Sic Semper Tyrannis

"Kippur" A review by Alan Farrell

Directed by: Amos Gitai (written by same…the which makes him an auteur or at least a raconteur, since he was evidently in some engagement of the 1973 Yom Kippur War of the same name of the title of which). Starring (?): Liron Levo, Tomer Ruso, Uri Ran, Julian Merr, Yoram Hattab.

"Back to the Future" in the ME

"Twelve Republican Senators demanded hearings on the administration’s ending of negotiations with the Iraqis — for now at least — on the continuation of American training and on counterterrorism efforts in Iraq.

“As you know, the complete withdrawal of our forces from Iraq is likely to be viewed as a strategic victory by our enemies in the Middle East, especially the Iranian regime,” the senators wrote Wednesday in a letter to the chairman of the Senate’s Armed Services Committee"  NY Times

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

Surely these senators know better than this.  The Bush Administration negotiated the agreement under which the Maliki government has effectively demanded complete American withdrawal.  Obama did not end negotiations for modification of that agreement.  The Iraqis did that because Maliki's coalition includes several groups that want us out.  That being the case, the fact that the non-Kurdish population wants an end to occupation was decisive.  What was Obama to do in that context?  Should he have staged another "surge" to satisfy those who never understood that we had not conquered Iraq and could not keep it?

Social Security is 46 bilion dollars in the red this year in the US.  That is a small amount of money in the context of the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars.  The US needs to re-structure its forces to deal with real threats rather than the shiboleths which many generals and admirals are fond of because they maintain traditional types of forces within which generations of people like me have prospered.   In my view, we need airforces, but maybe a lot less in the way of manned aircraft.  We need naval forces to hold the seas open for us and keep trade moving.  We need SOF forces to pursue irregular enemies on the direct action side and on the SF side to work with the locals in ways that worked well in Libya.

What we do not need are ground forces as big as the ones we have now.  Both the Army and Marine Corps should be restructured and made smaller in their armor, infantry and artillery forces.  These should not be done away with but they should be smaller, less expensive and tailored to a a foreign policy that is less clearly imperial with all this talk of "exceptionalism," etc.

A tripwire in Kuwait?  I have argued for that since the First Gulf War.  IMO something like a composite division of ground troops and an air wing would probably be appropriate.  pl

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/30/world/middleeast/united-states-plans-post-iraq-troop-increase-in-persian-gulf.html?_r=1&hp

Sharia Law is NOT Closer to America than it Appears... Part V: Dubious Qualifications for a Presidential Advisor

Adam L. Silverman, PhD*

"Phares obtained a fellowship at the conservative Foundation for Defense of Democracies and a teaching position at National Defense University. He became a trainer at the Center for Counterintelligence and Security Studies, a nongovernmental organization that claims to have "trained over 75,000 Intelligence Community, Military, Law Enforcement, Homeland Security, Government and Corporate employees over the past 14 years." Phares has testified before Congress and advised the Department of Homeland Security."  and ""[Phares] is telling people to suspect all Muslims Americans as something other than how they portray to themselves," says Thomas Cincotta, one of the authors of a report titled "Manufacturing the Muslim Menace," published by the liberal group Political Research Associates. But it's not just anyone Phares is preaching his ideas to. "He's addressing the intelligence community, he's addressing policymakers, military personnel," Cincotta notes." (hat tip to a commenter named Alex at Stiftung Leo Strauss: The Bunker)

Click on over and read the whole thing.  I first met Dr. Phares in person in 2004 at a Florida Political Science Association conference.  I was coordinating the panels on terrorism and political violence (and was one of the presenters).  Every so often we'd cross paths.  While I was a post-doc at UF we did some Florida Public Radio segments together by three way telecon on events related to 9-11, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.  I knew he was a Lebanese Christian, somewhat conservative, and had been involved with the Maronite militias.  What I did not know was just how involved.  From listening to his conference papers, reading his articles on conflict resolution, and doing one or two radio segments together you would have thought he was a center-right, pretty main stream, professor at a tier 2 university.  Apparently when you make the jump to a neo-Con funded outfit originally backed by Frank Gaffney and run by one of his proteges, you can really let your freak flag fly!  The frightening thing with this is not just that he provides expert testimony for the prosecution in counter-terrorism prosecutions (as we've detailed here before), while admitting he doesn't know a whole lot about Islam or that he's training law enforcement and intelligence personnel (as the Mother Jones' reporting indicates), but that he is now advising the GOP candidate that is considered to be the most likely to gain the nomination at this time.  Have to give the neo-Cons credit, they do know how to play the long game.

*Adam L. Silverman

President Romney will follow the generals and Israelis.

If Mitt Romney becomes president, there are a lot of important foreign policy decisions that he’d leave up to others. Most notably, Romney often says that whatever the generals decide, that’s the course he’ll take in Afghanistan (although he backtracked on that stance when pressed recently).  Think Progress

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

Romney appears to be yet another person who wants to be something rather that to do something.  In this case he wants to be president and to that end is kissing up to anyone and everything who will have some effect on the outcome next November.

Evangelicals, Zionists, hard hearted Republicans who boo gay soldiers deployed in the theater of war, other (or the same) hard hearted Republicans who yell, "Let him die!" when asked if treatment should be given to someone with no health insurance, all these are in Romney's constituency.  Ah, I forgot the Mormons.

It is implicit in Romney's position that the COCOMS and JCS will run foreign policy, or, at least any part of it that the Israelis don't want to run.  I can't vote for this man.  The president of the US is supposed to run foreign and defense policy within boundaries of funding and structure allowed by Congress.  Romney either does not "buy" that or is playing a completely cynical geme.  Take your pick among those two undesirable possibilities.

Who are the other possibilities? 

-  The president.  I am unimpressed by his foreign policy "triumphs," and his domestic actions seem to be those of a servant of the moneyed class who wishes to disguise that identity.

- Cain?   I like the smile but IMO this whole effort on his part is a joke that has gotten out of control.  The "smoking" commercial seems to have been an appeal for an escape route.

- Perry?  No.

-  Gingrich?  Hell no!

- Father Santorum?  No.

- Ron Paul?  Evidently not.

- All others now running?  No.

So, what's left?  A hung Republican convention and a "dark horse?"  Maybe.  pl

http://thinkprogress.org/security/2011/10/28/356276/romney-israel-policy/

"Secret Pakistan" BBC

I strongly recommend that you all watch the six parts of this that are Available on U-Tube.  This is not being broadcast outside the UK.  That makes it appear that some governments do not want us to see it.  There will be a second segment next week.  If someone finds better links please give them to me.

The American officers and numerous former CIA men who had their say in this deserve our respect.  The Obama Administration is relentless in its pursuit of "leakers" and that is how they will see this.  pl

http://criticalppp.com/archives/60846

or

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=secret+pakistan&aq=0z&oq=Secret+P

 

Pakistan wants a Chinese naval base.

According to this article Pakistan is pressing China to construct a naval port at Gwadar in SW Pakistan on the Arabian Sea.   China has already taken over  (at Pakistan's request) the little used commercial port at Gwadar.  Karachi is Pakistan's major port.

The Chinese are apparently reluctant to make an overseas naval commitment of this scope.  Such a naval base would be Pakistani but dual use by the two countries seems likely.  The same article mentions a separate possible Chinese naval base in Sri Lanka.

Uighur Muslim guerrillas are active in Chinese teritory in Sinkiang.  These are reported in this piece to be trained in camps in Pakistani Waziristan.  The Chinese are interested in establishing a ground military presence in the north of Pakistan to put an end to that training and support.

IMO all of this is related to the rapidly disintegrating relations between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia on the one hand and the United States on the other.  pl

 http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/MJ26Df03.html

 

 

"Taliban commanders say Pakistan intelligence helps them " Reuters

Wed Oct 26, 2011 11:00am EDT

"LONDON (Reuters) - Pakistan's security service provides weapons and training to Taliban insurgents fighting U.S. and British troops in Afghanistan, despite official denials, Taliban commanders say, in allegations that could worsen tensions between Pakistan and the United States.

A number of middle-ranking Taliban commanders revealed the extent of Pakistani support in interviews for a BBC Two documentary series, "Secret Pakistan," the first part of which was being broadcast on Wednesday.

A former head of Afghan intelligence also told the program that Afghanistan gave Pakistan's former president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, information in 2006 that Osama bin Laden was hiding in northern Pakistan close to where the former al Qaeda leader was eventually killed by U.S. special forces in May.

Admiral Mike Mullen, then the top U.S. military officer, accused Pakistani intelligence last month of backing violence against U.S. targets including the U.S. Embassy in Kabul.

He said the Haqqani network, an Afghan militant group blamed for the September 13 embassy attack, was a "veritable arm" of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency (ISI). Pakistan denies the U.S. allegations.

One Taliban commander, Mullah Qaseem, told the BBC the important things for a fighter were supplies and a hiding place.

"Pakistan plays a significant role. First they support us by providing a place to hide which is really important. Secondly they provide us with weapons," he said, according to excerpts provided by the BBC.

Other Taliban commanders described how they and their fighters were, and are, trained in a network of camps on Pakistani soil.

According to a commander using the name Mullah Azizullah, the experts running the training are either members of the ISI or have close links to it.

"They are all the ISI's men. They are the ones who run the training. First they train us about bombs; then they give us practical guidance," he said." 

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

It appears that Pakistan has played us like a violin.  pl 

"Israel’s Nukes" By Richard Sale

I read recently about Israel’s attempt to “deflect” pressure regarding its nuclear arsenal and felt suddenly tired. 

Israel’s coyness about its nuclear weapons is a bit nauseating.  I have been amazed fo years about media that keep referring to Israel’s “presumed” nuclear weapons.  It prompts you to ask,  what century are they living in? 

After the fiasco of 1956 when the British, French and Israelis invaded Egypt, Guy Mollet, who headed a new French socialist government, told Golda Meir among others, regarding Israel’s nuclear plans, “I  owe the bomb to them. I owe the bomb to them.”

"Beaufort" a review by Alan Farrell

Beaufort (variously pronounced). 2007. Directed by (also written by): Joseph Cedar (set in Lebanon, too… get it? cedars? Lebanon? Lebanon? Cedar? Sorry to do that, but you had that look again, dummy). Starring: Alon Abutbul (who played the bandito in the Magnificent Seven); Daniel Brook (the evil Chinese guy in Year of the Dragon); Oshri Cohen (Red Will Danaher in the Quiet Man); Nevo Kimchi (Saito in Bridge On the River Kwai); Ohad Knoller (voice of Oscar the Grouch); Arthur… wait a minute! What the silly hell have those guys got on their heads? What is that thing? Look like the bag the U.N. building came in. Some kinda voluminous, flaccid, sacklike, elasticized something-or-other, I’d say a helmet cover if it weren’t the size of Dee-troit and what they need cover for in urban enviro, anyhow? Whaaa…? Most of us have come to respect the equipment Israel has forged out of necessity and whole-cloth for her soldiers (Uzi, Galil, Desert Eagle, Merkava…), but Jeeeeezus, what is that thing? A bridge too far. Sheeesh! Make the guys look like they’ve got head stuck in a condor’s nest (or kite, or whatever flockin’ bird they got in Middle East…).

The DNI's bad idea.

"Future analysts and operators will open their computers to a common browser that will take them to sites where they can gather data across the community, assuming they have the authority and clearances."  Pincus

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

I have no quarrel with the DNI's desire to have the national agencies work together better, but his "thinking" about the relationship between collection and analysis is disturbing.  If I understand this correctly and Pincus has reported it correctly, this is a terrible concept.

For the uninitiated, "collectors" find and bring in data in various ways.  Analysts are tradtionally engaged in scholarship that produces opinions as to what that data means.  The present DNI does not seem to have ever accepted that division of labor.