The Other War

Our military in Iraq and Afghanistan aren't the only ones subjected to armed conflict.  Citizens on our border with Mexico are being subjected to combat conditions with no support from our government or law enforcement.  You don't hear of this in the media because it goes against the meme of 'the only people crossing the border are poor oppressed Latinos who need our superior liberal help so how dare you deny them access to American wealth to which they are entitled.'  You also don't read about it in police reports because the police are not reporting what is really going on.

An example: A friend of mine goes hunting in southern Texas on a large ranch.  The ranch manager tells him of finding an unfamiliar truck parked next to one of the ranch gates with men trying to open i.  When he challenges them, they open fire with automatic weapons.  He returns fire with a shotgun, and the men increase fire and try to flank him to kill him.  He manages to escape with his life.  The police report says that the only evidence found at the scene are shell casings from his shotgun and one .22 shell casing (most likely .223, but I guess that's close enough to .22).  What they failed to put in the report are photos of the side of his truck with lines of bullet holes down the side put there by automatic weapons fire.  Move along--nothing to see here.

Another example: A ranch hand is sitting in a bunk house on his own when the door is kicked in and two thugs demand the keys to his truck.  He pulls out a firearm and they flee.  The ranch hand says that this is common and no one goes unarmed where he is.  You don't dare kill one of these trespassers because they tend to run in gangs, and for every one or two that are out in the open, there are usually five or more in hiding waiting to see what you do.  So, rather than cleaning the gene pool out, you have to let them go because you don't know how many you're actually facing--which means they're free to go rob/murder the next rancher.

Anglo leftists use the charge of racism to halt any inquiries into this activity because they need the 'oppressed' to support their Leftist causes.  Latino leftists use the charge of racism to destroy our borders and expand Mexico because they want to push out Anglo culture and reclaim the land they lost long ago due to the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo.  The drug traffickers use both to clear the way for business.  We are left to pick up the pieces because multiculturalism and political correctness prevent us from acknowledging that war has been declared on us one ranch at a time.

Hope and Change - Secondary and Tertiary Effects

The growing fecklessness of the current Administration is having effects beyond the Middle East.  As detailed by George Friedman of STRATFOR reports, the European Union and NATO are losing their luster with former vassals of the Soviet Union (who know a thing or two about tyranny, socialism, and unaccountable bureaucrats).

Poland, Hungary, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic have established the Visegrad Group.

The region is Europe — more precisely, the states that had been dominated by the Soviet Union. The Visegrad Group, or V4, consists of four countries — Poland, Slovakia, the Czech Republic and Hungary — and is named after two 14th century meetings held in Visegrad Castle in present-day Hungary of leaders of the medieval kingdoms of Poland, Hungary and Bohemia. The group was reconstituted in 1991 in post-Cold War Europe as the Visegrad Three (at that time, Slovakia and the Czech Republic were one). The goal was to create a regional framework after the fall of Communism. This week the group took an interesting new turn.

On May 12, the Visegrad Group announced the formation of a “battle group” under the command of Poland. The battle group would be in place by 2016 as an independent force and would not be part of NATO command.    Yes, go back and read that again (in fact, go read the whole article).  Four European nations have decided that NATO (and, by extension, the United States) is no longer seen as a guarantor of freedom.  Of course, I'm sure that our treatment of Israel and response to Iran and the "Arab Spring" had nothing to do with this turn of events.  After all, the United States is no better ally and friend--just ask Hosni Mubarak.

Hope and change... still having magical effects around the world.

The Problem Is That He Does Get It

Ever since President Obama made his speech at the State Department this week declaring that Israel must return to her pre-1967 borders, commentators, pundits and delusional Democratic Jews have been continually making excuses for him, claiming that he doesn't understand Israel's security problem with doing that, that he doesn't 'get it.'

I don't think he misspoke at all.  Based on his past and his ideology, he understands perfectly what he was saying.  The clues are rather obvious...

Cuban Missile Crisis - Take 2

Germany's Die Welt has reported that Iran is planning to build a medium range ballistic missile (MRBM) base in Venezuela on the Paraguana Peninsula. Nice payoff for Hugo Chavez--he must provide exceptional fellatio as guys like Bashar al-Assad of Syria and Mahmoud Ahmadin-Nejad keep showing up.

Why should this be a concern for us?  After all, MRBMs are supposed to have a range of 3,500 kilometers (~ 2,200 miles).  Well, when you consider that it's only 1,367 miles between Caracas and Miami, it's gets to be a little more personal... and, given that the estimated maximum range for the Shahab-3 is 1,300 miles... you get the idea. (The Shahab-5, under development by Iran , is estimated to have a range of 4-5,000 kilometers or 2,500-3,100 miles).

Again, why should we be worried, because, after all, the Shahab is based on the North Korean Nodong missile--which is based on old Russian technology.  Be worried because Russia has been working with the Iranians since the 1990s.  Russian state agencies and private firms involved in Iran's missile program include the Russian Space Agency; the state-owned arms trading company Rosvooruzheniye; NPO Trud, a rocket engine manufacturer; Polyus, a laser manufacturer; the Bauman Institute; and the Russian Central Aerohydrodynamic Institute (TsAGI). These entities reportedly have sold Iran important components, such as the gyroscopes used in missile guidance systems, and have helped in the design of nose cones and missile guidance and propulsion systems.

Hence, my title of 'Cuban Missile Crisis - Take 2.'  Because the Russians are covertly putting in to place the kind of sword over our heads that they wanted in place back in 1962--a means of striking the United States.  With everyone concentrating on missiles coming from the Middle East and Russia, missile defenses are oriented towards the likely attack vectors.  This adds a new factor to the game.

Because this time the Russians won't have the problem of being tied directly to the missiles they way they were back in 1962.  No pissant dictator directly tied to their state honor and support.  No reason for the United States to strike them directly if anything ever flies from Hugo's back yard.  Using Iran as their front man to place the threat for them is the kind of deft chess move that befits their history.

Russia knows that Iran is the thorn in the side of the West--and they have no motivation to help remove it. Hence the lack of support in the U.N. for serious penalties for Iran's proliferation.  Why remove a major source of anxiety in the world which is keeping oil prices high and, coincidentally, of course, pouring billions in additional profit into Russian coffers. (You did know that Russia exports a crapload of oil, didn't you?)

Aren't you glad we have the most competent Administration evah in office now to handle this kind of danger?

Seeing The Egypt They Want To See

Andrew McCarthy has written yet another superb article on the Middle East.  In "An Ill Season," McCarthy writes:

Screaming “With our blood and soul, we will defend you, Islam,” jihadists stormed the Virgin Mary Church in northwest Cairo last weekend. They torched the Coptic Christian house of worship, burned the nearby homes of two Copt families to the ground, attacked a residential complex, killed a dozen people, and wounded more than 200: just another day in this spontaneous democratic uprising by Muslim hearts yearning for freedom.

In the delusional vocabulary of the “Arab Spring,” this particular episode is known as a sectarian “clash.” That was the Washington Post’s take. Its headline reads “12 dead in Egypt as Christians and Muslims clash” — in the same way, one supposes, that a mugger’s fist can be said to “clash” with his victim’s face. The story goes on, in nauseating “cycle of violence” style, to describe “clashes between Muslims and Coptic Christians” that “left” 12 dead, dozens more wounded, “and a church charred” — as if it were not crystal clear who were the clashers and who were the clashees, as if the church were somehow combusted into a flaming heap without some readily identifiable actors having done the charring.

Well, what, you may ask, would cause such wailing and gnashing of teeth?

The provocation that stirred Muslims this time, as if there had to be one, involved a rumor that Copts are preventing a Christian woman from converting to Islam — and who wouldn’t grab the blowtorch over that? The rumor is probably not true, but what difference does that make? A Christian woman about whom a similar claim was made a couple of years ago ultimately denied that she had ever attempted to become a Muslim. That didn’t stop enraged Muslims — rage being the default condition — from killing 51 people in a similar arson attack on a Syriac Catholic church in post-Saddam, “Made in the U.S.A.” Baghdad.

Go read the whole article here.

A New Twist

The clash between Khameni and Achmadi-Nejad is growing, revolution simmers and now and then bursts into flame in Syria against Assad,civil war still goes on in Libya (even though the media has all but dropped it from coverage as the continued carnage does not reflect well on the Chosen One), Yemen continues to descend into chaos, and things are beginning to heat up in Bahrain again.

Of course, these secondary and tertiary effects of the 'Tunisian Virus'are not what is wanted by Iran or Egypt.  The Muslim Brotherhood wants to keep things quiet until it can take over peacefully through elections (and then go about establishing a fundamentalist Islamic state), and Iran prefers that any chaos be at its instigation and control.  Iran needs people to focus on anti-Semitism vice their internal conflicts. (Hence, the interesting development in which the Palestinian Authority entered into a peace agreement with Hamas.)

Sadly, one thing that Arabs can be counted upon to do is hate Jews.  They've spent the past 60+ years trying to destroy Israel and teaching their children and children's children to hate. Every May 15th Arabs celebrate the 'Naqba' (Catastrophe in Arabic--meaning the founding of Israel) by rioting and trying to kill Israelis.  Today's festivities, however, brought a first--thanks to the wonder of modern technology and social networking capabilities like Facebook, rioters descended upon Israel from all directions and all borders.  The incursion from Syria was a surprise to Israeli officials, but shouldn't have been.  Syria (and, by extension, Iran) are desperate to keep their populations focused on Jew Hatred vice the evils of their own regimes. 

Unfortunately, 15 rioters were killed--which suits Syria and Iran quite well.  Tomorrow will be the funerals, ripe with emotion that will be played upon by agitators.  Tomorrow will be another opportunity to remind Muslims that their first duty is to destroy Israel before they get around to destroying themselves.  How tragic that so many of them will be eager to do just that.

Management Science - Lesson #3

If you work for the government, you know this job very well.

Who Knew Saving The Environment Could Be So Practical

Hat Tip: Pearls Before Swine

Management Science - Lesson #2

Once Again, Europe Demonstrates Why It Is Doomed

Germany’s Chancellor Merkel has criminal complaint filed against her for bin Laden comments.

Incredible.  Obviously, some Europeans have forgotten what it's like to confront evil.  BY his reasoning, we should have just captured Adolph Hitler and put him on trial (if he hadn't saved us all the trouble by blowing his own brains out).

This is especially galling considering the city where the 9/11 attacks were planned was Hamburg, Germany (which is continuing it's reputation as a center for Islamic terrorism.)

Hat tip: Questions and Observations

Posting the Photographs/Video

I am of two minds as to posting the photos (and any video) of the late, unlamented Osama bin Laden (who is currently being subjected to the barbed phallus of Satan).

On the one hand, I think it is essential as a statement by the United States to all current and prospective terrorists that it doesn't matter how long it takes--if you do something bad to the US or its people, we WILL hunt your sorry ass down and we WILL kill you!  Some people have raised the point that publishing the photos would inflame/enrage the Muslim world.  Well, it doesn't take anything to inflame/enrage the Muslim world--they are quite capable of doing that all on their own.

It does not matter what we do or don't do.  They will take to the streets, riot, destroy, and kill at the slightest provocation (see France, the Middle East, Africa, Indonesia, etc.).  Somehow we excuse this barbaric behavior as appropriate because it must because of something we white, imperial colonials have done to deserve it.  If you did not know it, the most persecuted religion in the world today is Christianity.  Thousands of Christians are murdered and not a peep from the mainstream media.  Let one mouthy minister burn a Q'uran in Florida and it is like the Crusades all over again.

This excusal is a sign of racism and elitism.  Our self proclaimed cultural elite excuse barbaric behavior because the poor dears just can't help it--they're oppressed minorities who are merely reacting to past and current outrages perpetrated by the evil West.  No, what they are doing is exhibiting the signs of a culture arrested at adolescence, where the world revolves around them and their wants (like any 13 year old), and no one has administered the discipline to get them to grow up.  They rip the clitorises off of women's bodies to prevent them from feeling pleasure, stone them for adultery when they are raped, kill them for wanting to live their own lives and not following the childish whims of the males, force them to cover themselves outside the home, murder Christians and 'infidels' without remorse, demand that other cultures and societies bow to their sharia and demands, and our Western elite just tut tut and tell the rest of us to ignore it all because the perpetrators just don't know any better, and, besides, their culture is just as valid as ours. ("It's just their way--who are we to say anything against it?")  There should be a special place in Hell especially for feminists who say nothing about this abysmal treatment of women under Islam.  (It's amazing what the Left will tolerate when it doesn't support their meme.)

Publishing the photos and videos of a dead bin Laden would put a marker down that says 'No, you can't kill and maim us without consequence.'  Personally, I don't care what Islamic societies do in their own countries.  Their populaces have access to modern communcations and media, and thus know what Western societal values and beliefs are.  If they wan't to continue dwelling in the 11th century, so be it.  The have the right to continue oppressing their own people.  Just don't expect the rest of us to live there with them.

However, Lt Col Oliver North (USMC ret) raises a valid point:  If we publish the photos and videos, then it would expose our warriors to the international criminal court and leftist pussies like the Italian prosecutor and judges who tried and convicted our CIA agents in absentia for snatching terrorists off the street and interrogating them.  Some dhimmi anti-American lawyer would use the photos as evidence in criminal proceedings to try our specops warriors (and who knows how far up the chain they would attempt to go) for murder.  In essence, we would be handing the hammer to ungrateful swine who would use the passing from this earth of a mass murderer to push their anti-American agenda.  And you know they would...

Why Sometimes SiIence is Really Golden

President Obama made the announcement about our specops warriors killing Osama Bin Laden shortly after it took place.  Afterwards, it came to light that the operators on the ground sucked the compound dry of paper, electronics, and pocket litter.  If our intelligence community had been given time to go through the documents and hard drives, we could even now be wrapping up even more parts of Al Qaeda... but that takes silence and operations security to make it happen.

It takes a lot of time to do the forensics on computers, sift through all the files, translating as you go, looking for the nuggets of data that will allow you to follow the organizational lines of communication and ball up those next in line.  We could have done tremendous damage to current, active Al Qaeda operatives given the time, but because it was announced so soon after the fact, everyone in Al Qaeda and other terrorist fecal matter know to scatter and change operating patterns, tactics, techniques, and procedures.  I'm sure our intelligence professionals will milk the data pulled in for all its worth, and we'll still do a lot of damage using the gifts Osama left for us--but it could have been worth so much more if only the President had waited to claim the credit for this great op.

Got Him!

Rot in Hell, you evil son of a bitch!

You can run, but eventually we will get you.

The Nature of Conflict and Today’s Civilizational War – Part 3

So how long have we as a species been practicing the art of war? Professors Richard Gabriel and Karen Metz lay out the background for us in their work, "A Short History of War."  Understanding how mankind developed this aspect of interaction is crucial to understanding how culture plays into conflict. Thus, reading their first chapter on the origins of war is essential:

The invention and spread of agriculture coupled with the domestication of animals in the fifth millennium B.C. are acknowledged as the developments that set the stage for the emergence of the first large-scale, complex urban societies. These societies, which appeared almost simultaneously around 4000 B.C. in both Egypt and Mesopotamia, used stone tools, but within 500 years stone tools and weapons gave way to bronze. With bronze manufacture came a revolution in warfare.

This period saw the development of many new weapons -- the penetrating axe, armor, helmet, composite bow, the wheel and chariot -- and gave birth to a number of tactical innovations -- phalanx formations, increased mobility, pursuit, emergent staffs and rank structures. It would be incorrect to conclude, however, that new weapons were responsible for the great increase in the scale of warfare that characterized this period of human history. Improved weaponry, by itself, would have produced only a limited increase in the scale of warfare unless accompanied by new types of social structures capable of sustaining large armies and providing them with the impetus and means to fight on a heretofore unknown scale. The military revolution of the Bronze Age was rooted more in the development of truly complex societies than in weapons and technology.

What made the birth of warfare possible was the emergence of societies with fully articulated social structures that provided stability and legitimacy to new social roles and behaviors. The scale of these fourth millennium urban societies was, in turn, a result of an efficient agricultural ability to produce adequate resources and large populations. It is no accident that the two earliest examples of these societies, Egypt and Sumer, were states where large-scale agricultural production was first achieved. The revolution in social structures that rested upon the new economic base was the most important factor responsible for the emergence of warfare.

The development of central state institutions and a supporting administrative apparatus inevitably gave form and stability to military structures. The result was the expansion and stabilization of the formerly loose and unstable warrior castes that first emerged in the tribal societies of the fifth millennium. By 2700 B.C. in Sumer there was a fully articulated military structure and standing army organized along modern lines. The standing army emerged as a permanent part of the social structure and was endowed with strong claims to social legitimacy. And it has been with us ever since.

2700 BCE is significant in that it is when the first historically recorded war took place.  It was between Sumer (in modern Iraq) and Elam (a region that is now part of Iran).  Fought in the area around Basra, the Iraqis and Persians have been at each others' throats for millenia.

 As important as these developments were, they could not have worked as they did without a profound change in the psychological basis of the people's social relationship with the larger community. The aggregation of large numbers of people into complex societies required that those living within them refocus their allegiances away from the extended family, clan, and tribe, and toward a larger social entity, the state. This psychological change was facilitated by the rise of religious castes that gave meaning to the individual's life beyond a parochial context. Organized belief systems were integrated into the social order and given institutional expression through public rituals that linked religious worship to political and military objectives that were national in scope and definition. Thus, the Egyptian pharaoh became divine, and military achievements of great leaders were perceived as divinely ordained or inspired. In this manner the terribly propulsive power of religion was placed at the service of the state and its armies.

It is important to remember that the period from 4000 to 2000 B.C. was a truly seminal period in the development of the institution and instrumentalities of war. When this period began, people had not yet invented cities or any of the other social structures required to support communal life on a large scale. Agriculture, which became the basis for the nation-state in the ancient period, was still in its infancy and could not yet provide a food supply adequate to sustain populations of even moderate size. Psychologically, people had not yet learned to attach meaning to any social group larger than the extended family, clan, or tribe. The important force of religion had not yet been given specific social focus to the point where it could become a powerful psychological engine to drive the spirit of conquest and empire. Even warfare itself had not in any meaningful sense been invented. There were only the embryonic beginnings of a warrior class still loosely embedded in a tribal social structure, a structure that lacked both the physical and psychological requirements to produce war on any scale. Military technology and organization were primitive, and the professionalization of armies and warfare had not yet begun. In any significant sense warfare had not yet been embedded in the social structure of man as a legitimate and permanent function of developed society.

As noted above, religion has been a driver in conflict for over four thousand years.  It was in the period 4,000-2,000 BCE that mankind learned to harness its lust and ego to the gods.

The two thousand years following the dawn of the fourth millennium changed all this. As a mechanism of cultural development, the conduct of war became a legitimate social function supported by an extensive institutional infrastructure, and it became an indispensable characteristic of the social order if people were to survive the predatory behavior of others. This period saw the emergence of the whole range of social, political, economic, psychological, and military technologies that made the conduct of war a relatively normal part of social existence. In less than two thousand years, man went from a condition in which warfare was relatively rare and mostly ritualistic in which combat death and destruction were suffered at low rates to one in which death and destruction were attained on a modern scale. In this period, warfare assumed modern proportions in terms of size of the armies involved, the administrative mechanisms needed to sustain them, the development of weapons, the frequency of occurrence, and the scope of destruction achievable by military force. And it was in Sumer and Egypt that the world witnessed the emergence of the world's first armies.

Understanding our past is key to understanding our future.  Go read the rest of Professors Gabriel and Metz's work.  You have much learning to do.