Sic Semper Tyrannis

Happy New Year SSTers!

Intellectual Garbage at the New York Times

After travel, I am catching up on my NY Times reading and discovered that someone left the editorial keyboard unguarded at the NY Times and a miscreant wrote a budget cutting list for the U.S. military. (Editorial, December 20).

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/opinion/21sun1.html?pagewanted=2&hp

I find myself irritated when pseudo knowledge is mixed with decent thinking. The vision in this editorial is to bolster our land forces by shifting funds out of sexy and/or unneeded Air Force and Navy programs. There is a kernel of good in this tome, as it points out the serious imbalance in our land forces investment. Alas, much of the list of cuts (and why these cuts) comes from some ideological cloud formation that isn’t in the METARS training I received in private pilot school. The correct information is available with a little journalistic work and subscriptions to Aviation Week and Jane’s. To have the Times slip to this level of sloppiness is simply disgusting.

For the sake of brevity, one tawdry example, on the production of the F-22 Raptor.

The Times writes:

End production of the Air Force’s F-22. The F-22 was designed to ensure victory in air-to-air dogfights with the kind of futuristic fighters that the Soviet Union did not last long enough to build. The Air Force should instead rely on its version of the new high-performance F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, which comes into production in 2012 and like the F-22 uses stealth technology to elude enemy radar.
Until then, it can use upgraded versions of the F-16, which can outperform anything now flown by any potential foe. The F-35 will provide a still larger margin of superiority. The net annual savings: about $3 billion.

I am heartily tired of said unwashed repeating that a system was designed for the Cold War and that this simple mantra is proof that a system is gold plated, overly complicated and complete overkill for our needs. Let’s deal with some ugly facts.

The F-22 is expensive but has superior stealth to the F-35. Its major flaw is that it took a decade of development to get it into the war fighter’s hands. What was a leap forward avionics package is now only a middling improvement, compared to the F-35. The processor speeds on the F-35 are miles ahead, and its AESA radar performance will be as well. The F-22 already verges on obsolescence in that phase. And I shudder to think of the cost of updating the avionics in the Raptor and how long that might take. The fact is, ultimately, it just doesn’t carry enough ordnance. It will have to be mixed into packages of other missile carrying aircraft, stealthy or not, who can rely on it to front the strike package and use linkage to identify and target. But it has range, more than planned for the F-35. It is a force multiplier. The continuing production decision is complicated but sure as hell not worthy of being decided by the vapidness fronted by this editorial.

Our intrepid editors also confidently inform us that the early 70’s, non-stealthy F-16 is superior to any other airplane flown by our enemies and should be continued to be acquired. I suspect the miscreant/editors haven’t thought about the AESA radars being used by Russian or Chinese aircraft with very effective long range air to air missiles or the threat of double digit Russian SAMs that have 150 mile plus ranges. Or that said planes and missiles are cheerfully and assiduously exported. The list of friendly folks who have acquired advanced Sukhoi aircraft and SAMs include Venezuela and Indonesia. And, India's SU's, participating in Red Flag training, show some superior abilities to our F-15Cs.

The ultimate intellectual bankruptcy of the editor shows up in this final fact. The F-16 is used almost exclusively in air to ground roles and the F-22 is a pure air superiority fighter. Its fourth generation counterpart is the F-15. They couldn’t even get that right.

I want to believe that the amount of fact checking I have to do when reading the Times is somewhat nominal, so I can deal with the ideological differences when reading. I have been abused of that notion. Fool me once….

Michael Chevalier

"More difficult than anticipated?"

"Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said the current, aerial phase of the operation was just "the first of several" that have been approved, an Olmert spokesman said.

But after four days of airstrikes against the symbols of Hamas power, there are few targets left beyond buildings evacuated days ago. On Tuesday, the biggest bomb load yet struck an empty Hamas government complex, as well as security installations and the home of a top militant commander.

Three Palestinians were reported killed Tuesday, compared to dozens in previous days. Since the offensive began Saturday, 368 Palestinians have been killed. More than 1,700 have been hurt, according to Gaza health officials.

Palestinian militants, meanwhile, kept up their rocket assaults on Israeli border communities, despite relentless Israeli air attacks against Gaza's Hamas rulers and unwelcome word from Egypt that it would not bail them out by ending its own blockade of Gaza crossings.

The question hanging over the Israeli operation is how it can halt rocket fire. Israel has never found a military solution to the barrage of missiles militants have fired into southern Israel.

Beyond delivering Hamas a deep blow and protecting border communities, the assault's broader objectives remained cloudy. Israeli President Shimon Peres acknowledged the challenge, saying the operation was unavoidable but more difficult than many people anticipated."  Yahoo News

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"More difficult than many people anticipated."  Say what?  More difficult than anticipated by IDF General Staff Intelligence?  If that is so, then things have really gone to hell in a hand basket in the Qirya.  You used to do better work.  Maybe it is the politicians who have imposed this "goat rope" on the IDF. Maybe.

Remember Lebanon in '06.  We all really know how well that went for the IDF (irony alert).  In the Lebanon case the air power crowd succeeded in persuading the Israeli government that the Lebanese (in general) could be intimidated into accommodating the Likud/neocon/Bush program for Lebanon.  That failed in spite of devastating air attacks on civilian infrastructure targets the length and breath of the country.  Then, there was a half hearted air/ground effort to destroy Hizbullah's forward positions and rocket firing capability.  That proved impossible to do at any price that Israel was willing to pay.  The net result was that Hizbullah became an exemplar for every Muslim enemy of Israel, an example of how the IDF can be defeated by brave and well prepared men.  Politically, the ultimate result of '06 was to make Hizbullah, and their Christian allies under General Aoun, the arbiters of events in Lebanon.

We have now seen the Israelis run through their target list in Gaza.  Hamas is still firing at Ashkalon and Beersheba.  One wonders just who has who by the testicles in this situation.  If the Israelis back away with some sort of unilateral ceasefire, then the '06 judgment of the Muslims on them will be confirmed in many minds.  Thus far there are not enough ground troops "showing" in what the Israelis have brought to Gaza.  These deployments are a mere threat.  They will have to call forward many more units before the threat of a major ground operation becomes credible.

A major ground operation in Gaza may cause Hizbullah to resume hostilities from north of the Litani.  This should be considered as a risk inherent in a ground operation in Gaza.

Muslim militiamen of the Hizbullah, Hamas, Jeish al-Mahdi, etc. varieties have a major advantage in fighting the Israelis.  These Muslim fighters all believe in an afterlife in which they will be rewarded for their shihada, their testimony, their martyrdom in what they believe to be the path of God.  If you do not think that they believe that, then you are truly clueless.  There are not many Israeli Jewish soldiers who think the same thing.  Some, but not many.  This makes for a wildly disparate attitude towards casualties.  In Lebanon the Hizbullahis wore body armor and dug in well.  They did that because these men were valuable assets, not because they were not willing to "be all they could be."

"More difficult than many people anticipated."   Really?  Were Feith and Wolfowitz involved in the planning?  pl

A "Tabouleh Line" in the South?

"According to Israeli officials, Hamas has smuggled 70 tons of high explosives into Gaza since it violently wrested control of the territory from Abbas' Fatah faction in June. Hamas also has at least 15,000 full-time guerrillas, many of them trained in Iran and Syria.

Israel's army does not want Hamas to acquire the capabilities Hezbollah demonstrated in Lebanon during the summer war in 2006. IDF officials say they cannot wait until Hamas has built up defenses along the Gaza frontier that would make an invasion unbearably costly in terms of Israeli casualties.

"Hamas is trying to entrench itself along the Gaza Strip border fence," Brig. Gen. Moshe Tamir, a senior commander of Israel's forces outside Gaza, told journalists recently. "They're digging tunnels beneath, building bunkers, establishing mortar nests, observation posts and escape routes."

Amos Harel of the Ha'aretz daily said Israel feels its natural tactical superiority being eroded by the asymmetrical fighting with Hamas.

"Until recently, it was obvious who was winning this confrontation. The Israel Defense Force has an enormous advantage in terms of firepower, observation, control of the air, armored vehicles and troop training," Harel said. "But in recent months, the efforts by Iran and Hezbollah to improve Hamas' military capabilities are beginning to be felt. It is not only better weaponry, but also careful study of the lessons of the Second Lebanon War."  Jewish Arizona

---------------------------------------------------------------------

I suspected that it might be true that Hamas forces have been preparting to fight a Hizbullah style positional battle against the IDF.  If that is the case then there is a military reason why the IDF has chosen to go forward now rather than later with an offensive against Gaza.  There is also a military reason why Hamas might welcome such an engagement.

An atttritional battle of the kind fought in Lebanon in '06 would be greatly to the disadvantage of the IDF. 

Two questions:

- How much has Hamas accomplished in preparations?

- What are Hamas's intentions?  pl

http://www.jewishaz.com/issues/story.mv?071109+gaza

http://www.jewishaz.com/issues/story.mv?081226+gaza

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/12/hamas-fighters.html

"Peace for Ashkalon?"

I know.  They have some other name for this one.  Yes.  The Palestinians are idiots for firing rockets into Israel.  The Israelis want revenge.  I understand that, but this seems a bit excessive.

Gaza is a small, very populated place.  Anyone who has been there knows that you can't throw a lot of air ordnance into Gaza without killing a great many civilians.  Any idea that you can do "surgical strikes" in Gaza is either egregious or intentionally deceptive.  The effect here is something like the bombing of London, Rotterdam or Guernica.

Golda Meir used to say that there are no Palestinians ony "South Syrians."   This punitive air offensive in Hannukah is either ineptly timed or eerily ironic when considered in the context of the story of the Maccabees.  Maybe it just reflects contempt for the Palestinians?  How dare they elect these "illegitimate" "Khamas teghoghist"s (quoting the lovely Livni).  Why is it that a native speaker of Hebrew can't pronounce Hamas correctly?  I am told that there is an aspirated "H" in Hebrew.

So far it sounds to be a Douhet style aerial attempt to bghaek the will of the Aghabs a la all over Lebanon in '06.  The Palestinians (like the Lebanese then) have no anti-air defense to speak of so the bombing part should be pretty easy.  The "will breaking" part always eems to be a little difficult. Has the IDF-AF lost any aircraft yet?  This is always a good indicator of what is really happening.

So, they are going to beat up Gaza; 21 days to Obamaland (this should tie his hands!), Natanyahu leading in the polls, a good chance to put some space between the Americans and those pesky Muslims, an opportunity to prove that the IDF hasn't lost its wog bashing mojo. 

Will there be a ground effensive into Gaza?  I dunno.  Have the Hamasniks been digging in Hezbullah style?  You tell me.  pl

http://uk.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUKTRE4BR1RW20081228

The Human Terrain System (HTS)

"J" sent me this citation for the official Army Training and Doctrine Command website for the HTS.  As I have written before, this program fills a massive lacuna in Army capability.

Today's US Army produces specialist officers who are generally part of the active force and who fill high level military-diplomatic and general staff positions.  They are called "Foreign Area Officers" (FAOs) Such officers require lengthy academic and on the ground preparation in qualification for a career filled with such duties.  They are not usually available to advise battlefield commanders at the brigade (3,000 soldiers) level.  There are not enough of them for that and there will not be enough.  It is a question of Army personnel priorities.

Something usually emerges to fill a vacuum, and the HTS program emerged after the beginning of the 9/11 wars to fill the need experienced by combat brigade commanders for advisers who could explain local populations to them and in turn explain coalition forces to the locals.

I have participated in the educational end of preparing some of these teams for deployment to both Iraq and Afghanistan.  I found them to be very good students.  The teams are typically made up of retired or reserve military personnel who manage the effort, indigenous interpreters and the civilian social scientists (political science, anthropology, economics) who are the core of the capability provided.  So far, commanders in the field express great satisfaction with the service provided.

The social science associations have expressed some reservations about this program.  They should think that over a bit.  The Army has been careful not to make these teams part of the unit's intelligence function that produces intelligence that drives combat operations (kinetic).

This program is developing and evolving in a dynamic way that is responsive to the needs of the present and probable future engagements.  The social science associations should seek to be involved in that development.  pl

http://humanterrainsystem.army.mil/

The Syrians are Waiting for Obama

" The Bush administration's attempt to isolate Syria has failed, even in the judgment of senior White House officials. That leaves Assad in the catbird seat, courted by European and Arab nations and conducting back-channel talks through Turkey with his erstwhile enemy Israel.

Asked, for example, about reports that Saudi Arabia is seeking to improve its relations with Damascus because it sees U.S. engagement with Syria ahead and fears that "the train may be leaving the station," Assad laughed.

"Maybe it has already left the station," he said. But he vows that he is ready to receive any emissaries. "I have no problem with the Saudis. We would like good relations with every country in this region."

Assad said that he is ready to move to direct talks with Israel as soon as he receives clarification on two points: One, he wants assurance that the Israelis will withdraw fully from the Golan Heights. To clarify that issue, he sent a "borders document" to the Israelis this month that highlights some points along the pre-1967 border. As of Monday, he said, he hadn't received an Israeli response. His second condition for direct talks is that the United States join as a sponsor."  Ignatius

----------------------------------------------------------------------

The "borders" issue in the Golan Heights has become a non-issue.  This is not the '60s.  Israel's survival does not depend on the possession of a few hundred square kilometers of stony, scruffy land.  Technology and capabilities have moved on.  The military realities that the Likudniks like to talk about render such consideration "oldspeak," mere excuses for not giving up a square centimeter of the others side(s) land,

Bashar Assad's Syria has sought accommodation with the US for the last several years.   This was firmly rejected by the Bush people because it was and is neocon/Likud doctrine that Syria must be subdued and eviscerated, not accommodated.  Assad wants to be let out of the "doghouse."  He wants there to be a new beginning for the Middle East, one that a modern man like him can accept.  This is our chance and the biggest opportunity the Israelis have ever had.  Can the Israelis and their American "friends" rise to the occasion.  I doubt it.  They are so paralyzed by fear that their options are self limiting.  We should hope for the best.  pl

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/23/AR2008122301998.html

The Bush people should have their day in court.

"...when the President does something, it's not illegal. From the beginning with Cheney, even more than with Bush, the law was whatever he said it was.

He goes out the door as stubborn and defiant and out of touch as ever, talking about the way he defended and protected the Constitution. Talking now because soon nobody will care what he says. Saying that history will be so much kinder to him and Bush than their current critics. It can only mean Cheney believes history is dumber than Donald Rumsfeld's postoccupation strategy in Iraq."  Mike Lupica

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The red part is from Frost versus Nixon.  I watched this Cheney interview.  It was so disturbing that a general sense of malaise settled over the house in spite of the previous ascent into Yuletide cheer. 

Cheney's utter certitude is the worst part.  He is insistent that in "wartime" the president has dictatorial powers.  He made a snide (but correct) little joke concerning Biden's inability to cite the Constitution correctly.  He is unrepentent for having told Senator Leahy "go f**k yourself" in the senate.  All these things speak of a man who is proclaiming to his followers the end of the rule of law in the United States.  He is saying that "we did what we pleased and we got away with it."  This lesson is being learned.

The "existential threat" to the United States by the Al-Qa'ida nuts was always greatly exagerated.  Cheney is one of those responsible for the exageration.  This was an exageration calculated to stampede the American people toward the occupation of Iraq in a war that was clearly a desired end of Bush policy from the beginning of his first term.

The law is what the president says it is?   That principle should be tested in federal court.  Everyone who loves this country as it has been, as the Framers intended it to be, should press for criminal indictments against Bush, Cheney, Rumsefeld et al.  They should be made to defend themselves in the dock.

Will Obama want to do that?  I doubt it.  He is a member of the "club" of office holders now.

It will be up to the people.  pl

Was it the "Victor's Justice?"

"The abuse of detainees in U.S. custody compromised our moral authority and damaged both our ability to attract allies to our side in the fight against terrorism and to win the support of people around the world for that effort. In May 2004, just after the pictures from Abu Ghraib became public, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz said that the abuses depicted were simply the result of a few “bad apples” and that those responsible for abuse would be held accountable. More than seven months later, then-White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Asked about accountability for detainee abuses, Gonzales said “we care very much about finding out what happened and holding people accountable.” Neither of those two statements was true. "  Report of the US Senate Armed Services Committee.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wolfowitz, Smerconish, Gonzales, Duncan Hunter, David Addington, John Yoo.

These are men without compassion or basic decency, men who care nothing about the principles on which the great experiment of the United States was built.

On Hardball Smerconish quoted Ben Gurion's sneer about an "ideal world."  Ben Gurion was an ardent nationalist who cared nothing for anyone but his own people.  Is that what we are?

These men have disgraced us all.  They have disgraced the American soldier.

There should be a reckoning and not in the ICC.  Where is the outcry here for punishment of those who led the country into these crimes.  Where is it?  pl

Cheap gasoline will mean big cars.

El presidente has decided to give GM and Chrysler money from the TARP.  They have until March to re-structure enough to survive as distinct business entities.  If they can't do that they have to re-pay the money.  Oh?  With what?  Ford does not want any money just yet, maybe later.

Who thinks that the Big Three will solve their problems by March, or maybe July, or maybe October? I do not think that their financial situations will allow them to continue for much longer in their present form.  Merger or liquidation awaits them.

As I said before, I have two excellent vehicles, one from GM, and the other from Ford.  I am completely happy with them.  Before these I had two Ford products.  Both were without any problems.  People like to say that the Big Three did not make good vehicles.  I have never experienced that.  People also say that the Big Three should not have made full sized cars, pick-up trucks, or SUVs.  Well, capitalism implies obedience to market forces.  Most Americans like big vehicles. The Big Three responded to that preference.  If you prefer a command economy of the sort that we might approach in the USA, then you might have the opportunity to see if you like automotive products that environmental activists design.  The products of the former Soviet automotive industry come to mind.  Those who were lucky got "Lada."  The nomenklatura rode around in "Zil."  Do people think that the American nomenklatura are going to ride around in tiny electric or hybrid cars?  Get real.

Gasoline will be below a dollar a gallon soon.  How long the price will stay at that price level is not immediately apparent.  Will most Americans want little cars when gasoline is at prices of that sort?  I doubt it.

Do the environmental faithful believe that Obama would ask Congress to legislate against big vehicles if polling (triangulation) says that most people are opposed to that.  Do people think that he will ask for high gasoline taxes?  Come now!  Look at his cabinet choices.  This man is a politician, and a skilled one.  2012 is coming...

Someone suggested that I keep the Escalade as a museum exhibit.  Who laughs last, laughs best.

Does "peak oil" have any effective meaning?  pl