US Soldier Rampage in Aghanistan; Is There No Leadership?

Afghan villagers mourn their dead -- again         (c) Atlantic

Click here for related story [NY Times]

Once again, we witness an egregious US incident in Afghanistan.

A US soldier loses it and goes on a killing rampage in an Afghan village; the death toll is currently reported at 16, including nine children; we expect it will grow.  The Afghans, whose hearts and minds we are theoretically trying to win over, once again find it safer to ally themselves with the Taliban than with the US military.

And our troops become targets of both foe -- and friend.

This is the most recent in a series of incidents which portray our troops in the worst possible light: a viral YouTube video showing our troops urinating on dead Afghan Taliban, the burning of Qurans in a trash fire, drone strikes which have killed civilians in "collateral damage", and the "payback", our troops as the random murder victims of their Afghan counterparts; and  recently, the as-yet unexplained circumstances surrounding the murder of two US officers inside a secure room within a Afghan Government facility.

Nation Builder -- or Executioner?
Afghan Perceptions

The American military are doing their level best to maintain the traditional image of the honorable soldier, helping the oppressed in other countries. But that honorable image is fast eroding because of a few thugs, criminals, and psychotics allowed to wear the uniform and degrade their fellows -- and the US.

We've mentioned before that the proud tradition of the US Military as emissaries of the American people and protectors of freedom is being undermined by a lackluster and irresponsible leadership.  That problem starts at the top and filters down through the ranks.

If we kill all the Afghan civilians, do I get a Silver Star?

The US Commander, General John Allen, obviously can't control each and every soldier in his command, but it would appear he is incapable of even instilling in his subordinate officers the concept that they must lead by example and control their troops at each echelon -- down to the platoon and squad leaders.

Leadership by example is a precept of the US Military Officer; General Allen apparently skipped that class at the Academy to attend a class in social climbing etiquette.

General Allen seems to have chosen Mr. Obama's concept of "leading from behind" while being pulled to the top by his mentors.

We've commented on Allen's deficiencies before, and reckon that he remains ensconced in his sinecure on his way up the ticket-punch ladder to a top government position -- perhaps an appointment as Chairman of the JCS -- based on his record of incompetence and failures in Afghanistan?

Allen's Order of the Resplendent Banner

 
He seems to be a favorite of the US ruling class [e.g., Council on Foreign Relations, Georgetown], and is one of the select few Marine Generals who lacks any combat decorations --

although he does sport three Legion of Merit awards, and recognition from Poland, Taiwan, and the Mongolian Meritorious Service Medal -- all obviously preferred to such trivial US medals like the Bronze or Silver Star for combat-related service.

The hazards of the international cocktail circuit can be truly terrifying, even to the most hardened political aspirant.

We prefer our military leaders to have experienced such challenges as dirty fingernails and the sounds of gunfire beyond the skeet shooting range.  The Marine officers who have served under me have been brave, dynamic and honorable men, deserving of the highest respect.  Then again, they were all commissioned well before Allen, so maybe standards have changed; or perhaps Allen simply slipped through the cracks as happens periodically with select Academy grads.

Westie's chopper had FTA painted
on the bottom of his chopper by his troops

Older soldiers and Viet Nam vets recall a similar ceremonial soldier who rose to the top: William Westmoreland, who regarded himself a clone of Douglas MacArthur.

We recall Westie's emphasis on having his combat soldiers stand inspection with shined boots during his base camp visits with dozens of helicopters carrying his staff [the choppers were thus unavailable to support ground combat operations or to evacuate wounded soldiers].

We're not "winning" in Afghanistan.  In fact, we fail to see the real purpose in Afghanistan now that our target, Osama Bin Laden is dead  and buried [albeit at sea].

 

The Russians and Brits played and lost;
now it's our turn to lose.

Our Military has now become an "occupying force" with the same level of endearment by the Afghan people as the Brits, and later the Soviet troops enjoyed during their time in "The Great Game" of the 19th Century.

We have no objective, other than as "Nation Builders."  

But there is no nation to build, and our preference is that we not attempt to build a faux nation on the corpses of our soldiers.

UPDATE:

Observers on the ground report that the shooter was a Special Forces Staff Sergeant.   He was reportedly part of a group of soldiers who went through several villages systematically executing men, women, and children, and then burning their bodies.  This was a killing spree more than likely done for sport rather than retribution.

Early SECAF responses indicated he was a lone gunman suffering from PTSD.
That is obviously not the case now.

The penalties will be severe for our ground forces, and this criminal action reflects on all our Military in Afghanistan and Iraq, and throughout the world.  We are now officially the "bad guys" and have lost the respect we've spent centuries building.

We revert to our  early position that General Allen's lack of responsible leadership has created a lawless environment among our ground troops which may encourage criminal behavior.

I strongly urge the Administration to relieve General Allen of his command and to replace him with an officer who knows how to lead troops, rather than sashay around the cocktail circuit en-route to his appointment as Chairman of the JCS.


 

Nuke Iran! We need another war.

Iran: Our Next Proxy Enemy?

Click here for related story [Washington Monthly]

The thunder of saber rattling has become deafening in recent weeks.  Iran is building a nuclear weapon most assuredly aimed at Israel; so it's essential that the US attack Iran by land, sea, and air --and our own nuclear strikes to protect Israel.  And, if we don't, Israel will launch its own pre-emptive strike!

Prime Minister Netanyahu has conveyed this demand to us, and he promises to launch World War III -- unless we give Israel more aid.

Chiang Demanded We Attack  China 

We older soldiers recall another Netanyahu, Chiang Kai-shek, who had lots political clout on Capitol Hill.  Chiang proclaimed the need for the US to attack China to assure Taiwan's safety and independence.  And, if the US would not give him lots of economic and military aid, then he would unilaterally attack mainland China - initiating WW-III.  Walt Kelly's portrayed him in a comic strip as a uniformed little mouse standing in a rowboat shouting "Unleash Me!"

And we considered, briefly, engaging in WW-III.

Now, some would call this diplomatic blackmail; but, Israel is our "close ally" and it carries a pretty powerful political and media clout in the US -- so, US politicians are loathe to antagonize our Israeli ally.


But, the US is now war-weary --
after Iraq, which apparently did not have the Weapons of Mass Destruction -- and which supposedly targeted Israel; and Afghanistan, where the opium trade poses a greater threat than the remnants of Bin Laden's Islamic terrorists; and Libya, where we went to war by [very expensive] proxy so Europe could have oil if the Russians withheld theirs.

      Have I got a deal for you!  (c) UPI
Your Wallet -- or WW3!

So, we're now presented with Mr. Netanyahu's demand that we either give Israel a lot more economic and military aid, or he will launch a strike against Iran which will trigger WW-III.

Shibley Telhami (U of MD) in cooperation with the Dehaf Institute of Israel, released their results showing that public opinion in Israel opposes a strike on Iran:

"... only 19% of Israelis favor a strike, even in the face of US opposition.
"34% oppose a strike no matter what!
"42% would back a strike only if it had a at least the support of the US."

Meir Dagan, former head of the Israeli intelligence agency Mossad, opposes a war with Iran, noting
"I decided to speak out because, when I was in office, Diskin, Ashkenazi and I could block any dangerous adventure.  Now, I am afraid there is no one to stop Bibi and (Ehud) Barak."

The problem is credibility; the threat of Iran's nuclear weapon capability may be a bit overstated.

Paul Pillar, who sports considerable expertise in both the Middle East and Counter-Terrorism, supports this view.  Pillar, a Vietnam era Army officer, a well-respected National Intelligence Officer at CIA and the National Intelligence Council, regards the
 "Iran Nuclear Threat" as speculative at best!

New Balance of Power?

"... they are not seeking a weapon which ... will be launched against Israel.  Indeed, Israel knows this very well, as Ehud Barak himself recently confirmed.  But, the fear mongering, in both the US and Israel, is politically useful and Israel is indeed very worried that their nuclear monopoly will be broken.  So are the Saudies, who, like Israel, would have a much more serious opponent to deal with in a nuclear Iran."

Now, Israel has had a nuclear weapons capability for more than 30 years, detonating their first bomb near South Africa in the late 1970s.  That caused a bit of angst in the Middle East and raised the fear factor there quite a bit -- perhaps leading to a bit of discomfort for Israel's Arab neighbors.

[Having that nuclear weapons capability is a powerful deterrent as the French noted following WWII in its position with the USSR.

French soldier preparing to attack

The French, known more for their daunting record of forceful bravado and defeats than for their military prowess and resolve, decided early on to let the Soviets know that at the first indication of a military threat, they would unleash their entire nuclear arsenal against a variety of Soviet cities.

In the end, the French military remained notable only for its parades and fancy uniforms; but, the Soviets knew better than to even voice a military threat against France, and the French were safe.

 

The Israelis, noted for their intellect and media clout -- if not for their social charm, recognized the French defensive measure as one they should employ -- and have, for decades.

So, what's the risk of letting all this huffing and puffing and saber rattling play out in our current political climate?

Heh, Heh.   So, what did that NIE mean!       (c) Mike Judge

Inevitably, our politicians, who rarely read more than a few paragraphs of National Intelligence Estimates, will likely intuit that Iran actually does have a nuclear weapon ready to launch at Israel and New York City, and screw themselves into a patriotic tantrum to launch a preemptive military strike at Iran.

How can they go wrong if they support that Yahu from Israel?

They fear being labeled as Anti-Semitic by MSM and the Council on Foreign Relations if they challenge Netanyahu -- and an uphill battle in their next election campaign.

No one argues that Iran's leadership deserves a good, swift kick in the rump.

But, are we willing to send our troops back to the Middle East to engage in a war no one wants and which will serve no purpose?

That's how we got into Viet Nam, Iraq, and Afghanistan.

The Jewish Vote Counts  (c) USA Today

Yes, we should support Israel.

They are our ally [aren't they?] in the Middle East, and our politicians don't want to risk losing the political support in the US that Israel can give -- or deny.

If the Israelis don't support Netanyahu in this nonsensical demand for a political war to bolster his ratings, why should our politicians?

Some wonder who the greater threat is:
Iran?  or  Netanyahu.

RIP Breitbart: We're Investigating

He died of "heart stoppage" 
now known as a Breitbart Moment

Follow @SpookdBlog

Click here for related story [NY Daily News]

If you'd asked me two weeks ago who this Breitbart guy was, I would not have known; I don't watch TV these days

But, he had quite a track record.  Perhaps we should have been more alert since we shared a philosophy:
"... was committed to the First Amendment and the 'open and free exchange of ideas.' "
He published on six websites, and helped found the Huffington Post.


In addition to editing the Drudge Report, he wrote for the Wall Street Journal, the National Review Online, the Weekly Standard, the Washington Times, and Real Clear Politics.

 He also received the Reed Irvine Accuracy in Media Award and was a frequent speaker at Tea Party events.

[Recently reported was Obama's UK birth certificate showing his birth in Kenya, then a colony of Great Britain]

Outing ACORN embarrassed Obama  
(c) JD Long

The LA Times smugly covers his death with frequent updates, milking the story for its visibility, but adding no new substance.

They're not quite, but almost gloating that this Conservative curmudgeon won't be around to bash the MSM anymore.  They declare his outings of Liberals as "alleged"
[e.g., Anthony Weiner, the ACORN brothel expose, etc.]


[Interestingly, just about every US and international news coverage of his death reads like a script, using the same phrasing, and even the same sequence of comments.]

Breitbart came under much fire from Liberal politicians and Media, and responded to DNC and Nancy Pelosi accusations that he was racist [he dared to criticize Obama policies];  he met these slurs by stating that he would contribute $100,000 to the United Negro Fund if his Democrat critics could produce any evidence that he had ever made a racist remark.  The DNC, Pelosi, and the MSM did not accept the challenges -- but the issue suddenly disappeared from MSM coverage.

Get rid of those tapes  (c) Politico

Notably, just before his unusual death by heart-stoppage, he had announced that he would be releasing Obama's Harvard tapes, which he said would be revealing and shocking to the American public. Records of his father's expulsion from Harvard were to also be made available.

We suspect they the tapes will be quite interesting, if they ever see the light of day.

But will his organization release the tapes?



Now, in the dark world of aggressive politics, there are many means to induce "heart related deaths" to include a quick blast of aerosol at the face, a buttocks injection, suffocation, etc.  It only takes a few seconds to zap a guy in good health out for an evening stroll.

"Just because you're paranoid
doesn't mean we're not out to kill you"

To fend off questions about his untimely death, a flurry of whacko conspiracy theories has been posted, which I suppose are designed to pre-discredit any questions into the odd circumstances of Breitbart's death -- which was "heart related."

We can expect an aggressive ridicule campaign against any who question the circumstances of Breitbart's death, and we'll have allusions to "tin-foil caps" and "alien intervention."  The Twitter boards are already flooded with distractors, so anything of substance will be buried.

Ridicule is standard fare now and has been used to discredit anyone who questions "official explanations" of questionable events.  Those who question Obama's birthplace are labeled "Birthers" and are assaulted with MSM ridicule and personal expose's.  Then there are the "Truthers" who question the events of 9/11; whenever they pose a legitimate engineering or demolitions question, they are suddenly assaulted by a flurry of "expert" testimony which attempts to undermine the questioner's credibility, sexual orientation, and family history.

We often see controversial people die unusual deaths when just moments before, they were in excellent health.  We recall an almost endless string of odd suicides by those who could testify against Bill Clinton.  But, they all died of "heart stoppage" too.

AIG Set-Up?

But, sometimes, it's just a smear campaign, such as that inflicted on Eliot Spitzer by AIG in March 2008, just before he was to testify before Congress on the imminent meltdown of Wall Street.

He didn't testify, and the financial crisis he predicted did come to pass, plunging the country into its worst recession since the 1930s.

Wall Street, the subject of countless Spitzer investigations and prosecutions, worked closely with the MSM to discredit Spitzer -- and they succeeded.

Church Committee displays CIA Dart Gun [1975]
It fired frozen liquid darts 
-- causing the heart to stop

Breitbart's death was "heart related".

Hmmm.

If your heart stops, you die; the question remains, how/why did your heart stop?

CIA's "heart stopping" technology dates back to the 1970's, presented as evidence at the 1975 Church Committee hearings.

According to DCI Bill Colby, the CIA specially-designed gun which fired a tiny frozen projectile/dart with the diameter of a human hair and a length of a quarter inch, at an accurate distance of 250 feet.  

The poison was a mixture of shellfish toxin and cobra venom and is virtually undetectable, other than a tiny red dot on the skin as the frozen dart would dissolve immediately after impact, entering the victims circulatory system.
[Other dart formulas included a mixture of viruses which would cause a combination of ailments to the victim, causing him/her to die a slow and painful death.]

[Alternate gun designs were in the form of a walking cane or umbrella [as used by a highly publicized Bulgarian assassin].

Heart Stoppage by multiple shooters

JFK's death was heart related as well since his heart stopped; the bullets fired by JFK's driver may have contributed, but, he died when his heart stopped.

A coroner's inquest will be conducted in LA; we trust he'll look for a tiny red dot, but, we doubt it will say anything more than Breitbart died of "heart stoppage".


We look forward to an accurate account of Breitbart's death, and to the release of the Obama tapes.

Editorial Note [7/2019]:
This blog post was written back in 2012, immediately after Breitbart's murder.
The coroner died shortly after, as did the assistant coroner, as did the witness to the murder.
The coroner's files also disappeared.
We followed this blog post with a consequent blog providing more details of this assassination.

It is interesting to note Breitbart's accusations from that era, which the Media dismissed as nonsense, and we've since learned that all were quite accurate - resulting in the arrest and prosecution of Intelligence Community executives.