Category Archives: Military

At last: A voice of reason in the strategic wilderness

Henry Kissinger weighs in on the Syria mess with clear-sighted reasoning, “A Path Out of the Middle East Collapse”.  Definitely read the entire article at the Wall Street Journal, because Dr. Kissinger explains the situation succinctly.  He begins with an honest assessment of US policy failure to date:

“American policy has sought to straddle the motivations of all parties and is therefore on the verge of losing the ability to shape events. The U.S. is now opposed to, or at odds in some way or another with, all parties in the region: with Egypt on human rights; with Saudi Arabia over Yemen; with each of the Syrian parties over different objectives. The U.S. proclaims the determination to remove Mr. Assad but has been unwilling to generate effective leverage—political or military—to achieve that aim. Nor has the U.S. put forward an alternative political structure to replace Mr. Assad should his departure somehow be realized.” (my italics)

Further in the article he lays out key points to consider for future policy”

“Too much of our public debate deals with tactical expedients. What we need is a strategic concept and to establish priorities on the following principles:

• So long as ISIS survives and remains in control of a geographically defined territory, it will compound all Middle East tensions. Threatening all sides and projecting its goals beyond the region, it freezes existing positions or tempts outside efforts to achieve imperial jihadist designs. The destruction of ISIS is more urgent than the overthrow of Bashar Assad, who has already lost over half of the area he once controlled. Making sure that this territory does not become a permanent terrorist haven must have precedence. The current inconclusive U.S. military effort risks serving as a recruitment vehicle for ISIS as having stood up to American might. (italics mine)

• The U.S. has already acquiesced in a Russian military role. Painful as this is to the architects of the 1973 system, attention in the Middle East must remain focused on essentials. And there exist compatible objectives. In a choice among strategies, it is preferable for ISIS-held territory to be reconquered either by moderate Sunni forces or outside powers than by Iranian jihadist or imperial forces. For Russia, limiting its military role to the anti-ISIS campaign may avoid a return to Cold War conditions with the U.S.

• The reconquered territories should be restored to the local Sunni rule that existed there before the disintegration of both Iraqi and Syrian sovereignty. The sovereign states of the Arabian Peninsula, as well as Egypt and Jordan, should play a principal role in that evolution. After the resolution of its constitutional crisis, Turkey could contribute creatively to such a process.

• As the terrorist region is being dismantled and brought under nonradical political control, the future of the Syrian state should be dealt with concurrently. A federal structure could then be built between the Alawite and Sunni portions. If the Alawite regions become part of a Syrian federal system, a context will exist for the role of Mr. Assad, which reduces the risks of genocide or chaos leading to terrorist triumph.

• The U.S. role in such a Middle East would be to implement the military assurances in the traditional Sunni states that the administration promised during the debate on the Iranian nuclear agreement, and which its critics have demanded.

• In this context, Iran’s role can be critical. The U.S. should be prepared for a dialogue with an Iran returning to its role as a Westphalian state within its established borders.

The U.S. must decide for itself the role it will play in the 21st century; the Middle East will be our most immediate—and perhaps most severe—test. At question is not the strength of American arms but rather American resolve in understanding and mastering a new world.”

I think he’s got it right and I italicized that key flaws in the Obama policy wonks’ and the neocons’ reasoning – there is no plan in place to replace Assad, if he falls first and dealing with ISIS takes precedence.  So, perhaps I passed  Mid-East foreign policy strategy 101, LOL.

2 Comments

Filed under Foreign Policy, General Interest, Military, Politics, Terrorism

Our Generalissimo….. (Lord, help us all)

The Washington Times reports:

“Obama ignores generals on troop levels for unprecedented sixth time”

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Culture Wars, Foreign Policy, General Interest, Military, Politics, Terrorism

“A prudent and practical measure”

Since the mainstream media can’t seem to report objective facts these days, I’m going to quote a very reliable source, John McCreary’s Nightwatch. Sorry, it’s a subscription service now, but well worth the $24.99 a year.

From Nightwatch,  October 14, 2015:

“A significant divergence of policy and strategy between the US and Russia is now apparent in Syria, Iraq and other Mid-eastern countries. The US strategy since 2011 mostly has focused on building up opposition entities to replace authoritarian governments with democratic systems. That has backfired by contributed to widespread instability; civil war and state fragmentation; legitimation of elected Islamist regimes and a backlash among the local populations in favor of stability, exemplified by political developments in Egypt.

Notable exceptions to this strategy are Afghanistan and Yemen. The Afghanistan conflict predates the current US administration whose policy has been to reduce the US presence to an embassy by the end of 2016. In Yemen, the US tends to support the Gulf states and Saudi Arabia against the Houthis, possibly because all the Gulf state air forces fly US combat aircraft.

The Russian strategy is built on supporting the governments in power in order to stabilize the existing order. Russia lacks the resources of the US, but President Putin has used his limited resources prudently and maneuvered deftly to advance Russian military presence and influence. Putin’s timing has been almost superb.

For old hands, the Russians and Americans appear to have reversed their traditional roles and swapped strategies and roles. Twenty-five years ago, the Soviets were destabilizing regions by supporting opposition elements in states friendly to the US. Now they are on the side of regional stability.“(Italics are mine)

and from Nightwatch, October 15, 2015  a report, along with a comment:

Russia-Israel:  On 15 October Russia’s defense ministry announced that its forces in Syria had set up a “hotline” with Israeli forces to avoid air accidents over Syria.

 An “information-sharing” mechanism “has been established through a hotline between the Russian aviation command center at the Humaymim air base in Syria and a command post of the Israeli air force,” the ministry said in a statement.   The statement also said that the two sides were undergoing training on how to cooperate.

Comment:  The Israelis and Russians wasted little time in establishing a hot line. This is a prudent and practical measure that does not imply recognition or acceptance of the other sides’ political views. It recognizes the new conditions in which combat aircraft are operating.

 Israel’s decision to establish a communications link to the Russians near Latakia highlights Israel’s resolve to retaliate against Syria for every spillover effect from the Syrian civil war that lands in Israeli territory.

The bold is my emphasis and I highly recommend our emotionally-driven nitwits in the White House and Pentagon should do the same thing.  Our pilots’ lives matter more than playing some male, ego-driven game of “chicken” in the skies over Syria, to no strategic purpose!!!

Leave a comment

Filed under Foreign Policy, General Interest, Military, Politics

“Domestic terrorism”: I report, you decide

Posted a comment at National Review on a article by David French, in which he clarifies “enemies” as the type Jim Webb, mentioned in that Democratic debate the other night.  French writes:

“But lest anyone think I’m a self-righteous scold, I’ve got a confession to make. One of the worst things I’ve ever said was not dissimilar from Hillary’s response last night. In 2007, shortly before I deployed to Iraq, I was asked at a conservative event why I had decided to join the Army Reserve at the same time that I continued my First Amendment litigation practice (mainly focused on college campuses). My response? “Because I think the two greatest threats to the U.S. are Islamic jihadists and the radical university Left, and I feel I should fight both.”

That statement was horrible — spoken out of stupidity, foolishness, and ignorance. I hadn’t yet seen jihad with my own eyes, and when I did I felt deep shame that I’d linked my ideological opponents in any way to evil, murderous savages. So I vowed going forward that in my constitutional litigation and in my conservative writings, I would reaffirm my commitment to attack ideas, not individuals, and to never treat my fellow citizens as enemies — no matter how they treated me. Simply put, I needed to grow up, to get outside the polarizing bubble of my own ideological battles. Jim Webb did that long ago. He understands what true “enemies” can do their fellow man. His colleagues, sadly, do not.”

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/425565/lesson-our-political-aristocrats-jim-webb-puts-enemies-perspective-david-french

Well,  I draw my “red line” at being attacked in my own home, on American soil,  so here’s my response

susanholly Thursday, October 15, 2015 12:18 PM

Agree, up until domestic political power is used to attack me personally in my home, which happened to me during the Impeachment saga in 1998. Being a nobody, I could not get anyone to listen to me then and each attempt to get anyone in the media to listen to me has met with silence. I wrote comments on the Excite message boards during that time, but I can not prove it, so for years I kept silent. I wrote my story, albeit in a light fashion, but the story itself is the TRUTH. I used pseudonyms for all the “characters” and last year I offered to provide the real names of these “characters” to several “journalists” and not a single one even asked for the real names. I swore an oath to defend The Constitution against all enemies, both foreign and domestic, Mr. French. So, while it’s nice to want to moderate the tone of political discourse in America, I draw the line at being attacked in my own home over comments on an online message board about following the rule of law.

http://libertybellediaries.com…

Leave a comment

Filed under Culture Wars, General Interest, Messages of mhere, Military, Politics, The Constitution

Tried the Left

Just posted a comment at The Huffington Post, “Russia’s European Game in Syria” – repeat of my plan, lol.  The author of this fear-mongering piece is Bernard Henri Lévy, a French intellectual sort, who promoted intervention in Bosnia to prevent genocide and also in Libya, after talking to rebels in Benghazi, you know, that Libyan city of Jeffersonian democrats in the making (NOT),  the likes of who killed our ambassador and  three other Americans.  Lévy’s Wikipedia entry offers this take:

In March 2011, he engaged in talks with Libyan rebels in Benghazi, and publicly promoted the international acknowledgement of the recently formed National Transitional Council.[23][24] Later that month, worried about the 2011 Libyan civil war, he prompted and then supported Nicolas Sarkozy‘s seeking to persuade Washington, and ultimately the United Nations, to intervene in Libya to prevent a massacre in Benghazi.

These Benghazi rebels are the  likes of the type Madame Secretary Clinton wanted to protect from Gaddafi.    Jack Cashill at the American Thinker wrote an excellent dissection of “Hillary’s Genocide Lie”, which debunks Monsieur Lévy’s genocide claims.  Now, I have not gone to Benghazi and talked to the rebels there, but assuredly, our open source intelligence reporting indicates they are Islamist/Al Qaeda types, so I leave that to you to decide.  Of course, Madame Secretary states lots of stuff that turns out to be lies, like she blamed the 2012 attack on our embassy in Benghazi on a YouTube video. Cashill writes:

In fact, Qaddafi did not attack peaceful protesters. The rebels started the violence, and Qaddafi responded. Barely six weeks after the rebellion started, Qaddafi had all but suppressed it at the cost of about one thousand lives. Then Obama authorized NATO intervention. That intervention prolonged the war seven months and cost roughly seven thousand more lives. At war’s end, rebels killed scores of the former enemy in reprisal killings and exiled some 30,000 black Africans.

During the insurrection, the Obama administration had been funneling money to Qatar to help arm Libyans rebels. As the Times reported more than a year after the fact, “The weapons and money from Qatar strengthened militant groups in Libya, allowing them to become a destabilizing force since the fall of the Qaddafi government.” After the fall of Qaddafi, these groups refused to disarm and continued to resist government authority.

In the midst of this mess, in early April 2011, American special representative Christopher Stevens arrived in Libya on board a Greek freighter. His job was to research the various groups involved in the Qaddafi opposition and report back to Washington. His bosses at State and in the White House would reward his loyalty and courage with the most disturbing lies of their relentlessly dishonest careers.

Needing to blame something for Stevens’ death other than the administration’s fatally befuddled foreign policy, Hillary Clinton sent a memo the very evening Stevens was murdered indicting “inflammatory material posted on the Internet.”

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/10/hillarys_genocide_lie.html#ixzz3odvJYBi7
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

So, let’s look at what we knew about Benghazi when Hillary opined about her fear of “genocide” in Libya and those poor rebels Monsieur Lévy talks about.  The Combating Terrorism Center at West Point acquired  Al Qaeda records from Iraq in 2007, referred to as the Sinjar Records, captured by American troops in Iraq.  These records provide important glimpses into al Baghdadi’s terrorist enterprise(Al Qaeda in Iraq, now the Islamic State) and while these records are just a glimpse, some interesting information on “foreign fighters” emerged. Those records show that:

Almost 19 percent of the fighters in the Sinjar Records came from Libya alone.  Furthermore, Libya contributed far more fighters per capita than any other nationality in the Sinjar Records, including Saudi Arabia (pages 8-9)

and

The vast majority of Libyan fighters that included their hometown in the Sinjar Records resided in the country’s Northeast, particularly the coastal cities of Darnah 60.2% (53) and Benghazi 23.9% (21). (page 11)

You form your own conclusions, but I suggest you dig into the open source reporting and I assuredly would like the names of the rebels and their groups in Libya, whom Monsieur Lévy deemed as poor freedom fighters in Benghazi warranting US intervention to “prevent genocide”, as he and Madame Secretary claim.  Her ability to ascertain reliable intelligence seems highly questionable.

Here’s the comment I posted at the Huffington Post (similar as my other comments posted at other sites, so just skip it, if you’re following my blog):

There’s this delusional trapped thinking that paralyzes so many of these academic strategic analysts, who only talk to other like-minded insular thinkers. No new ideas, no bold moves, just regurgitated, echo-chamber nonsense. So, try this on for size – if Assad falls, ISIS will seize control of all of Syria. This will be a seismic event for the “Caliphate” and IT will encourage more radical extremism, because nothing encourages followers more than being on a winning team. It motivates people to sign up.

Dennis Ross, Michael O’Hanlon, the Obama administration, and the neocon contingent in America argue the exact opposite. They say Assad staying will encourage more jihadists, but here’s the catch, the only way to avoid ISIS seizing control of all of Syria is for someone to fight ISIS and the Russians have put together an alliance to do that.

The reality on the ground determines the options available -a smart strategist should try to seize this opportunity for America to change course, talk to the Russians – work out a coordinated effort to defeat ISIS and guess what, if we act, a lot of the Arab leaders will gravitate toward the US alliance, because they will want to counter the Iranian influence. Balancing the push and pull from both sides of the Shia/Sunni divide will be easier to work out with the Russians than with the Shias and Sunnis frankly.

We do not need to become BFFs with Putin, but we must act and since Russia is acting, ISIS will retreat back into Iraq. We should prepare to cut them off at the pass and that means coordinating and informing the Russians and our ME allies of OUR PLANS. We maintain total control and decision-making over our decisions. The hand-wringers have no plan, only imaginary safe zones, Cold War era fear-mongering, and unreliable maps
(http://libertybellediaries.com… from the Institute for the Study of War, which feed the Obama narrative (LIES). The real threat to America is not Putin, it’s this administration and their strategic paralysis!

Saber-rattling about Stalin,Communism, and the Cold War gets us nowhere! Putin is propping up Assad. If Assad falls, ISIS will gain total control over Syria, while the West blabbers about war crimes. The only way to allow a political process or international pressure to impact Assad is for some stability to return to Syria and then let the good folks in Brussels rally the world to that cause. Putin might be inclined to sacrifice Assad if there’s a Russia-friendly regime in Syria to replace Assad. Syria has been a Russian client state for 40 years, so Syria remaining a Russian client state changes little. We’ve got humanitarian interventionist on one hand wailing about genocide and geopolitical Cold War era strategists having an apoplexy over Russian replacing the U.S. as the geopolitical world power in the region, yet neither side has any plan to deal with Syria if Assad falls – which will be another mess like Libya – another power vacuum, which radical jihadists are the only ones on the ground ready to fill.

We need to keep our eyes on REGIONAL STABILITY, which benefits everyone, except ISIS and other jihadist nutjobs. Power vacuums are a more immediate threat to American national security than Russian long-range grand strategy moves. With Obama and Kerry at the helm, we can not do anything about countering that, but we could make a strong strategic move to fight ISIS in Iraq, while Russia shakes that center of gravity in Syria. In the process, we might be able to redeem some American credibility with our allies in the region.

Let the Cold War die – look ahead and try to think of a different approach!

http://libertybellediaries.com

1 Comment

Filed under Culture Wars, Foreign Policy, General Interest, Military, Politics, Terrorism

Another comment

Posted a comment at National Review,

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/425518/krauthammers-take-we-need-help-free-syrian-army-topple-assad-nr-staff

susanholly • 3 minutes ago

There’s a lot of misinformation and propaganda being spread. The Institute for the Study of War seems to be the accepted “expert” on the rebel forces in Syria, just like in the lead up in 2013 to “arm the Syrian moderates – with everyone relying on a young woman, who turned out to have lied about her credentials and was also the political director of the Syrian Emergency Task Force. Her op-ed in the Wall Street Journal was quoted by the media, the Secretary of State and John McCain, and her map was the de facto – accepted source – NOT US intelligence sources. Check the ISW maps floating around – I have three linked on my blog two from FOX news and one from CNN. http://libertybellediaries.com… and also here – http://libertybellediaries.com… Look closely at the rebel area the media and the Obama narrative railed on about – there was ISIS or Al Nusrah in those first Russian strikes on two maps and one has just rebel forces in the SAME area. Their maps fit their propaganda. – The Long War Journal tracks all the fighting and you can follow along on the Syrian opposition, which sure differs from what the ISW reports.

IHS Jane’s and our own intelligence identified this early: Here’s a McClatchy DC article from August 2015, explaining the 2013 propaganda – http://www.mcclatchydc.com/new...

Here’s a UK Telegraph 2013 link,http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new..., giving IHS Jane’s assessment, but everyone seems to listen to the Kagan clan. We are being fed a narrative and sorry, Mr. Krauthammer and the media haven’t paid any attention to FACTS.

Here’s my ideas of what to do: http://libertybellediaries.com… and http://libertybellediaries.com... and here, http://libertybellediaries.com

Leave a comment

Filed under Foreign Policy, General Interest, Military, Politics, Terrorism

The Democratic debate

Phew, I survived the Democratic debate. Lincoln Chaffee seemed all over the board, but he’s right on the need to end these wars. Bernie is out there. Martin O’Malley excelled at being the most annoying political hack.

I wondered which of her 101 accents and personalities Hillary would settle on. Question answered – she decided to take on her most supercilious “The Queen” persona and that holier-than-thou tone. And as fitting The Queen, she got to talk more than any other candidate – unfortunately.

The best candidate by far, to include the GOP field too, is Jim Webb. He’s honest, he’s forthright, he’s served and bled for our country, he’s great on foreign policy, he’s sensible on domestic policy, he wants to keep the federal government working within the confines of The Constitution. Too bad, he doesn’t stand a chance and in this debate, they pretty much kept him sidelined and out of the conversation.

Leave a comment

Filed under Foreign Policy, General Interest, Military, Politics

Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton scandals, ranked from most important – Washington Times

1. Monica Lewinsky: Led to only the second president in American history to be impeached.

Source: Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton scandals, ranked from most important – Washington Times

Leave a comment

Filed under Foreign Policy, General Interest, Military, Politics

An idea takes hold…. imagine that

Hey, perhaps my idea is taking hold: “Will Obama Respond to Russia in Syria? by Michael Curtis.  He recognized that the US policy is more concerned with Assad than with dealing with ISIS – how about that “revelation”, lol.  Same old, same old – just like with the Elizabeth O’Bagy situation,

I posted this in comments at the American Thinker under my susanholly name:

Yes, the US should talk to Putin – wrote this on my blog since October 5th- (http://libertybellediaries.com…, http://libertybellediaries.com…, http://libertybellediaries.com… and I have posted it in comments here and at National Review several times. Chaos or ISIS will seize control if Assad falls first in Syria. There is no plan to prevent that from happening. Obviously, if the Russians and Iranians help the Assad regime retake more territory in Syria, ISIS will be pushed eastward. We should work with forces from the east and in Iraq to push against ISIS from that direction. Rather than all this saber-rattling about Putin, we should be in serious talks about Our Plan to degrade and defeat ISIS.

In grade school long ago, they used to teach kids about various forms of government and at the far end, the worst thing is not a despot – it’s anarchy and that is what we left in Libya and when we pulled out of Iraq too. Libya is still in chaos, ISIS filled that power vacuum in Iraq and is poised to do so in Syria if Assad falls. Syria has been a Russian client state for 40 years, so big deal if it remains a Russian client state. The big threat to the US is not Russia in Syria, it’s Russia being successful in Syria and replacing the US in influence in the region. We can regain American credibility, by moving to help restore REGIONAL STABILITY

If Assad goes as seems to be the US policy at the moment, there is no plan in place to fill that power vacuum. The Islamic State and radicalized Sunnis will seize control. Our policymakers have offered nothing that makes any sense at all.

Now we could talk to Putin like sane people and come up with a real plan to defeat ISIS as the Russians push them eastward toward Iraq. Then after some stability and order is restored in Syria and Iraq, international pressure could be brought to bear from Brussels to deal with Assad. The Russians might be inclined to give up Assad if a Russian-friendly government is in Syria, international pressure could then promote safe zones and actually make them work in Syria for a return of displaced refugees. And the US and Russia might be viewed as adults on the world stage for a change, instead of treating the rest of the world like pawns in some geopolitical chess game (which the US plays badly btw).

Leave a comment

Filed under Foreign Policy, General Interest, Military, Politics, Terrorism

Short note

Posted my plan again at National Review under my susanholly username – in the comments of some piece that reads like a freshman college research paper – lot of noise, no real insights or understanding of military strategy.   A lot of recitation of the neocon talking points.  Btw, I wonder if Andrea Tantaros read my plan –  yesterday in that group of talking women show on FOX she suggested talking to Putin and attacking ISIS as they move eastward… LOL Maybe women will be more receptive to a new strategy coming from a woman.  Men won’t even pay any attention to my plan.

“How To Confront Vladimir Putin” by Matthew Continetti

Leave a comment

Filed under Foreign Policy, General Interest, Military, Politics, Terrorism