Wednesday, November 3, 2010


What a Yemenvitation!

 Dissing the fearful boring asset defeatists who wouldn't know a good time if it sat on their face, Great Satan should use Uncle Tony's 'Intervention Invite' Check List:

  1. Are we sure of our case?
  2. Have we exhausted all diplomatic options?
  3. Are there military operations we can sensibly and prudently undertake?
  4. Are we prepared for the long term?
  5. Do we have national interests involved?
"Where the answer to all five questions is “yes” then there is a strong case for intervention.

Actually - Yemen is a wonderful op for combined ops using every tool in the shed - Drones Gone Wild, COIN, hunter killer teams, mercenaries ala You know what Water.

Open intervention - clippage constantly rotating on al Jazeera - and/or sending out crazy signals  could reap a bonanza of dividends.

Instead of the tired old refrain that Great Satan and NATO will be leaving just over the horizon - make a big deal of eternal Yementervention. 

Great Satan is never gonna leave - as long as aQAP exists and even then - not til Yemen has a lit rate at least as high as Palestine (the most literate Arabs ever on the face of the earth), a nonstop mall of strip clubs, gay bars, abortion clinics, churches, bookstores, hospitals, schools and every girl has the chance to become an attorney, doctor, stripper or teacher and a constitutional functional democracy - fully crunk and off the hook with fun and free choice.    

"...Retreat heck - we just got here!" A great catitude for giving the old stymie maximus to the proxilicious warfare betwixt Wahabi Arabia and Mullahopolis and more

"...Also, we have now dodged two bullets from Yemen, but that does not mean we do not have the time to slow the bleep down and first gather a little situational awareness before screaming for policy makers to DO SOMETHING.

Great Satan should do it to it - Terrorist ratlines could be revealed by creating a giant sucker trap for easily inflamed minions and ardent supporters alike. Heavy on spies, satellites, drones gone wild, Special Forces, Delta Forces, Navy Seals and Teufel Hunden Recon sweetly dropping in unannounced for righteous kills, snatching up fresh HUMINT for thorough, leisured enhanced interrogation along with a constant pr barrage of "Dang! Well, we done tried everything else, laws yes."

Yemen makes a great spot for jumping off into Sudan and S'Molia too 

Pic - "There is no alternative to military action"


Old Retired Petty Officer said...

I am in favour of Carpet Bombing and Fuel Air Warheads on Tomahawks.

Jpck20 said...

co-sign above.

A. S. Wise said...

I like the "Peace through superior firepower" approach described above. May I also recommend we reactivate all four Iowa-class battleships, and cruise them up and down the Persian Gulf? Even better, if they're allowed to fire a massive broadside in unison, and sink the Revolutionary Guards' fleet. That would send a distinct message to the mullahs. Hopefully the Army waives my dairy allergy, so I can go into OCS, and defend my beloved United States. Cheers!

Old Rebel said...

I'm just curious -- do you people ever think about anything other than vaporizing helpless victims?

Do you have any human emotions? Do you like puppies? Babies?

Are there ever any thoughts in your minds other than battle, death, and imposing suffering on others?

Just curious.

Anonymous said...

Are you asking on behalf of the Sons of Confederate Veterans?

Have you asked the same on the Jihadi websites?

This blog is dedicated to certain subjects. If you came here looking for puppies and babies you might want to upgrade your search engine.


Jpck20 said...

I'm just curious -- do you people ever think about anything other than vaporizing helpless victims?

Yes: I also think about vaporizing helpless Libs.

Do you have any human emotions?

Yes: A very strong hate for terrorists, Liberals and any other person who wants to see the destruction of the United States of America.

Do you like puppies?

Of course. Puppies are cuddly and cute.


Who doesn't like babies?

Are there ever any thoughts in your minds other than battle, death, and imposing suffering on others?

I think about strippers, beer, football and getting a massage from a hot asian girl.

Any other questions?

GrEaT sAtAn'S gIrLfRiEnD said...

As best understood - for Old Rebel - everything is about Old Rebel. If it isn't - Old Rebel endeavours to make it about him. Not a cut - just sayin'

Jpck20 said...

Better be careful Courtney, or Ol Reb will claim we are bullying him and it will be all over the Libo Blogosphere...

J. said...

I gotta wonder if you really read the article with "Unka Tony's" doctrine. You see that conclusion at the end?

"Kosovo is a flawed application of the “Blair doctrine”; Afghanistan and Iraq are clear violations of it. But in any case, the new vision outlined by Tony Blair in his 2004 Sedgefield speech has little connection to the idealistic vision of 1999."

Exactly what national interests do we have in Yemen? If it's preventing the export of bombs that don't work, hey, we have the CIA and SOCOM working with the Yemeni government.

Are you really prepared to "react and rebuild" as the article suggests? Do we just tack that onto the $3 trillion open bill that Bush 43 gave us with Iraq and Afghanistan? Do you think the Rethugs are going to ask Americans to pay for all that, either thru program cuts or tax hikes?

Come on, be more thoughtful than the "Faux and Friends" gang. Encourage the GCC to solve regional Arab problems. Look at intervening in Mexico if you're really interested in short term and important national interests.

Old Rebel said...


I expected nonsense and chest-thumping (and was not disappointed), but pray tell, WHAT do the Sons of Confederate Veterans have to do with this?

Jpck20 said...

Old Reb, the jokes on you if you thought you'd get a serious answer to the inane questions you asked...

Anonymous said...

Sigger and Tuggle.

How about you two get a room?

GrEaT sAtAn'S gIrLfRiEnD said...

Thanks J - excellent counter - tho - a case still needs to be made for even tolerating illegit regimes that fiddle about with WMD, torment their neighbors, their own ppl and act out against any democrazy in weapons range.

Seriously - why not take them out - all the way out?

Old Rebel said...

"Seriously - why not take them out - all the way out?"

Because it's illegal and immoral, that's why. Iran has not threatened us. Look at the disaster Iraq is now because of what Bush & Co. "knew" that turned out to be false. Even Bush regrets his mistake about Hussein's non-existent WMD.

GrEaT sAtAn'S gIrLfRiEnD said...

Incorrect Old Rebel - by any measure of measuring - illegit regimes - that no one voted for - that violate the R2P Clause or tend to act out as noted above are illegal sir. Tolerating them or acting as if they are as legit as say SoKo or Brazil is immoral.

That is not to say to knock them all out. As Uncle Tony says "Yes, certainly - get rid of the lot of them. We don't because we can't - yet when we can - we should"

Old Rebel said...


Since you invoke a UN rule as justification, you must be aware that UN Article 39 requires a Security Council vote to authorize a member nation to go to war.

The Bush regime did not get that authorization. That's why everyone from Neocon ghoul Richard Perle to UN Secretary Kofi Annan agreed the Iraq War was illegal.

courtneyme109 said...

Incorrect again Old Rebel - UN Sec Reso 1441 adopted unanimously by the United Nations Security Council on November 8, 2002, offering Iraq under Saddam Hussein "a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations" that had been set out in several previous resolutions (Resolution 660, Resolution 661, Resolution 678, Resolution 686, Resolution 687, Resolution 688, Resolution 707, Resolution 715, Resolution 986, and Resolution 1284).

Resolution 1441 stated that Iraq was in material breach of the ceasefire terms presented under the terms of Resolution 687. Iraq's breaches related not only to weapons of mass destruction (WMD), but also the known construction of prohibited types of missiles, the purchase and import of prohibited armaments, and the continuing refusal of Iraq to compensate Kuwait for the widespread looting conducted by its troops during the 1991 invasion and occupation.

Anonymous said...

“Because it's illegal and immoral, that's why.”

So is kidnapping naive and innocent hikers and tourists. So is arming, training, supplying, and directing terrorist groups all over the world. So is stoning women to death for adultry. So is dumping anti-ship mines in the Straights of Hormuz. So is secession from the United States.

“Iran has not threatened us.”

You're just plain lying now. Iran declared war upon the United States in November of 1979. A declaration of war is a threat, by definition.

“Look at the disaster Iraq is now because of what Bush & Co. "knew" that turned out to be false.”

Except that Wikileaks, quite unintentionally on their part, has proven beyond any shadow of a doubt that it was not false. Iraq was not a disaster between 2006 and 2008. It didn't become a disaster until US troops were withdrawn by President Obama.

“Even Bush regrets his mistake about Hussein's non-existent WMD.”

Only in certain details. 500 tons of Yellowcake, hundreds of tons of chemical weapons, and dozens of long range missiles cannot be swept under the carpet. All confirmed for the public record, to the dismay of Julian Assange, by Wikileaks. Additional confirmations can be found in the UN public records and in the Canadian governments deal to remove and dispose of that Yellowcake.

“Since you invoke a UN rule as justification, you must be aware that UN Article 39 requires a Security Council vote to authorize a member nation to go to war.”

And every single permanent veto-holding member of the UN Security Council has violated that article at least once since it was enacted.

“The Bush regime...”

W's enforced retirement demonstrates beyond any shadow of a doubt that it was not his regime. It is the United States regime and it has been since 1789, making it one of the oldest regimes in existence.

“...did not get that authorization.”

Didn't need it either, obviously. Only two of the five permanent members of the security council have intentionally and with malice, directly and/or indirectly, attacked UN personnel and employees since 1945. (China and Russia w/known as the USSR). Removing Saddam and his military, all the terrorist freaks he was harboring, and all the terrorist freaks from other nations that came to play after the fact was not and cannot be a bad thing. Temporarily isolating Iran between two US armies was not a bad thing either until...

“That's why everyone from Neocon ghoul Richard Perle to UN Secretary Kofi Annan agreed the Iraq War was illegal.”

Hey Mike, Richard Perle has something to say to you...

Julian Assange and Noah Shachtman have something to say to you as well...

...And that is why Secessionist ghoul Mike Tuggle gets zero respect outside of the League of the South.

Old Rebel said...


Now you're making stuff up. Even the US ambassador to the UN, John Negroponte, admitted 1441 did not authorize an invasion. Military action must be approved by the Security Council, and it did not do so.

That's one of those things we realists refer to as "facts." Get to know them -- they can save you from a lot of embarrassment and grief.

Old Rebel said...


I can see you're working on a SERIOUS crystal meth buzz, so I'll only address a couple of your loopy assertions here.

Iran has not declared war on the US. Don't you think the US would've vaporized that country if it had?

They did occupy the US Embassy in 1979. They were upset about us overthrowing their elected government and installing the corrupt Shah. People don't like it when you interfere in their country.

Show me where any State has renounced the Declaration of Independence. You need to read the Tenth Amendment.

The Iraq War remains illegal, no matter what the chickenhawks say. The condemnation of the UN Secretary General is another one of those facts you folks have such trouble with.

I'll let you go back to popping whatever brain cells you still have.

Old Retired Petty Officer said...

And who in hell says we have to abide by UN Resolutions? I do not consider them binding. Obviously being the good guys, I suppose we should give them window dressing. But not in this day and age. There is serious, dirty work to be done.
And obviously Old Rebel has a very short memory. As of this time 31 years ago, Iran has been a threat to us.
I say we blow them all to hell.

Old Rebel said...

Old Retired Petty Officer,

I'm with you in spirit on the UN, but the fact remains that the US is a signatory to the UN charter. And our Constitution makes it clear we must abide by its rules: Article VI, paragraph 2 says: "...all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land...."

But Iran is not a threat to us. With military expenditures of 9 billion, at 2.7% of GDP, and the US at 663 billion, which is 4.3% of GDP, it's easy to see which is the more militaristic.

The Iranians are the ones who've been mistreated by the US, not the other war around. If we leave them alone, they'll leave us alone.

GrEaT sAtAn'S gIrLfRiEnD said...

1441 is often citred as a figleaf - yet in this partic instance - close matters - like jdam's or the biz zone of an m203. Illegit would be best applied to UN at the Oil for Food scandal time - France selling vetoes and threats of vetoes while launching an illegal war for chocolate in Ivory Coast.

Yet the illustration that Great Satan is unbound by the world she herself made serves as a really cool message to despotries far and wide.

Old Rebel said...


It's been said before that Neocons never learn from their mistakes because they never admit mistakes.

You've just illustrated that.

Anonymous said...

Just dropped in from Armchair Generalist and wow.