Archive for the ‘Geopolitics’ Category
Obama admin just doesn’t like fences
But notice there is a rather large fence around the White House.
Debka reports that U.S. Army engineers have been recalled from a $500 million project constructing anti-smuggling fencing between Egypt and Gaza.
After eight months of back-breaking work, the American military engineers helping Egypt build a steel anti-smuggling wall along the strategic Philadelphi Route dividing Gaza from Sinai were suddenly recalled, debkafile’s military sources report – signaling the collapse of Egypt’s blockade of the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip. Washington thus abandoned its half-a-billion dollar investment in the joint Egyptian-Israeli siege project.
Of note: While our nation is going bankrupt, Obama gave a $400 million “down payment” to Gaza and West Bank.
In: Geopolitics · Tagged with: Egypt, Gaza, Israel
Video may prove that Gaza flotilla was carrying weapons for Hamas
http://www.flix.co.il/tapuz/showVideo.asp?m=3423928
In: Geopolitics · Tagged with: Gaza, Israel
Obama’s warning comes true: ‘extreme elements’ incited to violence
In the Wall Street Journal’s Best of the Web Today article, James Taranto writes that the “extreme elements” President Obama warned us about have indeed been incited to violence. Just not the ones Obama may have had in mind:
“In a blunt caution to political friend and foe, President Barack Obama said Saturday that partisan rants and name-calling under the guise of legitimate discourse pose a serious danger to America’s democracy, and may incite ‘extreme elements’ to violence,” the Associated Press reports from Ann Arbor, Mich.
Two thousand miles away, another AP dispatch reports, there occurred an example of exactly what the president was warning about:
Close to 20 businesses were damaged after what started as a peaceful immigrants’ rights march in downtown Santa Cruz [Calif.] turned violent, requiring police to call other agencies for help, authorities said.
Police spokesman Zach Friend said an estimated 250 people started marching through the city around 10:30 p.m. Saturday.
It was a harmonious but “unpermitted and unsanctioned event,” he said, until some in the crowd started breaking windows and spraying paint on retail shops that line the downtown corridor.
Friend said he wasn’t sure if the damage was caused by people marching in support of immigrants’ rights, or if the group was “infiltrated by anarchists.”
Anarchy signs were spray-painted on some of the buildings.
“They’re a group of people who seem to fancy themselves as revolutionaries, but what they really are are a group of morons,” Friend said.
You’ve got to love the way the AP describes this: It started as a peaceful march but “turned violent.” It was totally harmonious “until some in the crowd started breaking windows.” And the window breakers might have just been infiltrators!
Compare this with the lead paragraph of the AP’s March 20 dispatch on the anti-ObamaCare tea-party protests:
House Democrats heard it all Saturday–words of inspiration from President Barack Obama and raucous chants of protests from demonstrators. And at times it was flat-out ugly, including some racial epithets aimed at black members of Congress.
The claims of racial epithets have since been disputed and were never substantiated, but let’s give the AP the benefit of the doubt and assume that at the time, the reporter knew of no reason to doubt the word of the congressmen making the claims.
Even so, had the tea-party protesters gotten the Santa Cruz treatment, the AP would have noted that the rally was completely nonviolent, even if it featured some ugly words; that there was no ugliness at all until the protest “turned ugly”; and that the people who (allegedly) shouted the ugly words might well have been infiltrators.
If the Santa Cruz protesters had gotten the tea-party treatment, by contrast, the AP would have described the event simply as a riot and would not have distinguished between the peaceful protesters and the violent few who might be infiltrators anyway. What’s more, conservative politicians and commentators would be sounding a constant refrain–echoed by the mainstream media–that politicians are inciting the violence with “antigovernment” statements like this one, reported April 23 by CBS News:
President Obama suggested today that the immigration bill expected to be signed into law in Arizona is a “misguided” piece of legislation that “threatened to undermine basic notions of fairness that we cherish as Americans, as well as the trust between police and their communities that is so crucial to keeping us safe.”
We don’t think that journalists should give the Santa Cruz protesters the tea-party treatment or the tea partiers the Santa Cruz treatment. Both sides ought to get the same treatment–fair treatment–from those whose job is to cover the news impartially.
As for Obama, his efforts to demonize the opposition are unseemly and unpresidential. Given the breadth of his policies’ unpopularity, they amount to an attack on the majority of Americans. That seems likely they will prove politically unwise as well.
In: Geopolitics · Tagged with: Barack Obama, illegal immigration
Statistics don’t look good for COIN
Things are going from bad to worse in Afghanistan. How is it possible to conduct a successful counterinsurgency campaign in a country that 1.) doesn’t support it’s own government; 2.) despises foreigners – especially non-Muslims; and 3.) in many cases, prefers the Taliban?
From a post by Juan Cole highlighting the recent Pentagon study on the war in Afghanistan:
NATO is operating in about 100 districts of the country (the vague equivalent of counties).
Number of Afghans in 92 districts (assessed for their relationship to the Federal government) that actively support the government of Hamid Karzai: 0
Number of districts out of 92 that are neutral toward the government: 44
Number of districts sympathetic to the insurgency in March 2010: 48
Number of districts that had been sympathetic to the insurgency in June, 2009: 33
Increase in violent incidents from Feb. 2009 to March 2010: 87 percent.
I support our military – which means I want our troops to have the best equipment, training, leaders, and strategy possible. When we have been fighting in Afghanistan for nearly nine years, and as we see above, our “won-loss record” (regarding the districts referenced above) is 0-48-44, it is past time to consider changing game plans. And by changing plans, I do NOT mean leaving Afghanistan. We have no choice but to fight.
This would never fly in sports, and it sure as hell shouldn’t be the case when lives are being lost.
In: Geopolitics · Tagged with: Afghanistan, counterinsurgency
COIN: Know when to say when
To conduct an effective counterinsurgency (COIN) campaign, it is my understanding that one must also have a legitimate government that has the support of the people.
But Afghan president Hamid Karzai recently told members of parliament that he would join the Taliban if outside governments continued to pressure him.
Regardless of whether or not Karzai was serious, his remark effectively legitimized the Taliban. Has Karzai forgotten that tens of thousands of foreign troops are currently fighting the very terrorists he threatened to join? And the billions of dollars being spent to improve his country while the Taliban is busy destroying said improvements?
At this point, I don’t see how a COIN campaign can possibly achieve victory in Afghanistan. But then again, perhaps it never was since our leaders refuse to even use the word victory.
Maybe it is time to ask ourselves what George S. Patton would do. Old Blood and Guts was unceremoniously dumped by a military that was far less PC than what we have today (I doubt Patton would be promoted past Corporal in today’s Army). But he knew how to fight. And isn’t that the point of our armed forces anyways?
Given the chance, Patton would have today’s military run through Afghanistan like s–t through a goose (and don’t tell me our troops couldn’t do it if they had the support). The Taliban would learn the hard way that hiding behind women and children and fighting from mosques isn’t such a good idea. Real quick-like, the Taliban’s supporters – tacit or otherwise – would either change their minds or die in battle. Knowing that certain death awaits those who care to join the jihad would have a chilling effect on recruitment as well.
Then the Afghan people might realize that it’s the Taliban – not the U.S. – that’s making life bad for them. Rather than complain of – or fabricate – collateral damage from coalition air strikes, Afghans would turn on their Taliban for the IEDs that just so happen to kill or maim far more Afghans than they do foreign troops, or for any of the group’s innumerable atrocities committed against their own people.
There is no perfect solution, as fighting the Taliban without nation building would result in an environment where the Taliban can keep popping back up – although they would be significantly weakened each time. In that case, effective use of intelligence and special operations would strike them as soon as they threatened the U.S. again. In war, the most dedicated wins. And when we fight to the best of our ability, no terrorist group can outlast us.
If there was a compromise that could have been reached without resorting to war, we would have done so. But the Taliban will not compromise. Therefore, war is unavoidable – it’s basic human nature. And this war was declared on us. That being said, it would behoove us to begin fighting. Cutting the Taliban a $500 million stimulus check will not change their minds. Announcing to our enemies where we will attack next, or encouraging them to further exploit the rules of war by emasculating our rules of engagement will not change their minds. Neither will building schools, roads, or painting their picket fences. We can’t change their minds. And since we can’t compromise on our security, then war is the only choice.
We have been in Afghanistan for nearly ten years. I am not even sure why our troops are there now to be quite honest. After 9/11, I was under the impression that we sent troops in order to deny al Qaeda, the Taliban, and other terrorist groups the ability to operate training camps to conduct further terrorist attacks against the U.S. or our interests.
When Karzai legitimizes the very terrorists we are fighting, it’s high time to let the military be the military, and stop using them like public works employees and politicians.
In: Geopolitics, Military · Tagged with: Afghanistan, counterinsurgency, General George S. Patton, Jr., Taliban
Nigel Farage for President
I mean, if Obama can be president without producing a birth certificate, then why can’t we have a foreigner that SUPPORTS -- rather than UNDERMINES -- our founding principles?
Supreme Court justice Sam Alito and Rep. Joe Wilson have NOTHING on Britain’s Euro MP Nigel Farage, who co-chairs the Europe of Freedom and Democracy (oxymoron, I know) group. Recently Farage attacked Herman von Rumpoy, who is the first “President” of “Europe,” in this tirade. And he didn’t even need a teleprompter!
Below is a brief sampling of political brilliance from Farage:
In: Geopolitics · Tagged with: Europe, Herman von Rumpoy, Nigel Farage
Just how evil is the Taliban?
This account is from Meena, a 13 year-old Pakistani girl who grew up around the Taliban. While you read this (and it would behoove you to read the entire piece), remember that Barack Obama seeks to pay off the same Taliban with your tax dollars.
From a BBC interview (emphasis mine):
My brother used to tell me that the place for a woman is either at home or in the grave. I was always restricted to home.
He said: “If you leave the house I’ll cut off your head and put it on your chest.”
My brother had been to the local school and beaten the girls and the teachers.
Taliban commanders used to come to our house. There was an underground bunker beside the house, with electricity.
It was concrete and very strong. Cars would drive on top but no-one would realise what was underneath. In that hideout they used to train suicide bombers.
Most were children of my age or younger than me. They were used for these activities because they were too young to know any better.
If U.S. Marines were training Afghani children to be suicide bombers, then I would join with other countries in portraying us as war criminals. But these barbarians get a pass? What kind of no-load, puss-nut asshole uses children to fight for them?
I used to see these children getting on a vehicle to go for their missions. They used loud Islamic CDs to motivate them.
And I would think, “My God, more Muslims are going to be buried”. Then the news would come that more Muslims were wiped out.
The vast majority of Taliban and al Qaeda victims are Muslims, not Westerners.
My brother used to prepare bombs and my sister-in-law did too. He told me that he would teach me this. I told him no. I would not even look at what they were doing.
My father and brother told me to carry out a suicide attack. They were pressuring me to do this.
They told me: “If you do it you will go to paradise long before us.” I replied: “Why don’t you tell me I will go to hell long before you?”
Every day they used to tell me this. Every day. I was very young when they started telling me this. I said to them: “What about all the people I will kill? They are all Muslims.”
They started beating me when I refused. They beat me non-stop. They made my life hell. I never had a single moment of happiness. They did everything other than kill me.
And if she dishonored her family by becoming pregnant (from her father and brother’s ‘punishment’), they could restore their family’s honor by killing her – nonpunishable according to Islamic Shariah law.
They said: “The bomb will be connected with a button, or something like the remote control of a TV. We will give you this kind of remote, and you will go to the place.
“We will also give you a mobile, and we will ring that phone, and press the remote, and you will be blown up with this bomb.”
They told me they would use such a large amount of explosives that no-one would even know if it was a man or a woman.
They told me that I had to do it.
There was a kind of medicine they used to give to the bombers that made them go around smiling, in a trance.
They said they would give me that medicine, and then I would go running to die – with a smile. I was so scared I decided to prepare my own tea, and my own food.
I was afraid they would mix that medicine with my food.
Sister’s story
They attached a bomb to my sister Nahida. They tied rectangular pieces to both her arms, and a black strip was wrapped around both her legs.
Then they connected the whole thing. She told my brother the bomb was heavy and she could not walk.
He said she would be comfortable once she was sitting down in the car.
They gave her medicine. But she was crying very loud for my mother. She kept going to her and hugging her. When my sister looked down at the bomb, she shivered.
Then my brother and my father started beating my mother, and they were shouting: “Why you are distracting the girl from her mission?”
I heard my sister saying: “Where is Meena? I want to see her.” But I didn’t have the strength. My heart couldn’t take it.
My mother fainted when they put her in the car. My brother said my sister’s attack was in Afghanistan.
I always think about my sister. She was healthy and a very nice girl. She was younger than me, but she was wiser. My mother used to tell me that I was an idiot, but she was very wise.
How does one put bombs on their children, and beat them for not wanting to go off to die? What kind of sick f— does something like that?
The Taliban slaughter other people’s children. They turn women into widows. They should be made to suffer too.
I want these Taliban to be burned alive.
In: Geopolitics, Religion · Tagged with: Afghanistan, Islam, Pakistan, Shariah law, Taliban
Afghan interpreter kills 2 US soldiers, US gov’t makes excuses
Last Friday an Afghan interpreter shot and killed two U.S. soldiers before being killed himself.
“Initial indications are this was a case of a disgruntled employee,” a military said according to Reuters.
An Afghan provincial official, who also asked not to be named, said the interpreter had quarrelled with the soldiers over pay and treatment, before opening fire.
Circumstances surrounding the incident are strange: Little to no information on the shooting is available – ISAF only issued a two-sentence statement, only a handful of publications (mostly foreign) have picked up the story, and the names of the fallen soldiers are still not listed a week after the incident.
With that in mind, can we trust this unnamed “Afghan provincial official” (perhaps he is disgruntled, too)? But if what he says is true, why was the interpreter disgruntled? Are we about to witness a string of disgruntled interpreter attacks? Could the 13 year-old Afghan boy who was injured the following day when the IED he was placing prematurely detonated have done so because he too was disgruntled? Were we attacked on 9/11 by disgruntled individuals?
Perhaps our government thinks that this whole war is being fought against enemy who is simply disgruntled, which would make more sense as to why Obama thinks that the Taliban can simply be paid off (with our tax dollars). Disgruntled employees can be placated with money, but uncompromising ideologues can not.
It is plain to see that the U.S. government covers for Islamic jihad at every opportunity. But why?
And while they tell us not to jump to conclusions, they are jumping from conclusions. Which is worse? The truth is what counts, not perceptions.
In: Geopolitics, Military · Tagged with: Afghanistan, jihad
Corruption at the UN
Corruption in the United Nations? Surely not!
The folks who brought us one of the greatest scandals of all time (the Oil-for-Food program) have figured out a way to avoid future corruption and scandal: eliminate their anti-corruption task force that had been policing the UN since 2006.
And the U.S. General Accounting Office’s estimates determined that Saddam Hussein made about $10 billion off the deal, not $1 billion as the AP story below reports.
The Procurement Task Force spent about three years chasing down about 20 major schemes, totaling about $1 billion in contracts and foreign aid.
From the AP (via Fox News):
… at the beginning of 2009, the United Nations shuttered the agency and diverted its work to the Office of Internal Oversight Services’ permanent investigation division.
Since then, the number of cases opened, pursued or completed has dropped dramatically and the division has let go most former task force investigators, the AP found in an examination of U.N. documents, audits and e-mails, along with dozens of interviews with current and former U.N. officials and diplomats.
Over the past year, not a single significant fraud or corruption case has been completed, compared with an average 150 cases a year investigated by the task force. The permanent investigation division decided not to even pursue about 95 cases left over when the task force ceased operation, while another 80 unfinished cases have languished.
It also stopped probes into contractors and cut qualified staff and other resources — and halted five major corruption investigations documented by the task force in the final days of 2008.
But we shouldn’t be concerned. Why? Because the UN says so.
“The investigations division, I am convinced, is doing a very good job, and is continuing the good work,” U.N. management chief Angela Kane said in late October. She repeated the assertion last week.
Some of the fraud from this year:
— Nothing has come of a task force report completed in December 2008 that found $1 million a day flowing out of a safe in a U.N. project office in Kabul — part of $850 million intended for Afghanistan’s rebuilding and elections between 2002 and 2006. A year later, U.N. managers say the case is still under review.
— Task force staff ran out of time before they could complete two more investigations on Afghanistan. One involved evidence that a U.S. firm padded its charges by $1 million and the other that U.N. staff diverted millions of dollars from Afghan elections, roads, schools and hospitals, according to U.N. documents and officials.
Task force investigators found evidence some of the money went to expand U.N. operations in Africa, Asia and the Middle East without authorization. And they found no documentation to confirm how the Kabul office used tens of millions of dollars meant to promote democratic elections in Afghanistan.
— No action has been taken on a task force finding that about half of $350,000 in U.N. funds intended to launch a radio station for women in Baghdad was used to pay off personal loans, a mortgage, credit card bills and taxes, as well as for cash withdrawals from a bank in Jordan. The task force recommended disciplining a U.N. staff member and referring the case to national prosecutorial authorities. Neither has happened.
— A task force investigation of collusion and bid-rigging involving a transport company in Africa found contracts steered to one company and two of its senior officers. The task force recommended the case be prosecuted; nothing has happened. U.N. managers say the case is under review.
— In another case, task force investigators obtained evidence of major corruption involving more than $200 million in transportation contracts for U.N. peacekeeping throughout Africa. U.N. procurement records show Russian companies held a large proportion — a quarter of about $400 million in U.N. air transportation contracts in 2009. The case has since been dropped.
Now would Obama kindly explain why we are wanting to send .7% of our nation’s GDP to the UN (about $100 billion from the U.S. each year alone)?
In: Geopolitics · Tagged with: Barack Obama, corruption, Global Poverty Act, UN
Saudi girl gets 90 lashes for having cell phone
Do our “friends” the Saudis hate little girls? It would appear so after looking at their doling out punishment for various crimes.
The country whose “police” kept 15 school girls from escaping a burning building – they burned alive because they were not wearing proper Islamic dress as they attempted to flee – now has sentenced a school girl to 90 lashes for bringing a cell phone to school.
The 13 year-old will also spend two months in jail.
Just three years ago, 16 school girls were sentenced to between 200 and 500 lashes for “being aggressive to a teacher.”
But in September, 20 Saudi miscreants received only 30 lashes for ransacking shops and restaurants.
30 lashes for criminal activity and 500 for being aggressive towards a teacher?
In: Geopolitics · Tagged with: Islam, Saudi Arabia, Shariah law
