was never pacified and maintained its status as a hotbed of Al Qaeda (AQ) activity. Neither President Bush nor President Obama finished the war. To the present day, Mosul has been a part of the ratline of jihadists making their way to fight in Syria. In fact, US intelligence has been well aware that Mosul has been a key staging point for AQ training and equipping jihadists en route to joining ISIL for years. Mosul has also been effectively “no-go” territory for westerners and has been controlled since before the US retreat by Sunni extremists. As such, the fear and panic that ISIL has “captured” Mosul is overstated. It is true they kicked out the token government forces, but the Iraqi military never controlled anything beyond the ground below their feet hiding behind the walls of abandoned US military bases. Beyond kicking out the token Iraqi forces, the only difference appears to be ISIL formally cemented their previous control of that city and surrounding regions with the execution of anyone supporting the Iraq government. So, if O’Reilly was consistent and well informed, he would have recognized that Mosul and neighboring cities like Tikrit with a large presence of Sunni extremists “falling” to ISIL was not in and of itself a game changer.
Second, O’Reilly fails to remember that it was the Sunnis, during the “Awakening,” that allied with US forces to fight the Shia militias attacking and killing Americans daily. In fact, I distinctly remember Sadr’s brigades of Shia militia backed by Iran attacking US military personnel with zeal throughout the war. I also remember the Shia going from house to house in what was originally mixed Sunni-Shia neighborhoods of Baghdad and ethnically cleansing the population. The Shia death squads brutally murdered any Sunni they found and turned Baghdad into a Shia city. However, it is now the Sunni extremists that O’Reilly has repeatedly called “savages” that deserve to be bombed. I would argue to O’Reilly that both factions have lived up to the pejorative term savage and have demonstrated their eagerness to kill Americans before their fellow Iraqi time and again and as such, we should be happy to leave them to their demise. In short, they are getting what they deserve and I see no reason Americans need to be again placed in the line of fire and paying to “save” savages that want us dead while they are busy killing one another.
Third, O’Reilly has totally forgotten that it was Maliki and the Iraqi government that refused to grant the US a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) that would have protected our troops and allowed them to remain in Iraq beyond their set date of retreat. True, President Obama used the SOFA as a means to justify the US retreat out of Iraq, but nonetheless, the Iraqis wanted American forces out of their country. O’Reilly should perhaps volunteer himself for military service in a country that he is not invited and where killing, even in self-defense, will be deemed murder. Perhaps he does not realize the very real legal dangers our troops will be faced with as they return to Iraq. O’Reilly’s insistence on the deployment of military forces creates a conundrum for the troops because they are being deployed outside of war, to a sovereign nation, and violating its laws. Does O’Reilly actually believe Maliki’s word that our troops will now receive immunity and that President Obama will do whatever is necessary to ensure Maliki is held to his word? I think not.
Third, O’Reilly just doesn’t seem to get the fact that the war as fought under Bush was a disaster and later under Obama was also a disaster. I guess O’Reilly missed the fact that when the war began, Saddam Hussein was killing extremists for free and had nothing to do with 9/11 beyond being the fall guy for Saudi Arabia. It was Saudi Arabia, not Iraq, which was responsible for carrying out a state sponsored act of war against the US on 9/11. This fact is why Representative Walter Jones from North Carolina wants the classified 9/11 Report released so that the public will know the truth and the lies perpetrated by the US government. If US strategy was effective, there would be LESS, not more extremists. Of course it is overwhelmingly clear our strategy failed judged by this bar. O’Reilly also seems to forget that by toppling Saddam’s regime, we created the vacuum that allowed these extremists to flourish to the point they now occupy their own autonomous Islamic state. When this point is made, O’Reilly flies into defense mode and charges the person as an “apologist.” O’Reilly solely blames the Islamists, but fails to recognize the very clear order of events of cause and effect leading to this situation. O’Reilly can believe what he wants, but is not allowed to create his own facts and cherry pick from his arbitrary timeline of events. For example, O’Reilly makes the point that we invaded Iraq to rid the country of Saddam and for humanitarian purposes. On this point alone, O’Reilly must have deleted his memory files much as the IRS seems to have deleted emails. We did not invade Iraq for the purposes O’Reilly states. We invaded Iraq because we were made to believe that Iraq was an existential threat that possessed weapons of mass destruction (WMD) that it would not turnover to U.N. inspectors, was going to use the WMD against the US, and was supporting AQ. Nothing short of creating this existential threat would have brought American into the war. As the invasion kicked off and the contrived lies became clear, the Bush Administration had to save face. The Administration then made a deliberate policy decision to change the motive for the war effort to regime change and humanitarian issues. As such, O’Reilly’s stated purpose for the war is completely fictitious. Further, O’Reilly has chided every democratic administration for humanitarian military operations, but somehow thinks he can hang on to that rationale to defend the disaster Bush created in Iraq.
O’Reilly claims we did Iraq a great favor by ridding the country of Saddam, but again, suspends logic by implying that a full invasion was the only way to “rid” Iraq of Saddam. O’Reilly has to know that there were numerous opportunities and plenty of other options to eliminate and or contain Saddam and any threat he could have possibly posed to the US. In stating this, O’Reilly totally undermines the deaths of near 1,000,000 Iraqis throughout both wars with Iraq. More importantly to me, he also dishonors the American veterans that fought in Iraq by incorrectly believing that perpetuating political lies and propaganda he somehow brings honor to their unnecessary injuries and deaths. Only by telling the truth and prosecuting the political liars within our own government that sent them out to fight a senseless war would he actually do these honorable men and women justice. However, O’Reilly continues to pander to his establishment masters to the disgrace of all who served. Although the likes of Karl Rove, Donald Rumsfeld, and Dick Cheney may applaud O’Reilly, Bill becomes vile in the eyes of veterans those traitors sent to an illegal war. I am positive that very few of the million dead Iraqis posed even the slightest threat to America and would be much happier if they were alive for starters. I am also confident that the thousands of Americans who lost loved ones or that were horribly wounded would also be better off alive and well today, even if Saddam was still in power. No matter what O’Reilly believes from his ivory tower about how we improved the lives of the average Iraqi, the millions of wounded, displaced, starved, and dead would find comfort in knowing the US would never come to “help” Iraq again.
Fourth, our bombing didn’t work, yet, O’Reilly is adamant about the positive effects “heavy bombing” would have for the US against ISIL. O’Reilly seems to think that if we just carpet bomb one more convoy we will win. He seems to “know” that our pilots can positively identify targets flying at nearly the speed of sound or faster and often from above 35,000 feet as long as the “bad guys” are in the open desert. I would laugh, but he is actually serious…and using his own words, a buffoon. I guess he fails to understand how the fact ISIL is operating with the same US provided military vehicles that the Iraqi military is using can complicate targeting. If perhaps, O’Reilly had actually served in combat as a Joint Tactical Air Controller, he would know that his line of logic is ridiculous, but since he did not, let me enlighten him. Just because there is a convoy of trucks with guns in the Middle East does not positively identify the convoy as “bad guys.” In fact, the factions fighting often look indistinguishable even from the ground and much less so from the air. Without good intelligence and legitimate boots on the ground observing, identifying, and marking targets for air, O’Reilly’s airstrikes will not only be futile, but 100% counterproductive. I also think that O’Reilly must have somehow shelved the knowledge that ISIL possesses “Stinger” missiles. Even though I would argue that the likelihood is the bulk of these man portable, surface-to-air missiles are advanced Soviet designs smuggled into Syria by our very own CIA from Libya (hello Benghazi), the missiles nonetheless exist and pose a significant threat to our aircraft operating at low altitudes. I wonder if the loss of an American pilot and an F-16 is worth it to O’Reilly?
Finally, O’Reilly went on to say that ISIL does not recognize the Iraq-Syrian border and that we must pursue ISIL into Syria. I do not disagree that the border has long since ceased to exist and that to prosecute an effective campaign, you must not allow the insurgent sanctuary. Too bad we didn’t use this same logic in Afghanistan where even the dullest of officers recognized that to decisively defeat the Taliban, one must either secure the border or cross into Pakistan, but I digress. Moving back to bombing ISIL in Syria, O’Reilly completely demonstrates his hypocrisy and wins the award for pinhead. Time and again, O’Reilly has been on air demanding President Obama support the rebels in Syria and has attacked the Administration repeatedly for not doing enough, yet, he fails to realize that he is simultaneously demanding we bomb ISIL and support ISIL. O’Reilly is naïve and or ignorant if he fails to make the connection that we have been covertly organizing, arming, training, and equipping the rebel forces in Syria to fight President Assad and it is these same forces, which are now rampaging throughout Iraq. The savages that O’Reilly demands we bomb are the savages we created just like in Afghanistan and Libya. In fact, if we bomb ISIL at their points of origin as O’Reilly suggests… in their training camps in Syria (Jordan and Turkey too O’Reilly), I wonder if he realizes we will be killing American special forces and CIA ground branch officers currently training these terrorists. So I ask O’Reilly, who are the good guys and who are the bad guys because I am very confused.

By Guiles Hendrik
All rights reserved.

Truth Trickles Out: Afghanistan troop cuts will likely lead to Taliban surge, study warns (Surprise…exactly as we predicted)

March 3, 2014: Our track record continues its pristine record of accurately cutting through the lies and deception and correctly forecasting the impact of United States’ policy.  In one of the most recent reveals, it took a gold star panel of overpaid, retired bureaucrats and generals (forgive me if I am redundant) to “discover” that NATO’s optimistic predictions for Afghanistan’s future, contrived at its 2012 Chicago summit, were ridiculously flawed.  The study conducted by the “nonpartisan” think tank CNA concluded that stability in Afghanistan will require tens of thousands more troops costing billions more dollars than NATO envisioned at its 2012 summit.  The review,conducted at the behest of the Pentagon’s policy directorate, found that the Taliban insurgency is likely to swell in the years following the upcoming US and NATO military withdrawal, which contradicts the expectations set at NATO’s May 2012 summit. The review also saw widespread deficiencies in NATO’s planning for Afghanistan manpower, logistics, air support and ministerial strength.

As we reported previously, it was readily apparent to anyone willing to take an unbiased look at the situation in Afghanistan that our counterinsurgency strategy “coined” (pun intended) by strategic snake oil salesmen like disgraced General David Petraeus, Australian “fiction author” David Kilcullen, and RAND Associate Director/Mental Incompetent Seth Jones was an abject failure.  In particular, sealing the border connecting Afghanistan to Pakistan, the single most critical element required to win in Afghanistan, was not even attempted and discounted by the brain trust listed above.  Further, the brain trust relied nearly exclusively on financial aid (bribes which ultimately funded the Taliban) and training of the Afghan police and military (soon to just be a well trained and equipped Taliban army), which has again proven to have no historical precedent for success in warfare.  The damning Government Accountability Office (GAO) study (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1166.pdf) sums up this situation succinctly stating: “The Afghan government and international community have set an objective of having the Afghan army and police lead and conduct security operations in all Afghan provinces by the end of 2014. As of September 2010, no ANA unit was assessed as capable of conducting its mission independent of coalition assistance.”  After a decade and almost a trillion dollars of direct and indirect spending the US had effectively trained a whopping 0% of the Afghan Army to operate on its own!  Anyone that thought just a few hundred billion more dollars and a couple more years would change this was stupid or lying…perhaps both.  I am honestly sick of listening to these idiots create policy after policy on how to “win” in Afghanistan when none of them have a lick of sense, have been in an actual firefight firsthand, or can show that a single policy they recommended led to a decisive US victory.  Of course many excuses were put forth, but the reality was something much deeper as those with functional brains recognized.  The fact was that victory was impossible without the will to actually fight a war to decisive ends, which required the US to have a coherent strategy, competent leadership, the ability to unilaterally run the Afghan government, and the “US” military (not the Afghan enemy) to prosecute a war of attrition across the border into Pakistan and wipe out millions of Pashtuns.  None of these necessary conditions were in place, which created an insurmountable situation in Afghanistan in respect to achieving a decisive victory.

Not so ironically, the review comes as the US policy makers realize they must retreat out of Afghanistan in defeat and will need an alibi to cloak their failure.  Dusting off the Iraq playbook, it should come as no surprise the US, after “exhausting all options with an intractable President Karzai,” will have to pull its troops out of Afghanistan because he won’t sign a status of forces agreement (SOFA).  The spin will be used to justify Bush and now Obama’s military defeats, but don’t expect anyone to question Jay Carney about why after invading, occupying, killing over a hundred thousand people, and placing our puppet in charge that we somehow are now unable to stay because of minor bureaucratic red tape.  The weakness of the public mind knows no bottom.

The CNA review panel at least is correct in recognizing the persistent Taliban insurgency will mount an increased threat to the Afghan government for years after the envisaged NATO withdrawal. The CNA team’s prediction of an increased Taliban threat to Afghanistan through 2018, supported by a recent US intelligence assessment, “stands in direct contradiction to the assumption of a reduced insurgent threat made at the Chicago Summit,” the report states. This is about as much credit as I can give the CNA team.  Beyond this, their analysis becomes pure garbage and it is nauseating to think how many tax dollars were spent on this trash.

The problem with the study is the CNA panel falls short on accurately getting the present facts right and thus, utterly blows their long term forecasted endstate, which predicts a stalemate.  “We conclude that this force is not likely to defeat the Taliban militarily, but that if it can hold against the Taliban insurgency through 2018, the likelihood of a negotiated settlement to the war will increase,” the CNA review found.  The reality is that every province that has been turned over to the Afghan military has effectively been turned over to Taliban control.  The Taliban have outlasted the US, NATO, and the Afghan military for over a decade.  The Taliban will make short work of the Afghan military one on one.  To think they will be looking for a “negotiated settlement” is utter insanity.  The Taliban will defeat and absorb the Afghan army rapidly.  As the last US forces pull out of Afghanistan the Taliban will mount a full scale assault on Kabul to retake the country.  This will leave the situation on the ground almost the same as the US found it in 2001 with the difference being the Taliban are far more numerous, better trained, better armed, better organized, and with an earned hatred of the US.  In a laughable twist to counter this, the CNA team advises (remember, the team is made of “senior” policy makers and generals) the Pentagon to keep international military advisers in the Afghanistan ministries of defense and interior through “at least” 2018 to mitigate long-term problems, including corruption and incompetence.  After reading this, I was left with zero doubt why the Taliban have outlasted the US military.  Our leaders are idiots.  It is a joke to propose that a few advisors will save the day.  Equally blind is the notion that corruption and incompetence, not a viable enemy at the gates will be the big problem for the encircled Karzai regime.  Even with a large number of troops and advisors in country right now, the US has failed to accomplish defeating the military or rooting out corruption.  After thousands of Americans have been killed in this useless war, there still is not even the slightest spark of logic or integrity within the senior echelon and the apathetic public remains in a mute, trance like state when it comes to calling out President Obama and his mob of derelict morons driving the US off a policy cliff.

To conclude, make no mistake of these facts and further predictions.  One, the US suffered a strategic defeat in Afghanistan.  Two, the US will use the failure, albeit an intentional failure, to sign a SOFA (agreement) as a means to save face as it retreats.  Three, the Taliban will retake the country and will be more powerful than they ever could have been if the US did not invade back in 2001.  Four, the Karzai puppet regime will not last to 2018 and Karzai will most likely be killed or flee back to Europe where he hid billions of US aid in complicit Swiss and Dubai banks.  Fifth, in absence of a war in Afghanistan and a failing domestic economy, the US will start wars elsewhere to feed the coffers of the Congressional-Military-Industrial Complex and distract the unemployed masses back in the US.

By Guiles Hendrik

March 3, 2014

All rights reserved.

The Forgotten War: Afghanistan 12 Years Later

America’s war against Al Qaeda terrorists in Afghanistan began over 12 years ago last week.  This grim milestone came and went with no media coverage even as some of America’s best men and women were killed there in combat this week.  Now, in the lead up to a complete US military withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2014, it is blatantly clear our pessimistic analytical forecast for Afghanistan has proved accurate.  Today we will recap the state of affairs of the War in Afghanistan and what to expect in the coming months.

The Obama Administration is quick to broadcast anything it can spin as good news.  The opposite is true of bad news so it is telling that it has maintained a near total media blackout on Afghanistan.  Making President Obama’s whitewash of the dire state of the war even feasible has been a complicit media and their absolute dereliction of a social responsibility to be the watchdog of the government.  This is the same biased media that broadcast images from the Iraq War around the clock during the Bush Administration, but now suddenly has nothing to report respective of the on-going Afghanistan War.  The truth the Obama Administration and his media henchmen are hiding is that the war has gone horribly wrong and the US is rapidly retreating in defeat.

I for one hate the notion of defeat and am incredibly ashamed of even the notion that the US could allow itself to be defeated in a war.  One would think that our nation’s leaders learned something from the Vietnam catastrophe, but then again, most of our leaders on both sides of the aisle were draft dodgers, cowards, potheads, and never served a day in the military.   Considering this, one should not be surprised to find out the Taliban are alive and well.  Not only have the Taliban weathered the full onslaught of a combined US, NATO, and Afghan military force for over a decade, but they are now more numerous, control more territory, and are better armed, trained, and equipped than they were when the US entered the war in 2001.  The Taliban still have the will and capability to fight and still take to the battlefield.  By any measure of warfare, if an invading army is forced from the battlefield and ultimately from the land which it invaded while the opposing army still holds that ground, the army that retreated was defeated.  If the media and the Obama Administration were honest and upfront with the American people, they would report that they never so much as fully secured a single province in Afghanistan.  As quickly as the US has handed over these still contested provinces to the “Afghans,” they have been taken over by the “Afghan Taliban.”  The latest sign of this came on September 13, 2013 when Taliban insurgents nearly overran the US Consulate in Herat, Afghanistan.  Not only was this attack just 48 hours after the anniversary of the attack on the US Consulate in Benghazi, but it was in a far western area of Afghanistan that previously was thought to be immune from Taliban influence.  Soon there will be no more US military forces in Afghanistan to come to the aid of these diplomatic enclaves.  When that day comes in just a few months, the US will be forced to quickly withdraw its last remaining diplomats in defeat.

Afghanistan has been an unsustainable war from the very beginning due to the lack of genius in our senior military officers, our unwillingness to pursue the actual enemy into Pakistan, self-defeating strategies, and the ultimate failure to recognize the strategic importance of sealing the Afghan-Pakistan border.  Our failure to neutralize and or destroy the Taliban safe haven across the border in Pakistan, has allowed the Taliban to wait out the US just as they did the Soviets.  Inside Pakistan’s safe haven, the Taliban fighters receive arms, training, funding, and sanctuary from the Pakistani government…the same government we give over $5 billion in annual aid to (read self-defeating strategy).  While the Taliban organize, train, and equip in Pakistan, the US has spent over a trillion dollars vainly setting up forward operating bases all over the desolate wasteland where the sole mission has become clearing roadways of improvised explosive devices so that the troops can get supplies to their remote bases so they can clear the roads so they can get in supplies, etc. etc. etc.  At no point in this ridiculous slow bleed strategy did our troops ever come close to strategic and decisive gains against the Taliban.  Instead, we spent and bled our nation to defeat without the Taliban having to do more than push an occasional button on an explosive device produced in Pakistan or shoot one of our soldiers in the back while dining together.  This absolute disaster of a war is a testament to the massive amount of money the US taxpayer has been forced to waste on a military bureaucracy so large and unwieldy that defies description.  Until the Department of Defense (DOD) can show that it can actually win a war the budget should be slashed, slashed some more, and then cut in half again.  If the politics won’t allow for a war to be fought, then we shouldn’t fight wars and waste money on our massive and dysfunctional military.  We don’t need smart bombs, we need leaders with the will to fight and win.  That said, without any doubt, for probably under what the DOD spent in a week on the Afghanistan War, a small contingent of country boys sporting nothing but scoped deer rifles, good leadership, and freedom of action could have decisively defeated the Taliban and ended the war in Afghanistan in just a few months.

Not only is the war unsustainable for the US, but also the Afghan government.  Over a hundred Afghan soldiers a week are killed, many times more are wounded, and even more defect to the Taliban.  The situation is so bad that the Department of Defense made it official policy to no longer report the number of Afghan casualties out of fear of losing all moral in the Afghan National Army.  Remember too that the mauling the Afghan military is incurring is with the help of NATO/US forces in Afghanistan to include air support.  Once the US and NATO pull out, the Afghan National Army will face total defeat as it dissolves into a more formalized Taliban Army.

Collapse is now imminent in Afghanistan.  Perhaps six months to a year separate the current state of affairs from a Taliban takeover of most of the country.  As the US accelerates its withdrawal, the Taliban will begin to operate more overtly in Afghanistan seizing at first greater footholds in the regional villages and towns and then overwhelming major cities.  Kandahar may again be one of the first cities to fall to the Taliban as soon as the spring of 2014.  Once Kandahar and surrounding provinces fall fully back into the Taliban’s (Pakistan’s) hands, it will only be a matter of months before Kabul falls under heavy attack and is overrun.  President Karzai will most likely do what he did before and flee his country to save his own skin.  This time though Karzai will flee with over a billion dollars (compliments of the US taxpayer by way of the CIA) hidden away, rather overtly, in Swiss and Dubai bank accounts to live out his days in Europe as his countrymen suffer the aftermath of his corrupt regime.  One can only hope he is forced to stay and weather whatever consequences the war may bring as the captain should either save the ship or sink with it.  In the interim, Afghanistan will exist as the world’s premier narco-state with President Karzai the undisputed cartel leader.

Make no mistake that any notion the US will be able to maintain a footprint in Afghanistan once the pull out begins is an illusion.  I can’t say for sure whether our leadership in the US is just that dumb to believe we will be able to stay (they are building a billion dollar embassy in Kabul) or is simply lying to provide top cover while we retreat.  Nonetheless, the result will be the same.  Think Saigon circa 1975.  To say the least, we will be lucky to have an exit as orderly as the Soviets.  If we are so lucky, it is only because the Taliban correctly assessed that it was in their best interests to simply let us leave as soon as possible while saving up their strength for a full offensive.  Once NATO has gotten out of the way, the Taliban will move to finish the civil war they started before the US invasion.

As the last troops retreat out of Afghanistan in defeat the military-industrial-complex will be faced with a dire situation.  The situation will be one of reduced budgets and no pressing war to sell their wares.  This means the titans of defense will lose billions of dollars and tens of thousands of Americans will be put out of work.  As such, we predict the military-industrial-complex will work closely behind the scenes with Congress to engineer a new war before the complete end to operations in Afghanistan.  The most likely candidate for this will be a war with Iran via Syria.  This war, as we have repeatedly warned, will be a complete disaster on a scale unprecedented in American history.  In fact the consequences could be so dire that historians may very well point to the folly as the end of the Republic.

Please remember our troops on the ground fighting in Afghanistan…they are the real victims of bad leadership, yet bravely stand their posts.

By Guiles Hendrik

All rights reserved. 

US Continues Dangerous False Narrative about Assad’s use of Chemical Weapons

The US again jumped to conclusions about the latest alleged use of chemical weapons in Syria and immediately condemned President Assad’s government.  However, Washington has no way to immediately verify the attack was indeed a chemical attack and even less ability to know who was actually responsible for the attack.  Nonetheless, this didn’t stop the White House calling for serious consequences and the use of force against the Syrian government.  In short, President Obama is ready to launch the US into another disastrous, undeclared, and unconstitutional war based on the word of Al Qaeda avowed terrorists that have everything to gain from conducting a false flag attack that brings the US into the war on their side.

To understand the big picture, one must understand how the actions in Syria relate to Israel’s strategic goal of eliminating the Iranian regime.  Just as we have repeatedly reported, Israel is reluctant to launch an attack against Iran without first securing its northern flank.  To do this, Israel conspired with its allies to significantly degrade Iran’s proxy army Hezbollah and its ally Syria via the use of a proxy army made up of global jihadists.  This group of Al Qaeda avowed jihadists, which now form the bulk of the rebel Free Syrian Army (FSA) is backed by the US and regional allies opposed to Iran such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar.  This plan was intended to depose President Assad and weaken Hezbollah without drawing the US and Israel directly into the war.  However, the plan fell apart as Assad’s forces coupled with Hezbollah fighters began to drive back and defeat the FSA in battle after battle.  As each day goes by, the situation for the FSA has become more critical and has thrown the Israeli war plan into chaos just as Iran’s nuclear program is approaching what Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu describes as his “red line.”  Set against this diminishing timeline, Israel and the US are desperate to finish off Assad and justify the US entrance into the war with Syria.  Syria must fall because it is an essential part of strategy for drawing the US into a greater conflict with Iran, which has been the final goal all along.  As such, the US and Israel have resorted to false flag attacks and recycled the chemical weapon scare tactics used previously to involve the US in a war against Iraq.

The fact that the US and Israel are already engaged in a war against Iran and the Syrian front is just the last stage before an actual overt war against Iran is launched.  The truth doesn’t matter to the Obama Administration just as long as the narrative suits its political agenda to entangle the US into a war with Iran.  Some will be quick to point out the sources contradicting Washington’s narrative are Russian and thus somehow are not credible, but it is also very reputable elements within the United Nations inspection teams that have called into question the origin of these alleged chemical attacks.  Make no mistake, Israel will follow through with its plan to destroy Iran and President Obama has proven incapable of resisting the powerful lobbying behind the scenes.  Furthermore, if President Obama fails to involve the US military in Syria to deliver decisive ends that satisfy Israel, Israel will unilaterally launch an attack against Iran that will, as we have repeatedly warned, force Washington’s hand into entering the war unprepared.

In the coming days and weeks, we as a nation again enter a “red zone.”  The coming months will be a time of great instability, upheaval, and potentially large scale war in the Middle East.  The US doesn’t do this out of its own best interests or national security, but as a result of powerful alien lobbyist elements within our midst that demand the destruction of Iran.  Even though the major news agencies have all but ignored Iran in recent months, Israel has not.  Ignoring the situation between Iran and Israel has not made the situation go away even if the average America has long forgot the war propaganda about red lines, centrifuges, and enrichment.  In fact, the situation has been quickly approaching a major break point where either the US acts, or Israel potentially launches a tactical nuclear strike launched from submarines now stationed in the Persian Gulf and arguably in the Black Sea.

In the run up to what will become a strategic disaster for the US, expect more false flag attacks that are used to justify increasing US involvement in Syria.  Both Tel Aviv and Washington are acutely aware that the rebels will lose if the US doesn’t become decisively involved in the civil war now.  This will include special operations forces on the ground and air strikes that will be launched under what will be named a “no fly zone.”  The Israelis have already been launching air strikes inside of Lebanon as retaliation for alleged rocket attacks, but have used this as cover to test the status of Syrian air defenses in preparation for air strikes in Syria.  Only an immediate and massive public outcry against another war will we stand a chance of averting America’s overt entrance into another war that will be far more costly than the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Both Republicans and Democrats should stand united on this front.  The Democrats and media in particular, which doggedly attacked George Bush over the war in Iraq, need to unite against this war unless they wish to be proved total hypocrites and blind stooges of President Obama.  The military too needs to speak out and register its protest to its involvement in what will prove to be an unwinnable war fought for foreign interests at the expense of American blood and treasure.  Please call, email, and write your elected representatives immediately and say no to any further US involvement in the Syrian Civil War.

 

By Guiles Hendrik

August 24, 2013.

All rights reserved.

 

For more reading:

http://rt.com/news/libya-syria-weapons-rebels-117/

http://rt.com/news/syria-chemical-catastrophic-uk-932/

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2013/07/20137920448105510.html

USA Enters War Allied with Al Qaeda

On June 13, 2013, President Obama announced authorization for the arming of the Syrian rebels last week amidst a string of growing scandals rocking the White House.  President Obama’s action authorized without congressional debate or public justification the United States’ entry into another war.  Not only has the US now picked a side in a bloody civil war where both sides are hostile to the US, but committed the US to a war in a country where the US has little national interest.  At best, this action is constitutionally unsound and a gross abuse of the powers prescribed to the Commander-in-Chief.  At worst, this is an illegal war that will ultimately result in the single greatest foreign policy disaster of Obama’s administration to date and bankrupt the US.

Contrary to the Administration’s claims, the only security threat Syria poses to the US will be the one we create by arming Al Qaeda affiliated rebel groups that openly espouse destruction to the US and Israel.  The White House rationale for this undeclared and unnecessary war was that President Assad used chemical weapons.  In the midst of growing public scandals, does President Obama’s hypocrisy know no end?  First, it was then Senator Obama that openly attacked the Bush administration’s entry into what he deemed an illegal war in Iraq on fabricated intelligence even though the international community did believe Saddam Hussein still possessed weapons of mass destruction.  Yet now, President Obama wants the US to enter another war in the Middle East again on very dubious claims of chemical weapons and when no good argument for US interests exist.  Not only is Obama’s “intelligence” on chemical weapons suspect, but the investigations done by the United Nations, which are available for public scrutiny conclude that “if” chemical weapons were used, they were used by the “rebels” and NOT Assad’s forces.  This glaring contradiction to the Administration’s official spin was dismissed by White House Press Secretary Jay Carney.  The White House departure from its long history of walking in lock step with the U.N. is certainly telling.  The problem this time is even the Washington Post which, known for its overt support of liberal policy and President Obama, called the Administration’s claims into question.  In the Post’s article it states; “Despite months of laboratory testing and scrutiny by top U.S. scientists, the Obama administration’s case for arming Syria’s rebels rests on unverifiable claims that the Syrian government used chemical weapons against its own people, according to diplomats and experts.”  It goes on to say, “If you are the opposition and you hear” that the White House has drawn a red line on the use of nerve agents, then “you have an interest in giving the impression that some chemical weapons have been used,” said Rolf Ekeus, a Swedish scientist who headed up U.N. weapons inspections in Iraq during the 1990s.

Things are sounding an awful lot like the Bush-era false war propaganda about Iraqi chemical weapons with a touch of President Clinton’s policy of bombing “terrorist” targets at the height of the Monica Lewinsky Scandal.  Hopefully, the American people have finally learned their lesson and will demand to see the actual evidence and be given a legitimate reason why war is “necessary” this time, what our strategy is, and what is the desired end state.

One need not be a fortune-teller to foresee how U.S. involvement in Syria will go down as one of America’s greatest foreign policy disasters.  After being defeated in Iraq and now Afghanistan, the U.S. should have learned a few lessons about the folly of interventionist policy.  In the least, it should not be committing the U.S. to another war before it has at least finished its fight in Afghanistan.  In this regard, the hubris of the Obama Administration in this regard is staggering.  Now, not only has the U.S. entered a war against a nation, but it has entered a sectarian war between Shia and Sunnis that has split Islam since the seventh century.  This war extends far beyond Syria’s borders and is engulfing the entire Muslim world.

Currently, approximately 1,100 Marines and possibly up to a few thousand “advisors,” are in Jordan.  This is in addition to a small cadre of Special Forces and CIA case officers working closely with rebel elements in and out of Syria.  Further, U.S. forces are positioned to the north of Syria in Turkey and have been clandestinely supporting rebel training camps, NATO airbases, and air defense facilities.  As Washington’s plan to arm the rebels fails to save their strategy to overthrow Assad, Obama will be forced to increase American intervention.  This will likely involve the implementation of a “no-fly zone” and will be the next step towards a hot war with Syria and Iran.

Obama is no doubt in a dilemma.  He foolishly thought the he could use proxies to topple Assad in order to destroy Iran’s fifth column in the preliminary phases of the ongoing cold war with Iran.  The failure of the rebels means Washington must either face humiliation as its policy to remove Assad collapses or now openly enter into a war on the side of rebels previously known as terrorists, insurgents, and jihadists.  Obama has doubled down on the rebels.  Of the rebel forces, Jordanian intelligence estimates upwards of 80% of their combat power and front line fighters are jihadists that have avowed the destruction of both the US and Israel.  In fact, even US allies in the Middle East have openly called into contention the notion the CIA can distribute advanced military weapons only to secular Sunni rebel forces in Syria.  Supporting this skepticism is the fact the most powerful element within the Syrian rebel force is the al-Nusrah Front, which is allied to al-Qaeda.  As such, the thought that the US can arm these jihadists turned rebels and not directly endanger American lives is so foolish; the mere suggestion is an absolute bald face lie.  Therefore, the sudden policy shift and use of the chemical weapons rationale to arm the rebels exposes the true nature of Washington’s intent to use Syria as a stepping stone toward an ultimate showdown with Iran.   As Obama’s administration is forced toward war with Iran by special interests, he will now have to demonstrate greater and greater involvement.

Moving forward, the US now owns the civil war in Syria.  Obama has joined forces with known Al Qaeda terrorists to fight an equally nasty dictator.  Neither of which support US interests.  The newly armed and resurgent rebels will not hesitate to attack US interests at the first opportunity.  American’s will die because of this policy disaster.  Washington and by default, the American people, will now be blamed every time the rebels commit an atrocity.  These Sunni extremists are the same brand that attacked the US on 9/11 and there is no reason to expect them to act any differently in the future.  We are indeed creating our own enemies.

The violence has now fully spilled over into a regional conflict.  Hezbollah in Lebanon has now committed fully to the war.  Iran has committed to support Assad as well and has sent thousands of troops to support Assad’s military.  Qatar and Saudi Arabia are sending billions in arms and equipment.  Turkey’s streets are on fire with protests.  Egypt is now warning of outright civil war.  Israel is on high alert and dealing with daily cross border fire from the conflict in Syria.  Iraq is now fully re-engulfed with sectarian violence as we previously warned would occur.

How President Obama believes that any good for the US can come of providing US military weapons and equipment to a motley collection of known terrorists, international jihadists, and Sunni extremists is beyond rational logic.  No matter how the conflict ends in Syria, the party that takes or retains power will be openly hostile to the US.  Not only are our analysts predicting greater bloodshed, but we now see all of the signs of a full-blown regional conflict that has the potential to rapidly draw the US back into a full-scale disastrous war that will likely be the final blow to America’s global economic and political dominance.

 

By Guiles Hendrik

June 26, 2013

All rights reserved

Failure in Afghanistan Slowly Creeps into National Dialogue

With little fanfare, media hype, or public outcry the inevitable conclusion that the War in Afghanistan is a failure has begun to take root in the public as well as political psyche.  Slowly but surely the media has quietly, but definitely begun to write the closing chapters on one of the greatest American foreign policy disasters since Vietnam.  Perhaps this quiet acquiescence is the result of media bias and its gross protectionist agenda for President Obama or perhaps this is simply the last whimpers of a nation overcome and war weary.

On March 19th, Afghanistan’s presidential spokesman Aimal Faizi adequately described the state of the NATO-led military operation in the country as “aimless and unwise.”  He specifically said, “The people of Afghanistan ask NATO to define the purpose and aim of the so-called war on terror… (They) consider this war as aimless and unwise to continue.”  Both the American war fighters and the Afghans have known this fact for years.  It now appears that only our senior policy makers are left believing their own propaganda as they tenaciously try to divert criticism from their own failed strategies and policies just long enough to retire or blame someone else.  It is worth noting that pundits will still correlate the daily “defeat” of the Taliban on the battlefield with victory in Afghanistan.  These grossly false conclusions should serve to fully discredit whoever was dumb enough to make the statement.  Just as in Vietnam for the U.S. and in Afghanistan for the Soviets, simple defeat of the insurgent on the battlefield is not enough to win the war.  Over the years we have written profusely about this reality to include directly indicting the failure of then General Petraeus’ counterinsurgency strategy.  Specifically, we identified the failure of the strategy to remove sanctuary and or secure the border, which even a basic knowledge of insurgent warfare shows is the absolute key essential to winning a cross-border, state supported insurgency such as we are fighting in Afghanistan.

Only in hindsight will the true magnitude of the United States’ defeat in Afghanistan be realized.  What can be assured is that by the oldest historical metric of victory in warfare, the force that holds the ground at the end of the day has won, the U.S. has lost.  There is no doubt that the Taliban is in firm control of not just some, but more of Afghanistan than before the U.S. invasion.  In fact, the Taliban have even extended control throughout regions that the “Northern Alliance” formerly controlled and the pseudo-experts like David Kilcullen deemed “immune.”  This includes expanding across the border into Uzbekistan and Tajikistan.  Further, Pakistan has continued to allow sanctuary and provide covert support to the Taliban unabated by drone strikes and bolstered by U.S. foreign aid, which all but assures the imminent overthrow of Karzai’s puppet regime in Kabul.

As NATO shutters its operations and begins its long overdue pullout the costs are immense and are only now beginning to be counted.  Thousands of dead and wounded, incalculable numbers of broken families, trillions of dollars in un-repayable debt, economic devastation, obliteration of national prestige, and the massive growth and spread of radical Islamism are just the highlights.  Our performance in Afghanistan has been so dismal, one could make a legitimate argument that if the U.S. had done absolutely nothing after 9/11 as compared to over a decade of warfare, the U.S. would be in a better strategic position today.  The trillions of dollars dedicated to our high tech military supremacy simply was not enough to overcome even the lowest level of military threats and is due almost exclusively to the intellectual dereliction of our policy makers and poor leadership.

If this has taught us nothing else, it should serve as a stark warning against future intervention in places like Mali, Somalia, Libya, and Syria and most certainly, a full blown war with Iran or North Korea.  Further, it serves as a reminder of how futile spending money on equipment and weapons is if there isn’t the leadership capable of designing and implementing effective strategic policy.  If the U.S. fails to heed these warnings, the U.S. will find itself embroiled in another strategic disaster before the end of 2013.  Eerily similar to the lead-up to the Soviet defeat and withdrawal from Afghanistan, the U.S. finds itself bankrupt and dangerously strategically overextended on the eve of its retreat from Afghanistan in 2014.  If the U.S. falls victim in its weakened state to another war and policy disaster, it could spell at minimum, the economic collapse of the U.S.

See the below articles for further references to the U.S. failure in Afghanistan:

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/03/04/what_went_wrong?page=0,3

http://www.france24.com/en/20130319-afghan-spokesman-labels-nato-war-aimless-unwise

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b22_1363444518&comments=1

http://www.saveamericafoundation.com/2013/03/19/america-has-won-her-last-war-a-lack-of-courage-a-loss-of-will-by-j-d-longstreet/

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2013/03/08/iraq-afghanistan-and-the-end-of-winning-wars

http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/2219845279001/afghan-president-accuses-us-of-collusion-with-taliban/

 

By Guiles Hendrik

Assessing the Success of the War on Terror Part II: Return on Investment and Perpetual War

Part II of our series continues to evaluate the success of the War on Terror.  It is our thesis that not only has American policy and strategy failed to defeat terrorist threats to the United States from radical Islam, but it has in fact exasperated them.  Today, Al Qaeda and terrorism have become the new boogie men, replacing the Communist menace of the Cold War.  This manufactured threat has now taken on a persona of its own and has been used to justify endless war across the world.  Ultimately, it will be America’s downfall as the evidence is clear the US is losing the strategic war.

To illustrate this slide, consider the following.  On September 10, 2001, few Americans had ever heard the name Osama bin Laden (UBL) or were aware of the organization that came to be known as Al Qaeda (AQ).  Today, UBL and AQ are household names.  At the turn of the century, AQ consisted of perhaps a couple hundred fighters at most and was not broadly operational.  Today, AQ has branched into a franchise like organization recruiting operatives from Detroit, Michigan to Jakarta, Indonesia and numbering in the thousands.  In 2003, Al Qaeda didn’t exist in Iraq, but today it operates with near impunity in cities such as Mosul where it has established facilities for training and arming terrorists ready to conduct jihad in Syria and the greater Middle East.  In Afghanistan, the Taliban, which was once at least partially hostile to AQ, has fully integrated its operations with AQ extremists.  Further, the Taliban has spread beyond its original Kandahar region all throughout Afghanistan.  This includes regions previously controlled by the “Northern Alliance” and considered “immune” from the Taliban according to snake oil hacks like David Kilcullen and has now even spread over the borders into Tajikistan and Uzbekistan.  Other areas to include the Philippines, Indonesia, the Balkans, the Caucuses, and Western Europe have all seen steady growth of Islamic extremism.  Considering the above, one need not dig deeper than the blatantly obvious to realize that the War on Terror has not been won and in fact, has gone horribly wrong for the US.

Operationally, AQ has shown that it is not only resilient, but growing.  The fact that AQ is still operationally capable of killing an American Ambassador over a decade into this war is not only massively embarrassing for the US, but it proves US  senior leadership and strategy have been a failure.  Simply tracking the number and location of drone strikes one can quickly conclude that not only has the theater of AQ’s operations expanded from Afghanistan to one of global influence, but that AQ’s numbers are growing faster than the United States can target and kill its leaders.  Just as discussed in Part I of this series, limited targeted assassinations and strikes have been tried over and over throughout military history and have never yielded decisive gains.  Worse, the US appears to be living in ignorance of reality.  The progressive agenda during the most recent presidential campaign wanted to proclaim Obama defeated AQ and led US leaders to a naïve sense of security as a result of whitewashing the actual threat respective of the spread of AQ.  These ideological blinders led to the death of four Americans including an ambassador in Libya at the hands of AQ affiliated fighters on no less than September 11th when America should have been at its maximum state of readiness.  Associated with this fallout is the spread of Islamic extremism, terrorism, and insurgency now throughout the northern half of Africa.  This event was accurately predicted by our analysts and has now come to fruition as the weapons looted from Gadhafi’s arsenals have fallen squarely in the hands of extremists and AQ affiliated groups.  This includes more than 20,000 advanced man portable surface-to-air missiles, which we continue to predict will soon be used against a commercial airliner.

If Libya wasn’t a big enough disaster, the US has now begun to dig itself into an even broader war in Mali and other African countries from Nigeria to Somalia.  This has already cost innocent American lives in Algeria after Islamic terrorists attacked an oil facility in retaliation for America’s support to the French in Mali.  Nonetheless, the press does not hold President Obama, then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, or any other senior policy maker accountable for the blood on their hands.  If American policy makers think Algeria was an isolated incident, they are ignorant and in denial of reality.  Americans appear quick to forget how well our operations in Somalia turned out and are again conducting the same type of operations clandestinely over a region thousands of times larger.  There simply is no need to involve the US in these local fights.  The blowback will be severe and certainly far outweigh any benefit except for the very few elites getting oil and mineral rights to the newly acquired lands wrought from disturbingly imperialistic motives.

Looking at AQ’s spread is not sufficient to capture the bigger strategic picture.  Not only has AQ, with the help of the US (most recently in Libya and Syria), globally expanded, but it has accomplished what even Pan-Arabism and Nasserism could not.  The “Arab Spring,” has taken down one former pro-American regime after another.  The dictators like Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak that have acted as America’s brutal puppets for decades are being toppled by Islamic extremists now routinely.  In the vacuum, the Muslim Brotherhood is consolidating power and moving the Middle East and North Africa firmly toward a fundamentalist interpretation of Islam and obliterating any vestige of a secular government.  This cataclysmic reordering of the geopolitical balance of the Middle East and North Africa is far from over as history is being made before our eyes.  We predict that with covert support from the US, Qatar, Turkey, and other nations, Syria will be the next regime to fall.  This is being done for the shortsighted goals of checking Iran’s regional dominance, but will lead to one of America’s greatest policy disasters in the region.  In effect, this will allow extremists to encircle the relatively friendly nation of Jordan and the US ally of Israel.  The monarchy in Jordan will then be threatened and could be toppled and reset the Middle Eastern stage to 1973 on the eve of Yom Kippur.  If Jordan falls, a final sweep of the region for extremists will be within reach.  In fact, it is then entirely likely UBL’s originally long term goal of toppling the Saudi regime will be realized.  This would allow Sunni extremists to form an unprecedented block of power throughout the Middle East and all but eliminate US influence in the region.

In conclusion of Part II of this series, we looked at how AQ has spread from a little known entity of a few individuals to a worldwide franchise.  Only through America’s disastrous self-defeating policies has this been possible.  Now, more than a decade into a war being fought against rebels that at best are third rate, the purportedly most powerful military in the world has been checked and strategically defeated.  The US is broke just as UBL intended and Washington is being forced to make painful cuts to domestic programs that may very well lead to massive social unrest.  In the end, the Islamists hold the ground from Asia to Africa as the US is forced to pull its forces back as the debts of tax dollars vainly wasted over the last decade come due.  As such, AQ still holds the battlefield as America retreats.  Based on this and using one of the oldest measures of victory in warfare, the Islamists have won and the US has been defeated thus far in the war of East versus West.

Part III will conclude this series and discuss the return on the investment of trillions of dollars in defense and security spending.  Most disturbingly, it will look at how the “terrorist” threat is now being used to declare American soil a battleground, justify the creation of a police state, and declare citizens threats and order their assassinations in secret all while bankrupting our nation.

 

By: Guiles Hendrik

Senator “Chuck” Hagel’s Nomination for Secretary of Defense: Traitors Oppose Him Because He Told the Truth and Put America First!

What appears now to be President Obama’s imminent nomination of former Senator Chuck Hagel has caused a firestorm of criticism from traitors in our midst.  In particular, Senator Hagel is under attack because he was gutsy and honest enough to state an obvious fact about the disproportionate and decidedly negative influence various Israeli lobby groups exert over U.S. policy.  Some may try to deny this fact, but I would submit that the mere fact that there is such uproar over this small statement made years ago proves how disproportionately powerful this lobby continues to be.  Then Senator Hagel didn’t stop there and was brazen enough to also boldly state that U.S. interests should come first and that he swore an oath to the Constitution!  How dare he put the U.S. first and swear allegiance to the Constitution and want to follow the rule of law!  On second thought, how dare any American criticize him for taking that stand!

Let’s separate fact from fiction.  Senator Hagel in my book is far from a perfect candidate for the position of Secretary of Defense, but the man has a lot going for him.  For starters, he is a self-made millionaire and understands business.  The Department of Defense is the world’s largest bureaucracy so we need a good manager to rein it in.  Mr. Hagel has also openly made comments suggesting he recognizes that the interests and security of the U.S. should be placed ahead of other nations’ interests and that he recognizes the U.S. Constitution as the supreme law of the land.  This too IS a good thing for America!  However, if you happen to believe that the best interests of a foreign nation should supersede those of the U.S. and you are not a foreign national, then you need to disclose yourself as an agent of a foreign government to the F.B.I. and the American public before suggesting Mr. Hagel is a bad guy for taking the side of the country he is sworn to protect.

Second, Mr. Hagel seems to recognize that the Constitution is an important and valid document.  This is a vast improvement from his predecessors, which under Congressional Testimony seem to forget that the Constitution exclusively gives the power to declare war to the legislative branch of government (Congress).  Both Panetta and Gates, when questioned directly by Congress on this subject, testified to the point that the authority to commit U.S. troops to war lie not with Congress, but the international community, whatever that is.  What it isn’t though is Constitutional.  Further, in the context of Hagel’s statements against the Patriot Act and then President George Bush’s constant push for the war in Iraq, it was quite clear that he was drawing a distinction between party politics and the best interests of a free nation.  Again, this is commendable.  Finally, Mr. Hagel voted in favor of Senate Amendment 2022, restoring habeas corpus, the right to due process, to American citizens detained at Guantanamo Bay detention camp, but voted against a similar resolution restoring it to non-U.S. prisoners detained at Guantanamo.  This demonstrates Mr. Hagel understands that U.S. citizens have certain unalienable rights granted by the Constitution and are materially different than foreign combatants.  The need to have a Secretary of Defense with this type of legal and ethical compass is even more important now after President Obama just signed into law the latest National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which effectively suspends habeas corpus and allows American citizens to be captured and indefinitely detained even while inside of the U.S.  This latest law is draconian and the epitome of tyranny.  Mr. Hagel may be one of the few that could achieve appointment while still imparting some balance.

Third, the man actually served in the U.S. military, has seen “ground” combat in Vietnam, and earned two purple hearts.  Any one of these would clearly set him apart from his peers, but combined, suggests Mr. Hagel recognizes the dangers of useless wars with no winning strategy or end.  His criticisms of the War in Iraq demonstrated that not only did he see Iraq for the massive waste of life and resources it was, but also was willing to stand up and say something about it when the rest of his Senate peers quietly walked in lockstep with the Republican Party.  I for one believe anyone acting in the position of Secretary of Defense should know firsthand what it is like to be in combat, risk your life, and be put in a position where you must take the life of others.  No text book, degree, or amount of empathy can replace the raw horror of war.  As such, no one that hasn’t actually experienced war can truly appreciate what our troops are asked to do and properly formulate Department of Defense policy.

If not enough, Mr. Hagel serves on President Obama’s Intelligence Advisory Board.  This is a senior position with access to highly classified information and is central to the development of security and defense policy at the Presidential level.  As such, Mr. Hagel is in the know.  What is funny is that he is criticized for his “soft” position on Iran, when he is one of the people who would be in the exact position to understand exactly what the U.S. is doing in respect to Iran, how well it has worked, and what the actual versus publicized threat of Iran really is to U.S. national security.  Further, he would also be acutely aware of the degree to which countries like Israel have lobbied to inject their interests into our policy with respect to Iran and whether or not this was in the best interests of the U.S.  Knowing all of this information, Mr. Hagel has come out against “hard” policies toward Iran as counter-productive and particularly against sanctions.  Mr. Hagel was correct in his policy prescription toward Iran in part because he is privy to information most readers honestly are not.  Second, specific to his opposition to sanctions, he was again correct in his policy prescription.  Sanctions haven’t worked against Iran and have only complicated our negotiations, made life very difficult for the average Iranian, and bolstered the regimes propaganda that Iran’s ills are being caused by America.  Finally, Mr. Hagel speaks first hand regarding the intimidation the Israeli lobby wields over U.S. policy makers.  Note, Mr. Hagel’s statements regarding Israel never suggest he didn’t believe that Israel was a U.S. ally or that the U.S. and Israel would not continue to support each other.  Mr. Hagel only stated that U.S. interests must come first.  This clear state of mind and understanding of his responsibilities to “our” nation is of the utmost importance and I applaud him for telling the truth.  If anything, one should be demanding why the media hasn’t raised such a cry for those nominees and candidates that haven’t taken such stances and seem to put America last.  This is the real story of a seditious media that lacks any real accountability and has a clear bias against “U.S.” interests in its reporting.

No nominee is perfect and this is true with Mr. Hagel.  Although, I would like to see other nominees and do believe based on the above Mr. Hagel is a better choice for Secretary of Defense than other potential candidates, he does have critical flaws.  Specifically, even though he has voiced support for the Constitution, which today is exceedingly rare amongst politicians, he did support the Patriot Act after initially voting against it.  He also voted for FISA, which among other classified powers, gave wide surveillance and warrantless wiretapping authority to the government.  I believe the damage the Patriot Act and FISA have done to the freedom, liberty, and privacy of citizens is egregious and is difficult to reconcile with anyone truly respective of civil liberties and the Constitution.  Perhaps the only defense of Mr. Hagel on these issues is that the most invasive spying, surveillance, and detention policies these acts proscribe were only written into law and passed after he left office.  All considered, under the circumstances Mr. Hagel is likely the best nominee free Americans can hope for from this Administration, but the buyer should beware.

By Guiles Hendrik

The Final Presidential Debate: Lies, Truth, and the Collapse of US Foreign Policy

President Obama and Mitt Romney find it amusing you believe anything they say.

At first it might be hard to decide what candidate for president to believe, but the answer in truth is easy.  NEITHER.  Both have been part of the lies and corruption too long to provide any real positive substance to the debate.  Beyond more of the same political spin on old failed policies, you will hear no new ideas, many excuses, lots of finger pointing, and most importantly, no real strategy that departs from the failings of at least the last 11+ years.

For almost four years President Obama has continued many of the Bush-era policies while adding his own flavor of failure.  Libya is just one of the most recent examples of an Obama owned foreign policy disaster as the return of four dead Americans can attest.  By arming and supporting known jihadists, he set the stage for greater bloodshed throughout Africa and the Middle East.  Even worse, Obama also quietly sold American sovereignty down the river to push an internationalist agenda.  By allowing the United Nations Security Council and not Congress to be the single authoritative body to send Americans to war and placing Americans under foreign command without objection, Obama intentionally set a new precedent in international law that further erodes American sovereignty.  Obama just recently was stating how Al Qaeda was decimated, but unfortunately for him and his propaganda machine, reality reared its ugly head all across North Africa, the Middle East, and South Asia.  To illustrate his colossal failure in the Middle East and beyond it is worthwhile to highlight some key events from just a couple short weeks in September.  During this very short timeframe a US diplomatic motorcade was blown to pieces in Peshawar, Pakistan wounding an American diplomat, four Americans to include an Ambassador were assassinated in Libya, numerous NATO forces were killed and wounded in Afghanistan by “friendly” troops and the Taliban, our embassies and consulates were attacked and torched in countries like Egypt and Sudan, Syria continued to deteriorate, and bomb blasts ripped through Iraq to name just SOME of the major events that affected Americans.  Moving beyond our unending wars with Islam, Japan and China moved closer to war, Russia reinforced units with elite combat troops on the border with Georgia, North Korea threatened America and South Korea with a nuclear attack, and the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant continued to release massive amounts of radiation…again, to just identify a few highlights.  On the economic front a near imminent disaster is facing Europe that will certainly collapse the global economy and take the US down with it.  Further, the US debt has spiraled past 16 Trillion and is picking up speed with no end or even cuts in sight for spending.  The true magnitude of the impending economic disaster will only be seen after the election and the temporary Band-Aids placed on the world economy to support President Obama’s re-election fall away.  No Mr. President, Al Qaeda is not on the run, we are.  No Mr. President, the world is not safer.  No Mr. President, our debt and spending have not decreased.  No Mr. President, our economy has not recovered.  No Mr. President, you do not deserve another term!

As for Romney, this is a man with no foreign policy credentials.  He is the man who somehow managed to already offend even the British before he was in the U.K. for a day.  This is a man who has already kissed the ring of Netanyahu and sworn allegiance to a foreign power in exchange for political support.  This is a man who thinks the policy era of George Bush was a success and should be brought back.  So much so, his advisors and potential appointees are all Bush-era retreads reshuffled.  To think America would allow Bush-era policy “experts” back into the White House after what we already lived through and expect anything to improve is simply beyond comprehension and must be put squarely in the court of idiocy.  In respect to Romney’s stated Middle East policy, war mongering would be an understatement.  Even though Romney is nothing more than a well-endowed draft dodger, he apparently thinks nothing of putting your sons and daughters lives in danger as he plots an even more disastrous round of wars with Syria and Iran for Israel’s security.  I guess he didn’t get the memo regarding how “well” the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq went.  Nonetheless, he seems to think he can start a war with Iran and that somehow will benefit America although I would challenge him to justify this argument in the upcoming debates.  Further, he somehow believes that by giving more tax dollars to the incredibly over funded Department of Defense and starting a war with Iran he can simultaneously balance the budget.  In one of the rare cases of Bill Clinton being right, Romney’s numbers just don’t add up.  As a purported businessman, Romney must know this flaw in his arithmetic so it is fair to conclude he is stupid or lying to the public.  Beyond the Middle East, Romney has also managed to pick a premature fight with Russia and risks restarting the Cold War.  If Romney can’t even understand the consequences of wars in the Middle East, he is woefully unprepared to take on the likes of Russia and China in strategic policy.

America, your candidates chosen for you by the elites will not return peace and prosperity as they claim.  Instead, you will get greater debt, a worse economy, unending bloody and costly wars, and further destruction of your freedom and liberties at home.  We have seen both parties’ policies and they are abject failures, ignore the rule of law, and trash the Constitution.  Neither is acceptable.  Only by ditching the two very unqualified candidates and their establishment parties en masse can America hope to avert total disaster during the next four years.  The Democrats and Republicans do not represent your best interests unless of course you are an extremely wealthy donor, financial institution, or mega corporation.  Whether you disagree or agree, you, the citizens of the United States of America, will get the government you collectively deserve come November so choose wisely.

 

Below are links to a few recent articles illustrating the US strategic failure in Afghanistan:

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/10/21/al-qaeda-in-afghanistan-is-attempting-comeback/

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/10/06/insurgents-kill-2-us-troops-in-eastern-afghanistan-bombs-kills-2-afghan/?intcmp=obinsite

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/10/13/blasts-in-southern-afghanistan-kill-2-afghan-policemen-3-intelligence-officers/?intcmp=obinsite