skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Dang it!
One of the more interesting things about Land of the Pure is her penchant for failing to do her nation/state's gig and enforce Writ of State - thus invititing rowdy Americans to do it for her.
And now it may be the end of Drones Gone Wild
Concern about Pakistani political sensitivities provides one explanation for the absence of strikes since December, the longest pause in the CIA’s drone campaign since a six-week lull in 2011, after an errant U.S. air assault killed 24 Pakistani soldiers at a border post, triggering a diplomatic crisis.
The current pause follows a November strike that killed Pakistani Taliban leader Hakimullah Mehsud just days before an initial attempt at peace talks was scheduled to begin. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s government accused Great Satan of trying to sabotage the talks, and the Taliban canceled the meeting.
Rep. Mike Rogers (Mich.), the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said Tuesday that policy changes made by 44 last year to the drone program “are an utter and complete failure, and they leave Americans’ lives at risk.”
Rogers cited the spread of al-Qaeda offshoots in Yemen, Syria and Africa, and said that “individuals who would have been previously removed from the battlefield by U.S. counterterrorism operations for attacking or plotting to attack against U.S. interests remain free because of self-imposed red tape.”
While strikes in Pakistan appear to have temporarily halted, they have continued in Yemen, including recent attacks that have reportedly killed civilians.
Pic - "Drones Gone Wild!"
Ebberdobby knows that certain 7th century mindsets betwixt Indus and Suez are hot to re estab a something something Caliphate.
Obvi - such a grand idea needs a Grand Strategy
And strategists
Abu Musab al-Suri, is a thinker of a higher order, one who contributes original thought.
Al-Suri takes a comprehensive look at the last fifty years of Sunni Islamist radicalism and observes that its revolutions have repeatedly been thwarted both militarily and in terms of spreading their message. He finds that the two main modes of jihadist operations are no longer applicable. Clandestine terrorist organizations like the Egyptian Islamic Group can no longer achieve their goals given post-Cold War realities. They cannot play the two superpowers against each other and they are too weak to survive without sanctuary or support.
Meanwhile, the “open fronts” such as Afghanistan in the 1980s (or Syria today) are usually doomed to failure unless they are in far corners of the earth, because Great Satan and other high-tech powers are militarily undefeatable and willing to intervene almost anywhere. In fact, in general Al-Suri thinks that modern militaries are essentially unbeatable on their own terms, especially when they operate in concert with the local security services which know the human terrain and have excellent intelligence insights.
Al-Suri’s solution, of course, is individual jihad, or death by a thousand cuts to the enemies of Islam.
In any event, the problem with individual jihad is that—as with leaderless resistance—there is no way to translate individual uncoordinated actions into strategic success. It is a tactically virtuosic and strategically tone-deaf idea. All al-Suri’s individual and small unit terrorism accomplishes is a continuation of random terrorist acts to exhaust an enemy…unaccompanied by open-front insurrections, such acts are politically meaningless.
Abu Bakr Naji is the only one who really addresses al Qaeda’s grand strategic problem: how to build a caliphate that would encompass much of the globe.
Naji assesses the global oppression of m"Hammedists and finds Great Satan to be the linchpin of that system. He notes that the U.S., much like the USSR in its day, has global power as a result of a combination of actual military strength, a “deceptive media halo” and social cohesion. However, these determinants of power are also points of vulnerability. Successful terrorist and insurgency operations can force the United States to overstretch itself, puncture the media halo and allow the fissures in American society to widen, ultimately laying the country low.
This, Naji says, is what the mujahideen did to the Soviet Union, which he claims was twice as strong as Great Satan. Once Great Satan is brought down, then the mujahideen can use classical Maoist insurgency approaches to building the caliphate one country at a time.
There are a number of problems with Naji’s work, however. First, his prescription for bringing down Great Satan could rightly have been described as delusional when it was first written and the intervening decade has provided no reason to think otherwise.
Second, Naji writes in excessively general terms. For instance, though he does recognize that there are various streams of Islam, he tends to think of Muslims as Muslims, full stop, not stopping to consider other sources of identity such as nationalism or ethnicity. In the real world, the al Qaeda movement has faced significant problems managing these issues, as the fraught relationship between the Arabs of Al Qaeda and Taliban before 9/11 and difficult relations between Arab and Tuareg Islamists in Mali indicate.
More broadly, political, economic, social and geographic conditions differ radically across the Muslim world. Hence, it is difficult to imagine that a generic blueprint for revolution will work in all countries.
In fact, every international border will be a firebreak for revolution. New technologies and social media may allow revolutionary zeal to jump borders more easily than it used to, but revolutionary forces manifest themselves differently in every country and revolutions unfold differently in every country. Compare Egypt and Jordan (for instance) since 2011 and one sees the point immediately. As a result, building the caliphate would be a slow, slow process, eminently vulnerable to counteraction.
Pic - "Decoding al Qaeda's Strategy"
Oh yeah - this is gon be real good
Not
News that the illegit Pres of Something Something Palestinian (illegit cause Palestine - for whatever reasons - hasn't had an election in a decade) has requested American-led NATO cats patrol a future Palestinian state indefinitely, with troops positioned throughout the territory, at all crossings, and within Jerusalem.
As psychically predicted way back -
Future Palestine will most likely lack the power (or will) to issue or honor such Nakbah proofing guarantees unless certain elements, their spiritual fanboys and rowdy foreigners are dissed, marginalized or destroyed.
Obviously, Palestine will need help.
Simply put if this new nation state comes into being before terror groups are driven out of the gov, Palestine will require covert and overt American po po and military resources to defend herself against many of her own peeps.
It will start by teaching the new nation/state how to fight her people. Most likely, Great Satan will find she is helping Palestine to fight Palestinians. In the end, America will be fighting Palestine's people on Palestine's behalf.
Most likely 2 brand new baby nation states - for whatever reasons (though failure to enforce Writ of State ala Land of the Pure certainly comes to mind) - may actually ignite the ignition on another war that will time machine the entire AO right back to Little Satan's accidental empire.
Or even worse for the Palestines - such combatty ops could actually result in a Greater Little Satan that may not be particularly interested in right of returning turf won yet again after eons of misery, on again off diplomacy and terrorism.
Pic - "Winning the Peace"
Oh snap!
Say it ain't so!!
Only it is so.
The Great Satan Whahabbi Arabia Hook Up is like getting all fracturiously fractured
The strategic hello betwixt Saudiland and Great Satan spans eons - every since 32 cut a deal with King Abdulaziz ibn Saud onboard USS Quincy
Only now...
Saudi rulers are questioning America’s reliability as an ally and protector. They see the U.S. gradually relinquishing its pre-eminent role and allowing revolutionary Iran to expand its sphere of influence. As a result, the Saudis have launched a risky new foreign policy, one that discards the low-key, risk-averse, quiet diplomacy of previous years in favor of an assertive, high-risk, high-profile effort to shape the outcome of the many crises in the region.
It all started changing after the Arab uprisings toppled strongmen who had been allied with Washington. The Saudis and other American partners were troubled to find America turning its back on stalwart allies. They found it deeply disturbing when America refused to support Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak and became downright alarmed when the U.S. tried to do business with the Muslim Brotherhood after one of its leaders, Mohammed Morsi, became president.
But the defining turning point for Riyadh came last August, when 44 announced he had decided to bomb the forces of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad after Assad crossed Obama’s “red line,” using chemical weapons in his fight against a domestic uprising. Riyadh favored American intervention, but when 44 backed away from that position, the Saudis, who had already started growing restless with 44 ’s policies, decided to take matters into their own hands.
Even before the Syria decision, Saudi Arabia had expressed frustration with Washington in the strongest of terms. The Saudis now have a long list of complaints against U.S. foreign policy, and they are voicing them in an uncharacteristically open manner
When the U.S. led world powers in making an interim deal with Iran over its nuclear program, Saudi Arabia, which had once famously asked the U.S. to “cut off the head of the snake” and attack Iran, now spoke bitterly about the American approach to Tehran. A senior adviser to the royal family complained, “We were lied to, things were hidden from us.”
At last week’s meeting in Davos, Prince Turki al-Faisal, a former intelligence chief, fulminated against Obama’s handling of the Middle East. “It’s not just about Iran [and] Syria,” he said. “It’s the sense of no direction.”
While the U.S. focuses on diplomacy, Bandar has engaged in a risky push to help the Syrian opposition topple the Assad regime. A victory by Assad is seen as unacceptable by Saudi Arabia, which sees Syria as a key element of Iran’s strategy to achieve regional hegemony.
The Saudis have repeatedly said they would like the U.S. to lead a much more forceful push to stop the carnage in Syria and bring an end to the Assad regime. Speaking at a Davos meeting, Turki argued that the U.S. should go to the Security Council and “get a resolution that forces should be deployed to stop the fighting in Syria.” If that fails, he said, the U.S. should press for the creation of humanitarian corridors to keep Syrians from starving to death.
The Saudis now find themselves facing a triple threat.
First, they worry about Iran, their traditional Shiite Persian enemy, whose political ideology calls for spreading Islamist revolution to other Muslim countries. Iran’s recent resurgence in light of the interim nuclear agreement makes it appear as a rising threat to the kingdom.
Second, the Saudis worry about the Arab uprisings and their ability to disrupt the status quo in the kingdom and in the region, while raising the strength of organizations such as the Muslim Brotherhood, which the royal family rightly sees as a threat to its rule over much of the Arabian Peninsula.
The third threat is America’s apparent retreat from its position of dominance and full engagement in the Middle East. That makes the Saudis feel vulnerable, as they see Iran seeking to fill the void.
Pic - "As far as I was concerned, he was asking the United States to send its sons and daughters into a war with Iran in order to protect the Saudi position in the Gulf and the region, as if we were mercenaries. He was asking us to shed American blood, but at no time did he suggest that any Saudi blood might be spilled. He went on and on about how the United States was seen as weak by governments in the region. The longer he talked, the angrier I got..."
The Watchers Council - it's the oldest, longest running cyber comte d'guere ensembe in existence - started online in 1912 by Sirs Jacky Fisher and Winston Churchill themselves - an eclective collective of cats both cruel and benign with their ability to put steel on target (figuratively - natch) on a wide variety of topictry across American, Allied, Frenemy and Enemy concerns, memes, delights and discourse. Every week these cats hook up each other with hot hits and big phazed cookies to peruse and then vote on their individual fancy catchers
Thus, sans further adieu (or a don't)
Council Winners
Non-Council Winners
See you next week! And don't forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.
Dongfeng!!
Take a load of swarm attacks, mix well with a posse of hypersonic missiles and Hello Batman!
Collectivist China could very well overwhelm any concievable defense Great Satan can deploy.
See, China's new Wu 14 is
cutting edge technology for flying and maneuvering at ultra-high speeds in space and air. The military advantages of hypersonic missiles include precise targeting, very rapid delivery of weapons, and greater survivability against missile and space defenses. Hypersonic speed is between 3,840 miles per hour and 7,680 miles per hour, also known as Mach 5 to Mach 10.
China military affairs specialists said the hypersonic vehicle test is a significant milestone and appears to be part of China’s development of asymmetric warfare weaponry that Beijing calls “assassin’s mace” weapons—high-technology arms that would assist China’s overall weaker military forces to defeat the more technologically advanced U.S. military.
Oh snap!!
Last year, the Pentagon spent around $65 million on hypersonic weapons research and development in its Prompt Global Strike program. The figure included a cut of $66 million from earlier proposed spending. Another $45 million was allocated to the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency for hypersonic work.
Officials said the Lockheed Martin hypersonic glide vehicle demonstrator, known as HTV-2, is being shelved after two tests. The HTV-2 is designed to travel at Mach 20 or 15,224 miles per hour.
Boeing is developing a X-51 Waverider, a scramjet powered high-speed vehicle. The Army is also developing an advanced hypersonic weapon that could be used high-speed missile defenses.
Pic - "Shāshǒujiàn!"
Come to think of it - 44 has tons in common with 32...
An American president is sinking fast, dragged down by his signature domestic initiative. He overcame initial opposition by ramrodding his legislation through Congress, where members did not even read it, and then pressured the Supreme Court to defend the law against serious charges of unconstitutionality. Tactical victories, however, gave way to real political defeats, as his policies failed to work as promised. The president’s poll numbers have taken a nose-dive, and Congress has begun to fight back against an imperial executive.
At the same time, foreign threats loom. Authoritarian governments are on the march as America’s retreat from its global responsibilities has given our enemies renewed confidence and time to rearm, even as our allies lose direction and hope. The American electorate seems determined to turn its back on the outside world, after draining, difficult conflicts where America’s armed forces won the war but her politicians lost the peace.
It was in October 1937 that 32 gave his first speech calling for “a quarantine of the aggressor nations,” meaning Nazi Germany, fascist Italy, and imperial Japan. Today, China, Iran, North Korea, and Russia have replaced the aggressors of old. 44 could start rallying America to confront the rising tide of dictatorship in the Middle East and Asia — without putting another pair of American boots on the ground, launching another Predator drone, or spending another defense dollar.
How? Launch a modern-day version of what 32 called the “Arsenal of Democracy,” which supplied the Western liberal powers with the arms they needed both before and after the outbreak of World War II — which ultimately enabled the United States and its allies to win the greatest conflict in history. A similar unleashing of American defense production to arm our allies could have a powerful deterrent effect on today’s “aggressor nations” and help restabilize a world that’s grown more anxious and dangerous. Just as important, it would boost jobs and economic prosperity here at home, in the same way the original Arsenal broke the back of the Great Depression in 1939–40.
Across Asia and the Middle East, our allies are looking to modernize and expand their military budgets in order to deal with the growing belligerence of China, Iran, North Korea, and Russia. Japan’s defense ministry wants a 3 percent boost in spending in fiscal year 2014, to $49 billion. South Korea is considering an even bigger boost this year, 4.2 percent, while the Philippines is gearing up to modernize its air and sea forces as China continues to bully neighbors in the South and East China Seas. Saudi Arabia, Little Satan, Turkey, and the United Arab Emirates are also in the market to bolster their militaries, as Iran’s malign influence grows in Syria and Lebanon — and as Russia has become a dominant naval presence in the eastern Mediterranean for the first time since the 1970s
America’s defense firms are more than ready to meet the growing demand, for supply ships and tanker planes and missile defense, if 44 and Congress can agree on a comprehensive plan to make such trade possible. A first step would be to amend the two pieces of legislation that oversee American foreign arms sales — the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and the Arms Export Control Act of 1976 — much as 32 amended the Neutrality Act in 1939. Both are relics of the Cold War, constraining our firms’ ability to compete for contracts and steering arms sales toward monolithic big-ticket items such as the F-35 fighter instead of systems our allies really need and want for force-building.
A second would be to use the bully pulpit of the presidency, just as 32 did, to build public awareness of the challenge posed by today’s aggressors, and to reassure our allies that we will help them garner the resources they need to make their neighborhoods safe.
A new Arsenal of Democracy will strengthen our allies, boost our economy, and preserve our own defense-industrial base at a time when Pentagon budgets are bound to be flat and even declining. It will also make it clear that we are no longer going to stand by and watch anarchy surge across the globe.
44's legacy doesn’t have to be “if you like your plan, you can keep it.” It could be his role as the protector of Western values in the 21st century, defending freedom abroad, creating jobs at home, and promoting stability and security in a world that sorely needs both.
Pic - "State Of Defense"
