Thursday 0230 GMT December 31, 2015

Editor will be at his desk for New Year’s Eve, as usual, work being worship and all that. It seems all his life Editor has been praying to a penurious god. Or perhaps just a miserly one. Question for god: how is Editor supposed to glorify your name if one is perpetually broke? Publicity costs money, you know.

·         Moan, whine, complain, drown in self-pity Seems as good a way to spend New Year’s Eve as any. No, this is not another story about Editor’s No-Date-Saturdays. That’s no reason to feel sorry for oneself. The particular provocation is $996/year. This is Editor’s co-pay for a generic drug he has been put on since yesterday, by his Medicare HMO, doubling the amount he pays for an asthma protocol (four drugs), cholesterol (one), acid reflux (one), depression (two). Bette Davis said growing old was not for sissies. Having passed 70 Editor is forced to admit she was right.

·         Some of the medicines are over-the-counter. Does that mean they’re cheap? Haha. It means that insurance does not help, but one needs them anyway, so the pharma mafia just keeps raising the price. 

·         So what is this new drug that is almost as expensive as gold? (Gold say about $1200/oz or 28-grams medicine $1000 for 36.5 grams per year.) It’s generic name is Modafinil or something. To explain: you know that for about 1 ½ years Editor has been complaining about not feeling well. Older one gets, the more one gets used to feeling unwell. No cause for alarm. But with Editor in danger of failing Fall semester at college, he had to act. His primary physician said its mental. His loony doctor – who only prescribes medicine – said its physical. Just as an aside, even when he on the verge of death, Editor does not LOOK sick. This does not help with doctors. Particularly these two who are ultra-cute. Editor immediately breaks into big smiles when he is with them. “Sick? You’re not sick” they say. Then Editor went through this three-week spell where he just stared at the computer screen. Sure he did his orbat stuff, but he’s been doing that for so long, he can function on automatic. His mind started to go blank and stay blank at questions such as “Discuss data collisions between MD5 and SHA-1”. This is all new stuff to Editor.

·         Finally, the loony doctor figures it out. There is no known cause for the symptoms: chronic fatigue and sleepiness despite getting 8 ½ hours of sleep, more on weekends; intensified depression; fogginess of mind; feeling the world is just a play one is watching (not sure why this is a problem, because everyone is just watching life’s play, particularly when one anyway comes from Mars) and so on and so forth. You must remember since Editor does not smoke or drink or imbibe prohibited substances or even caffeine (bar 1 daily Diet Pepsi) it is much harder for him to just mask conditions and just get along.

·         So, Day 1 (yesterday) take one tab at 0600 and it’s a miracle. Editor did not feel sleepy the whole day, physical energy started returning, and while he still can’t face MD5/SHA-1, at least he got his class-work out and assessed how far behind he is. MD5/SHA-1 to be tackled today. Has depression abated? Well, hardly, when one has to pay $1000/year for the medicine as co-pay, and the back of the sofa shows not a stray nickel. Then there’s a six-page list of side-effects. The last one is – and Editor is not making this up: “Patient feels an uncontrollable urge to get on all fours and bite the ankles of passersbys, followed by an urgent need to raise a leg and piddle on their expensive shoes.” Isn’t modern medicine amazing? Of course readers may write in and say: Big deal, those urges, I have actually been doing that for the last 10-years and I have no clue what modafinil is.

·         This medicine, BTW, is much prized on the black market for use by students needing to stay awake to turn in A-grade term papers. Just imagine, Editor is taking a medicine that is prized on the black market. Isn’t this so exciting? Finally life has some meaning, and Editor suddenly has status instead of being a nobody.

·         More seriously, why bring up all this stuff in a public forum? Why cant Editor decently hand his washed laundry inside the house instead of exposing his tattered undie to the world. There is a reason.

·         You see, Mrs. R. IV and Editor got together when she was the wrong side of 16. For 32-years Editor watched as she got sadder and more anxious. Editor is one of those who proclaims: For every problem there is a solution. Men are generally like that. Moreover, when someone who one cares for is suffering and there’s nothing one can do about it, first there is despair and then there is anger directed against oneself and then at the other person. Particularly when one knows that the way one lives life (excessive risk taking and not caring about tomorrow) is half the problem the loved one faces, and every effort to change the way one lives never works (dyslexia is the cause in Editor’s case) one just gets angrier and angrier with oneself and the other person. Further, Editor cannot stand drunk people, and people who because of their mental issues just want to party all the time.

·         Indian men are very quick to blame everything on their wives’ “problems” so Editor couldn’t very well drag Mrs R. off to the shrink. Editor kept saying “why can’t you just get over it?” Its only when Editor got into chronic depression himself after Mrs. R left in a “I will destroy you “ mood  plus breakup of a long relationship, last remaining child at home going off to college, and great financial insecurity due to bust-up, etc etc etc.) that he realized Mrs. R couldn’t have just gotten over it, and that her issues were so severe she could not do anything but blame Editor for everything). It’s the first time he realized that when dealing with mental issues, sheer willpower can be insufficient, particularly when one refuses to numb oneself with alcohol, nicotine, and illegal substances.

·         So the point of this long rant is two-fold. One, readers may be reassured that Editor is back in force, and already has plans to revive orbat.com. Two, most of our readers are men. If Editor can talk openly about his mental/emotional problems, perhaps this will help some reader in similar circumstances to realize there is nothing weak or unmanly in saying “I need help”. If Editor runs into a brick wall (he’s been known to do that too, while working problems in his head), he accepts treatment: band-aids, Tylenol and so on. There’s no shame in looking for treatment if one has a mental hurt.

Wednesday 0230 December 30, 2015

·         The war against Islamists Ramadi can be considered a won battle, even if Iraqi commanders say it could be two-weeks before it is fully cleared. So what happened to Editor’s pessimistic prognostics about Ramadi? Nothing, really. He had doubted if the Iraq Army could fight, and indeed, it did not fight or was even asked to. The battle was conducted by Army and Federal Police SF. Though the spring credits the Sunni militias as being part of the battle, their role was insignificant and highly secondary. Just as well, because it is not a good idea to have armed Shia and Sunni troops next to each other. Editor also was skeptical about the notion that the Shia militias would fight for the Sunnis; and they did not.

·         Nonetheless, Ramadi was taken because (a) the US gave air support as needed, not as wanted by the US. It still wasn’t a lot of sorties, perhaps 4-6/day; still given the very few defenders, this was the major contribution to victory. And (b) IS did not put up a fight, just as it did not at Tikrit. The Iraqis suffered negligible casualties at Ramadi because of the lack of resistance. It did fight for Baiji, another victory for the militias/Kurds, but the number of fighters was a few hundred. But while one can analyze stuff till the cows come home, what counts is what happened, and what happened is that for the first time since January 2014, IS lacks a meaningful presence in Ramadi.

·         What is the strategic significance? Please note that IS is still strong at Fallujah, next to Baghdad, but the threat to the capital has considerably receded. IS’s campaign to enter Baghdad from the south succeeded in destroying the Iraq Army, which mostly chose to retreat rather than stand. But the Shia militias stopped IS. Meanwhile, the militias also stopped a potential IS encirclement of Najaf.

·         So the narrative has now become: On to Mosul. Oh dear. Mosul cannot be taken without a major commitment by the Peshmerga. The Shia militias cannot be used because Mosul is a Sunni city. Aside from the obvious potential for internecine conflict, the Shia militia, just as at Ramadi, have little wish to win ground for the Sunnis. Is the Peshmerga going to do the fighting at Mosul? This is one of those Iraqi situations you can look at from 10-sides and still not arrive at a useful conclusion. Per se, there seems to be no reason for the Kurds to get into a long, bloody campaign to gain Mosul for Baghdad. The latter no longer even sends money to Irbil for the Kurdistan share of national revenue. The Americans have been sitting heavy on the Kurds and have apparently extracted a promise of two Peshmerga brigades for Mosul.  The US will equip them and likely pay for everything, in return the US will continue backing the Kurds in the north at the expense of Baghdad.

·         Quite aside from the complex military situation in Mosul, a few thousand Iraq Army and Police SF plus two brigades of Peshmerga are not going to take Mosul, though the Kurds will certainly grab as much surrounding territory as they can. That territory will become part of Kurdistan. Mosul is a city of 2-million, of which a million will likely be left after months of flight before the campaign gets started in earnest. Now, just to be clear, Editor does not think a reason given by the western media as an impediment to success will be a factor. This is the assumed reluctance of the US to cause civil casualties. Without the heaviest possible air support, Mosul cannot be taken. Editor’s assessment is that the US is getting pretty fed-up at the snail’s pace of progress in Iraq and that it will do what it has to do. But if 300-800 IS defended Ramadi, several thousand will defend Mosul because of its critical importance to IS. At Tikrit, something like 20,000 Iraq forces, mainly militia, were present, against an initial approximately 500-800 IS, which dwindled to 300 because of casualties and IS fighter departures, and then to a few score as most of the 300 also pulled out. US air support was also available. There will be nothing comparable at Mosul.

·         Meanwhile, back at Ramadi. What is going to happen when the few thousand capable Iraq troops/police move out? The US theory is that the Sunni militia will take over. And why will Baghdad allow that? It hasn’t allowed the US to properly arm/support the Sunnis so far. The first thing that will happen is that the Sunni tribes will fight each other. The second thing will be a bunch will defect to IS. Indeed, IS could not have taken as much of Iraq as it did without the open or tacit support of the Sunnis. The third thing is that IS will start infiltrating back as soon as the elite forces leave. They are already doing that along the LOC between Fallujah and Ramadi, just as they have established themselves in the west/northwest outer areas of Baghdad.

·         See, you and Editor may consider IS as the greatest scourge since whenever. But there is a reason IS rose. It represents the last hope of the Iraq Sunnis for some kind of power in Shia Iraq. No condition has materially changed. The US may continue severe outgassing about how the Shias must share power with the Sunnis. The minute the US left in 2011, the Shias stopped their show of cooperation with the Sunnis, which was only a show for the Americans: the Americans are the ones who enabled the Sunni militias in Anbar, not Baghdad. This time the Shia’s have refused to let the US directly help the Sunnis and have, as before, stalled US indirect help. The Americans know by now they can resolve nothing long-term in Iraq except to it break up into three countries each protected by the US. This has been a highly successful strategy in the Balkans. If the US cannot do this, all it can do is – as in 2011 – arrange a situation where it can declare victory and go home.

·         This time around Baghdad has refused the Americans to intervene on the ground and there is nothing Washington can do about it. Particularly with Putin panting and drooling at the chance to send HIS airpower to Iraq.

·         Doubtless IS has suffered defeats in Iraq-Syria. But the imaginary moderates have not gained: it has been Assad and Islamist groups particularly those allied to AQ.  Sure, US backed forces in Syria have made have gained ground. How long beforeTurkey, which is already whacking them, says "this is it" and starts eliminating them. Wait a minutes: didn’t Washington to say AQ is cooked? Except it hasn’t: its making a come-back. Its expanding in Afghanistan and Yemen; in Somalia the Islamists have served notice they will fight IS, which is expanding in Libya and in Iran. Meanwhile, the Taliban is resurgent in Afghanistan right after we declared victory…

·         Oh heck, why are we even bothering with the Islamists? We seem to have zero ability to fight them. Maybe we should just come home and double down on the beer-realityTV diet. We’re really good at that.

Tuesday 0230 GMT December 29, 2015

·         Star Wars VII: You can never go home again It is a complete exploitation of those who loved the original trilogy. We ensured the prequels because of our affection for the Real Star Wars; the prequels were totally exploitive too. VII has no plot of its own, simply repeating the plot of the original, and doing it passively. Same sequence of the robot attaching himself to the hero/heroine; same cantina sequence, same death star/plant that can be disabled because of a weakness at one point (doesn’t the Empire learn anything from the destruction of the Death Star?), same “shocking” death of a beloved, wise character.

·         The 3D specs ruin the photography, giving the cheap effect of the 1950s 3-D viewers.  Editor found the dollar signs that kept leaping out at him quite unnerving.

·         The whole thing is a gimmick to further the merchandising, where the real bucks will be made. Business Week says the plan is to pull in $5-billion, of which the movie will make only one-third. Making the main character a lady is simply another gimmick and repetitious at a time so many movies have female leads. Financially it has worked. Making the second main character a black person is a genuflection to the gods of Political Correctness.

·         The notion that the lady hero, in her first experience with a lightsaber, can beat an evil-Jedi type is laughable. That she wins using physical force is even more ludicrous. Oh yes, she is aided by the Force, but has no training, whereas the villain is a serious knight with serious powers. At one point he uses the force to hurl her against a tree. With that power at hand, why does he have to close with her for a sword fight that risks singeing his fluffy hair-do? Vader and Kenobi were equals, at least.

·         The villain looks just like one of Editors namby-pamby beautiful boy students who pose and look cute and the girls throw themselves at them. Since when does Evil resort to projecting giant holographic images of itself to impress mere mortals, and looking like a large green leper? Editor does not hear well, but at one point it seems the villain is drooling over the lady hero and moaning that he is so lonely. Excuse me, please, with his powers, status, and background, how does he not have a date every Saturday night?

·         There is no battle scene worth mentioning, 30-years have passed and folks are still flying the same model fighters, the aerial skirmishing we have seen before and was done with much great dramatic tension in the original. This movie has nether art, heart or craft. It is a brass penny compared to the $20 gold coin of the original.

·         Okay, okay, readers say, you’ve made your point. Can’t we talk of something else? But that still leaves Editor with one question. The Stormtroopers wear heavy armor, yet it takes just one shot from a handgun to kill them off? Jeesh.

·         Letter from Major AH Amin on Helmand and Afghanistan His ire was triggered not by us, but by yesterday’s Washington Post http://tinyurl.com/qehjg72 He says:

·         First your entire facts are wrong. I was in Helmand recently and it is under Afghan state control. Secondly Helmand’s control is not central to the issue. It is an outlying area and the Soviets never had more than a regiment here. US surge in 2009-11 in Helmand was entirely innecessary and should have been resisted by Mc Chrystal and Petraeus if both had an iota of moral courage. My argument is based on free copy of my brief book which can be read on slide share link at http://www.slideshare.net/AAmin1/revised-callous-indifference-6-oct-2015   

·         Secondly nothing significant has happened so this Washington Post article is a storm in a tea cup. Understood that journalists and papers have to be sold. The bottom line is that 60 % Afghans want US to stay and if US has to leave any place it may leave the south and stay north of the line Wardak-Shindand. Now, who wants US to leave Afghanistan? Most of all Pakistan, but also China, Russia, Iran, and Saudi Arabia. Most of the Taliban are Pakistani proxies but US all along has lacked the moral courage and strategic resolution to face the Pakistani state. Strategically US can retain North Afghanistan a valuable base at low cost and must retain it or all US investment and sacrifices will go down the gutter. Only China and Russia would be the WINNERS. The detailed strategic analysis is in link below  http://www.slideshare.net/AAmin1/294027718usapakistanciaisialqaedaandtaliban.

·         And lastly about Bagram ambush please care to read link below. http://www.slideshare.net/AAmin1/amin-on-us-military-leadership-dec-23-2015

Monday 0230 GMT December 28, 2015

·         Editor’s position on Muslims A Twitter note asks us: you criticize Muslims but what is the solution? First, to be clear, the nonsense currently going on has nothing to do with Muslims but everything to do with Islamists. Yes, Islamists are Muslims by self-declaration, but they are a tiny minority who come up with sick, murderous formulations of what Islam is. Islam does not have a central authority, and every cleric is free to interpret things as he likes. The Islamists are the apostates.

·         Yes, Editor is aware there are 109 verses in the Koran/Hadiths sanctioning violence, but without getting too Marxist about it, religion comes from politics and politics comes from economics. The Prophet got his stuff from 20-years of revelations made to him by the Archangel Gabriel; the same gentleman who sits at God’s right hand. Is it beyond belief that the Prophet heard/saw what he wanted to?  Is it beyond belief that he interpreted what he heard/said to further political purposes? Is it beyond belief that his followers wrote down/modified his words to suit the political/economic purpose of the day?

·         It shouldn’t be, because the Old Testament has a lot of violence. Yahweh not only said it was okay to eliminate nations, but promised to do it himself. So once upon a time Christians merrily slaughtered non-Christians and each other. But Christians grew out of this habit. What Yahweh said was mandatory 3-6,000 years ago doesn’t apply now. Anyone claiming he has to right to kill others in the name of the Christian God would quickly up against today’s God, the state, which says you don’t have the right to kill anyone. Yes, Editor does see the irony here because the new God, the state, says it’s perfectly okay to slaughter those the state nominates as non-believers.

·         In all this please not to forget Communism, a peculiar religion because it removed God from supremacy and instituted its ideological formulators as replacements. Horrible as the deeds of Islamists are, they are not a patch on the deeds of communists. Just as one example, we have a very long way to go before Islamists can even think of equaling the killings of Stalin and Mao. Cambodia had a population of 7-million in 1975; between 20-40% of the population was eliminated in four years. Hitler, Stalin, Mao should be ashamed of themselves for their lack of zeal. And the Cambodians did not have German efficiency.

·         Okay, okay, our readers plead. Enough already. We get it. Just as you cannot blame the majority of Christians for the excesses of the past, you cannot blame the majority of Muslims for the excesses today. We agree that the Shia Muslims, to take an example, are as much victims of Sunni Muslims as are Christians and other minorities. So what is it Editor is saying?

·         Simple. Editor did criticize American Muslims for failing to sufficiently stand up and condemn the enemies of America, just because they happen to share parts of the beliefs that allegedly motivate the Islamists. “We can’t be seen to be criticizing our religion when it is under attack.” Here is the thing, people. If you refuse to stand up, you are anti-American, and Editor could care less what religion you are.

·         Please also to note that the Editor has repeatedly criticized the American leadership, which is composed of Christian and Jews, for standing indifferent to the genocide of Christians in the Middle East. Instead of standing up, our leadership tells us, in effect, that we should be ashamed of ourselves for demanding action on behalf of Christians. Our Noble Leader tells us he cannot advocate for Christians in preference to others because this is not who we are, and these are not our values.

·         Oh, please Noble Leader. Put a large sock in it, better still, put a dozen unwashed stinky socks. Who are you to tell me who Americans are and what my values should be? It is okay to be at war to save Muslims of Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria from brutal Islamists but not okay to fight for Christians? It’s okay for us to promise to kill those who harm Jews but not defend Christians?

·          Talk about discrimination! Any man who would save others rather than his own is not an exemplar of American values. Of course, Noble Leader can get away with his stand because Americans are not standing up for non-American Christians. These are our values? If so, the majority of Americans will permanently buy the farm once the Second Coming arrives.

·         As for us not suggesting solutions as our Twitter reader accuses: please, people. Editor has suggested the solution many, many times. You don’t try and cure and redeem rabid dogs, you kill them. Kill the Islamists until we reach the point that people say, okay, we give up this Islamist thing because we’d rather live. Sure, many will say we’d rather die. In which case it is our American duty to give them what they want.

Saturday 0230 GMT December 26, 2015

·         Food aggression and cultural appropriation at Oberlin College The Atlantic Magazine reports: “The core student grievance, as reported by Clover Lihn Tran at The Oberlin Review: Bon Appétit, the food service vendor, “has a history of blurring the line between culinary diversity and cultural appropriation by modifying the recipes without respect for certain Asian countries’ cuisines. This uninformed representation of cultural dishes has been noted by a multitude of students, many of who have expressed concern over the gross manipulation of traditional recipes.”” http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/12/the-food-fight-at-oberlin-college/421401/

·         By this token, should Americans the world over complain about darn nearly every country appropriating our culture? Take pizza. This Italian dish came over with Italian immigrants to the US, and was discovered by American soldiers in general during the Italian campaign. So pizza was appropriated from Italy and went mainstream American. Now, considering that our pizza is mass-produced as a convenience food, Editor can bet it is a pale imitation of traditional Italian pizza. So are Italian students at Oberlin complaining about cultural appropriation? Not that we know of.

·         In the 1980s, if Editor recalls correctly, American pizza was brought to Delhi. Naturally it was adapted to Indian ingredients and tastes. So should we now complain about the Indians appropriating our pizza which we appropriated from the Italians? Nah. We’re flattered that the world eats pizza copied from us which we copied from the Italians.

·         News flash! Importing and adapting dress, food, etc. from other countries has probably gone on since folks began to trade. In our time, as a world culture develops, more and more folks are taking stuff from other countries. This not cultural appropriation, it’s called melding. It’s supposed to be a good thing because it brings different people together in a shared experience. To the foreign origin students at Oberlin objecting to their native dishes being massacred, we have two suggestions. One, go home. Or, start your own movement to serve your country’s food made appropriately. You could get rich.

·         When foreigners come to live in America, it is not for us to adapt to their ways. It is for them to adapt to ours. Don’t agree? Okay, let’s say 10-million Americans settle in India and insist Indians adapt to our ways. What would happen? Likely they would be run out of India. Would that prove that Indians were racists? (We are, but that’s another story.) It would not. It would simply show that Americans have come to our home, and if we are to adapt to Americans ways, it has to be at the pace WE want to adapt. And if we don’t want to adapt at all, we have to be respected.

·         So, back to Oberlin. Does it prove that Americans are exponentially becoming more crazy? We don’t think so. Remember, back in the Good Old Days, if you were a crazy at Oberlin, there was no way you could propagate your craziness. But thanks to the media today, a bunch of nuts at Oberlin who may not number more than a dozen hard core cases, get to tell their story to the whole world. Since the Internet is always gasping/panting for more material to fills its vacuous mind, someone is going to pick up such a story and forward it to everyone.

·         Are these Oberlin students ashamed they are being called crazy (as in Cwayzee!)? Not a bit. Like all of us, they want publicity, and the internet + new media gives them their 8 seconds of fame. Yet, for every sour-faced, self-righteous, dismally boring, and mindless person who comes up with stuff like at Oberlin, there is another who posts funny, sad, enlightening, informative etc. stiff on the web that allows us to reach out and share their experience regardless of where we live in the world. It seems a small price to pay for the loony-tuners using the same media that helps us appreciate that peoplekind truly is one regardless of nation, race, culture, gender and so on.

·         Let us give Oberlin the Big Avoid, and instead celebrate the 15-year old Atlanta boy who was shot to death as he covered two girls with his body when gunfire erupted. That we know every detail of the incident and have pictures of him is entirely thanks to internet + new media.

Friday 0230 GMT December 25, 2015

Blessed Christmas

·         Ramadi Iraq forces numbering some hundreds and composed of Army and Federal Police Special Forces have managed to rescue 150+ civilians from the central districts. Ample US air support is available; Iraqi commanders freely acknowledge their debt to the US. That the US is finally making it a practice to give air support as needed regardless of civilians is a healthy sign. Let us repeat all the hypocritical ritual words about civil casualties being a great tragedy etc etc. Well, this is not the Iraq desert and a fight between two regular armies. On the enemy side you have a bunch of thugs who enslave, maim, and murder civilians as a matter of routine. They hide among civilians to save them from air strikes. To make sure their civilian hostages do not flee, they periodically encourage them to stay by executing families. The first priority has to be killing Islamic State even if it means civilians must die.

·         The US has, till recently, understood this. But of a sudden, in the last 10-years or so, after the widespread deployment of precision weapons, the US began this pious chant of “we do our best not to kill civilians, whereas folks like Assad and Putin don’t care.” Well, Assad doesn’t have precision weapons and the Russians are running out of them. So if we cared that much we should be flying sorties for Assad and Putin. Naturally, the US has every right to be faux virtuous, but when it comes right down to it, when we have to, we kill civilians as easily as tyrants do. And Editor for one does blame the US. War is not a game. The only way to minimize suffering is to make the war as short, rapid, and brutal as possible. Killing a few score people a month over years and years is not inherently more moral than killing hundreds or thousands at one go and ending the war.

·         For some reason, folks are defending Obama’s refusal to establish Syria No-Fly zones and create protected camps inside Syria for refugees. Now, this concept is obviously moot after Russia entered the war. So this is a pointless debate. It does need to be said, nonetheless, that the western/Arab coalition bombing Syria and arming rebels of their choice is unrestricted aggression against a UN member. Please, please, let’s not say the President has authority under the 2001 AUMF resolution or whatever. The thing is that we are at war with a sovereign nation who was not our enemy, however deplorably it was behaving toward its own citizens. Congress has not declared war. We have no UN authority to attack Syria. Let us at least be honest and call this spade for what it is: a deliberate decision by the US to attack another country in support of our national objectives and the legalities be darned. BTW, Editor is perfectly comfortable with this. It just makes him sick that the Nobel Prize Winner has thrown all international law to the dogs.

·         In America we are lawyers, and we think if we use every twisted argument to justify a foreign war then we are morally right. Excuse us, please, but the rest of the world doesn’t agree we are morally right. The point of law is not to convince ourselves we are right, but to gain general consent from those we rule that we are right. When overseas wars are involved, we have to convince the rest of the world. Since we have not convinced the world, the world considers us outlaws.

·         All Editor is personally saying is that hypocrisy should not be the American default. How can we convince the world of our moral superiority when we seem to tops at breaking the law. All Editor wants is for the US to say: “We rule the world, we are going to arrange the world as suits us, and if you don’t agree, go lick a lolly.” Otherwise we are under constant global attack by folks using our words of moral superiority against us. Why should we be in that position. Putin is out there slaughtering left and right with a big smile on his face because only he has a legal right to intervene in Syria. Since he’s never said he cares about civilians; no one is attacking him for being a hypocrite. In a peculiar sort of way, Putin is more moral than we are. We have to be morons, idiots, and poltroons to be less moral than him.

·         BTW, its just a matter of time the Euros start lifting their embargoes on Russia. And the US has done more to defeat the bad guys by producing as much oil as we can despite tight environmental restrictions.  Perhaps the Greens can reflect on the ironies here.

Thursday 0230 GMT December 24, 2015

·         We Indians are convinced that we have the best minds in the world. Perhaps every country feels that way, though personally Editor has never seen this conceit in Americans. Though President Obama would do very well as an Indian, since he/his are convinced he has the finest mind in the known universe. Of course we Indians easily top him. If he can see every side of an argument, we Indians can see arguments right down to the quantum level. It’s not mere shades of grey or even 50 shades of grey for us. We can see every shade of an argument from 0 to 100,000 angstroms.

·         And that’s just in this universe: we Indians are aware of an infinity of universes. BTW, we figured infinite universes out millennia before Western scientists did. We also knew that the universe is mind, not matter. As for conceptualizing time, we could, again millennia ago, conceptualize time from a trillionth of a second to trillions of years. Indeed, one of Editor’s pleasures is seeing the latest Western science conceptualize stuff we knew at least 3000 years ago. The problem as far as the West is concerned, that we Indians don’t have proof of our concepts in a form acceptable to the West. But think for a moment: if the universe is mind, then it can be fully explored via the mind. More on this another time.

·         So Delhi has become the smoggiest city in the world: 18-million people, 9-million motorized vehicles including 2-wheelers. So the city is under court orders to clear up the air. So the city – rather the megapolis – decided a few weeks ago to do a 2-week experiments where vehicles with odd numbered plates will ply one day, and even numbered plates the other day.

·         As a first example of genius-ness, please note that the cause of the smog is already well known, and vehicles are only part of the problem. It is dust from surrounding arid regions including the Rajasthan Desert, smog from the heavily industrialized Haryana and Punjab states, farmers burning straw to clear their filed, hundreds of thousands of small factories, etc, etc. Cars are NOT the major source, as most cars made in the last 15-years are to Euro4 standards. 2-wheelers: 32% of vehicle pollution; trucks, 28%; cars 22%; CNG vehicles 11%. See http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/what-about-55-lakh-bikes-mr-kejriwal/1/541022.htm

·         Second example of genius-ness: a few weeks were given to prepare for the start of the short experiment. When activists protested that 10,000 clean buses were needed (about double the number of public buses on the roads) so that people could get around without their cars, the Delhi government waved this off as an insignificant point.

·         Then a week before the experiment is to start, the Delhi Government announced exemptions in 20 categories of all vehicles. Editor shares them with you. http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-news-india/20-categories-exempt-two-wheelers-women-drivers-hybrid-cars-vvips-except-delhi-cm-kejriwal/#sthash.budYCvhQ.dpuf

·         Vehicles of the physically challenged; CNG vehicles which will have to display the certificate; Electric vehicles and hybrid vehicles; Emergency vehicles, ambulance, fire, hospital, prison, hearse, enforcement vehicles; Vehicles of paramilitary forces;  Ministry of Defense; pilot and escort; Vehicles of SPG protectees (VIPs with extra tight security; Vehicles bearing diplomatic corps registration numbers. Okay, reasonable.

·         Vehicles of the President, Vice President, Prime Minister, Speaker of Lok Sabha, Deputy Chairman of Rajya Sabha, Deputy Speaker of Lok Sabha, Governors of states/ Lt Governor, Chief Justice of India, Union Ministers, Leaders of Opposition in Rajya Sabha and Lok Sabha, Chief Ministers of states except Delhi, judges of Supreme Court and High Court, Lokayukta. In other words, the governing elite. Who in any case have plenty of vehicles and would easily meet the odd-even rule. The rich also will have no problem with odd-even because they have multiple vehicles or can buy a second if not.

·         But now we come to Women; women drivers with a male child up to the age of 12. Huh? Cuckoo Cuckoo. 

·         Those on way to hospital for a medical emergency should carry proof. Huh? What and how proof? A doctor’s certificate? So I’m having a heart-attack and I should first get a government-recognized authority’s certificate?

·         Last, but not least: All 2-wheelers. These number 5.5-million, 60% of Delhi vehicles, and are big polluters. These are exempted in the name of the “Common Man”. But exempting these guts the purpose of the law.

·         So, please look at the genius of us Indians. Anyone given a thought to how this odd-even is  going to be enforced? No problem says the Delhi Government, a $30 fine will be issued each time. Yes, but that’s not the question. How are the authorities going to manually check 9-million vehicles? It’s not like Central London, where cameras are everywhere. How is all this going to be processed through India’s notoriously over-crowded courts when people contest the fines? What will happen when enforcement teams themselves create bottlenecks on Delhi’s amazingly overcrowded roads? Here’s Editor’s projection: in the 2-weeks of the experiment, nothing will happen except more chaos.

·         So, now, America, how can you deny us Indians have the finest minds? Could you all have come up with this brilliant scheme? Never. But we did.

Wednesday 0230 GMT December 23, 2015

·         The end of the US 2-party system? We’d ventured the thought to an astute observer of American politics that perhaps the two-party system has outlived its utility. For one thing, the elites of both parties operate on common ground with regard to money. They disagree on the crumbs that should be thrown to the rest of us. The Democrat elite would throw more than the GOP elite, but both are quite comfortable owning half of America’s wealth and see no reason why it should be otherwise.

·         Second, we are now 315-million people, likely to be 350-million in 10-years. There is no longer a national narrative to keep us on the same page. Each party is being forced to accommodate such a wide and wild diversity of views that it is just no longer possible to have just two containers. Now, more and more, every sub-group and sub-sub-group has its own narrative. So inevitably more containers are needed, at the minimum IOHO four parties. Thoughts?

·         A reader’s reply to our Trump-Could-Be-Prezzy thesis “Sadly, Trump is an opportunist with no particular ideology or platform.  He might be described as a xenophobic fascist but that would give him too much credit.  He has the skill that both parties but particularly the GOP has in spades:  using the American mythology of rugged individualism and self-sufficiency for the subversive purpose of transferring power from government to the 0.01 percenters.  Bernie is on to that game but the 0.01 percenters are going to crush him.  The Democratic Party is already sidelining poor old Bernie. There'll be no blowback because as the 0.01 percenters have acutely understood those Keynesian automatic stabilizers tamp down the fury of the unemployed, underemployed and underpaid from revolt. It's a win-win for the 0.01 and even the 1 percenters. Thus has it always been. Thus it shall always be as long as the stabilizers are used. Even in a multi-party system Bernie would have to threaten Hillary sufficiently to motivate her to have a serious sit down with the 1 percenters to get them to compromise.”

·         Until the other day we ourselves were expounding the thesis that the elite so far, over the last 35-years, indeed crushed all effort by the Rest-Of-Us for a more equitable America. Editor attributed this to reality TV and cheap beer, which has kept us mesmerized us to such a degree that Marx, who said religion was the opium of the masses – only to replace other religions with the communist religion – would be astounded. The communists could only dream of the mind-control that has been successfully imposed on the American people. Recently, someone suggested that there is a third tool in the mind-control list, free or very cheap pornography.  We accept this idea but are reluctant to add to our list because then we’d have to add narcotics, legal and illegal, the illegal ones also indirectly controlled by the state. Then we’d have to add consumerism, which has us working for the Man voluntarily, even though our urge to consume arises because of the most sustained brainwashing campaign conducted in history. And so on.

·         Still, and perhaps Editor’s instinct is quite wrong, in the rise of Trump and of Sanders he sees hope that the long-awaited rebellion may have already been sparked, with one of the pyromaniacs being – oddly enough – a 0.01-percenter. It is quite possible that the time for rebellion is not yet right, and the elites will tamp it down. But once the cat is out of the bag, once people realize that our whole life is a lie imposed by the elite, Editor doesn’t see how growing realization can be snuffed.

·         Okay, finally something we cannot blame on Obama The US really is willing to step up its combat support for the Iraqis. It has proposed that it deploys Apache attack helicopters and combat advisors for the Ramadi battle. But Baghdad has said no, mainly because the Shia militias that are the real fighting power in Iraq have refused. They’ve even gone to the extent of saying if US troops are deployed in combat, the militias will attack them.

·         Incidentally, you may recall Editor has been repeatedly saying that it is not Obama’s fault that no US troops remained in Iraq after 2011. Baghdad refused to give them immunity, without immunity, continued deployment was impossible. Obama opponents have argued that he could have tried harder. But how? The US had defeated the Sunnis. Iraqis are xenophobes and simply did not want the Great Rainbow Father around anymore. All Obama did was say: “Mission accomplished” – it had. When Baghdad was telling him to shove off, why should he argue given that the war had been won?

·         Kenya Muslims save Christians from Islamists Said Islamists stopped a bus and told the Muslims to form a separate group so that the others could be killed. The Muslims refused, saying to the Al-Shaabab gunmen that they, the gunmen, must leave them alone, or kill them all. After killing a couple of folks the Islamists pushed off. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-35151967

·         Talk about courage. Stories like this need more publicity.

Tuesday 0230 December 22, 2015

·         Will Editor have to eat crow on Trump? Editor has been telling readers from the start that Trump speaks to a significant proportion of Americans and that he should not be taken as crazy, But Editor has also said Trump will not be president. Editor could be proved wrong on this because there is a theoretical way in which he could become Prez.

·         First, we all have to accept the idea that Bernie Sanders will run as an independent. He is not part of the democratic establishment and is opposed to most of what it stands for. He cannot be persuaded to be a good soldier and throw his support to Hilary. His followers are so passionate that they will not vote for Hilary even if he was to ask. And there is no reason for him to ask because, as we’ve said, he couldn’t care less if Hilary lives or dies. She is a zero factor in his reality. If he goes independent, he could cost Hilary the election against Trump.

·         Wait a mini-min, you will say. How can Trump be the GOP nominee? Don’t we all know that once marginal GOP candidates start dropping out, they will loyally ask their supports to vote for the official nominee, say for Cruz? And since every GOP candidate is a party man except for Trump, s/he will for sure ask her/his people support the official nominee.

·         Aha! Nice story, but the media may be scripting it wrong. After all, they’ve been consistently wrong on Trump from the start. The media has only now starting acknowledging that Trump actually does appeal to a significant portion of Americans. That didn’t stop media, when Trump trashed Muslims, from saying “Oh, he’s done for now”. Not to boast, because it was so obvious even to a mushroom, Editor knew the anti-Muslim position would be met with approval and Trump’s support only grow. Which is what has happened. Just as is the case with Sanders, Trump could care a tenth of a hoot about the GOP. Like Sanders he is an anti-party person. So what happens if he goes independent? Like Sanders will destroy Hilary, Trump can destroy the official GOP candidate.

·         The Hilary Democrats will concede nothing to Sanders, such as asking him to be Veep. And even if they did, he will never accept. But on the GOP side, it’s possible that many candidates will ask their supporters to give their support to Trump even though he is only a Republican in name. The rest could be history.

·         Before our readers say “We knew Editor was crazy, but this new thesis he propagates is not nice crazy but bad crazy”, all Editor is doing is doing a broad-brush war game acting like a rogue Red Team. You need such people, because if the official establishment plays Red as well as Blue, you are going to land up with totally wrong conclusions. Such as, you ask? Such as US foreign/military policy since 1945. Even 1991, which was our one unequivocal military victory – it could hardly have been otherwise – was a case of winning the battle and losing the war. We weakened Saddam, and the results are obvious. Red Team should always be played by rogues and never by the establishment pretending to be Red. Is anyone in the establishment listening? Obviously NOT. So obviously we are going to continue to fail abroad.

·         Similarly, people more knowledgeable than Editor will have to play Red rogue in the 2016 Presidential scenario. Editor is just making a suggestion here that just saying “Obviously Trump cannot become president or even the nominee” will not make it so. We’ve all been wrong on Hilary before – 2008. If you look at Hilary now, it’s quite clear there is immense dissatisfaction with her. The country is in a wild mood. They could end up saying “lets blow up everything”. On which case Trump will become the unlikely harbinger of the Second American Revolution by destroying the existing system. It won’t end the way Trump wants it to end because once a revolution starts it becomes unpredictable, but that’s another story.

Monday 0230 GMT December 21, 2015

Winter Solstice

·         More discussion on the US Navy Reader Michael Purviance sent a discussion with the expert on the US Navy, Norman Polmar http://breakingdefense.com/2015/12/polmars-navy-trade-lcs-carriers-for-frigates-amphibs/ Before we get deeper into  the US Navy, back for a moment to the Littoral Combat Ship which has been under attack since it was first planned. We discussed some of the weaknesses of the LCS last time, and were particularly contemptuous of the idea its survivability is supposed to lie in its ability to run and hide, and in the idea that if it gets hit just once, hopefully the crew will be able to limp back to port.

·         After posting the article, we recalled one class of vessel is built precisely for the hit/run/hide/limp mode of surface warfare, and that is the gun/missile boat.  Lt. John F. Kennedy’s PT-109 had 14 crew, 12-hr endurance, 4 torpedoes, one 20mm cannon, and two depth charges. Engagement range was 4-km. The idea of fighting a destroyer at 4-km is unlikely to raise any enthusiasm in sane people, but that’s the way things were. The modern version, Russia’s Osa class missile-boats had a displacement of 200-tons, 29 crew, 5-days endurance, maximum 42-knots, 4 SS-2 Styx, and 2 X 30mm cannon with 2000 rounds. The Styx was unlikely to arouse much enthusiasm either, because it was liquid-fueled and unarmored above deck, a hit by aircraft or a naval gun would result in a giant, unhappy kaboom. Still, the Soviet concept, emulated all over the world, was to have a cheap, lethal, throwaway littoral combat vessel to keep attacking navies off the coast.

·         Emphasis, please, on cheap, throwaway, lethal. We will note simply that LCS now cost half-a-billion and has no anti-ship missiles, so it fails on all grounds.

·         So the frigate version, depending on which configuration is chosen, will have Hellfire VLS (maximum range of 8-km) with perhaps 32 missiles, a 11- cell SeaRam short-range SAM/ASN launcher, and 2 x 30mm cannon. It might have a 76-mm gun in place of the 57mm. Okay, a lot better than LCS, but still hopelessly undergunned and expensive, remaining neither fish nor fowl.

·         Back to Mr. Normal Polmar. He is sometimes criticized as having no service experience. Personally Editor feels Polmar’s very extensive knowledge, his ability to think of the navy as a system with interlocking parts, and his ability to ruthlessly analyze more than makes up for any failing on the operational side. His current thesis is that the US should considering halting new carriers for about 15-years and substituting large deck amphibious ships. He argues that that the US Navy’s destroyers, cruisers, and submarines are superb ships with all the long-range strike power required. Carriers, on the other hand, are not cost-effective in terms of firepower, particularly given their enormous cost.

·         He attributes the decline of attack carriers to the steadily reducing capabilities of carrier air groups.  With the retirement of the A-6 without replacement, the long range strike capability is gone. With short-legged F-18s and F-35s replacing the long-range F-14s, the carrier has to wait until cruise missile ships and air force bombers have degraded enemy defenses to the point the attack carriers are survivable. With the retirement of the long-range S-3 ASW jets, and replacement with SH-60s, ASW capability has been lost. Similarly, the long-range EA-6 electronic warfare with a 4-person crew has been replaced by EF-18 short range aircraft.

·         Worse, the Navy has no money to buy aircraft to use the enormous capacity provided by the Nimitz and successor class carriers. The fighting part of the carrier wing is down to 44 F-18C/E, which will gradually become 44 F-35/F-18E. One point you should ignore in the Polmar article. The writer has Polmar saying there is no money to buy more than one F-35 squadron per carrier. US Navy has ordered 440 F-35s, enough for 20 per carrier. Even after one USMC F-35 squadron is taken on board, as is the plan, there will still be just 54 aircraft. Compare to the 90 combat aircraft on the World War II Essex-class (5 squadrons of 18), and 74 on the Forrestal and follow-up carriers (5 squadrons of 14 each plus 4 long-range reconnaissance A-5s), and 5 squadrons of 12 equaling 60 aircraft on the Nimitz carriers

·         The new carriers are costing a whacking $13-billion each, with a complement of 54 – thanks to the Marine Corps, which once ashore needs all its squadrons. To Polmar, the idea that you first have to use long-range missiles and bombers to clear out the battle space before the giant carriers with 54 aircraft move in makes little sense, and he does have a point. You can build 4 LHA with a load of 40 fighters, helicopters, and tilt-wing troop carriers for the price of 1 super-carrier. Sure this will cost more than one carrier. But if you put 10 F-35s on each plus 30 other aircraft/UAV, you get almost as many fighters as the super-carrier and plus you get lift for 4 battalion landing teams of marines.

·         There is another way to look at what Polmar is saying. First, the F-35 despite all the loose talk about being the most expensive fighter in history actually has a lower unit and life cost than the Rafale and about equal to the Typhoon. Considering it’s a 5 Gen fighter and the others are 4 Gen, this is actually a very good deal. So a first step could be more aircraft, for – say – a 70 aircraft wing plus 15 or so support aircraft – AEW, ECM, and rescue helicopters. Second, by all means build more LHA types, but optimized as aircraft carriers and carrying ASW and other supporting aircraft needed: say 10 F-35 for self-defense, 18 ASW MV-22, 6 tankers, 2 COD, and 4 helicopters. One of these supporting carriers would work with a task force of two super-carriers.

·         That still leaves the problem of range. Well, one suggestion is to revive the A-12, which was an A-6 replacement, and build an upto-date model. This could be done in 10-years if the US puts its mind to it.

·         Obviously the underlying assumption is that the US Navy and other services stop footling around with ultra-expensive ships and equipment. Numbers are as important as quality. Having a few very high-quality ships is not a solution because each time one gigantically expensive ship becomes a casualty, you lose a big part of your overall combat capability. And obviously more money will be required even if ships/aircraft are brought down in price thanks to longer production runs. And obviously asking the US services to be sensible and being economical with their funds is never going to happen.

Friday December 18, 2015

·         The US Navy’s Littoral Combat Ship Ever since return to the US 26-years ago, Editor has been unable to do any work on the US Navy. The problem, as we’ve discussed, that while in India, acquiring data, analyzing it, and writing reports was his full-time occupation. That 50-hrs/week is now 20-hrs/week because he has a full-time job in the county schools, and of that 8-hrs goes in the blog, leaving 12 for everything else. World Armies takes up most of the rest.

·         So Editor has not been able to study the US Navy’s Littoral Combat Ship in any detail, even though from the start (around 2001) this has been evident as a most peculiar ship with no relevance to US Navy requirements. Editor has no clue how this program was even approved. The first odd thing was it size: one version is 2800-tons, the other 3600-tons. This is, for the Navy, a toy. Its destroyers, for example, run from 9000-tons (Burke) to 14,000-tons (Zumwalt).

·         The LCS is the alleged replacement for the missile frigate FFG-7 class of which the US Navy got 51. And a most handy frigate it was, capable of missions across the spectrum, from operating as part of carrier battle groups to escorting replenishment ships and amfibs. It was about 4000-tons full-load, 40 medium range SAMs/Harpoon SSMs, a 76mm gun, a 20-mm Phalanx, and 2 ASW helicopters, and 4500 nm range. LCS was to replace FFG-7 on a 1-to-1 basis, that’s why the order for 52.

·         But LCS was designed for littoral warfare – brown water – and not for blue water. Where did this coastal requirement come from? Editor has no clue as yet. The US Navy has been focused on blue-water global operations for 80 or more years. In Vietnam it created a riverine warfare force because of the nature of the south’s geography. But littoral ops? What was going on? Despite extreme skepticism directed toward the LCS from Day 1, Editor has no doubt it can do its coastal job properly. The weapons, depending on the module, including a 57mm rapid-fire gun, 2 x 25mm high-speed cannon, SeaRam short-range SAMS, 2 ASW/Anti-Surface Warfare helicopters and…and…and…well, there is no and. That’s it. Great for battling it out with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Navy’s swarm gunboats. Not so good for operations outside the Persian Gulf.

·         The LCS is supposed to perform anti-submarine warfare, mine countermeasures, anti-surface warfare, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, homeland defense, maritime intercept, special operations, and logistics. It has a shallow draft, allowing it close inshore. You can see it would be great for inserting special ops raiding teams, clearing mines, and so on, Persian Gulf stuff. Excellent for anti-piracy, say in SE Asia. Not all at the same time, it depends on the module. LCS is fast, stealthy, and networked with other LCS. But what about fleet operations? Nary a peep. Indeed, the ship-board anti-surface warship mission aside from the 57mm gun is non-existent.

·         That is only the start of the fun. The LCS cannot survive a hit from anything bigger than machineguns, cannons, and rockets. It cannot survive close underwater shock. It is a Delicate Darling. So are we doing Barbary Pirates again after 200-years? A littoral capability is good to have, if there’s a littoral threat. Outside the Persian Gulf it’s hard to see where else the threat exists. No one is going to be running LCS up against the Russian or Chinese coast. Both these navies have hordes of very cheap throwaway gun- and missile-boats for littoral defense. You can sink 5 or even 10 of them for the loss of one LCS, and still emerge the loser.

·         By the way, the Navy says it knows LCS is essentially unsurvivable in a fight against anything other than coastal warships. But since it has stealth and speed, it can run and hide. And if hit it can limp back to port or the crew can abandon ship. Huh? Since when does the US Navy do run-and-hide or plan to abandon ship if hit? If these things cost $50-million each that strategy would be fine. But they cost $500-million each. Yup, half-a-billion bucks.

·         Also by the way, a US Navy secretary has said that the lack of defined missions is one of the LCS’s greatest strength. Huh? What’s with this double-talk? If the ship doesn’t have a defined mission, than why is it being inducted? Crazy is too mild a word.

·         In the meantime, however what happens to the Fleet, which now is short of 50 general-purpose frigates? That’s one-sixth of the entire surface combatant navy. Fleet gets to suck its thumb and play with rubber duckies in the bathtub.

·         To add insult to injury, take a look at India’s Talwar class missile frigates, which are modified Krivak IIIs. In 4000-tons they have 8 VLS cruise missiles, 24 medium SAMs, 8 point-defense SAMs, a 100-mm gun, and two close-in high speed cannon systems. Plus a helicopter and a depth-charge launcher. The latest version under acquisition costs $1-billion, so it isn’t cheap, but it is a fleet warship, not a tin can with a pop-gun.

·         Re. Tin Cans. This is the nickname US Navy sailors gave their destroyers to convey both pride and derision. The ships were highly vulnerable to hits by torpedo, bomb, or shell-fire. Nonetheless, the destroyers were expected to fight it out to live or to die. The Navy lost 70 destroyers in 3 ½ years of combat. There was no plan or question of running and hiding. What a perfectly pathetic little country we have become.

Thursday 0230 GMT December 17, 2015

·         Proton Mail So we have a friend who wants to communicate on Proton Mail (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ProtonMail) for reasons of his privacy. He sent us an invite; apparently the demand for the service is so heavy they’re adding servers as fast as they can get money, and there’s a wait of a couple of weeks. The service, which works on client-side encryption, was started as a crowd-funded venture by three gentlemen at CERN and is based in Switzerland, outside of US/EU jurisdiction. Its basic service will remain free, but other levels will require payment.

·         Since Editor started a master’s in information technology, he has become increasing wary about anyone promising secrecy. Even if you aren’t severely into computers, you’ll know the story of Tor and the US government. Nonetheless, secrecy is not important to him. That may surprise readers who know his background. The reality is that using encrypted communication is the fastest way of drawing government Stink Eye attention to what one is doing, and this was particularly true in the days before the Internet. The simplest way to break a code is to grab the person of interest and subject him to gentle persuasion to hand over the key.

·         Personally, Editor would be highly flattered if the government – any government, even Zimbabwe’s – deigned to read Editor’s mail. He often invites the CIA to tap his communications so that he can have status in Washington, which is a very status conscious town. No luck, confirming that Editor really is a nobody. Sigh. Of course, Editor could lie and says CIA does listen in, but generally in the intel biz it pays to tell as few lies as possible. This is a habit of Editor’s and it’s hard to now break. A friend of Editor’s gets a lot of attention by insisting that various people have been spying on his communications and he’s having pay more than he can afford to have industrial strength security clean out his systems.

·         The young, would-be spies among our readers may ask: “But why do you advise telling the truth as much as possible? Isn’t that counter-productive in the spying world?” Here we go back to something we have said before. If you don’t tell lies, no one can fool you with their lies. You have to decide for yourself where is the balance of advantage in telling lies or knowing when others tell lies. Other reasons not to tell lies is that once you start, they start multiplying in complexity, and you start trapping yourself.

·         Another reason to be truthful as much as possible is that when you absolutely must tell a lie you are less likely to be caught out. Likely Editor has told you the story of how the he saved a friend’s wife from harm at his hands – and saved him jail-time. His friends lived a few houses down. One afternoon Editor is working away at home when the wife comes charging in saying her husband is coming with his gun and he’s going to kill her because - usual story – he came home unexpectedly and she couldn’t open the bedroom door because the paramour was present. Both paramour and she got out through the bathroom (in India every bathroom has a door to the outside so that the bathroom cleaning person can do their job without coming into the main house). Paramour sensibly ran for his life, abandoning his lady-love. She ran to my house.

·         When hubby arrived flashing his revolver and demanding to know which room his wife was and not to lie to him because he had caught sight of her running into my house, Editor said: “Have I ever lied to you?” The hubby admitted I never had. So Editor said: “I swear your wife is not here, and you’re welcome to search the house. I ask only that you don’t look in my bedroom because as you know Mrs. R the Fourth is away to China and her best friend has been staying here to console me.”

·         My bedroom was where wifey had fled and locked herself within. Of course hubby did not search anything. Editor doesn’t drink but always keep the hard stuff for guests, so we spent the next hour consoling each other about the perfidy of wives. A third of a liter bottle of scotch later he decided to go home. What happened next is a long story but it involved no violence and many apologies from hubby to wifey for doubting her fidelity. Us men are just such total idiots when it comes to women. Never lie to your wife else when she’s lying you won’t pick up on it.

Wednesday 0230 GMT December 16, 2015

·         Desert Merrie Melodies So yesterday came the announcement that Saudi Arabia has created an anti-terror coalition of 35 Arab nations. May we Roll On The Floor Laughing? The greatest funder of terror is Saudi Arabia. So exactly how are we supposed to believe Saudi is serious? Matters not helped by our own John Kerry, who delightedly announced that the US had been pushing on much the same lines. The US is not included in this coalition. We think that’s a joke, but of course it fits Mr. Obama’s preferred narrative of locals powers cooperating with each other to meet the Islamist threat, freeing the US to remain in a supporting role, leading from behind. May we remind readers that the cart does not lead the horse, so we don’t really understand the phrase unless it is being sarcastically.

·         If this development was not sufficiently hilarious, there comes the news that the US has gotten the Libyan factions to work together to fight Islamic State in Libya. Some official clown said this is to prevent IS escaping from Syria and Iraq from setting up elsewhere. More ROFL. Who told this worthy that IS-in-Libya is formed from IS escaping Syria and Iraq.

·         First, what pressure exactly is IS feeling in those two country that they need to escape? Sure, their advance has been stalled after 18-months of weak US action. Sure, they’ve given up some ground; in Iraq for example they have been pushed out of Bayji, Shingar, and Tikrit. But they’re still very much active in those areas. In Shinjar, the latest “victory”, they’ve built a bypass to keep active their LOC between Raqqa and Mosul. They’ve done it so rapidly that we have to ask if they hadn’t started preparing as soon as they came under pressure at Shingar. IS is not creating a fuss right now at Bayji, but they are still around. Similarly, they are not in Tikrit city but they have control over the LOC to Anbar. IS-in-Libya were busy as beavers before their advance in Syria and Iraq was stymied. Saying they are escaping to Libya is like saying they are escaping to Yemen and Afghanistan. This is all part of their expansion strategy.

·         Second may we remind Senor Kerry that if the US had not decided – for obscure reasons – to destroy Gaddafi, IS would not have been able to plant in standard in Libya. May we also remind that after Gaddafi was toppled, Islamists rapidly expanded through the Sahel and Boko Haram began another rise.

·         Third, would it be too much to remind that Libya has endured four years of anarchy as it split along tribal lines. What makes the US/West acting under the UN umbrella think that it has successfully settled the issues within a few months and that the tribes are now going to sit in each other’s laps and do kissy-faces? Have we been able to manage tribal rivalries in Yemen, Syria, and Iraq? What puerile, stinky arrogance to assume that Libya is now ready to function as a united nation against IS. Please also to remember that IS is known for taking over local groups and that is one reason for its rapid expansion. It’s been doing the same thing in Libya. And as in other lands, they have the locals terrified stiff with their extreme brutality. No one will fight against them until they are sure IS is so defeated it cannot return.

·         Adding to the Desert Merrie Melodies is Israel/Palestine which we have been wrongly ignoring. The Government of Palestine is about to collapse and with it the US-backed security forces. The Palestine president is threatening to continue attacking Israel until Tel Aviv reoccupies Gaza. Huh? How does that make sense? Simple, really. The Palestinians have such a miserable life that Israeli occupation is preferable. Israel will have to look after its reoccupied territory.

·         We’ll cover Ramadi another time. Because the US has been bombing away, progress has made against IS. But as for the Iraqis fighting, a senior Iraq commander admits that 80% of the work is being done by the US. If he is saying 80%, we’d say its 90%. The Army has 600 commandos, the Federal Police has a few hundreds, the Sunni militias are also in the hundreds and being kept to secondary tasks as the US quite rightly doesn’t want the Shias and Sunnis to tangle. Which they will if US wins Ramadi back. The city is Sunni majority. What laffs when Shia forces are in charge. To channel Bob Dylan, this Ramadi thing is going nowhere.

Tuesday 0230 GMT December 15, 2015

·         Deutschland goes Looney Tuners So let’s go back to 2011, when Germany had its last census and found it was 1.5-million citizens short. Amazing, you will say? If the Germans can’t count right, where’s the hope for the rest of us? Though this is somewhat irrelevant, the Germans actually neither as efficient nor as hardworking as they think they are and were once. But the undercount was not a result of inefficiency. There had been no census since unification in 1990 because the Germany people wouldn’t allow it. They thought it would violate their human rights. So the Germans were using estimates. And lo! When the 2011 census did take place, 1.5-million citizens had vanished into another universe.

·         Editor thinks the whole affair is quite funny. The Germans, however, did not see any humor. They went straight to panic stations. You see, like most West Europeans nations they were losing population and expecting to fall to 71-million by 2060. If you come from India or the US, naturally you ask: what’s there to panic about? After all there’s way too many people in the world from a number of viewpoints and if the highly economically developed West Euros have shrinking populations, then it’s just a matter of time before the rest of the world follows. (For example, there’s been a huge drop in Indian birth rates, some states are already at Zero Population Growth.)

·         Well, the Germans panicked because they – like every developed country including America – have a peculiar economic system. We can economically survive only if our populations keep expanding so that future generations pay the retirement benefits the current generation has given itself.  So when the Mideast refugee crisis exploded (aided by countries like Germany because the refugees knew they now had a place to go, so they started paddling), the German light-bulb went off: Aha! We can get immigrants from the Middle East. Germany plans to take 800,000, but remember, many of the families that are arriving are fractured. There’s a lot more people to come who are parents, brothers/sisters, and children of that 800,000. You can’t very well say “we let Daddy in with two of his kinds, now Mommy and the other two kids can’t come.”

·         That’s the background. Now Germany has announced it wants Ukraine and Georgia citizens be allowed to travel to Europe visa-free. What happens to German society, culture and so on when a tide of immigrants arrives with their own languages, history, and ways of life? In the US it is politically correct to say “oooh, we are a nation of immigrants, and we welcome anyone who can get here legally or illegally. The truth is, its human nature to want to life with your own kind. A certain amount of change created by immigration can be handled, but in America we have gone well past that point – that’s another story for another time. The Germans have yet to fully assimilate the Turkish workers they brought over in the 1960s and 1970s, and now they want people from the Ukraine, Georgia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and so on? And what happens to the immigrants when robots start taking away more jobs than they have already? (We include computers as robots.) Yup, the robots are going to create a major crisis for the capitalist system very soon: maybe half of existing jobs will be lost.

·         And the best idea that we and the Germans can come up with to preserve social security is to import more people? So where does it end? When the US has 1-billion and Germany has 200-million? What happens to the quality of life?

·         Remember, when you overcrowd rats they turn against each other. Same with people, and it’s happening in the US because we’re used to a lot more space than the Euros and other countries. India has a third of the US land area and four times the population. The average density is 12-times that of the US.  Also, huge amounts of US space is untenable because of weather or lack of water. Oh yes, let the intellectuals scream “Simplistic! No understanding of economics! Unsubstantiated statements backed by zero facts!”.

·         Right. And you intellectuals have done such a great job with America.  Ditto Germany. Of course, we are all liberals now, and we know the West is rotten to the core and fatally flawed and deserves to vanish. But, hey liberals, in the interests of equity can you allow, say, 20-million South Asians in? Why are you all discriminating in favor of Hispanics, Arabs, and Ukrainians? As Obama says when asked why the US won’t take more Christians, “that is not who we are.” 20-million South Asians – or better still – 400-million will give the West lots of workers to support the social security of the older generation, Editor included. Of course, wages will fall to $4/hr. So Editor is not sure about how much the 400-million will contribute to keeping Social Security solvent. And when the 400-million reach retirement age? Simple. Import a billion more immigrants. Absurd? No more than what Germany/US are doing now. This is YOUR logic, not Editor’s.

Monday 0230 GMT December 14, 2015

·         China and the Pacific Simon Winchester has written a book on the Pacific where he asks how would the US like it if Chinese warships began patrolling our West Coast. Editor is not much for quoting others, as 99% he is inspired by his own thoughts; plus, he has extensively discussed this very issue. Still, since he is using Winchester’s question as a hook, that needs acknowledgement.

·         Don’t know about the US, but Editor would be positively thrilled and delighted if the PLAN began standing patrols 200-km off California. By the way, isn’t it time we stopped using the term “People’s Liberation” Army, Air Force, Navy and so on? The Chinese military is long since done with its liberation days, so shouldn’t we be using Chinese Army, Navy, and so on? Of course’s, its more convenient to use PLA, PLAN and so on.

·         Previously, Editor has written that US has effectively lost control of the First Island Chain, which China defines as Japan, Taiwan, Philippines and so, in other words, the waters of the China Seas bounded by islands to the east. True, the US is very much sitting in Japan, ROK, Taiwan, and after telling the US to get out, folks like the Philippines, Indonesia, Singapore, and Malaysia are trying to get the US back. All thanks to the rise of China, and all in line with classical balance-of-power theory. The latest manifestation if the stationing of frigates (formerly the Littoral Combat Ships) in Singapore and now P-8 MR/ASW aircraft. Defense cooperation between Philippines and US is also increasing.

·         So if one wants to be literal, US has not lost control of the First Island Chain; but you can see it no longer controls of the waters it encloses. How is control defined? By the ability to act unfettered by the adversary. The US can, at this time, prevail in a sea battle with the Chinese Navy, but there will be rising costs. The US reaction to this development, including China’s raising of islands in disputed waters and declaration of Air Defense Interception Zones? The Big Ignore. The US capitulation is so complete it is resorting to lies. Recently it claimed to have conduction a Freedom of Navigation through newly claimed Chinese waters, but it turns out it was a Right of Innocent Passage with every effort made not to provoke China.

·         The Big Fat Lie symbolizes all too clearly the US loss of the China Seas. China has already announced it wants to push the US out of the Second Island Chain, which means waters west of Guam, which includes Australia. Next step Hawaii, thus dividing the Pacific with the US. At this stage there is no plan to advance even further eastward; for obvious reasons the Chinese will not want to try the US’s patience in the Eastern Pacific. But one, this will mean a return to 1940; and two, it will mean Chinese warships will undertake patrols off Alaska, Washington, Oregon, and California, much as we now patrol the China Seas.

·         So what will Americans think? Remember, for the first time ever five Chinese warships appeared off Alaska. Even the Japanese never tried that stunt. The US response will depend on if we decide we have declined enough. On current evidence, the US will not care if Chinese task forces patrol off our west coast. Our claims to be a superpower in the Pacific are already threatened; when the Chinese take control of the Western Pacific, in the Pacific we will be reduced to the status of Great Power, i.e., back to the early 20^th Century.

·         What is most peculiar is that America’s decline is not on account of loss of resources as has been the case with empires for at least 2000-years and probably even further back. It is because of the loss of will. And the will is lost not because we are exhausted after making great sacrifices. It is because on every level Americans have become so self-absorbed that we can no longer think of America as something greater than us individuals. Editor has estimated that an 18-carrier force (as opposed to the current 10, going on to 11) suffices to contain China. This is easily achievable, but we don’t want to achieve this because we don’t want to divert one minute from taking our individual pleasure.

·         There are many things Editor is woefully ignorant of, and one of them is the dynamics of what has happened to America in the last 25-years to cause this loss of will. Most astonishing is this has come about in just 70-years after we rose to the position of leading world power. Somewhere Editor read that one reason may be the loss of a national narrative with the rise of the Internet. There is no one left to shape the narrative because we all create our individual narratives. Also, there is a dizzying fractionation of the country as we battle against each other: race against race, gender against gender, class against class. If all our energy is going in fighting for every centimeter, such as for example the drive to vanish any speech that offends someone in the slightest, then we have no time to think of ourselves as Americans with a common American destiny.

·         Ironically, this has happened at a time we still reign supreme, though that supremacy is starting to fray at the edges. We don’t seem to understand that all this self-indulgence is possible only because we are supreme. But that supremacy can rapidly diminish when nations like China, and more slowly India, are pushing forward with a common narrative. Indeed, one of the mysteries that baffles Editor is the snail-like pace that China shows in its military expansion. Going back to carriers, the US in 15-years from none except training types to 130. China seems to be taking baby steps. It is only building its first pair – the existing carrier is for training. China spends less than 2% of its GDP on defense. What happens when it jumps to 4% or 6% of a bigger GDP.

·         So perhaps the appearance of Chinese carrier task forces off the West Coast will galvanize us into action. That, however, seems unlikely because China will rise faster than we will pull ourselves together. That America will pull itself together is becoming doubtful. Perhaps it will take until China owns Canada and Mexico that we wake up. Editor’s not betting on it, though.

Sunday 0230 GMT December 13, 2015

·         Gambia now an Islamic Republic These days the news that a previously secular country, albeit with a 90% Muslim majority, is now an Islamic Republic must arouse some disquiet amongst those of us who are truly secular http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/12/gambia-president-declares-islamic-statehood-151212153025585.html

·         The Gambian President is a despot with such a bad human rights record that the west has suspended aid. Analysts say his unilateral declaration –illegal under the constitution – is an attempt to get money from Arab nations. He is said to run the country for his benefit rather than for the citizens. His explanation is that he wants to get rid of the colonial legacy. Excuse moi, in 2015 you are talking about colonial legacies. How exactly has Britain colonized you in the last 45 years since you became fully independent? Earlier, in 1965, Gambia was declared an independent nation within the Commonwealth ten years previous.

·         Do you perhaps mean that Britain as well as the west has been making aid conditional on your observance of human rights? Well, why do you still need aid after 55-years? Moreover, the west is willing to give Gambia aid, it just won’t give YOU aid. You are not Gambia.

·         The despot says that he must respect the wishes of his Muslim majority. But if you are secular, dear Prez, and you say you respect other religions, then you really cannot follow the wishes of the majority religion. Besides, have the people of Gambia demanded an Islamic Republic? The head of the Islamic Council says the council hasn’t met so he has no comment as yet. Isn’t this the same person who called for refusal of help to Gambian Shias? What did you say then? Something very secular, doubtless.

·         Matters are not helped, Prez my old friend, when one of the first announcements you make as being head of an Islamic Republic is to welcome Burma’s persecuted Muslim minority as your “sacred duty”. This “sacred” biz sounds ominous. BTW, sir, when did you even learn of the Burmese Muslims? Your fellow Islamic Republics don’t seem to give a tinker’s rusted pan for them. They don’t want any refugees, Muslim or otherwise. So is this a ploy to get money from the Arabs? Assuage their conscience by giving you dollars? But don’t you see, they have no conscience.  Are they simply going to throw you scads of money so you can misappropriate a part of it? Listen, the Arabs are not that gullible.

·         Also, if you don’t mind Editor saying so, if the Arabs were inclined to helped the Burma Muslims – being persecuted by Buddhists, mind you, you know, those peace and love folks – settle in Bangladesh?

·         Of course, it’s silly for Editor to say all this because at this he has no clue about what Gambia’s President is going with all this. All he can say is that as it was, US was not for giving aid to Gambia until something is done about this President. Can he imagine what the US Congress and Western governments are now going to say should the question of aid to Gambia arise? Okay, the President can say the bridges to the West are burned anyway. Right, but this is digging up the pilings and mining the waters. Sure, we could be wrong, but the first “aid” Gambia is likely to get will be from the US CIA.  Very helpful, those fellows.

Saturday 0230 GMT December 12, 2015

·         Yo, China, how is that vassal thing coming along? Folks, what is this thing about restoring past glory that afflicts China? Why not look to the future instead of the past? Moreover, there’s this tree-falls-in-a-forest thing. China may think it was in the past the Center of the World. But look, when you hold a sphere in your hands, each and every point on the sphere is the center. Next, since China chose to isolate itself, who in heck knew it was Center of the World? Since no one knew, how could they be expected to care?

·         Perhaps we are overdoing this Center of the World business. When Great Britain held the mightiest empire the world has ever seen, naturally the Brits thought they were the cat’s bananas, or however that saying goes. So obviously the non-whites could not be invited to tea because they, poor things, were uncivilized. The uncivilized including China. So perhaps it’s unfair to blame the Chinese delusions. But perhaps not, because the British did not think the Western Europeans were barbarians who needed to kiss the Royal Foot. Sure, when the American Empire superseded the British, the Americans had a kindly contempt for most everyone, including the Brits, but they did not expect anyone to kiss the Republican Foot.

·         But then you could turn the argument around and say that today China is doing no more than the US: Beijing wants its immediate neighbors – Japan, Korea, Mongolia, India, SE Asia, the Philippines and so on – to subordinate their security interests to Beijing’s.  It wants outsiders to keep their distance and accord China the respect Beijing believes it deserves. This is no different from the way the US has functioned 1940-today.

·         The problem with this line of argument is that the way the US has behaved since it rose to super-power status is no longer acceptable, most to the Americans themselves. The Americans are not intruding into other countries intending to show they make dangerous adversaries, so these other countries had better start groveling (China-Vietnam, China-India). The Americans are not excluding other people from their defense perimeter (China-South China Sea). Recently when five Chinese warships appeared off Alaska, breaching the US’s inner defense perimeter, Washington said the Chinese had every right to be there. Russian bombers regularly violate the US’s Air Defense Intercept Zone in the north; the US sorties to keep a watch on the intruders, but don’t go all ballistic with rage demanding the Russians fly unarmed and notify themselves to the US. When a country tells the US to get out, the US does.

·         You could also channel Editor and ask what difference do the rights and wrongs make. China is what China is, and until checked and beaten by superior force, will increasingly throw its weight around. The difference it makes is that China, clearly aiming for a Beijing centered world empire in its turn, is going to have no luck if all it has if force and yuan to beat people with. People have their differences with the US, violent at times, but they too aspire to American ideals of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Little too much of the last, in Editor’s opinion. The world – even much of China – has adopted/modified American culture as its own. Empires these days have to be soft, they cannot be hard. Do the Chinese understand this? Do they understand that ordinary folks are repulsed by the Chinese dictatorship and police state? Do they understand that no one outsider wants to migrate to China and become a Chinese, barring some North Koreans? Until they understand this, there will no Chinese Empire, because force these days begets force.

·         India is an example. Until the Chinese began their intrusions in Tibet, for example, India had reduced had reduced its forces in South Ladakh to just two regular and two Special Frontier Force battalions. The latter are at time used as regular infantry, but their job is to provide warning screens and carry out operations in Chinese Tibet in the event of war. Effectively there were two infantry battalions.  North of the Changchemo River there were two more battalions. But after the intrusions began, the Indians did a counter buildup. From two understrength brigades plus 1 tank and 1 mechanized battalion, the Indians have gone up to four brigades and one armored brigade (forming). Moreover, XIV Corps which controls the Ladakh theatre is getting a separate infantry brigade as a reserve. From four battalions India is moving up to 18, or 69 maneuver companies, without counting the corps reserve brigade.

·         China has created a serious threat to itself that didn’t exist before. We are not discussing other steps India is taking against the Chinese in terms of ground forces. Hitherto, the Chinese have had a regular regiment of 9 companies, excluding border guards. India has its own border guards. The regular ground forces threat to China has grown by perhaps 4-fold. This is without a full-fledged nine-brigade strike corps that is under slow raising for the theatre. According to us, China has behaved with extreme fecklessness just because it could not resist intruding into India-held territory as a way of forcing India to negotiate a permanent border settlement. Which they were not going to get before, and have made it impossible to get in the future. Smart diplomacy this is not. Nor is it anyway to build an empire.

·         Note: the Chinese regiment is only the forward deployed element of a division with more divisions in reserve. But India will also deploy extra divisions in the event of war.

Friday 0230 GMT December 11, 2015

·         Turkey: Strange Doings So it turns out that Turkey has had a training mission in Kurdistan. The other day, the Turks reinforced it with 150 troops and 25 tanks. The Iraq Government said the reinforced was not needed and asked it be withdrawn. Turkey said (a) we arrived with your permission so why are you getting your panties in a twist; (b) we need security for our training mission; (c) we ain’t going nowhere.

·         We haven’t been able to track down if Iraq really give permission for a training mission for the Peshmerga. Maybe someone casually said fine without meaning it. Iraq, which is to say Baghdad has been dead against anyone treating directly with the Kurds, saying Kurdistan is part of Iraq and all dealings must be via Baghdad. But whatever the past history, Iraq has asked the troops be withdraw and Turkey has ignored the ultimatum. Instead it has sent a delegation for “negotiations”.

·         Now, everyone knows the weirdness going on in the Middle East at this time. But this episode seems exceptionally weird. Last we know, Kurdistan was part of Iraq, though Editor was among the first to say that Baghdad had to let the Kurds go. But under international law, neither has Kurdistan seceded, nor has it been recognized as independent by anyone. So are we to conclude that Iraq has lost control of its territory and folks like Turkey can simply blow off Baghdad? We’re still thinking on this.

·         The background to Turkey and Kurdistan is this. One would think that the last thing Turkey would want is to help make Kurdistan independent, providing an example for the region’s other Kurds, including Turkish ones. You have to see that the Turks, along with the rest of the region, think they are masters of intrigue, deception, triple-dealing and so on. Kurdistan has oil up the wazoo. The Turks hate the Russians and want to be free of anyone’s oil. So what better than to tie up with Kurdistan for the export of the latter’s oil? As for the other complications, Turkey is confident it can handle them. Stupid, but there it is. It is also no coincidence that Erdogan’s son is making the shekels hand over fist, exporting –  Kurd oil to Israel – who sells it elsewhere after filling its own tanks, and to several other countries. Smuggled oil is tied in with this. Baby Erdogan has also built up quite a fleet of tankers. Also no coincidence that Erdogan’s son-in-law is energy ministry and so on and so forth.

·         But since Turkey funds Islamic State, why is Turkey helping build up the Peshmerga to do battle with Islamic State? Quite simple, if you are Erdogan. He doesn’t want IS to take over Kurd oil. So while he supports IS in Syria as a weapon against Assad, he is against IS in northwestern Iraq. Confused? This kind of lying, cheating and dishonesty is the name of the game in the region, and you will not be surprised the Americans keeping failing so spectacularly in the area trying to play the game.

·         The Turks may be taking their cue from the Americans. The US has sent combat troops to Irbil, not to train anyone but to fight in Syria. Baghdad got very angry, with Shia militias threatening to fight the Americans if they came across them. The Americans said: “no big deal, we cleared it with the Iraqis”. Well, the US may have paid off a few politicians including the Prime Minister, but there is no approval from Parliament. So the Americans are ignoring the Iraqis, just as the Turks are. The Americans are forcing Iraq to stay together, but having coming to realize the Iraq Shia army is not going to fight for Mosul, are speaking with a forked tongue. Not to worry, says Washington, we know this sounds like a contradictory policy, but we’re on top of it. Tres amusing.

·         BTW, if the Iraq Army is doing any fighting in Ramadi it must be in their minds. Iraq Army cannot fight, and we think the US realizes this by now. The fighting is being done by the Shia militias, the viciously sectarian Iraq Federal Police, who have been fighting consistently if not always effectively since June 2014. If there are a couple of thousands of Iraqis in Iraq Army uniform, while some may be fighting, the rest are not.

·         You already know the situation in Syria. Turkey, Saudi, UAE supports Islamic State; the US, having all but having given up on “moderate” Syrians to fight Assad, have been working with anti-Turkey Kurds. Including some belonging to an organization the US has declared is terrorist. The Turks are not fighting IS, they are fighting the US allies. Assad and the Russians are fighting everyone who is not Assad. US is fighting IS. So where. Recently, have you heard of a situation where two NATO allies are fighting each other through proxies – with Turkey doing its NATO duty providing the US airbases to kill IS, and while Turkey kills US allies and supporting IS. Meanwhile, the US underwrites the security of Saudi Arabia which is supporting every terror group fighting the Americans.

·         Makes perfect sense if you are a demented person who belongs in the looney bin. Which is where all these folks except Assad and Putin belong. Hope you understand a bit better that the US chances of success are minus zero.

Thursday 0230 GMT December 10, 2015

·         Good news – if true Baghdad claims to have retaken 60% of Ramadi. This news must come with many caveats. First, it is a habit of Baghdad and the US to declare victory only to see Islamic state come back. Second, this victory returns Baghdad to back it was in early 2014 after IS attacked Ramadi. Third, the ethnic situation is complex, to say the least. The local Sunnis may not be ecstatic about IS, but the hate the Shias more. Anbar has been a Sunni-controlled province. With Shia militias running around and exacting revenge for the atrocities the Sunnis committed against the Shias who committed atrocities against the Sunnis who committed atrocities against the Shia – you get the point.

·         However much the Americans may think the Ramadi situation is about the be solved, it is better for readers to think of one set of problems solved (assumed all Ramadi is cleared) with a new set of problems arising. The US, BTW, was very insistent that Baghdad arm Sunni militias and form a National Guard for the war on IS, Baghdad did nothing of the sort, fearing the armed “friendly” Sunnis more than IS. US, hopefully, has learned it has diminishing leverage with Baghdad in the matter of the latter’s internal problems.

·         Meanwhile, Homs has fallen to the Syria Government We can’t emphasize enough what a big deal this is. It’s the first Russian victory, that comes within 2-months of the start of the Russian intervention. It deals a severe blow to anti-Assad rebels because Homs is where the revolt started (seems its always Homs where the revolt starts). It represents a major slapping of the US strategy. Some rebels didn’t want to give up, but really there was no choice. The Die Hard faction didn’t sign the agreements by which the rebels left Homs, but said they would not get in the way of the ceasefire.

·         BTW, it is clear to everyone except the US Administration that the only hope of getting Islamists out of Syria is the return of Assad. Even here we’re not being quite fair, because the US is assiduously avoiding hitting Assad forces. Some plane or the other hit the Syrian Army; Syrians accused the US; US has very quickly blamed it on the Russians, who say “Bosh and All”. US is anxious that its quiet agreement with Assad should not be jeopardized. But this shows to which extent the US Administration go to lie its way out of things. Instead of admitting getting Assad out was a bad idea, US keeps fulminating about the man, followed by its lapdogs in the media. What’s utterly amazing to Editor is that the media does not seem to have figured out we are not at war with Assad any more.

·         Trumpism and the US media So you all know about Trump’s latest: don’t issue visas to Muslims. You also know the media is triumphantly announcing this time he’s gone too far; as part of the evidence the media points to condemnation by the other GOP contenders.

·         May Editor ask why does the media not realize that Trump is speaking for a good percentage of Americans when he demands “no more Muslims”? Now you take a poll and you will find – say – 70-80% saying Trump has crossed the line. The truth of that poll will be Minus Zero, because a whole bunch of people will be lying through their teeth. Why can’t the media and liberal America face the reality that the dramatic population changes in the last 25-years because of immigration has rattled most Americans – including African Americans? In Washington metro, for example, in the last 23-years the ratio has shifted from 70-30 for the white to 60-40. Is media seeing where this is going? In 25-years Washington metro could well see whites in a minority.

·         Why shouldn’t whites be disturbed, even panicked? It’s no use our President bleating pathetically that being anti-immigrant is not an American value, that this not who we are. Are Americans not human beings? Periodically through the decades they have got into a funk about immigrants and barred fresh immigrants. Accepting immigrants in “manageable” numbers is, sure, the American way. But the emphasis is on “manageable”. Why is media not getting this? Don’t they talk to average Americans?

·         Well, they don’t. And Editor has seen this for himself. Outsourcing has destroyed manufacturing jobs, and is now hitting white-collar professional jobs. Media keeps telling us about how the outsourcing has been fantastic for us. But it’s been horrible for tens of millions of Americans and it’s going to worse because now the robots are also going to take away jobs. What about the benefit from increased trade? Well, what about it? Sure Chinese goods are cheaper than US goods, but when Americans don’t have jobs/money to buy Chinese goods, how does this help us? How does it help America that people can’t afford medical care, proper homes, even to put gas in their cars? Not a problem for the media.

·         Mike Thompson wrote to us, saying:  ”You keep saying America needs a revolution and you keep asking where is the revolution. Well the revolution is starting and its leader is Donald Trump.” Let the American establishment stuff that thought in its Starbucks lattes. And if Trump isn’t the one to bring revolution, and if Sanders is not the one, Editor is thinking the Genie of Our Discontent is escaping his bottle and won’t be put back. Others will pick up. So maybe our establishment should think of buying land in Argentina and Brazil while they can.”

Wednesday 0230 GMT December 9, 2015

·         Saudi Arabia and the Shias Why does Editor say that if Saudi is flooding the market with oil to destroy the Shias,  it will lose this battle? Just as it will lose the battle to push up prices: each time prices increase, the American frakkers will increase production, driving prices down again.

·         Opinions differ, but probably Saudi needs $80/barrel to support its lavish life style, or at least what’s left after the Royals have been fed. Iran probably needs $100, because the embargo has cost it greatly, and Iraq probably needs the same because like Saudi, it has to satisfy the corrupt interests as well as the people.

·         As we said yesterday, Saudi’s existential threat is not American frakkers. They may threaten its disgusting, grossly corrupt life style and excess, but they don’t threaten Saudi itself. All the Royals need to do is limit their stealing to 5% of oil revenues, live modestly, and cut subsidies to the people, and Riyadh will do fine.

·         The threat comes from Iran. We can look at Iran in many different ways. One way is to see the Ayatollahs, as much as the Shah, want the return of Persian glory. Aside from the religious differences, the Iranians consider the Saudis to be ungodly vagrants, raised to their position by conniving western interests, camel drivers without any culture, intelligence, or sophistication. The Iranians, according to us, also cannot stand the gross consumption compulsion the Saudi Royals have.

·         Its easy to blame the US for the destruction of the pen built to keep the Iranians in their place. But please to remember, every Gulf monarch also wanted the fall of Saddam, even though he was a co-believer. If Saudi had refused to aid the US, Gulf I and II would not have been possible. If the US was exceedingly moronic in its assumption its troops would be home by Christmas, the Saudis, who should have known better were bigger morons. Once out of its pen, the Iranians moved to take over Iraq and intensified their push against the Sunni states.

·         So what do the Saudis et. al. do? They unleashed the fundamentalists against Iraq. So brilliant are the Saudis, so completely without scruple or morality, that they willfully ignored the reality that IS et. al. are a greater threat to Saudi and the Gulf states than to Iraq/Iran. So do the Saudis et. al stop sleeping with IS et.al.? Obviously not. But we digress.

·         The short issue is that the real Iranian military, the Revolutionary Guards are, well, revolutionaries. They don’t need gold-plated F-15s and the fanciest western equipment to fight.  They don’t have to buy their pilots $200,000 cars for having completed a few combat sorties – without opposition – over Yemen. They don’t have to hunker down out of harms way, their advisors and militias go out to fight, and their generals as well as ordinary soldiers get killed. They are on a crusade, and don’t need tens of billions dollars annually to wage war. We’d have to do a detailed analysis, but probably they could maintain a 100,000 man expeditionary force in the Mideast in $3-billion/year, mostly for operations and munitions.

·         Now, we’re just saying that for discussion, because sending their armies to occupy other lands is not the Iran style. They work with local forces, Hezbollah, The Alewites in Syria, and their carefully nurtured Iraqi militias. In other words, they get their local allies to something the US has conspicuously failed at since Second Indochina. And of course, in grand American style, we shafted the well over 1-million South Vietnamese who fought alongside, by refusing to deploy our airpower against the PAVN’s 1975 offensive, or even to fund $700-million worth of ordnance and parts for the RVN forces (about $4-billion in today’s dollars). We simply abandoned them with a “It’s been real”. Who in their right mind would want to fight for America? Indeed, let us ask a very politically incorrect question: why would Americans want to fight for America in our wars of choice. Anyway, we digress again. Must not let our disgust at the American establishment get in the way of our story.

·         Realistically, the Iranians probably need no more than $1-billion/year to show up at the gates of the Gulf states. BTW, did we mention the oppressed Shias in these states? No we didn’t. hahahaha. That’s another story. The point is short of the Saudis giving away free 10-million barrels/day, they are not going to break Iraq’s ability to fund the Shia crusade.

·         And as far as Editor is concerned, the sooner the Iranians overthrow the kleptomaniac Gulf rulers, the sooner the Islamists will be defeated. If we’re not going to help the Iranians, can we at least have the decency to get out of their way?

Tuesday 0230 GMT December 8, 2015

·         Saudi Oil Strategy: It seems to make no sense The official explanation from Saudi is that they want to crush US alternative oil producers. This means pumping as much oil as possible and driving down global prices. So in theory the frakkers go bust, prices increase, and the Saudis do a victory dance. Please note, BTW, the irony of a cartel meant to artificially boost prices using supply-demand tactics to deep-six the opposition.  

·         Before we tackle the question of how much sense the Saudi strategy makes, please keep in mind that it wasn’t just Evil OPEC that was responsible for the cartel. We are told the strategy was worked out by American economists, and the idea was to boost profits for US oil majors. That everyone got shafted, particularly the 3^rd World, was/is of no interest to the oil majors. You will naturally ask: “but why have US oil companies gone the frakking route and crushed their profits. Aha! It wasn’t the oil companies, it was the wildcatters, who could give a hoot about Biggie Oil. Wildcatters have a different mindset because they do not have the money to mine conventional oil. Their overriding plan is to make a quarter-billion or half a billion, or even one-billion and get out when the gig stops being profitable. The frakking revolution occurred because of supply and demand. Frakkers were prepared to risk everything in return for a big payoff. The regular oil companies, of course, think quite differently.

·         Okay, so back to Saudi. It so happens that frakkers are driving their costs faster than the Saudis are driving down prices. Yes, the wells that need oil at $70+ are taking a hit. Yes, drill rigs are being idled in great numbers. But the new technologies make drilling profitable at $35. But forget all that. Say the Saudis succeed. The oil price goes up. The frakkers return, and prices go down again. The end. Econ 1.

·         Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia is hurting badly. It has $750-billion of reserves, but is now drawing them down from this fiscal at the rate of $150-billion. This is a horrible situation to be in (poor, poor Saudis, Editor’s heart bleeds, Not.) Say by end 2016 the Saudi strategy restores the price to $80. The frakkers will be back. They have only capped their existing wells, it will take only a shirt while for them to be producing again. So then Saudi flood the market again? Okay, they make back some money and the frakkers return again.

·         The US majors/OPEC/Saudi strategy is built on the assumption that oil is a finite resource. But he world has trillions of barrels of untouched oil. We have used up the easy 2-trillion, we’re mining the next 2-trillion, and developing technology for the third third. Except there’s much more oil than 6-trillions in the form of the heavy stuff.

·         Ooooh, the heavy stuff! Horrible, sinful, the devil’s work! Luckily it’s so expensive as to never become a reality. Never say never. The new frakking has, for example, reduced water use by 90%, and water was a big obstacle to heavy oil. By reducing water use, the new techniques also seriously reduce the pollution/environmental problem. Please note we’re not saying the new techniques, designed for light oil, are going to work for heavy oil: Editor doesn’t have that knowledge. But if in a few years techniques were developed to reduce water to 10% for light oil, if someone sees the need, they’ll develop cost-effective, damage-limited strategies for heavy oil.

·         People look at tomorrow and think they’re looking at the future. So they don’t realize that the age of oil has in case begun to set. Huh? Well, look at coal. It’s on its way out, even China is cutting reliance on coal. Look at Europe. Even in the US coal use is declining. The same will happen to oil. Not in the next 20 years, but certainly after that. Also, remember oil is needed for a whole bunch of things aside from transportation. Hydrogen fuel today does not work without subsidies. But 10-20 years down the road is a different story. The world has seen several years of growth without a material increase in oil demand.

·         So we’re saying in the long run Saudi cannot win. Unlike the Norwegians who carefully hoarded/invested their oil dollars against the day oil would run out, the Saudis have been the poster kids for excess. And they’re in a trap: their folks have gotten so used to subsidies, if Riyadh cuts these back allowing the government to live within its means (easily done), there will be very serious trouble. Gee, we feel so bad for them. Hahahahaha. And of course the non-Saudi oil producers will see their countries go bust. Venezuela’s Government is only the first to fall.

·         But let’s keep one thing in mind The Saudis are saying they’re flooding the market to destroy US frakkers. But suppose the Saudis are not so stupid that our very elementary analysis eludes them. Then what’s going on? Simple. The Saudis are destroying Shia oil, Iran and Iraq because the real threat to them is not US frakkers but the Shias and the Persian Empire revived. Will this succeed? We can talk of it another time, but we don’t think so.

Monday 0230 GMT December 7, 2015

·         74^th anniversary of Pearl Harbor. US was already a world power then, though inclined to mind its own business. After the Second World War ended, US became THE superpower with 40% of world GDP. Soviet Union was never a superpower. 40,000 n-warheads don’t make you anything because they are unusable, though they do protect you from attack by THE superpower. Had the Soviets not invaded Eastern Europe and sponsored communist uprising everywhere, US, which had already gone home would have stayed at home. It is simply wrong to blame the US for the Cold War, as many current revisionists want us to believe. Similarly, because the US defeated Japan without the Soviet Union, it was entitled to determine Korea’s fate. Soviets did not even enter the war until after the A-bomb was dropped.

·         Our revisionists fail to tell us what right the Soviets had to enter the war when it was finished. It was a power grab, plain and simple. What right did they have to claim interests in North Korea? None. But the US, naïve and generous as it was then, gave USSR the right to be there and China converted the place to communism. What had the Chinese done to earn rights in Korea? Nothing.

·         Had the Chinese not decided to make a grab for Korea, in due time the US would have installed democracy there, however imperfect that democracy might have been by today’s standards. After all, the US was busy getting the imperialist powers to divest their colonies; it had no interest in making Korea a buffer. Remember, until 1950 when the Communists took over, the US and China were allies. Instead the US was forced back to East Asia.

·         The Communists, Soviet and Chinese, posed what was seen as an extensional threat to the western democracies.  Our revisionists can Monday quarter-back till the cows come home and go to the glue factory, but any sensible person in 1948 and 1950 would not have seen the threat in another light. Extensional threats require existential responses. The US objective in World War II, beyond the defeat of the Axis, was to bring democracy to the world. Instead of being able to do that, US got locked into supporting anti-communist leaders worldwide, and unfortunately many turned out to be dictators in their own right.

·         So why do western liberals blame the US for this? Why do they not blame those that should be blamed, the Soviets and the Chinese? This is because liberals, afflicted by some kind of mental illness, would rather blame their own governments than the enemy.

·         Now the revisionists say we should have recognized, for example, Ho Chi Minh was a natural US ally against China, based on a letter he wrote to the US president asking for help. But Ho prayed at the same church as Mao, talked the same talk, and walked the same walk. Knowing the word “communism” would trigger the US, wasn’t it up to Ho to say that he wanted democracy for this country and would the US help him? Because Ho was not interested in democracy. It’s quite simple. So when his proxies invaded the South, the US went to war against him, worrying about the Domino Effect. And hey, guess what? When the US was politically defeated in Vietnam, the domino effect really happened! Cambodia and Laos fell to the Communists! In Cambodia the Red Khmer killed 3-million people to assure no threat to their rule. In this tiny country alone the Communists killed more civilians that the US advertently or inadvertently killed in all the years of the Cold War. No to say that old scion of democracy, Mao, who may have been responsible for the death of 40-million of his people. Nice guy. Not to speak of the annexation of Tibet. Oh yes, Editor is familiar with the Chinese position on Tibet. But Indians, for example, Ashoka, once ruled (or what passed for central rule in those days) Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, modern India, Nepal, parts of eastern Iran and so on. So does that justify India to wage war against these countries to annex them?

·         The communists attacked Africa, South America (some nations), Asia, and so on to “free” the oppressed people. ROFL. Yes, the people WERE oppressed. But after “liberation” they would have been even more oppressed simply because the communists were more ruthless and efficient at keeping power than anyone else.

·         In 1976, Jimmy Carter forced the US into aligning its domestic principles with its international principles, communists be darned. The US worked assiduously to democratize Africa, Latin America, and parts of Asia. Now we see big lapses, and even the revisionists are quiet because this has happened despite the US. Democracy may be the normal yearning of people, but it is the normal state of the minds of the ruling elites.

·         Now look, folks. Obviously we could continue this rant for several hundred pages, discussing in detail each country, with thousands of “on the one hand and on the other hand”. Editor has painted world history 1945 to today with a very broad brush and a very few strokes. Editor’s point is simple. To blame the US for the world ills is the job of the Euro-liberals who are eaten to death by jealousy of America. Editor prescription for the Euro-liberals is simple: you all think you are so good and virtuous, and the US so brutal and stupid, why don’t you take responsibility for yourself? Your GDP equals that of the US. Why are you waiting for the US to take the lead against the Islamists and then contributing tokens such as six aircraft and a naval ship and 500 trainers to this new war?

·         But honestly, it hurts Editor when American liberals attack their country for sins committed by others? He cannot understand their motivation. He cannot understand Obama’s motivation in saying giving preference to Christian refugees would be unfair and not American. Arab Christians are experience a region-wide genocide. Why must we accept genocide victims of other religions but refuse to make room for Christians? There is something bafflingly sick about this form of reasoning.

·         Incidentally, Editor acknowledges his narrative becomes flawed after 2001, when the US began a serious of amazingly moronic interventions of choice that have caused havoc in the Muslim world. Sure, Muslims need democracy too, and sure, we should overthrow their dictators. But why we doing it in a casual way that is just making each country we arrive in worse than it was before. When you have an ADHD child who roams the house smashing everything in sight, regardless of his motives, we being the child under control. We don’t talk about his rights. In the last 12 years the US has become the ADHD child. Why are the American people not taking up their responsibilities to bring their government under control? And this ADHD business is politically neutral. First the GP spent 8 years messing up everything it touched. Then the Democrats are spending 8 years messing everything they touch. One shudders to think what the next 8 years will bring, because we’ll have a neo-con in liberal’s clothing, combining the worst of both worlds and taking none of the best.

·         Only you, readers, can stop this fantastic decline our nation has embarked on, at home and abroad, and by its own choice. This is not Editor’s battle. He’s an Indian citizen, he’s 70-years of age, 95% of his energy goes in trying to pay his bills, he can’t sleep at night despite two powerful medications because even in his sleep he wonders: will tomorrow be the day he loses his house and then everything. He is old, physically and mentally exhausted. YOU have to do the job, folks.

Sunday 0230 GMT December 6, 2015

·         Turkey invades Iraq Yes, that’s right. Turkey has sent 500 troops to the vicinity of Mosul, without the permission of the Iraqi Government. They are training Kurd forces for the future battle of Mosul. So we all know how sensitive Ankara is to encroachments on its territory, and we know about the savage decades-old war against independence minded Turkish Kurds. So how come it’s okay for Turkey to enter another country for its own purposes, siding with one faction and therefore help formalizing Kurdistan’s independence? We support that independence; we want only to point out Ankara’s massive hypocrisy. But then Turkey has that best of leaders in the hypocrisy department, which is the good old USA. We’ve invaded Syria without UN authorization, and we’re sending troops to Ibril without the permission of Baghdad’s parliament. What’s the big deal, the administration says: we have the Prime Minister’s okay. But is the PM authorized, under Iraqi law, to give such a permission without getting the consent of the parliament? Doubt it.

·         Syria: Another hilarious moment On Friday December 4, the RAF launched its second “wave” of attacks against Islamic State, and announced that the enemy had felt the “full might” of the RAF’s strength. Typhoons, Tornadoes, and Reaper UAVs took part. And just how many sorties did this involve? Eight. You got that right, eight as in twice four. If this is the RAF’s full-might, its fortunate that this is a play war and not a real one. RAF seems reduced to the Royal Midge Force. Sure, in theory you call kill a target by smothering it with midges, but as they say, don’t hold your breath while this is happening. Editor know how limited RAF has become in terms of strength, so we’re not blaming the force. We’re blaming loose-tongue-wagging by politicians.

·         We should point out that Islamic State for sure has lost ground, perhaps 25%. If you look at the fight as a war of many years, then this is good progress. But come on folks, be serious. Arrayed against IS are the world’s most developed countries, with a combined GDP about 40% of world’s GDP. At best, including money from all sources including sponsor grants, IS may have between $1-2 billion/year. So, let’s ask ourselves: what kind of success is this? It’s like saying “Mike Tyson recovered 25% of his toys seized by a 2-year old toddler”. We are being asked to agree the campaign is succeeding. Instead any rational person will simply hoot with laughter. And why are folks not counting the territory gained in Libya, Yemen, West Africa and so on by IS or allied groups? Indeed, does the count include Syria territory under other Islamist groups?

·         US/Iraq claim Ramadi offensive is succeeding Its kind of odd for the Iraqi government to claim anything because it has only a few thousand special police troops and a handful of army in the game. The rest are from Shia militias, many funded by Iran. How is success defined? Ramadi is supposed to be surrounded, with only one hole in the cordon. This hole is supposedly there to let civilians escape. Hello, Earth calling spacey-Iraq/US: you never leave holes in a cordon for civilians. You vet everyone who approaches any point of the cordon; you let them through or you arrest them. A hole is left if you are hoping that the intimidated enemy will flee. In which case the hole should be in the west of the city, not the east. Though Ramadi is officially cordoned, Iraq/US say it will still take months to clear Ramadi. Reminder, folks: it is two years since IS overran parts of Anbar with Iraq losing control of Ramadi and Fallujah. At this rate of course Ramadi will be won: the defenders will be dead of old age and boredom.

Saturday 0230 GMT December 5, 2015

·         Okay, people, time to call a spade a spade Before we do, please to note while Mrs. California Shooter arrived on our shores only last year, she was a committed social media type. Right in the middle of the attack, she just had to post a message on an Islamic State leader’s Facebook page, swearing her allegiance.  The couple also happened to be recording as they went. As Editor wandered his school’s hallways after learning of the above events, he had the usual experience when wandering hallways. At each step you are in danger of colliding with students who are texting or taking pictures, completely oblivious to their environment. Some days Editor has had six close encounters in three minutes in a hallway. Some days despite his vigilance he has a dozen collisions – you’re avoiding one student and get attacked by another walking the wrong way, or crossing the hall without looking, or suddenly stopping in front of you to do the needful. It’s very easy to believe that these days a person could be murdering people with one hand while using social media with the other, or between shots. It’s a strange world.

·         Okay, the spade. This was a terrorist attack, no ifs, buts, perhaps, maybes, “too earlys” and so on. What is the basis of the conclusion? Mr. Shooter liked his job, got along well with people there, and before leaving to get Mrs. Shooter, was sitting laughing and talking with half-a-dozen co-workers. So this is absolutely not a case of work-place rage. So lets call the spade a spade.

·         Reader Lou Driever sent us a number of emails yesterday with links to articles discussing findings as they developed. One strange thing that emerges is Mrs. Shooter had a zero digital trail. How is this possible today unless you are a very disciplined operator? Mr. Shooter has a lengthy digital trail, some of which Mr. and Mrs. attempted to destroy by taking a hammer to gadgets and hard drives and tossing other stuff in unknown places. More evidence that this was not workplace rage, aside from the point we made yesterday: you do not fetch your wife, leave your infant with grandma, and then the both of you start slaughtering folks. Work place rage is something you want the world why you did it, and you don’t make it a husband and wife outing, particularly when you like work and people at work like you. Anyhows, enough of this.

·         From what Mr. Driever gathers, this is not a direct, IS planned/executed attack. The pattern of behavior suggests either (a) a self-radicalized couple; or (b) that Mrs. Shooter was introduced by terrorist folks to Mr. Shooter in Saudi, at Mecca, and she radicalized him, and they constituted one of many sleeper cells in the US.  

·         But if one takes (a), then one is left with having to explaining the oddness of Mrs. Shooter’s behavior. Assume she is a normal person. She  was visiting Mecca from Pakistan, happened to meet a Pakistani-American, got engaged on the spot, travelled over to the US where her husband applied for a K-1 (fiancée) visa, and was allowed to stay while the full Monty background checks were being run. Media says it can be 12-18 months before a K-1 is converted to a green card. So she bears a child, so presumably she is happy to be in the US and is waiting for her green card, to be followed by citizenship. Why then join with your new husband in buying/stockpiling guns/ammo and working with him to kill Americans? What happened to her here that she was suddenly radicalized and stopped giving a darn for her own life and her baby’s future? Mr. Shooter at least had sort-of-links with terror suspects, such as liking a suspects Facebook. Even then, he had stopped contact with these folks. Where is her evidence trail to show how she was radicalized?

·         Well, apparently they cant even connect her to a driver’s license or any other document. You cannot live in the US, particularly not in SoCal, without a driver’s license. They had a SUV, surely she would want to learn to drive?  There are suggestions, BTW, that she started using another name after she came here and that’s why there is no trail of any sort in her name. Which if is this is a set-up would not necessarily be in her name anyway.

·         Okay, end of sermon. Because, to tell you the absolute truth, Editor does not care if the couple self-radicalized or this was a successful infiltration. We are at war with Islamists, even if acknowledging that seems to cause fainting spells among a significant part of our citizenry. Editor expects the Islamists will strike back. No big deal.

·         Editor’s real and only point is that aside from a few gestures such as a Muslim prayer service for the victims in the county, there has been no wholesale denunciation of this massacre by American Muslims, who number 3-million. Why? Why have Muslim communities all over the world (1.6-billion Muslims, about 22% of the world population) not denounced this attack?

·         They haven’t because they feel their religion is under attack, and they have to show loyalty to their religion over loyalty to their country. As we said yesterday, this is absolutely wrong, indeed, it is treachery. The well-known columnist Fareed Zakharia (BTW an Indian-America Muslim), has said that Muslims he talks to say the denunciation demand is hypocrisy,  because when a Christian massacres folks no one demands the churches denounce him/her.

·         Are we in fourth grade having an argument? Because that is the level of those who accuse Christians of hypocrisy. Islamists are killing folks in the name of Islam; indeed, for every western they kill, they kill 100, 500, 1000 Muslims. Christian killers are not killing for Christianity. Those who say they are – like the Planned Parenthood killer – are denounced across the land – by Christians among others.

·         Honestly, Editor could not care less that Muslims are causing this mayhem. They can be aliens, gays, communists, socialists, libertarians, Methodists, Hindus, whatever and whatever. Editor would denounce them as being anti-American and traitors to their country if they chose to defend their religion against their country.

·         Very sorry, my friends. In America there is separatism of religion and state. When you come here, or are born here, you implicitly or explicitly swear allegiance to the United States of America. The US doesn’t mind if you keep your former passport. But it does mind very much if you put your home country’s interests above America’s interests. Believe what you want of your religion. This is the US, you are free to worship dog poop if you are so inclined. Yet, you cannot, absolutely cannot, say that your religion comes before the United States. No one cares if your religion says it does. Loyalty to the US is paramount. If you cannot give that loyalty, go somewhere else.

Friday 0230 GMT December 4, 2015

·         San Bernardino, CA   At Editor’s school, we have many immigrant staff, mainly custodians, paraprofessionals, substitutes, and also a few teachers. So Editor was asked by a fellow immigrant what he made of the San Bernardino, CA shooting December 3, 2015: 14 dead, 17 wounded, two shooters dead. Editor heartily told his fellow immigrant that the latter had chosen to come to America, and he may as well get used to the idea that among first-world countries we are by far the most violent. Editor added he didn’t think anything of the shooting, move along, nothing to see here.

·         Editor’s answer did not seem to satisfy his audience, which included a number of African Americans. Then Editor realized the question really was what he thought of the two shooters being Muslims. Now we have Muslims at school, and one of the substitutes present was also a Muslim. So this was an awkward moment.

·         So Editor was left with no choice but to state the obvious. Had there been one shooter, the man, given that he was an employee at the office he attacked and had some problem there, then clearly until contrary evidence emerged, we’d have to assume this was just another deadly workplace shooting. But two items argued against this assumption. First, the man left the party to fetch his wife, who was a new immigrant, and presumably a willing accomplice. Second, the couple’s home had 4500 (that’s four thousand five hundred) rounds of .223 and 9mm ammunition, plus 12 homemade bombs. So, let’s be honest about this. Clearly this was an act of religious violence.  

·         Then Editor uttered the usual homilies that Muslims are just like us; you cannot pin the misdeeds of a very few on an entire religion and so on. All true and all totally barf-making. All present dutifully went “verily, verily”. But Editor being himself, had to add that when folks from a particular religion were creating mayhem in Asia, Europe, and the US, there was going to be backlash against that religion. The only way out of it is for ordinary Muslims to loudly and repeatedly denounce and disavow their fellow-religionists each time an act such as this occurs. Yes, there are some denunciations. Alas, they are too few. The very great majority of Muslims say nothing. Perhaps they are frightened to denounce a bunch of psychopathic cultists because of the possibility of being killed. See, for example, what’s been happening to secular/moderate intellectuals in Bangladesh, which till recently has been a very moderate nation.

·         At the same time, when stuff like this happens, the adherents of whatever religion is causing the trouble are forced to make a choice, however much they wish to be left alone, because beyond a point silence becomes complicity. True, an Islamist connection has not been proved so far. But given how many incidents are taking place all over the day, it is the duty of American Muslims to stand up and say: “We may be Muslims, but we are Americans first, and we absolutely condemn any co-religionist who may have taken up arms against the United States”. They also must add: “It is our duty as Americans to do everything we can to stop this menace.” And they must do all the PR optics things that are necessary in this country on any issue.  

·         If Hindus were doing global terrorism on a mass scale, including attacks on the US, Editor would have no choice but to stand up and denounce them. Sure he would be scared of retaliation. But if he did not do his duty to America, he would forfeit his right to live here.

·         Islam does not recognize the primacy of the nation state. Indeed, to Islamists, jihad is a religious duty no matter what passport you carry. This is a major reason why Islamist terrorism is quite different from other kinds. The other kinds usually center on political issues such as separatism, for example, the insurgencies in Russia, Former Republic of Yugoslavia, India, China and so on. But with the Islamists, after every liberal has spoken a trillion words, the issue still remains: America, love or leave it, or be ready to die because we’re gonna kill you before you kill us. In America we don’t care what religion you follow or not follow, all is well as long as your allegiance is to the American state.

·         It is time for us in this country to stop making false analogies. Turning away the ship with Jewish refugees is NOT the same thing as wanting to be careful 100-times over about Muslims fleeing to the US. The first was a crime against humanity based on racial hatred. The latter is simple good caution. It also does not help when Americans sneer about proposals to let in only Christian Arabs. Christians are being eradicated all through the Arab world. Americans have stood by and done nothing over the last three decades at least. Not only done nothing, we haven’t spoken out against the genocide of Arab Christians. Is this what being a liberal means?

·         Well, you know, Editor is a very hardliner on national security because he honestly believes an American led world is the sole chance for a peaceful world. Otherwise he is quite liberal. BTW, he considers personal responsibility and minimum government to be liberal concepts, concepts on which our country was founded. Where did these crucial American ideas become named conservative ideas? It’s all very strange.

Thursday 0230 GMT December 3, 2015

·         Oh No, not another rant on the US and Mideast! Actually, yes. If readers are at screaming point with boredom on the subject, please go create a crisis somewhere else so we can discuss that. Editor is beyond screaming. He simply eats another chocolate and if that doesn’t work he pops a Prozac, and all is calm and beautiful until the next personal crisis arrives. Inevitably the crisis is about bills (lots of them) and money (too little to pay them), and a severe one hits at least once a week. This marginal economic existence may be terrific for novelists, but it is wholly useless for us academic types. Anyhow, this is not a good time to be complaining about money because at least half the country seems thoroughly shafted in this regard.

·         So an irate reader asks: Editor, every day you attack the US Government and the West in general about the Mideast, but you never offer any solutions. Okay, that’s true, but it’s not quite true Editor offers no solutions. He’s mentioned them frequently. Plan A: go all-in, which he estimates will require at least 300,000 troops initially and a one hundred year colonization of the Mideast until the Islamists die of boredom. He doesn’t discuss this in detail because, frankly, America/West are too degenerate for hard solutions.

·         BTW, in case 100-years sounds absurd, please to note that since 1917 our policy is that no one should have adverse control of Western Europe. That’s 99-years, and it includes a continuous 70-year deployment of forces to Western Europe with no end in sight. Please also to note, that even with the fall of the Soviet Empire in 1990, we have continued to push the Forward Edge of our battle area further and further east, to the borders of what is Russia itself. So please, don’t say Editor’s time frames for Mideast are absurd.

·         Similarly, we’ve been in Japan for 70-years and no end in sight. With the rise of China we’re certainly going to be there another 30-years at least, unless the Japanese agree to become a Chinese vassal. Also, please to note, in 1907 – which is 108-years ago – we declared to the world that no one was to gain adverse possession of the World Ocean from Hawaii to the British Isles, and have acted accordingly.

·         What is lacking is not our capability, but our will to create a proper American World Empire, which Editor believes is the only guarantee of world peace. So, whatever, what is Plan B? Withdraw entirely from the Mideast and let the sodding occupants kill each other. But we don’t have the will to do that either. “No we cant” is the new national motto. Also, BTW, if readers think with Prez Hilabill its going to be any different, please be prepared for a shock. The form will be different, the substance will be the same.

·         So what’s the farcical news of the day First there is an indicator of the state of the West. The famed Luftwaffe has 69 or so Tornado attack aircraft and it has just 29 operational. From now on, Editor does not want to see any criticism of the Indian Air Force’s readiness rates. Compared to the Luftwaffe, we’re genius class. But it’s okay, because the Germans are going to send only 6 aircraft for recon missions to the theater. As for the once mighty RAF, they too are going to send six aircraft.

·         Second, there’s Yemen. AQ has just taken two major towns of a fourth province and has majority control of Aden. What? How? Where? Wasn’t AQ wiped out by the good guys, namely our Yemini lackeys, the Gulf coalition, and the US? Well, yes. They were cleared from this fourth province. Until they weren’t. Yemen lacks troops to keep control, even with the Gulfies deploying troops here. Aden? What on earth happened? Didn’t Yemen/Gulfies clear it of Houthi rebels? Yes they did, but then AQ moved in.

·         Third, we’ve mentioned a former US DIA chief has said the White House disregarded repeated intel saying IS was rising in Iraq/Syria. Apparently it didn’t fit the WH’s narrative of peace, love, success. You Know Who was concerned about the 2012 election, because acting strongly in Afghanistan/Mideast would have meant saying “I was wrong”. So for You Know Who’s personal agenda, the national security was sent down the Perfume River without the paddle. But that’s what Americans have fallen to.

·         Last, there’s the bit about a US SF task force deploying to Iraq to boost anti-IS-leadership capability. We’d discussed yesterday (a) this will have zero effect because (b) its far too small, much like a fly chewing on a buffalo. Oh dear, we’ve just insulted the flies who have more effect than the new task force will. Well, here’s happiness and joy for all: the Iraq PM’s allies and the Shia militias (whether Iran backed or Iraq backed) have said US combat troops are absolutely unacceptable and their presence will be fought.

·         So Washington is saying, what’s the big deal, we have Iraq’s permission. Well, we have the Iraqi PM’s permission but not the country’s. Washington is not telling us that the PM is on his way out and the Shias have no intention of arming Iraqi Sunnis to fight IS. Nor do they see the need to fight IS themselves. They’re not bothered if IS keeps Anbar and Mosul, as long as it does not attack Baghdad, Najaf etc.

·         Also BTW, the task force is going to Ibril, which means US has abandoned its useless policy of dealing with the Kurds only through Baghdad. That’s progress, but of course it accelerates the inevitable, a breakup of Iraq. A united Iraq is our Number One objective.

·         So overall we are left to channel Eric Clapton When Lady Liberty asks us “Do I look alright?” our sole response must be “Darling, you look wonderful tonight.” Our ship is sinking, but the band must play on.

·         BTW, what is it with these artists produce great stuff to get into the pants of their best friends’ wives? Eric, any clarifications on this? Editor was brought up to believe that was so wrong, even if the lady wanted to get in your pants. (This does not mean you can never have an affair with your friends’ wives. It means you never try to take them away and there is at least tacit consent of all parties. Including that of your wife.)

Wednesday 0230 GMT December 2, 2015

·         The Latest US Micro-Escalation in the Mideast Dear readers, before we discuss the latest US move to win the war against IS, we suggest you should sit down. The news is so amazing you are sure to be knocked off your feet. Here it is: The US is expanding its Special Forces in Syria (they will be based in Iraq and so do not represents boots on Syrian ground) so that it can conduct hostage rescue and targeted capture/kill of Islamic State leaders. Since the Administration’s first commitment of ground troops in Syria was “less than” 50, some say it is 30, we may guess that some small number of troops is on its way. Say perhaps less than 400, mostly to man the helicopters and special missions aircraft, with perhaps 100 commandos.

·         As for airpower, we are apparently flying 20 attack missions a day in the theatre. That probably equates to 40+ total missions because of the need for top-cover, refueling, transport, and electronic warfare support. Impressive? We don’t think so.

·         Once upon a time there was a very smart US SecDef who also was one of the biggest failures in that position. His name was Donald Rumsfeld. He articulated a vision in which American airpower would win wars supported by a minimum of ground forces. In theory this is not a bad idea. In practice it is a loser in the Mideast today because the number of sorties flown is so low, the number of SF is insignificant, and no ground troops are available.  If you read a typical daily target list, say for Sinjar (November 9, 2015), you see: near Sinjar, eleven strikes struck five separate ISIL tactical units and destroyed two ISIL assembly areas, 21 ISIL fighting positions, three ISIL light machine guns, and three ISIL vehicles. The reason for “so many” strikes is that the Peshmerga had launched an offensive to clear Sinjar, which they overran with few losses because IS pulled out before fully engaging. The problem: what exactly is a “fighting position”? It could simply be an empty bunker or a foxhole. What exactly is a “tactical unit”?  It could be a rifle squad, with two killed/wounded and the other men escaping unharmed. As for 3 LMGs and 3 vehicles, you can see how insignificant this is. http://www.centcom.mil/en/news/articles/nov.-8-military-airstrikes-continue-against-isil-terrorists-in-syria-and-ir

·         There is zero evidence that IS is being degraded. Remember, it may be making $400-million/year through illegal oil sales at $10/bbl, and several hundred million a year is channel through the Sunni states including Turkey, Saudi, and the Emirates. The material damage is likely less than $50,000, and killed/wounded likely in the vicinity of 10. Though Sinjar was only one target, it was the key for the day. Is it any wonder IS is not being contained?

·         Speaking of contained: the US Defense Intelligence Agency says that IS has set up an “alternate” capital in Libya, at Surt (is this Sirte?). http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2015/11/30/u-s-intelligence-concerned-by-isis-in-libya-todd-dnt.cnn Though the video suggests it is an alternate in case Raqqa falls, the move is likely an intent to consolidate IS gains in Libya and take more ground. Not an alternate capital, but a new waliyat (province) in the Caliphate.

·         So IS is spreading; the attrition from the air is minimal; in Syria the air strikes are being flown against other Islamist groups. Waiting for local forces to build up – who exactly are these moderate forces? – may be akin to waiting for Godot. This is staging a farce, not fighting a war. And personally, Editor cares half-a-hoot how smart our Prez is. If the Government cannot even follow the fundamentals of fighting a war, how smart can it be?

Tuesday 0230 GMT December 1, 2015

·         New ground reductions PLA China’s Army is down to 850,000 after a 2013 reduction. The figure comes from the Chinese themselves. In September 2015, China announced a further 300,000 reduction for all three services by 2017 There are rumors 3-5 Army corps will disband http://www.jamestown.org/uploads/media/China_s_Military_Regions_2-1.jpg An Army corps is the old Ground Army. Since the army corps are reducing to four large maneuver brigades. It is possible that a corps including its slice of higher HQs is about 30,000 troops. Seen through its end, the reduction could mean ground forces of ~500,000. Though, of course, major cuts to the PLAAF will surely continue as it comes down to 1000 modern fighter aircraft. For planning purposes, until it is known otherwise, Editor will use a figure of 750,000 ground troops.

·         India’s Army has a strength of 1.285 million when the thirty-eighth division becomes fully active. The division, 72 Division, has been delayed due to an alleged resource crunch. The thing is that takes a division as having 3 brigades, India will end up with something like 50 divisional equivalents after a number of planned independent brigades are raised. Is 50 divisions sufficient for a two-front war?

·         To discuss this intelligently requires a lot more space than available in the daily rant. But yes, it should normally suffice. Pakistan has the equivalent of 33 divisions, and if China has the equivalent by 2017 of, say, 17, then we will match our adversaries 1-to-1.

·         The first problem is that we have never done well when we have mere equivalence or even 1.2 divisions to the adversary’s 1. In Bangladesh 1971 we had more Border Security Force battalions than the entire Pakistan Army had battalions, plus 3-1 advantage of ground forces, 10-1 in the air, and more than total naval supremacy. In Kargil 1999 we had a 5-1 superiority in battalions or perhaps a bit less. Of course, the PLA would not be able to deploy its entire strength just to the Western Theatre, but Editor once calculated that to believe it can win a 2-front war, while 48-divisions is fine, more likely we would need 66- or 69-divisions.

·         Of course, a modern force that large included an up-to-date air force and reserve stocks for a 90+ day war would mean 6% of GDP spent on defense for 10-years, not the piddly 1.8% we spend down. By win we mean recover Ladakh and Kashmir, and stop Pakistan from rebuilding its military for 50-years.

·         Defense expert Ajai Shukla has for years been saying that beyond a point, large manpower superiorities are self-defeating because the troops cannot be equipped properly with the artillery, helicopters, missile systems, EW, engineers and so within the pathetic parameter of 2% of GDP. Editor’s rough calculation is that we can, at the most, afford 600,000 troops (18 divisions) plus 500 modern fighters, plus a strong navy. Even this, realistically, is too low.

·          Since the Ministry of Finance has zero enthusiasm for anything more than 2%, and since the MOD never advocated for the military, and since the GOI has not the slightest clue about the military, getting more money seems highly improbable. In its absence, whereas once the Chinese forces were the largest global repository of obsolete weapons, we now own than honor. And by the way, China spends no more than 2% GDP on defense, because it has a GDP of around $10-trillion, four times our GDP.

·         China has had huge land forces because it felt highly threatened on all sides and because it made up for quality by using quantity. But realistically, with the Russian strength down to perhaps 50+ brigades, no Vietnamese threat to speak of, and India with zero political will, and with 18-division equivalent land force back up by a modern air force and a navy second only to the US, China doesn’t need more ground troops. The US, after all, is the world’s strongest military with just 10 divisions.

·         So what the solution to India’s issues is remains – to Editor – murky. He has suggested a solution, hanging 1000 of the nation’s top non-performing politicos and civil servants to encourage the others, has not been met with enthusiasm. So little that Indians don’t even bother rebutting by saying the Editor is plain crazy.

·         Editor had hoped that with the election of PM Modi that we at least would see a vast clearing of rotting wood. Perhaps we are wrong, but Modi has not send a single politician to jail for corruption and ineffectiveness, forget the civil service.

·         Us Indian  patriots and optimists are doomed to disappointment.

Thursday 0230 GMT November 26, 2015

·         Russia/Turkey fighter incident (continued) Not that we needed US confirmation, but US says the Russian Su-24 was in Syria airspace when fired on. Editor can’t really take credit for figuring this out immediately, because once the Turks gave their version, it was obvious. US also says that yes, Turkey indeed did give the Russian aircraft 10 warnings before firing, despite Russian denials. Fair enough, but what exactly were those warnings? “You are within 15-km of the Turkish border, turn around”. Nice, except if the Russians had listened they’d have defacto agreed to a protected zone along the entire border, including for Turkey-supported rebels. So obviously the Russians couldn’t agree to this. More on this in a moment.

·         The pilot killed on descent was a Lt.-colonel, suggesting he was the squadron commander. The Turkamen rebels say they also killed the second pilot, who it turn out is a captain. Instead, after a 12-hour rescue mission, the Russians got their man out. Rebels fired a TOW missile at an Mi-8 on the mission, killing a Russian marine. The rebels say they shot the helicopter down; the Russians say it was damaged. Both assertions could be true (we haven’t looked into this) if the Russians recovered their helicopter. An Mi-8 getting hit by an ATGM normally means bye-bye Mi-8; the TOW, after all, is designed to take out 60-ton tanks. But suppose both the doors were open; the damage could be less than fatal. Again, we’re just guessing – need expert opinion on this. Personally, Editor thinks that it’s pretty impressive the Russians can do a hostile CSAR. Which then raises a question for India: if even the Russians can do it, why can’t we?

·         After the incident, Russia upped the ante by sending its missile cruiser Moskva, already in the Eastern Med for exercises, to off Latakia to provide air defense cover. The ship carries 64 S-300 long-range SAMs. Future attack missions are to fly with protective cover. An S-400 (presumably a battery) is being moved into Syria as of yesterday. All well and good, by Editor is wondering: how is Russia going to avoid shooting down own aircraft? Yes, the technology has vastly improved in the last 40-years, but normally the idea is to have the longer-range SAMs stay safely behind the line of contact. Now we’re dealing with long-range and very long-range missiles protecting strike aircraft right up against the border. The longer the distance to target, the earlier the SAM has to be fired, which means making assumptions about Turkish fighters on their side of the border. Of course, this may be the precise point the Russians are making: you may be on your side of the border, but if we feel threatened we’re going to fire. Incidentally, from what we can infer, the Russians have said they will fire on threat. Whether they actually do so is another matter, but for the Turks this complicates things.

·         As for the political ramifications, they are business as usual. US/Euros are telling Turkey and Russia to kiss-and-make-up because more important matters are at stake. This may also be a reason the US has publically said the Fencer was shot at while in Syrian airspace; i.e., don’t go Article 5 on us because you, Turkey, did a bad thing. We’re not aiding/abetting your aggression. It’s worth noting the US has the finest lawyers in the world, and they can find loopholes in any agreement the US signs. In any case, what is Turkey to do? Sue the US in US federal court?

·         This kiss-and-make-up thing is fine, except Erdogan has his own games to play. We don’t know if this was a local incident or new Turkish policy, the point is that Erdogan is attempting to accrue more and more power, aiming to make Turkey into an autocracy headed by him. While Turkish media has been fairly cautious, Erdogan can use any escalation to impose a state of emergency. As for Putin, he isn’t much of a wimp either. He’s imposing sanctions on Turkey left and right, and is threatening Turkey of consequences if incidents happens again. But honestly, as we said yesterday, this incident in itself will not be that big of a deal.

Wednesday 0230 GMT November 25, 2015

·         Turkey/Russia fighter incident Pssst! Editor wants to share a secret. This is not, in the larger scale of things, such a big deal. But don’t tell anyone he said that, because obviously for story-starved media, this is a very big deal and we will get myriad boring analyses over the rest of the week. http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/24/us-mideast-crisis-syria-turkey-idUSKBN0TD0IR20151124

·         That said, Editor needs to let Government of Turkey know that if you’re going to lie and need a cover story, please save yourself the trouble of thinking and call Editor. All he wants in return is a Saturday date with one of your justly famous redheads.

·         Here is Turkey’s problem. It says the plane flew over Turkey a distance of 1-km over 17-seconds. Lets assume the SU-24 Fencer was either preparing or exiting a bombing run at 420-knots. It would have been over Turkey for 4-seconds. There is absolutely no way that a Turkish F-16 could have shot down the plane over Turkey with an AAM  even had the F-16 been sitting on the Fencer’s tail at 500-meters or even closer, even if the Turkish pilot had the Russian in his sights and had only to press a button.

·         That plane was shot down over Syria, and basically Turkey is saying “we can shoot you down even if you intrude for 4-seconds and have left”. Not being a lawyer, Editor is unsure of the legal technicalities of this, but this isn’t the point. The point is that Turkey wanted to make a statement and made it: “Don’t mess with our rebels”. These happen to be Turkish Turkamen anti-Assad rebels supported by Ankara, and Russia has been giving them heck.

·         Okay. Point made. What now? First, if Turkey after repeatedly betraying the US over Islamic State (not attacking it) and Free Syrian Army (US ally, under heavy, sustained attack by Turkey) triggers Russian retaliation, the US will NOT help Turkey. Aside from the anger toward Turkey, Washington is not about to get into a shooting stink with Russia under any conditions unless directly attacked.

·         One could come up with many scenarios. Consider this. Russians have a Su-30 Flanker squadron in Syria. So the next sorties it flies adjacent to the Turkish frontier will have cover. While what we suggest is not quite as easy as playing a video game, it is perfectly possible for the Russians to shoot down Turkish fighters in Turkish air space if they are heading toward Syria, and have the Turkish plane crash in Syria. Then Putin says: “We are merely defending our ally against Turkish aggression; moreover, we are in Syria legally and Turkey, by attacking Syria is committing an act of illegal aggression. We're going to take this to the UN”.

·         Further consider this. The Turkamen rebels say they killed the Russian pilots as they parachuted down. Very stupid, as two live crew would have permitted much bargaining. Unless the Russian people are wired differently from other people, right now they will be going nuts over this killing. The demand to punish the Turkamen rebels regardless of consequences will be heated. So what happens to the rebels if Russia decides to fly 500 sorties against them in a week? As it is the Russians – like the French – are hitting anything that moves, and the Russians do not care how many civilians they kill. The result, Editor predicts, will not be wine and roses for the Turkamen rebels. Yes, they were driven to the edge by the Russian bombing and were angry. Now they’ll be angry and dead.

·         Editor is not taking sides. He’s just point out the obvious.

·         From the Indian side, Editor urges Russia and Turkey to get into it with Su-30s on one side and F-16s on the other. The Indian Air Force needs the data, as do about 20 other air forces.  So you two, please be altruistic and do the needful. It will be a  public service.

Tuesday 0230 GMT November 24, 2015

·         Happy Happy Joy Joy From a reader: There is a hilarious story in yesterday's New York Times.  The Pentagon Inspector General has opened an investigation into the manipulated Intel being sent out by Centcom re: ISIS.

·         In one example, the Intel analysts were writing about how the Iraqi army basically dissolved in Mosul when Isis appeared.  Before these assessments were sent to the political overlords in DC, one of the Centcom Generals edited the report to indicate that the Iraqi army didn't just drop their guns and run away -- rather, the report was edited to say that the Iraqi Army "redeployed" to Baghdad.

·         This is such delicious circumlocution -- the generals are now even more adept at lying than lawyers and politicians.   

·         The NY Times story is found at http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/22/us/politics/military-reviews-us-response-to-isis-rise.html?_r=0

·         Editor completely missed the part about an actual investigation being launched into the Pentagon’s “Operation Lie The Public To Death”. The reason is simple. One can read only a finite number of stories in a day. So when Editor first heard about the CENTCOM mess, he went no further than the headline. Because obviously the Pentagon has been fibbing big time; this was no news, so Editor saw no need to read the story and subsequent development. For a summary of the original developments, go to http://goo.gl/uHmcYq BTW, this is not your routine investigation that goes nowhere. The Pentagon IG has grabbed huge number of e-mails and documents and is increasing the number of personnel assigned to the inquiry. Also Congress is investigating, including Senator John McCain, and as you know, he gives no quarter when bull-poop is being generated. As of right now, Editor feels that this is not going to an investigation that is filed away. It seems inevitable folks are going to be indicted. For what? Congress will find something. After all, the Pentagon has been fibbing galore. So just as if another government agency was lying, investigations could lead to indictments, so could this one.

·         Now, Editor is a great supporter of the military, and one part of him is feeling bad that generals etc are likely to be punished for doing what the US military has been doing for 65-years, i.e., telling Big Fat Fibs. On the other hand, this nonsense has to stop sometime. Editor would feel better if Pentagon IG would go back all the way to 1960 just so the historical record can be set straight.

·         More than that, however, Editor would like to ask, how come the country’s national security teams and C-in-C were taken in by these reports? Its not enough to ay “the generals told us and our only crime is believing them”. Nononono. Anyone with the smallest familiarity with events in the latest Iraq intervention and with Afghanistan has known full-scale lying was going on. Editor has no access to “sources”. But simply from reading the western media, the Mideast media translated to English, and talking to a few people in that part of the world, Editor knew the Pentagon was lying. That combined with being on the job 55 years himself and so having an ability to read between the lines – not that much was needed in this case.

·         A further investigation needs to be opened: how did the civilians “experts” allow themselves to be fooled? Should they not have known from the same sources used by editor that a cover-up was going on? When you should know but shut your eyes, its willful negligence, which is also actionable under the law.

·         Last, remember what they say about the C-in-C? The Buck Stops Here. An apology to the nation, plus a detailed plan to prevent this from happening again needs to made by our C-in-C.

Monday 0230 GMT November 23, 2015

·         France must invoke NATO Article 5 The reason it is not doing so is that NATO, particularly the US, is not going to help http://www.cnbc.com/2015/11/16/why-nato-probably-wont-help-france-against-isis.html The CNBC article, like all good journalistic analyses, avoids making definitive statements so that if the situation should change, it will be spared the embarrassment of being wrong. Similarly, France doesn’t want to cause any embarrassment by bringing the issue to a head.

·         May Editor, however, suggest that the time for embarrassment is over? It is France’s duty and obligation to bring the farce of the US/NATO to an end. In the last 25-years, France has responded four times to support US security objectives: 1991, 2001, 2003, and 2014. If the US finds itself unable to aid France when the latter has been attacked, it is time to disband NATO and get the United States out of Europe. Rash words? Harsh words? Not a bit. The Editor believes one reason the Western world is in such a mess is because we have become so Politically Correct and Sensitive, that we can no longer call a busted car a busted car.

·         There is nothing sacred about NATO. It was formed for a purpose: defense of the west against Soviet aggression. Editor is wholly unclear how this purpose got transmuted into serving US objectives in Afghanistan and West Asia. Strictly speaking, that was the now-defunct CENTOs job. The Soviet Union disintegrated. NATO should have been disbanded. It’s no point saying: “But Russia has again become a threat.” First, Editor laughs at the idea that a country with a $2-trillion GDP is a threat to the west, with its ~$35-trillion GDP. Second, NATO has created the situation where the Russians have become belligerent by systematically advancing first to include East Europe, and then to include former USSR states.

·         Please, again to be clear: Editor has said he wants the West to advance to the Urals, because even Russia by itself is still the world’s largest country and has the potential of creating trouble for civilized Europe. But that doesn’t mean that Editor is stupid enough to assume the west, in its expansion east, is the victim and Russia the aggressor.

·         It is past time that the Euros stopped being pathetic lazy slob cowards, kissed the US on both cheeks, and sent it back to North America with a “Thanks for the Fish” or whatever. Perhaps “It’s been real”. Its past time for the Euros to become responsible for their own collective defense. It is NOT the US’s job to care more for Europe than Europe cares for itself. And it’s time the US stopped thinking it’s a global superpower, which means it has to maintain a Tin Man presence in Europe.

·         The French take a morbid pride in their realism. Well, how about showing some of that realism by saying aloha to the US/NATO? But, people will say, the current NATO crisis is created solely by Obama. He has one more year to go. After that things will be back to normal. Well, maybe they will, maybe they won’t. In any case, this is like saying we would rather not quit the US drug. Having Big Brother hanging around all the time has created a European dependency and grave irresponsibility. Beyond a point it has been destructive for Europe. Time to grow up and de-tox. And if the US wants to come back to Europe under the new President in 2016, then lets starts again with a slate wiped clean of previous assumptions. Too many years of too many assumptions distort rational decision making.

·         France, look at it this way. If you ask for Article 5 and the US refuses, you will have done the US a huge favor by exposing the fallacy of US/NATO by giving a needed 11,000-volts jolt to your old ally. Which has descended into a land of self-deception and inflated self-esteem. Yes, you’ll have to jump your GDP spending on defense to 4%. But then you get to double your armed forces and are quite capable of handling Africa and Mideast on your own.

·         BTW, the French have invoked the EU article on collective defense. It’s being said it’s a clever way to give Germany a kick in its sensitive parts and to justify busting past the economic controls Germany has imposed on France and Europe, to further its own interests. For example, France no longer has to adhere to the 5% deficit rule which is a commandment from Germany. This could help give France control of its economy, which it badly needs. Besides, if you double your defense spending you’ll also give UK a kick in its sensitive parts. UK right now has three deployable brigades, less than 100 deployable fighter aircraft, and a 20+ ship navy. It’s not just no regional power, it is NO power. France, you don’t want to hang around with losers.

Sunday 0230 GMT November 22, 2015

·         The Russian Air Force in Syria Honestly, we have lost interest in what US air is doing in Iraq and Syria. It is apparently averaging 7 sorties a day. Patience, mon bravos, calls out the Chevalier de Washington, aka Barry Choomer. All we need is time to finish Islamic State. Truthfully, we could all use more time for just about anything. But when you’re engaged in mortal combat you can’t be shouting “I need more time, be patient”. Because it’s not just you fighting, there’s also the enemy, and he also gets a vote. He has no interest in giving you time.

·         Fortunately, the Russians – like any normal folks – understand the way to win is not to give the other feller time. So, for example, on November 17 alone, 29 Russian bombers flew air strikes against Syria – 24 Tu-22 Backfires, and five Tu-95 Bears/Tu-160 Blackjacks, the latter probably firing mainly cruise missiles. That’s aside from Syria-based aircraft. Backfire is originally an anti-fleet weapon and can carry a useful 20-ton bomb-load. As nearly as we can tell, Backfires have also been firing cruises, but they are good for carpet bombing, which is what the Russians have been doing. They’ve also been busy firing ship-based cruise. In fact, we wonder if the current offensive is the reason the Russians asked Lebanon to close its airspace for several days. The Lebanese say they refused, but come on: as it is, civil aviation is giving Lebanon the Big Avoid, and simply making the announcement that a close-airspace request has been made suffices to make most intelligent folks do the Bigger Avoid.

·         The Russians have doubled their Syria air contingent to 69 aircraft. Sputnik International, a Russian defense magazine gives a breakdown at  http://goo.gl/aHntjW  ~30 x Fencers, which are like the F-111; 7 x Mi-24 heavy gunships; 12 x Su-25 Frogfoots; 4 Su-34 tactical bombers; and an unknown number of Su-30 Flankers which do both air superiority and interdiction. By subtraction, that should give about 12-14 of these.

·         The Russians have demonstrated their seriousness, in contrast to the US’s playacting and pussyfooting, by flying 60-80 combat sorties a day, ten times what we are doing. Of course, we don’t count our air superiority and support sorties such as tanker, reconnaissance, and EW. Seeing as there is no air threat to Russia, we can assume the Russia total is almost all strike.

·         Aside from being serious, the Russians have clearly said that airpower alone will not suffice to defeat IS. This is obvious to everyone except our American Clown Leadership. To be fair, the ACL has not categorically stated that air is going to win this war – though there’s extreme wishful thinking very much going on. If confronted, the ACL will say the airpower is intended to contain the IS while our local allies build up their ground forces.

·         Which then leads to the question: where are the local ground forces? They seem to be as elusive as Editor’s Saturday night date. This is being written Saturday US Eastern Time, so you can guess how successful Editor’s date has been. Aside from that, our local allies, both Iraqi and Syrian, displaying a remarkable propensity to avoid getting killed. Not that Editor is blaming anyone. He too doesn’t want to get killed. But then no one has landed in America to oppress us, so the issue doesn’t arise. But the Russians don’t have this problem: they have three local allies to fight on the ground, Assad, Iran, and Hezbollah. We don’t have direct evidence as yet, but we figure the Russians are talking to other potential allies like the Syrian Kurds. Arming them and whacking Turkey is to Russia’s definite advantage.

·         Talking about US local allies, guess what the Iraqis are doing? We’ve known since July 2014 that the Iraqi Army will not fight. So we’ve been holding our noses and accepting the Shia militias will do the fighting, even if these are Iran-controlled militias. Baghdad has some of its own militias, now hold your breath: because it is short of cash, Baghdad is cutting funding for the militias. Really smart. Even selling oil at $30, which Baghdad is doing, the nation has $60-million/day. But Baghdad has other, more urgent commitments than stupid old defense. A huge government payroll – there is no employer worth mention except the government, and then there’s the usual corruption. Editor asks readers: these are the folks we are at war for?

·         Meanwhile, isn’t it time we stopped pretending we can defeat IS while also defeating Assad. The democracy for Muslim nation is dead, dead, dead, and dead. We tried in a half-hearted bum-scratching sort of way. We failed. The fall of Assad will lead to even more chaos in the Middle East. Oooooh, we can’t ally with that vicious Assad. So that must make us morally superior to our forefathers who allied with one of the three most brutally tyrannically regimes seen by the modern word. That is with the Soviets. After much whining and complaining, we seem to have realized that we have to ally, at least unofficially, with the Russians. Now can we go all the way and get out of Assad’s way?

·         Senor Barry Choomer, it is not Islamic State fighting an ideological war. They’re fighting for the same things people have fought forever: power, money, women. There’s only one ideological actor on the ground. As in Second Indochina, First and Second Gulf, and Afghanistan, that ideological actor is us. (As in Pogo’s “we’ve met the enemy and it is us”, said in a different context.)

Saturday 0230 GMT November 21, 2015

·         The Pentagon Everyone has snap out of body experiences. Some of us are triggered by intoxicants or stimulations such as drugs and alcohol. Some don’t need that particular trigger. In Editor’s case, a massive logical disconnect in our current reality suffices. So it was yesterday, when Editor read http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/11/19/did-the-pentagon-cook-the-books-on-its-afghanistan-intel/?wp_login_redirect=0 Recently there are been a fo-fafarra because the Pentagon has been feeding the White House with made up reports of US success against IS in Iraq.

·         One supposes that this may one reason our Fearless Leader keeps coming up with the totally inane formulations of American success when, as anyone with the least IQ (above zero) there is only failure. Except, if we are to be rigorously truthful, we’d accept that the White House has made it clear it does not want any bad news regarding our wars.

·         When there’s a family dispute raging in his presence, Editor like most old folks develops selective hearing. Editor used to wonder why old people do this, and unquestioningly swallowed the canard it’s because they’re senile. The real reason is as one grows older, based on experience, one feels more helpless to change the way people think. No one listens to you anyway because you’re old and poor. You know no matter what you say, you will not affect any outcomes. So why not to maintain your dignity by saying nothing and not taking sides between family members? Let them think you’re senile.

·         But Obama is a young man. What is the excuse for his selective hearing? In his case, however, it’s a bit different. It’s not like his subordinates lay out the news to him and he chooses only to hear what he wants. He makes it clear you’re a dead duck if you come to him with anything that contradicts his pre-ordained belief system. So he is told only the good news. If there isn’t any, his subordinates simply make it up. We’re not blaming him particularly, narcissistic leaders and insecure leaders are that way, which is plain terrible for the country. Anyhows.

·         The Foreign Policy article wonders: since Pentagon has been feeding Obama fake stats of success, might the same thing have been happening in Afghanistan too?

·         So this spaced Editor out, as in “Where am I? Who am I? Is this another universe?” That sort of thing, First, it has been obvious to anyone paying some attention, that the Pentagon has been feeding Obama psychedelic lollipops from the day the US decided to return to Iraq, mid-2014, after IS struck. Again, don’t be too harsh on the Pentagon because Obama has explicitly mandated that he will not take another type  of  lollipop. So how is it that it took folks near 15-months to realize what Pentagon was doing? What’s going on? Where am I?

·         Even more spacing out is Foreign Policy asking if this same phenomenon has been taking place in Afghanistan? Sigh. First let Editor state that he is more patriotic than even very patriotic American. And having come to America 55 years ago, when Government and institutions were supposed to tell the truth as a default position, he was not just cheering the US intervention in Afghanistan, he was actually believing the Pentagon’s propaganda.

·         In all fairness, by the way, many folks have told Editor that his trust in US institutions has nothing to do with America being a different country in the past. It has to do, they insist, with a congenital tendency to believe what people are saying. Perhaps it has to do with his 13 years of schooling in Church schools. A couple have suggested it’s because of Editor’s dyslexia: one manifestation is an inability to read people through their words. Still others, including Mrs. Rikhye the Fourth, staunchly maintain Editor is simply a blithering idiot. Whatever.

·         It became obvious to Editor in 2005 that he had been deceived on the Afghan adventure, including all the reasons we gave for intervening. Editor has repeatedly, publicly beat himself for having taken four years to realize the truth. Indeed, the only reason the truth became evident was that he knows people in that part of the world and in Pakistan. Anyway: narratives about one’s own guilt are self-indulgent and boring.

·         So what Editor is saying is, if he of all people realized 10-years ago that Afghanistan was a Potemkin war, a giant play-acting stage set up by the US, with thousands of troops being killed or wounded in real life to add realism to the story we were really fighting a war and winning, why has it taken folks much smarter than him to ask, 10-years later, if the Pentagon has been lying on Afghanistan too?

·         Of course it has been lying. Shameless, systematically, and strongly. There was a time when the Pentagon stopped lying, in 2008 after Obama was elected. It told the new Prez the truth, and wanted more troops. The Prez arbitrarily reduced the number – which was already a minimum – and then added a wonderful new twist never before seen in war: he gave a withdrawal date for the entire adventure. Well, seeing as Taliban and AQ and the Pakistanis live there, how difficult was it for them to simply lay low until the withdrawal date was near? True Obama has changed his mind, but he must in a previous life been a bazzari in a Damascus soukh. No matter what the military tells him, he automatically has to make a severe reduction in what he approves. So he sets himself up to fail once again. There’s a mental evaluation and treatment for this syndrome, but when a man thinks he’s as smart as God if not smarter, it’s impossible to get him to admit he has a problem.

·         They say Obama has a congenital distrust of the Pentagon and the generals/admirals. Some say it’s more than distrust, he hates the military – we won’t go into why. Now, Editor does not trust the Pentagon and the senior brass, either, based on the evidence from 1960 to the present. But here’s the thing: Editor does not run the country. It’s not good enough for Obama to get passive-aggressive toward the military. It’s his job to make them trustworthy. And, by the way, we are told he has had several key civilians and even military men, whom he could trust and who could help him reshape the Pentagon. He drove them away. The passive-aggressive thing gets in the way: I don’t trust them and I’m not going to believe a word they say, nor am I going to change them because it’s so much fun to just hate them.

·         These are not the actions of a leader. They are the actions of a rebellious, immature, opposition-defiant teenager. When Editor’s students habitually act that way, they are dragged off for counselling and medication.

·         Why is no one dragging off our Prez? Because there are few adults left in America willing to engage him.

Friday 0230 GMT November 20, 2015

·         Border Control The speed with which the French and Belgians are clearing out terrorist nests is interesting. Naturally, we wonder to what extent the French state of emergency is permitting law enforcement to short circuit normal individual rights. The Europeans are very strong on these, and as far as we know they are more limited than the US post 9/11 in going after folks.

·         There’s much discussion about how come people like the Paris mastermind, who apparently returned to Paris from Belgium to plan the next round of attacks, has been able to come and go as he pleases despite being of close interest to law enforcement. The answer to this is an easy one. Once inside the EU you can travel without showing documents. That’s a key achievement  of those who want to make the EU a supra-national state. Of course, some of the bad people have been zipping into and out of the EU like poop through geese, to use one of General Patton’s favorite fave metaphors. But again, compared to the US there’s not that tight a border security.

·         Oopsies! Our bad! We should not have said that about the US. America has NO border security on its Mexican and Canadian borders.  Yes, yes, there’s a border fence of some hundreds of kilometers with Mexico, and there’s all that high-tech surveillance gear. But we regularly see fotos and videos of border crossers haring up and down the fence, so obviously along most of it there is little enforcement, and less where there is no fence. But anyways, our point remains: when individual rights predominate, and where countries don’t want to spend money on effective border control, obviously crossing the border will be a lot easier than – say – crossing the Inner German border  before the Wall came down.

·         Incidentally, we heard on CBS Radio news that 1-million Mexican Americans left the US last year to return home, partly because of the job situation in the US, and partly because folks are just fed up of being separated from their families.

·         To get back to our point, Editor finds it highly amusing when Americans say “we can’t seal the borders”. Hello, people, why are you lying? It’s really we won’t seal the borders, not. The border between West Germany and Soviet-controlled East Europe was, if we recall right, almost 1200-kms. The Soviets have not, to Editor’s knowledge, released figures on the efficiency of their fence. But would 97% or so be in the right ball-park? Not that there were many who tried, given that multiple wires, minefields, and shoot-to-kill orders were used.

·         The US-Mexico border is significantly longer at 3200-km. But come on folks, let’s talk sense. US GDP is around $18-trillion and we have 320-million people (almost). No one can say with a straight face we cannot seal that border if we wanted to. We don’t want to, because much of America depends on cheap labor from South of the Border. Others say it violates human rights  to seal the borders. Okay, explain why. Effective border control is a primary duty of a nation state even if there is no national security threat. Here Americans are going freak freak squeak squeak about 10,000 Syrian refugees, but why on earth do we worry about that when we have almost-open borders across which hundreds of thousands have crossed annually for at least a couple of decades. Not to mention white Europeans who are hanging around with the Islamists - several thousands, not to mention the several ten thousands of sympathizers in the home country.

·         Of course we can seal our borders and we must. If corporate interests object, it’s time to arrest the top 100 officers of the objecting corporation and set them to five-years duty guarding the border.

·         Folks go on and one about how we are a nation of immigrants. Yes, and so what? Being a nation of immigrants doesn’t mean we have open borders. Not to forget the million or so that arrive legally. Does anyone consider our legal quotas a violation of our immigrant origins? Don’t think so.

·         You see, one is not supposed to say this because its non-PC. America was settled in past days where it was considered perfectly okay to go to a promised land and kick existing people out. There was no law against it. Everyone did it, regardless of color, all over the world. How can you judge the standards of 150- to 300-years ago in the context of today. Anyone remember the Old Testament? Anyone remember how the Hebrews came out of Egypt and whacked one local nation after another to make their own? Anyone remember how the Muslim invasions meant a relatively small group of folks from the Middle East taking away densely settled lands from Europe to South East Asia. Not to mention our good buddies the Mongols, and so on and so forth.

·         Please, stop going on about the sins of our forefathers in exterminating the Indians and stealing their land. The “natives” were doing it too, using war and conquest to gain territory. The natives weren’t sitting around fires and singing kumbayah and welcoming new settlers with open arms and wet kisses. It was business as usual in those days. It was NOT illegal. It certainly was NOT a sin. And what does all that have to do with our refusal to close our borders today? Every country has the right to control immigration so that the country sees a benefit from immigration and not all sorts of problems. Does anyone think that had the situation been reversed today, i.e., strong native American countries, would they have felt morally obligated to accept an uncontrolled immigrant flow that eventually would destroy their way of life? Now, these WWJD speculations are a bit pointless. We don’t know what Jesus would do today. But nonetheless, Editor’s point is valid. Why do white Americans have to accept immigration that turns this country into an extension of Mexico plus a hundred other countries because people refuse to assimilate?

·         It’s not helpful that so many white elite feel guilty and feel the sole redemption is for the whites to commit suicide.

Thursday 0230 GMT November 19, 2015

Editor apologizes for missing Tuesday and Wednesday update. He found he had completely missed one major assignment for college. To turn it on time he has been forced to cut short other activities. We will return to the issue of why the world looks so crazy at this time. Our thesis is that the Great World Disorder we are witnessing has arisen because of the decline of the United States with no other power to replace it. This was not the case in the first half of the 20^th Century, where declining powers were matched by rising powers. Moreover, the US decline has been so rapid that there seems no hope of a gradual adjustment. If Editor is correct, then we’re in for a few – perhaps even several – decades of world disorder.

·         Events consequent on the Paris terror attacks France has been left on its own by the United States, UK, Germany, and just about everyone else. If the volume of hot air produced – especially by the US – were moved to the Mideast, Islamic State would die of suffocation within minutes.

·         What’s happening is shameful in the extreme, and is delivering such a heavy blow to the NATO fundamental principle of collective defense that one has to wonder if NATO is going to recover. As yet France has not invoked Article 5, which requires all NATO members to come to France’s assistance. There is terrorism and there is an act of war. When Algeria was fighting for independence from France and terror attacks in Paris seemed an everyday feature, that was not an act of war in a NATO sense. But what IS did is an act of war by any definition. Islamic State has attacked two members of the United Nations, Iraq and Syria. If France is attacking IS, it is not attacking another state, but a rouge insurgency of monstrous proportions and actions. We have questioned the legalities of NATO involvement in Syria because, as far as we can tell, it is not justified by the UN and is against the wishes of the Syrian state. Action in Iraq is justified because the Government of Iraq asked for assistance. Thus IS, though it calls itself but is not by any definition of international law, has no legal justification to attack France.

·         So why has France not invoked Article 5? Now, Editor has absolutely no more than a general expertise in the matter of multi-national and international treaties. But to him, the reason is quite simple. If France did call an Article 5, NATO will not respond. That destroys the rationale for NATO. You may as well think of it as a society for playing toy soldiers.

·         Let us take Germany’s reaction to Paris. Germany is important because it is the real leader of Europe. So close your eyes. Imagine a perfect void. That is Germany’s reaction. Seeing as Merkel of Germany has set off a bomb under united Europe by illegally announcing its own immigration policy without approval from other members is so shameful we are unsure why Merkel did it. But we do not see why it has not stepped forward in Europe in the matter of the attack on France.

·         Let us take UK’s reaction to an attack on an ally it has twice in the 20^th Century defended at the very cost of its own existence. Prior to the attacks, UK had announced it would no longer bomb Syria. After the attacks, to show its ever-lasting solidarity with the French, it sent one UAV to support French attacks on Raqqa, IS’s capital. People, Editor is over 70-years in age. It is hard to get any reaction from him on the follies of nations. So he is not going to rant about this. But if this is what UK calls punching above its weight, best to tie the UK down with ballast lest it float away from Earth and be lost forever in the void of space.

·         Last, there is the US. It is true that these days Obama’s statements, each more ridiculous than the last, do start Editor foaming at the mouth and a great desire to run around biting the White House team and piddling on the expensive carpets. At the same time, we need to repeat that what drives us nutzoids is not Obama’s policy per se, but his rank, blatant hypocrisy. The man does apparently have a belief system that he follows at the exclusion of all else. His system says (a) The US is not exceptional; (b) we cannot solve the world’s problems; (c) force is not the best way to anything; (d) only local force can solve their nation’s problems; and (e) pacifism is preferable to militarism.

·         That’s fine. But then let him have the courage of his convictions. Instead it looks like Obama will spend all 8-years of his presidency at war. achieving nothing. This means more years of shooting war than any other president in US history. Does this not strike him as inconsistent with his Nobel Prize-plated belief system? He doesn’t have the guts to go all-in, but he also doesn’t have the guts to go all-out. Instead he produces more baby-poop than the whole country put together by insisting his non-strategy is the right one. He says it will work, just that it will take time.

·         Well, the thing with war is that time is the one precious commodity that one does not have. That one statement by itself disqualifies him from being Commander-in-Chief because it shows he is truly clueless about the mechanics of war. He seems to think that the world goes into stasis while he adjusts his violin to get ready to play his grand concerto.

·         He is soon to start his eighth year of adjusting his violin, and we are still waiting for him to start playing. Meanwhile the threats continue metastasizing. IS has broken out of the containment that Obama thought he was placing IS in. He has not a single local ally where his strategy is to rely on local allies. He wants to keep Iraq together, after the Kurds and Shias have made it clear many times they are not going to fight for the Sunnis. In Syria, his reliable allies, the Syrian Kurds are under attack by Obama’s ally Turkey. They’ve made it clear they have no interest in Assad one way or the other, they simply want their own independent mini-state. Obama’s allies  the Sunni states are the ones that created IS as a bulwark against Shia Iran, while Obama’s policy is to let Iran gain supremacy in the Middle East. Meanwhile, the Islamists gain ground in Yemen and in Libya. If this wasn’t bad enough, the Islamists have attacked the European mainland.

·         How does this make sense? This is like an octopus fighting itself. Is Obama and his advisory team psychotic? In which case aren’t they a danger to the nation they are sworn to protect?

·         So precisely what is Obama doing for France? He’s ruling everything out and making clear the good ship America Polo Loco will continue swimming in circles in the White House bathtub. He has refused to lift his little finger to help.

• As for Editor, he has zero sympathy for America. Are you all insane that you go on electing these Harvard-Yale-Princeton types, and then whining nothing seems to work? YOU elected him, and Bush, and Clinton. Dont complain to Editor.

Monday 0230 GMT November 16, 2015

·         What the heck is going on with the world? Part I. Americans don’t do history, and they may have a point. To use history to look to the future is to get caught in old, probably failed, ways of thinking. Still, we need to know how we got where we are today, and make some sense of where we are going so we can accelerate a trend or jettison a trend.

·         The world as we see it today was shaped by the two world wars. In 1914 you had three declining powers: the Ottoman Empire, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and the British Empire. The British were about where we are today: few could have foretold the end of the British Empire, it remained the largest the world has seen. You also had three rising powers: German and the US. Japan was rising, but quietly and was quite behind the US and Germany. In 1914, the US had cleared its neighborhood: Canada, South America, the Pacific to Hawaii and the Atlantic were safe for America.

·         In the mayhem caused by World War I, the declining empires died; Germany was stymied; the US arrived on the world stage; and Japan was building its strength. World War I was a tactical loss for Germany, but it was not strategically defeated. How can we say that? Well, 25-years later the Germans had taken over Europe, for starters. They were finishing unfinished business. Japan was busy pillaging China. US couldn’t decide if it wanted to be a neutral or assume the mantle to which it was entitled.

·         By 1945, the US had emerged as the greatest military/economic colossus the world has ever seen: it had 40% of global GDP and one hundred aircraft carriers, plus A-weapons. The Soviets pounced on Eastern Europe and began pushing into every corner of the world, but it was an American world.  The Chinese became communist, but remained a nation of starving peasants.

·         By 2015, however, a very peculiar situation has arisen. The US is in decline for no reason anyone can tell, except it has lost the will to rule the world. For that you have to be valorous, disciplined, willing to sacrifice, and imbued with a conviction that God is on your side. Valorous? Ha. Disciplined? Haha. Willing to sacrifice? Hahaha. Convinced God is on our side? Hahahaha. We're, like, what right do we have to say our values are better than their values?

·         The Soviet Empire has collapsed. Lots of people have lots of explanations for why, but Editor has yet to read something that convinces him.

·         The Chinese have risen, and are determined to displace the US as The Superpower.

·         While the Chinese are rising to fill the vacuum left by the United States in the Pacific, their military power is still nowhere near up to the game. Economically they are displacing the US in the Pacific, South East Asia, South America; in Sub-Saharan Africa they have kicked the west to the curb. At $150-billion their defense budget is at least a fifth of the US (all things counted), but by 2035-40 they will be lagging the US only slightly. Because their per capita income will still be much less, their effective defense spending will be at least as high as that of US.

·         The US has tacitly accepted the rise of China. Forget American rhetoric, we have already conceded the First Island Chain to China, and given another 25-years, we’ll be pushed back to Hawaii. Unless the US wakes up – unlikely – you can stick a fork in it.

·         Now let’s look at the Middle East The US has collapsed in the Middle East in the sense it is unable to influence anything, and to the extent it tries, it makes things worse. But who exactly brought the US down in the Middle East/North America/Iran/Afghanistan? No one: the US did it to itself. The how and the why is murky. But it all started with oil dollars. We wont detail how the US rose to become the predominant power in the region except to note that after World War 2, the US agreed that Britain/France should continue to rule as they did before. The rise of Arab nationalism – which can be traced directly back to the US influence in making the UN 1944 into a force for decolonization, an important adjunct to US policy in this direction – and the decline of Britain/France led to a vacuum the Soviets gladly filled. The US got the Soviets out, one of the more brilliant achievements of US foreign policy post-1945.

·         Then came a bunch of US economists working for the Middle East oil companies, and they figured a cartel that limited production would cause western oil companies profits to soar. This basically crippled the 3^rd world, but for heaven’s sake, who cares about the 3^rd world. Simultaneously, for reasons we can’t go into here, US oil production fell, making the US more dependent on foreign oil (non-Canadian, Venezuelan, and Mexican; these counted as domestic oil). Part of the US/Western oil interests plan worked: with much more money – a direct transfer of wealth from the world to OPEC with zero economic justification – OPEC nations started to buy hundreds of billion dollars of arms, power plants, hotels, roads, and so on. Cool. But then so much money started to accumulate that the Mideast/North Africa/West Asia nations thought they were Big Cheeses, when in reality they were less significant than a fly on a poop-pile, and remain so today.

·         To Be Continued November 17, 2015

Sunday 0230 GMT November 15, 2015

·         Paris, France If you are expecting Editor to express horror, shock, outrage, and so on, please skip this. Editor leaves these sentiments for the mealy-mouthed politicians, who seem to have reacted on cue.

·         Then you already have New York Times telling us of the pain of Parisians having to explain to their children why they couldn’t go out and play. What’s left to say? How does the NYT know this? NYT, you can tell us what happened, but you can’t tell us what hypothetical people are hypothetically feeling about a hypothetical situation. These are memes you have developed to fill space in the media, and have no bearing to reality. Bad enough to do this to Americans, it’s totally classless to do this to the French. Here is an alternative meme that NYT could have tried – if it was at all necessary to say anything, which it was not: Parisians told their children they could not go out and play because bad people were killing citizens and it was not safe. Excuse us, Parisians have seen 129 of their fellow citizens killed, 350 wounded, many critically, and their big problem is how to tell their kids why they cannot go outside? Don’t think so. Then MSM wonders why fewer and fewer people trust it.

·         What Editor has to say is different. France, you brought this attack on yourself. No, this is not a liberal blame-the-victim statement. France, and the Europeans, have bought the American narrative that the west can fight a war against Islamic extremism at no cost to itself. Further, they believe they can fight an existential war while maintaining their descriptions of themselves as respecting human rights.

·         Given Islamic State’s courage and dedication – just because they are our enemies is no reason to disparage their fighting qualities – retaliation for the West’s anti-ISM was bound to come. All Europe is vulnerable, but France particularly so because about 1 in 12 French are Muslim. Plenty of water for the Islamists to swim in. Ironically, the French are so liberal they refuse to permit a census category enumerating how many Muslims there are in France. They, and most of the other Europeans are so crazy that their need to prove their liberalism in the face of mass Islamic (not Islamist) uncontrolled immigration triumphs their need to protect their way of life.

·         Surely the French learned in 2011 that toppling dictators because the dictators were committing massive human rights violations did not by itself lead to a better world. Surely they understand the fall of Gadhafi has enabled the rise of Islamic extremism in the Sahel. They could have learned this lesson as they had been lapdogs to the Americans in the anti-Saddam crusade of 2003. What was the need to intervene in Syria? Sure, Assad killed a large number of Syrians. But how many of those Syrians died because western, particularly American, Arab allies created the Syrian insurgencies to contain Iran? Iran, of course, was uncontained by the US for the stupidest, most facile, and most wrong motives. Is there a clause in the French constitution that says France must blindly follow the US into ruin and defeat?

·         Is Editor saying that France/Euros shouldn’t fight Islamic State because it leaves them open to retaliation? Editor is saying the opposite. First, France must accept its own responsibility for the rise of the Islamic State. That the US bears most of the responsibility is irrelevant. France is also complicit. Second, France has been seduced by the American theory that you can control a raging alligator by kicking its tail. There is only one way to deal with such a beast: shoot it in the head with a big, fat cartridge.  Third, we want the French to understand that even if they had declared themselves neutral in the war against the extremists, they still would have been attacked because the Islamists want the deaths of all Christians. That’s aside from the deaths of all Shias, and all Sunni sects they don’t accept – which is just about all of them. If the Islamists could, they’d love to kill the Hindus too. Just so happens there’s 1.25-billion Indians – Islamists would kill almost all Indian Muslims too because they consider them heretics. Also just so happens that India has spent at least a thousand years surviving the most genocidal invasions.

·         So what should the French do? Join in sending nine European and American divisions to Syria and Iraq. That means accepting that Assad is the lesser of many evils. With half-a-million troops in the region, the West can get down to doing what it should have from the start: killing every radical Islamist – simply for being a radical Islamist.

·         Brutal? Yes, and that’s the point. Horrible? Absolutely, and that’s the point. Kill them all and let God sort them out? Correct, and that’s the point. Isn’t this saying one western life is worth infinitely more than an Islamist life? How about that – it’s saying exactly that. Won’t this create more enemies? No, once you make it clear to the region that if you support or remain neutral you WILL die at western hands. How do you think China and Russia won their civil wars? It was not by giving their enemy’s daises.  It was by giving them bullets to the head.

·         Are we to fall to THAT level? Well, depends on if you want to survive or not. If you’re not prepared to fight and die for your way of life, if you think the enemy’s views are equally valid, then be prepared to die. The enemy does not think your way of life is as valid as theirs. So they will kill you, without remorse or guilt. Dear West, does liberalism matter so much to you that you can’t kill anyone who is killing you? Whatever you want, people. Then convert to extreme Islam and you’ll be left alone to live your life bereft of any value that you hold dear.

Thursday 0230 GMT November 12, 2015

·         More examples of why the US is going down, down, down The list comes from the official US Army website http://www.army.mil/e2/c/downloads/369926.pdf The annotation is mostly ours, but we needed  http://weaponsman.com/?p=25643  to explain some of the more esoteric points. The list is a great example of the complete dysfunctionality of this once great Republic.

·         1. Prevent Sexual Assault. Explanation: stop male army soldiers from raping females soldiers, same sex sexual assault is also covered. Repeat: This is priority Number One.

·         2. Balance and Transition the Army. Explanation: Agitprop speak for reducing the Army below the point where it can defend US interests. From two-wars we are down to one.

·         3. Champion Soldiers, Civilians and Families. Explanation from weaponsman.com: well, yeah, if they’re the right soldiers. Right being a function of race, sex, and sexual preference, not ability or performance. Yeah, we’re all for people — that let us count vibrant diversity beans. The rest of them can go to heck. Editor: Third most important priority is championing Soldiers, Civilians, and Families? Really?

·         4. Continue to bolster Army activities in the Asia-Pacific region. Explanation: “bolstering” means that US 8^th Army Korea, the major ground formation in the Pacific has ZERO combat brigades, Indeed, 2^nd Infantry Division now has only TWO brigades, both in the US. But that does not mean US Army Korea has zero troops. It has 29,000 wandering around providing secondary stuff. You’d think with that many troops, we could at least get a full division leaving 13,000 for corps troops plus skeleton Army and Theatre HQs.

·         5. Ensure personal accountability on and off the battlefield. Explanation: huh?

·         6. Tell the Army Story. Explanation from weaponsman.com:  Let’s elevate PR above performance! Why not? It’s DC, it’s what everybody else does.

·         7. Implement Army Total Force policy. Explanation: Sorry, Editor is confused. Wasn’t this supposed to be done in the late 1980s? Are we STILL doing it? Massive organizational fail.

·         8. Prudently manage reset, modernization, research and development. Explanation: US Government continues to cut Army budgets. No problem, y’all just do more with less.

·          9. Strengthen the defense of Army networks and build the Army cyber force. Explanation: Editor faints from shock. Number Nine is the first actual military goal after 8 non-military goals have been prioritized ahead.

·         10. Strengthen installations through effective energy solutions. Explanation: Must. Avert. Global. Warming. By using less energy at bases. Awesome. What’s next: Use less energy by lowering operational tempo? Giving priority to energy saving in combat?

·         Please note: nowhere does it say the top priority of the US Army is to win wars. The only war mentioned is cyberwar, and at least half of that is defending own networks. No mention anywhere of locating, fixing, and destroying the enemy in support of national US objectives. So this defense of networks has to mean protecting the ability of the troops to Facebook, U-Tube, and Twitter, to email, chat etc., and to play videogames.

·         Need further elaboration of why we’re headed to heck perdition? Editor doesn’t think so.

·         BTW, all the 10 objectives can be met most easily: disband the US Army and the other services too. No sexual assaults. No wastage of energy. No irrational demands to do more with less. No need for good management. And so on. No, no, don’t compliment Editor. You have a problem, he has an answer. It’s his job. His scared duty, even. The solution to all problems is to shoot yourself in the head; you’re dead; no more problems.

Wednesday 0230 GMT November 11, 2015

Armistice Day

·         A possible explanation for why the US is going psycho from Patrick Skuza When I was in the service at the time of the fall of the Wall, I observed that now that the US didn't have an enemy, we turned on ourselves.  There is no existential threat to focus our discipline.  Hence, Bradley/Chelsea Manning, gay assault reports from the military, etc. All a product of an indulgent generation that has no forethought and short hindsight. Just do it, as Nike Corp says.  This nation's institutions have crumbled before our very eyes.  We spend our time processing trivialities, with no time left over to accomplish needed tasks.

·         Ah, The wonders of technology in education Editor has three masters in Education, including one on technology in the classroom. Over the last 10-years he has seen that educational technology can help teach a class. But as for technology in the hands of the kids, namely their I-Phones, fugger abhat it. One of the biggest complaints teachers have is kids are constantly on their phones texting or playing games and so on when they should be paying attention to class work. During quizzes and tests, some students are busy texting each other for answers. Today Editor learned of a new use.

·         He was giving a pre-quiz, with the teacher’s explanation that the real quiz would follow the same lines. Editor repeatedly told the kids that this was their chance to get a great grade in their real quiz. Well, in this particular section only one student turned in his pre-quiz. The other 26, upto 5-minutes before class ended, were doing absolutely nothing except singing in the sunshine and dancing in the rain.

·         Two of the kids sitting right next to Editor’s desk were singularly merry. Four minutes to go, both of them are sitting furiously scribbling on their answer sheet (multiple choice). Within two minutes, one hands over his sheet, all 30 questions done. Editor was puzzled at how this happened. Obviously they were copying from another kid’s test. But when he looked carefully at the other kid, who was still scribbling away, he did not see anyone else’s paper. Suddenly it hit Editor: this Future of America was copying from his cell-phone. He and his friend had obtained an image of someone else’s pre-quiz and were rapidly and efficiently recording the answers. The answers were different from that of the one youngster who had handed in his sheet, so the image had to be from one of the other sections to whom Editor had given the test earlier.

·         Now, it happens that Editor has known both the kids from when they entered 9^th grade. They are sweet, well-mannered, polite and all the rest. The parents have done a good job in bringing up these kids. They were singing and dancing because of the hormones thing; getting overexcited about the girls, but they were not harassing anyone. But apparently the one thing their parents had not taught them is that cheating is wrong.

·         And Editor knows exactly why. For the 25 years Editor has been in college or teaching, cheating is absolutely accepted. People of Editor’s generation will be shocked at how much cheating goes on: in school, in college. It’s perfectly acceptable. What’s more, in Editor’s experience the greatest amount of cheating  is in the elite white county schools. At Editor’s minority-majority school, about half the kids are so indifferent they lack the rigor needed to cheat. At the white schools the students are under killing pressure from their parents, they see their adults lying and cheating all around, and that’s their model.

·         As for calculators. Let Editor state upfront he always wanted to major in math. But because he is dyslexic, he barely passed no matter how hard he worked. If calculators were not permitted on state licensing test, Editor would never have qualified. But because Editor is from pre-calculator age, and from the memorization age, he has a good sense if an answer given by the calculator is right. He has been working for one month in an Algebra 2 class supporting a teacher who has lagging kids. Forget the cries and howls of “But the calculator says…” which one gets at all levels of educational achievement. The majority of kids cannot multiply 16 by 16 without a calculator. About a quarter don’t know their two times table. We’re not talking about elementary school, we’re talking about Algebra 2, high school. On another note, in this particular section and in many others, students cannot solve for x in equations with just three terms. They cannot distribute – and they’re in Algebra 2. Some don’t even know that two negatives make a positive.

·         What’s going on? Very simple. (a) No Child Left Behind means no child can be allowed to fail. (b) in the name of a rigorous curriculum to meet 21^st Century standards (whatever they might be: we got to the moon and back without fancy curriculums) the material the kids have to cover is very hard for 70% of them. (c) Back in the day curriculums taught basics; now it’s all “real world” without anyone caring that mathematics is a highly developed theoretical system with its own arcane language, its not easily mastered by most of us. In the early 1960s Algebra I was enough to get you into an Ivy (Editor was at an elite private school). Later it became Algebra I and Geometry. Still OK. Now its FOUR years of math to graduate high school.

·         Have our kids suddenly gotten that much smarter in 60-70 years? Unlikely. Material they don’t understand is being force fed to them, like the French do to pate geese. They don’t learn because it’s all simply too much, too fast, for most of them. They get to college, and large numbers have to start with Algebra I or Geometry all over again.

·         It is absolutely not the fault of the kids, who are the same average kids since the dawn of public education. By the way, average means C. True B kids are about 14%, and A kids are, like, 2%. The reason everyone is passing now days is because the grades are manipulated – the adults are doing the cheating. In Editor’s county, reckoned as one of the 10 best in the nation, students cannot be given less than 50%. A 50% is the same thing as a zero back in the day. Write your name, turn in your paper, answer no questions, you will get 50%. It is not the fault of the teachers. Would you insist coaches that cannot make every kid succeed should be fired? Yet society demands it of teachers.

·         Remember the old saying? If you don’t have the time to do it right the first time, you must have time to do it all over again. Americans need to understand that you have one chance to educate a child to the point she can productively contribute to society. It’s time we started doing it right, else we’ll just have to do it over and over.

Tuesday 0230 GMT November 10, 2015

·         America, America We haven’t had a story in this category for quite some time. This one concerns Chelsea Manning, also known as Bradley Manning, who first achieved fame for casually handing over hundreds of thousands of classified document to the Wikileaks lot. He was – and still is – a US Army soldier. He was tried for treason, and is serving some kind of nominal sentence in military prison. During his trial, he revealed he had long wanted to become a woman. So he sued the US Army, and won: the Army has to pay for his conversion to a woman.

·         Now he’s suing the Army again. Why? Because he’s required to keep his hair 2-inches long – prison rules. So here’s the quote from the media source which is following the story.

·         Chelsea Manning Is Suing the Military Prison He's In, Saying the Regulation Two-Inch-Length Haircut Makes Him "Feel Like a Freak and a Weirdo". Manning, who was born as a man named Bradley, claims she has identified as a woman since childhood and had been receiving access to hormone therapy, speech therapy and cosmetics while in prison. But the military ruled that the former U.S. Army intelligence analyst must continue to cut her hair to 'military standards.' In a blog post from prison, Manning wrote that when she heard the news she was devastated, and felt like giving up.' After five years -- and more -- of fighting for survival, I had to fight even more. I was out of energy. I felt sick. I felt sad. I felt gross -- like Frankenstein's monster wandering around the countryside avoiding angry mobs with torches and pitch forks. 'I cried, and cried, sniffled a little bit, and then cried some more.' Manning said that after feeling 'devastated, humiliated, hurt, and rejected' she finally found the strength to fight again. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3310506/Chelsea-Manning-suing-army-feels-like-freak-weirdo-two-inch-prison-haircut.html#ixzz3r1l9vP66

·         Normally one would leave the story as it is, because it shows – once again – how absolutely ridiculous the US has become. But Editor has another angle. The Manning person is a US Army soldier. Can you imagine what America’s enemies are making of this. Somehow a great many foreigners believe that the US military cant fight – this has been going on for decades. An example: in the 1980s Editor was solemnly told by a German (who else) that if there was war in Central Europe, with the exception of the paratroops and Marines, the rest of the American Army would run away. A lot of this the sneering that low-class Euros and 3^rd World elites engage in, to offset their inferiority complexes about America. These days, with America descending into psychotic breakdown, few feel the need to put down America. Particularly as the whole West us going that way. (Some of Editor’s friends will tell you that the Euros have always been psycho degenerates.)

·         No use trying to convince anyone that Americans as a race – regardless of color – actually love to kill and love to fight, the more killing and fighting, the better. Indeed, there are some of us who are familiar with the European armies  of today who doubt even the German Army, or any European Army, will fight for –say – the Baltics or Poland. It’s possible the Germans won’t fight even for Germany unless it’s a tiny, sanitized operation involving a few brigades. The Brits, to give them credit, always have a small, tough core of folks who are just like the Americans when it comes to war. After all, the Americans had to get their habits from someone.

·         But imagine trying to convince the Taliban, AQ, Islamic State, and so on that the Americans love to fight. They will hold up the Bradley/Chelsea Manning article and Roll On The Floor Laughing their Butts Off.

·         Does perception matter? Unfortunately it does. America of 1940-70 was feared and respected throughout the world because we were by the far the richest, the most technology advanced, the most capable at undertaking complex, gigantic projects, and so on. Right now, with stories like this, including the general dysfunction of the nation, few fear and respect America anymore.

·         Editor has to comfort himself by saying when the trigger is pulled, all the skeptics are going to have to learn the hard way that America is not to be messed with. Then you have Obama and his 30 advisors to Syria, and even Editor starts wondering if he is wrong.

Monday 0230 GMT November 9, 2015

·         British GCHQ caught chatter right after Rus Metrojet went down over Sinai There’s been some confusion about when the British learned Islamic State may have bombed the Russian jet. Some accusations the Brits knew and didn’t do anything. The story in http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/617832/British-extremists-jet-bomb-accents-Sharm-El-Sheikh-Egypt makes clear the UK’s equivalent of our NSA picked up folks with Birmingham and London accents cheering when the plane went down, so British knowledge is post de facto.

·         The problem with this cheering business is that intelligence can pinpoint the individual telephone being used, so we assume some of these lad are not cheering right now.

·         Islamic terrorism has had a good run so far because western nations, anxious to preserve their images as liberal/rule-of-law states, have gone very light in chasing suspects and eliciting information. The hearts and minds thing. Problem here is that in counter-insurgency, hearts and minds doesn’t work. It gives the bad guys a chance to play the system. The only thing that works in CI – and we’re sorry about saying this Petraeus ol’ boy ol’pal - is that you squeeze your own side worse than the insurgents squeeze them. When pressured by insurgents, even the most patriotic of citizens will make deals with the baddies just to survive. You have to hurt the citizens worse so that (a) they give up all information they have; and (b) run to the authorities when the approached by the badies.

·         Sounds terrible, doesn’t it, inflicting more pain on your own people than the enemy does to keep the citizenry loyal? Yes it is. And that’s just one of the horrible outcomes of war in our times. Some liberals maintain that if torturing your own citizens is the price necessary to get the bad guys, its not worth getting the bad guys. Fair enough. But if you don’t get the bad guys by any means necessary, the bad guys will get us, including the liberals, And of course, as we’ve seen from at least the Russian Revolution 1917 – Editor’s memory does not reach earlier – the first thing the baddies do when they win is to kill the liberals. The simple truth is that no deal with the devil can work. It’s not complicated. Having much personal acquaintance with the fellow downstairs in a red satin suit and a pitchfork who rudely pokes everyone in the butt, Editor can tell you that when you deal with the devil, he loses all respect for you. He’ll use you and get rid of you.

·         Don’t think Editor is getting all holier-than-thou. He is a supreme sinner. Just a small example. In Delhi the authorities were trying to trace someone. They knew he was a friend of mine. I was not cooperating because you don’t betray a friend, right? So they kept me sitting in their office, and went back to my house where they picked up my wife and brought her to their office. Illegal, because she was not of legal age (21) and you’re not supposed to pick up or interrogate women below that age without a guardian present. So the head of the department and I looked at each other, with my wife sitting right there. He didn’t say a word. I said “Okey dokey, I’ll track down the gent for you”. The officers promptly took my wife back home, and I followed a couple of hours later.

·         In other words, caught between the likelihood my wife would be mistreated and betraying a friend, I betrayed the friend. Of course, I didn’t betray the friend; but honestly, if the authorities had been tough about it, as in “your wife is our guest until you deliver,” well, I would have betrayed him.

·         Note that is quite routine in India. Its SOP. They want a suspect to surrender to them, they will take your entire family to the lock-up until the suspect surrenders. It is 100% against the law. It is also a 100% SOP tactic, and if the suspect is a murderer or a terrorist, the public supports the police. Enthusiastically. The same thing happens in fairly much any 3^rd world country

·         So how does this link up with Metrojet and Islamic State and the whole rotten crew? If IS really did blow up the plane, or any other Islamic terrorists did, it will become one more step where’s there’s no going back. Thanks to 9/11, American liberals have already lost so many battles that on the question of individual rights they’re swaying punch drunk. But these rights are so extensive and so entrenched, that by no means have we reached the logical end of the process. Each time Islamists strike at the west, the liberals get more backed into a corner. Not only that, but some fraction of the liberals become hardliners. Give this process a few years, and we’ll all be hardliners.

·         And we’ll massacre the Islamic State and its followers, genuine or coerced. More innocent people than guilty will die. But that’s just the way it goes. Its nothing to bemoan. Following a liberal ideology when that means you and your will become victims is impossible. Life is paramount. Any and all of us will gladly sacrifice liberal ideals for our own survival. And it’s the right thing to do.

Sunday 0230 GMT November 8, 2015

·         Open letter to Pope Francis Your Holiness, can you kindly put off your Vatican reforms until I negotiate a saint-ship for myself? I am told that people are spending just under a million euros for this great honor. Now, it is true that by raiding my youngster change bowl in his room I can come up with 80 cents, which is a bit short of 1-million euros. At the same time, you are the Pope of the poor. Each according to his means, each according to his needs, and all that. My means are a dollar if I borrow 20-cents from one of my students. As for needs, the Church saw fit to saint Mother Teresa for her work with the poor in Calcutta. Here I am, 21-years into teaching America’s school children and trying to save America, one student at a time. True I took no vow of poverty, but I am poorer than Saint Mother Teresa. She at least did not have to pay rent and food and so on. And she gained endless fame for her work. I have just spent one month with special education students at my school. In this time I helped five students move up in math one marking grade level. It was their work, my job was merely to teach them as each needed, and to show I believed in thier capacity for success. Please tell me what’s harder: rescuing abandoned babies or rescuing American children? So where’s MY appreciation? These are my achievements over just one typical month. By all means, reform away. But give me a chance to present my petition to Rome. Sincerely yours, the Editor.

·         More seriously, Editor has been wondering what are these massive alleged corruptions at the Vatican? Given the size of the Vatican corporate enterprise, a few million dollars one way or another is insignificant. So the Church undervalues its properties. Haven’t the critics heard of standard accounting? After hundreds of years of depreciation these properties are worthless. So the Vatican corporate vice presidents live well, rent free in luxurious apartments. Free housing, a housing allowance in lieu is standard practice worldwide. Our President, for example, does not pay rent, let alone market rates, for his crib. Is that a scandal? Editor thinks so. After all, at $400,000/year salary, he can certainly afford a nice two-bedroom apartment downtown. But few others would agree. And while we’re at it, why can’t he fly economy commercial? As a loyal American taxpayer, Editor can’t afford to fly even unpressurized cargo hold. Forget that, he doesn’t have the eight bucks to take the bus to the airport.

·         Editor suggests your critics get a life. They need to come teach minority-majority schools inside the Washington Beltway. That would introduce them to reality.

·         Chicago, my kind of town A 9-year old child was targeted and murdered because his father is a gang member. The media would have us believe that America is outraged. The media has to stop manufacturing narratives and presenting them to us to comply with. No, America is not shocked. The truth is that America does not care. There are 315-million people in America. That’s a whacking great number of people. Its way too many for anyone not immediately in the neighborhood to give a quarter hoot. And the truth is the media doesn’t care either. So, dear media, just shut up and go away.

·         Massive demonstrations, rioting in American cities as 6-year old shot to death by police. Actually, no, we just made that up. You see, the child was white. And while one can’t tell from pictures, given Americans of all races are all colors, but one of the perpetrators seems to a person-of-color. White lives don’t matter. That’s because whites are the oppressors, and deserve what’s coming to them. You will ask: Do Americans of color really believe that? Unfortunately, many of them do. Editor wishes he could take his minority friends back in time to Boston of the 1960s where he grew up. They might be quite amazed to see how the police treated the poor white Italian and Irish kids if the police felt disrespected.

Saturday 0230 GMT November 7, 2015

·         The rats start deserting USS Obama This Commentary article and other indications forwarded by reader Mike Thompson say that Obama’s advisors are feeling, or getting ready to flee his ship. With a few days less than a year to go before the next election, one supposes each advisor has to decide when to jump so as to have a chance of redeeming themselves, or leave it too late and forever be associated with Obama’s military and foreign policy failures.

·         The dearly departed/department are busy with their cover stories, the gist of which is: “I had nothing to do with this, Obama wouldn’t listen to my advice”. The Pentagon which includes America’s most senior military officers, allows that it is “frustrated” with Obama’s indecisions. Very strange, because for 7-years all these folks neither expressed their frustration nor bailed.

·         The way they are telling the story, Obama is a singularly darned-minded leader who refused to listen to his advisors. He, entirely by his own little self, came with the policies for Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, Iran and so on, all after 2008 to be sure. Meanwhile, the true minded patriots concerned only with America’s best interest, stood by helplessly, so beaten down they could find no way to bring Obama’s mistakes to the public’s knowledge.

·         What utter bilge. These people vied with each other to enable Obama’s foreign policy weirdness. They sold their souls and their conscience so that they could be movers and shakers at the very center of American power, and by extension, world power. Now all of a sudden they decide the policies they enthusiastically supported/enabled were not their doing? Have they no sense of morality? Have they… Editor has to stop to take a deep breath. Because obviously they have no morality and particularly no concern for their country, only for their immediate petty advantage. They are lesser than the lowest form of sentiment life on earth. There are no words to do justice to their betrayal of America – and their leader.

·         Whoa! Some of our readers will say. Editor is defending Obama? Not one bit. Editor has repeatedly said that Obama lacks the guts to run up his true colors, which are those of a pacifist. He has true beliefs, he just can’t stand by them. So he equivocates and dithers, fails all around, and gets damned by all sides. A man without character, ideas, or ability. A total disgrace to Irish Americans everywhere.

·         None of this justifies or excuses his lamprey advisors, who having sucked all the blood out of Obama than they can get, are off to search for new victims. This disgusting spectacle has been going on for fifty years, since the US went large in Second Indochina. A country as old and as great as the US can survive one generation of self-serving criminals. We are now in our second generation. If there is a third, America will collapse faster than any one of has imagined.

Friday 0230 GMT November 6, 2015

Internet issues prevented Thursday update.

·         Strange doings In Syria, Russia has been bombing in support of “opposition” groups. Meaning, not in support of Assad, but in support of his opposition which presumably is threatened by the Islamic groups. The only way we can read this is that US-backed opposition groups have gotten fed up of waiting for the US to help them; failing to find help in the degree they want, they have turned to Russia. Against, unless later information invalidates our assumption, the Russians are now taking over “our” allies. There are talks underway between Moscow and Baghdad to see what help the former can give the latter. So again, Russia is playing in “our” backyard. The US, which has tried to dominate the region, largely by doing little and talking much, is not quite ready to kiss us goodbye, but let us just say the region is dating other people. No doubt, this too is part of Obama’s much vaunted strategy.

·         Next, it appears that 30 or fewer US Special Forces are in Syria, and they not to act as Forward Air Controllers. In a sick kind of way this makes sense. FACs have to operate right up at the edge of combat. Given the frequency with which opposition groups turn coat, and given we’re speaking of the point both combatants are trying to kill each other, how are we to protect our FACs? Remember, the orders from Washington are “not a single casualty”. If the SF are there as advisors, one wonders how much advising they can do well back of the front where it’s safe. This whole thing is quite baffling. With the US Government you just cannot assume at some point there will be clarity.

·         Also next, Editor’s friend Major AH Amin who has been more or less continuously in Afghanistan for at the last ten years, sent us an irate email. How is it, he asked, that the US is claiming to have destroyed a huge AQ training camp in Afghanistan when the US has been saying for years there’s about 60 AQ in the country? So we asked Bill Roggio, of www.longwarjournal.org for his thoughts. Bill has been intensively covering the US wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and now Syria for at least ten years. Bill referred us to several articles he’s written. The first one dates from 2010, and the gist is the CIA has been outrightedly lying to minimize the AQ in Afghanistan threat to support the US Government’s claim that we were winning the Afghan War.

·         Now look, folks, we cannot emphasize how serious this is, if it’s true. From our rather limited knowledge of the CIA, the agency has essentially provided true intelligence which is then manipulated by the Pentagon/civil leadership. From our rather more extensive knowledge of the State Department, their analysts always turn in high-quality depth analysis but no one in the US government listens to a word they have to say. But if CIA is also dancing to the tune of the piper, plus as is well known our top generals are complete sell-outs to the President whoever he may be, then basically we are doomed. This may provide a partial explanation of why we just keep failing and failing and failing in our overseas strategy (aside from not having a strategy to begin with).

·         When we say “intelligence” we are not talking about what the heads of the numerous terror groups are thinking at a particular time. That kind of penetration is amazingly hard to achieve, especially since the leadership of each organization is very small and insular. Forget the spy novels. We’re talking about simply reporting the facts on the ground. For example, “The Taliban has an estimated xyz number of men in abc district, and they control 123 amount of territory. “ Just an objective view of what’s going on. Without this, how can higher decision makers ever make a correct decision?

·         The problem here is – and the country first saw this in Vietnam – in American organization there is zero tolerance of dissent. You either back the head of the team, who takes her/his orders from the highest political levels, or you go find another team to play on. When reading about the German side of World War II, Editor is constantly amazed, astonished, unbelieving, at how extensively and forcefully the German generals argued between themselves, with their superior commanders, and especially how toughly the very senior most generals argued with Hitler, right down to screaming matches. Can you imagine General Petraeus and President Obama having a screaming match in which the good general refuses either to moderate his words or to back down?

·         If you are a Lord of the Rings fan, you might recall when Aragon, Legolas, and Gimli are racing to rescue the captured hobbits, they run into the Riders of Rohan. One rider says words to the effect of no one can get away lying to us, because we never lie. It’s that simple. If you lie habitually, you never know when others are lying to you. No way to run a great country. No way to run anything. Aside from what commandment Moses may have brought down from the mount, there is a very good business reason never to lie. You will always be able tell when others are lying to you. This is not idealism, this is hard, practical reality.

Wednesday 0230 GMT November 4, 2015

·         Editor was scolded by an acquaintance for saying Obama has no Mideast strategy Indeed, Editor was told, he has a clear strategy: (a) US cannot resolve local issues, only the locals can; (b) no commitment of US troops as in Afghanistan/Iraq; (c) local forces, assisted and trained and advised by US troops will do the fighting. Our answer to this is indirect.

·         Everyone knows that the Editor never gets a Saturday date or any other day. Editor has a clear strategy to get a date.  Bit of background. Editor has never dated. He was married at 19, and remained in a state of holy matrimony till 2003, when he was a bit short of 60. True, he was married many times and had his share of affairs. But none of this involved dating. You met someone at a party, you got married the next day or had an immediate affair. Since Editor simply does not know how to date (and nor does he have the time/money), and since American ladies are quite whacked out, his strategy has been to hang around where there’s women (as in school, college, and the gym), and wait to be picked up.

·         Well, this is year 12, and he has still to be picked up, for reasons Editor feels too shy to discuss. Okay, some factors are he is old, short, bald, short of sight, hard of hearing – like if you’re more than 2-feet from him, he can’t hear - of ample girth, and poor. If you are rich, none of the other factors count. Anyway, our readers will ask incredulously: “That is your strategy? Mon, why are you insulting the word ‘strategy’? You have zero strategy and therefore you have a zero score.”

·         So it is with Obama. Expecting the Afghans, Iraqis, Libyans, Syrians, and Yemenis to solve their own problem is utterly pointless. These nations have been so savaged by war that there is no government worth the name capable of resolving huge problems such as civil war. When there are no government forces we can usefully support, or rebels that we can get to fight under our set conditions, how are the civil wars to be fought? As for the absurd notion that US troops wont fight, let’s go back a bit.

·         1914: Germans invade France and the Low Countries, Previous Ghost of Obama says “we will send aid and advisors but no troops, the locals must resolve their own problems.”

·         1939: Germany invades Europe, Previous Ghost of Obama says “we will send aid and advisors but no troops, the locals must resolve their own problems.” How well would that have worked?

·         1945-1948: Soviet Union invades Western Europe, Previous Ghost of Obama says “we will send aid and advisors but no troops, the locals must resolve their own problems.” How well would that have worked?

·         1950: The Norks backed by China attack South Korea, Previous Ghost of Obama says “we will send aid and advisors but no troops, the locals must resolve their own problems.” How well would that have worked?

·         1961-onward: with heavy support from North Vietnam and China, South Vietnamese guerillas start taking over the country. Previous Ghost of Obama says “we will send aid and advisors but no troops, the locals must resolve their own problems.” How well would that have worked?

·         1990: Saddam invades Kuwait, looks set to take over the oil Gulf States. Previous Ghost of Obama says “we will send aid and advisors but no troops, the locals must resolve their own problems.” How well would that have worked?

·         So, no need to beat this point to death, readers get the idea. Simple question: how can Obama and his supporters possibly claim he has a strategy. This is exactly akin to saying: “My strategy to get to Mars is to sit in my arm chair and wait for the random workings of quantum mechanics to instantly move me to Mars.” We are not being sarcastic. If you sit long enough, you will be instantly transported anywhere, even to the ends of the universe. Science says so. And science also says it could happen in the next second, it could also take several live times of the universe. What does one call who relies on this strategy? Insane.

·         The big problem in America is that if you say anything against Obama, you get labeled an Obama-hater. Similarly, if you criticized Bush, you got labeled a Bush-hater. You cannot make an impartial, reasoned military argument that the “strategy” is a fantasy. As such all tactics to implement that strategy must fail. Editor has nothing against Obama. He’s an amiable duffer, incapable of anything practical because of his Harvard education, but too stupid to see that. Stay in the Mideast, leave the Mideast – Editor can make a case either way. These wars affect him not a bit. (He cant even say it costs him money in taxes because he is so poor he gets everything back from federal, state, and giant property tax rebates from state, county, and city).

·         But please no one say Obama has a strategy.

Tuesday 0230 GMT November 3, 2015

·         Letter from Reader KV on Modi and Hindu intolerance Yesterday we commented on what the media reports as a growing wave of right-wing Hindu intolerance in India. Reader KV sent us several articles and statistics contradicting this picture. For example, he says communal incidents (in India defined as incidents between different communities) has not increased under Modi. He says that when Muslims kill Hindus, there is no outcry in either the Indian or the world press. (This by the way, is true.) He feels there is a media campaign being waged by liberals who can be very illiberal (no argument here) against the Indian Prime Minister. And, he says, Modi did condemn the murder of a Muslim man accused of eating beef (turned out it was goat).

·         We think KV makes some telling points. The problem is that in the internet age, perceptions become more important than the truth. We see this daily in the United States. Mr. Modi, who is said to be Master of the Universe in the new media, got elected precisely because his US supporters mounted a highly effective new media campaign. As an inevitable consequence of the new media, expectations rise irrationally high. This is true about Mr. Modi. His counteraction should be to realize he is losing the media battle, and that he needs to strike back with his facts and figures.

·         All Mr. Modi has to do is to say: “I have directed the Home Minister to uphold the law of the land in all cases; my government does not tolerate communalism.” Instead he has chosen to remain very quiet – one statement made days ago does not count in this new age. His home minister – India’s top law enforcement person – instead of vowing to pursue all wrongdoers irrespective of religion, has been joining the scrum by insisting the anti-Modi campaign is politically motivated.  Well, yes. But so is Modi’s refusal to take a firm stand, and so is the Home Minister’s refusal to promise swift, impartial action against all lawbreakers. Given the perception of Mr. Modi’s action’s in the Ahmedabad communal rights (started by Muslims) in 2002, shortly after he became Chief Minister of the State, many people are scared of him and so watch him extra carefully.

·         It has to be clearly said Modi was acquitted by a judicial inquiry. The difficulty here was that the accusation against Modi was that when rioting started, he told his law enforcement officials there was no need for an immediate, tough crackdown. So we’re talking about action NOT taken, and we’re talking about verbal discussions. This does not prove that Modi did order a stand-down. But that doesn’t mean he did not “suggest” a stand-down; and he was unable to show he had acted rapidly and firmly. (Note the similarity between then and the current situation.) There were delays in calling out the Army, which is the responsibility of the civil administration. Once the Army came out, issued its usual shoot-to-kill regardless of religion orders, and after some unknown number of persons were killed, the riots at once ended.

·         Mr. Modi’s supporters can accuse their Congress party opponents of much the same thing in the anti-Sikh rioting following Mrs. Gandhi’s 1984 assassination. The Congress government made no effort to stop the killing (perhaps 3000 Sikhs were murdered in cold blood); the Army was ready to intervene within the hour but was given no such orders. When the Army was told to act, if Editor recalls right on Day 4 of the killings, the murders ended – immediately. If we recall right, the Army did not even need to kill any rioters. The minute it came on the streets, the rioters realized the game was over and stopped. The Congress Government then and later made no effort to apprehend its own people who had planned and instigated the killings, though 30-years have passed.

·         There can be no question that the greatest number of communal killings in India after the 1947 mass murders have been committed under the rule of the Congress party. There can be no question that the Congress has absolutely no moral right to condemn Modi.

·         But you see, none of this is helpful. Mr. Modi was elected because he promised to end the old ways of functioning, where everything was based on gaining political advantage. Mr. Modi was going to be India’s first manager PM, as opposed to a PM addicted to rhetoric. He cannot expect to be given a free pass just because the other side is wicked. No one cares what the other side has done: Indians know the other side is a bunch of filthy, corrupt, criminals. We want to see Mr. Modi take the lead in addressing the concerns of the people and in creating a new India, not returning to the tactics of the old India.

·         Again, perception is more important than the reality.

Monday 0230 GMT November 2, 2015

·         India Editor admits that he avoids the non-defense India news these days because it seems there is one cringe-making story after another. Strangely, this is happening at a time that the Indian economy is doing truly well: 7.4% increase in GDP and so on. China says it is down to 7%, but those who look closely at China say it may be 3%. China is an aging nation because of the 1-child policy; the recent revocation will have little effect for a couple of generations. In another 35 years, it is said, 35% of Chinese will be old. Since as yet there is no social security system, this bodes lots of trouble because China’s GDP growth will fall and remain fallen in a short while. India is bursting at the seams with youngsters. Moreover, India is so messed up bureaucratically that years of reform are needed, and each reform will spur growth.

·         India is going through what seems to be an extreme reaction against minorities, which in today’s instant-media age garners no end of negative coverage. Now look, minorities have always been welcome in India because Hinduism is the epitome of “Live and Let Live.” No kidding, but if you wanted to start a cult, all you have to do is go to Delhi, find a nice tree to sit under, strip off your clothes, smear ash over yourself, and refuse to say a word. Within three days people will be leaving you offerings, in a week you’ll have devotees sitting with you 24/7, in a year you’ll have your own ashram, and in three you’ll have your own political party. In ten you may even become the leader of the country. Editor is certain he could not stay silent for a day, forget 10-years, but really, India is a land of infinite possibilities.

·         But historically, however, India has not been kind to minorities who try and exert political power at the expense of the Hindu super-majority. Okay, everyone knows that, but you may well ask: “What’s happened that the Hindu supermajority – 80% of the population – has become so anti-minority, mostly against Muslims, some against Christians?”

·         Here’s the thing: 99% of the 80% majority remain committed to secularism. But 1%, unfortunately associated with the ruling party and particularly with PM Modi, is angry and upset with Muslims, which means they fear Muslims. People talk about “Hindu Nationalist BJP”. BJP has ruled India before. Fascinatingly, the BJP governments at the Center and in the states, tended to clamp down rigorously against anti-minority violence. The party took “One India for all Indians” very seriously.

·         The reason is simple. Indians are secular people. We suffered nine centuries of minority oppression, first under the Muslims, then under the Christians. We know the answer to that is to respect all religions, and that just because we can, does not mean its right to oppress minorities. Hinduism believes there is one god, and he has as many manifestations as there are individuals.  

·         Now, however, because of political, social, and cultural factors, a teeny-tiny minority of Hindus seeks to insist that the Hindu way of life is the only way. By all means live as a minority, but your first duty is to respect the feelings of the majority. We’d be sitting here until the cows came home and were sent to the glue factory before we could cover any of these factors adequately. Editor’s preferred explanation is simple. Rising Islam is intolerant in the extreme – even most Muslims are considered fit only to be killed. Given India’s historical fear of Muslims and the genocides they perpetrated, it’s perfectly understandable  many have reacted with anger at Rising Islam. Seventy years of war with Pakistan has not done Indian secularism good. Pakistanis are indoctrinated to hate Hindus, the same way as Arabs are indoctrinated to hate Jews (and as Europeans were taught). There comes a point where some cannot take it anymore, and start saying: play by Hindu rules and or go live in Pakistan. This is particularly true of the Muslim Kashmiris, who many Indians believe – with good reason – to be treacherous double-dealers.

·         This element has been present since independence in 1947. The difference now is the media, which basically creates reality, and a Prime Minister who tells the extreme wing of his party: “I feel your pain”. Before Americans start criticizing Mr. Modi, best to remember that in America, more than in India, fanatical extremists have taken over the political discourse. Extremism is rising everywhere in the world because the New World Disorder is threatening everyone. How can India be different?

·         Editor’s response is “India has to be different. Our sense of uniqueness, Indian exceptionalism if you will, is wrapped up in our beliefs in tolerance. If we start acting like everyone else, we will end by being no better than everyone else.” Is that what Indians want?

Sunday 0230 GMT November 1, 2015

·         Cowboy Obama rides again – facing backwards as usual Sometimes Editor wonders why Obama bothers making these gestures. Why waste everyone’s time? Why not say what he really believes? Just say he’s a pacifist, doesn’t believe force resolves anything, and outsiders cannot solve local problems. That way the world will at least respect him. Right now, in the US everyone hates him because he simply a wishy-wash, neither for a hard foreign policy, or a soft policy. Nor is he in the middle. He simply just IS NOT anything.

·         What is truly absurd is that he takes a minimum option, divides it by half, then by ten, and then by a hundred. What’s left he acts on, and then expresses disappointment that no results are achieved. How can anyone respect him or his national security team and by extension, respect America?

·         Goaded by his national security team, who are such useless gas-farters that they can’t any more stand their own stink, Obama is going to take decisive action in Syria. He is going to dispatch “fewer” than 50 SF troops to Syria. That’s fifty. As in half a hundred. Here is the US, with greater military power than the rest of the world power, and he’s sending fifty men. Left to himself, Obama would send no one. Oh yes, he’s going to intensify the Syria air campaign. Except from what Editor can tell, this means adding six fighters. Some intensification.

·         Then Obama virtuously announces the US will fight only Islamic State. At which point, most of us are left scratching our heads. Aren’t we in Syria to help overthrow Assad? But isn’t IS Assad’s enemy? So we are actually fighting for Assad? Apparently, but the President has failed to tell the nation that. Meanwhile, of course, the Turks (our allies) continue to hammer the Syrian Kurds (our allies). The Turks are not fighting IS for a good reason: they are major godfathers to this revolting organization. True that it has suddenly occurred to Turkey that it no longer has the control over IS that it may once have had (or thought it had), and that IS has made it clear the Turkey, too, are infidels. So, on to Constantinople and all that.

·         Then there’s Russia, who is slamming anti-Assad fighters, but also exploring an alliance with “our” Kurds who realize that unlike the US, the Russians don’t just talk, they fight. With the immediate danger to Assad receding, Russia is also attacking IS. That makes the Russians our allies. But aren’t the Russians are enemies because they want to shore up Assad? And aren’t they attacking Ukraine, which wants to part of NATO? Aren’t they threatening our NATO allies in the Baltics and Poland, also an ally? Aren’t the Russians showing the US that they can fly off the US Coast when they want and cut the trans-Atlantic cables on which we depend so much when they want? Not to speak of casually making clear to Sweden they can use its islands to take the Baltics. The Arctic theatre is under threat from Russia (and now China of all people), but Obama wants to cut 2600 Arctic troops from the few thousand that we have.

·         The truth is, that the puerile, stunted minds that constitute America’s national security decision-making are just way, way too unintelligent to cope with the bewildering events shaping our world. They are not just the Junior varsity team, they are the pre-Kindergarten team. Uh Oh, here come the pre-Kindergartners to protest – what? Oh, luckily it’s only the Halloween kids this time.

·         But not to worry, folks. Obama’s “fewer than 50” SF troops in Syria will turn the tide. Not.

Thursday 0230 GMT October 29, 2015

·         US bomber contract awarded to Northrup Grumman Though folks are referring to this as the B-3, its by no means clear that this is the official designation. That will depend on if there are other, cancelled bombers after the B-2. These programs were made classified after the B-1, so we don’t know if there are others that were cancelled. We mention this program for a reason: the B-2 was ordered in one-sixth the number planned. So no one should be surprised it costs $1.5-billion per unit. The new bomber will have a 100-unit run and will come in at only $550-million fly-away. Admittedly, the new bomber is less of a technological leap than the B-2, which incorporated all sorts of exotic stuff. This has helped keep the price down. But this is also the way these programs are supposed to be done: build each new weapon system as an improvement over the previous one, greatly reducing development time and risk. US loves to go for weapon systems that are far more advanced than the previous (F-35 versus F-16/F-18). So it takes donkey’s years to develop them, and the per-unit costs are mind-numbing.

·         Someone who either doesn’t like expensive weapons programs or does not like the B-2 was laughing himself to death after someone else said the new bomber is not intended to be used. Well, little laughing buddy, you sure should hope it is not used. Deterrence weapons are NOT intended to be used simple because if you have a hundred new bombers flying the combat mission they are designed for means they are dropping strategic nukes on someone. That is good neither for humanity nor for the planet. That does not mean they CANNOT fly the intended mission. Plus the whole point of N-weapons is that you build them so that you don’t have to use them. If the laughing person finds this too complex a concept for his little mind, perhaps he should take up something simpler as a hobby, like making holes in the ground and filling them.

·         As far as Editor is concerned, his main interest in the new bomber is the big boost to US conventional warfare capabilities. The two 8-ship B-2 squadrons can, on a single sortie, accurately destroy 320 targets. It will likely be at least 3-days before the next sorties are flown. This plane operates from US-bases for security reasons, but it is intended for global strike. So its crews fly whacking long sorties. B-2s are also sensitive beast, lack dragons. They need much care and feeding before they undertake a fresh sortie. If the new bomber is more robust maintenance-wise, and if a fleet of 100 gives 72-aircraft, almost 1450 targets will be taken down in one fleet sortie. That is seriously significant damage. After three sorties, there won’t be anything left to bomb in a typical country.

·         Meanwhile, Editor would like to respectfully ask Mr. Obama: do you think war is some kind of a joke? It is difficult to see in your “new” Syria/Iraq strategy and evidence that you take the business of war seriously. You are reportedly “frustrated” at the lack of progress in Syria/Iraq. This shows how completely out of reality you are. How can there be progress when (a) your strategy is massively flawed; and (b) the resources you have provided are massively small? Your approach is that of using a toy bulldozer to create flood levees, then saying “I’m so frustrated this is not working”.

·         The latest plan – created only because Obama does not want to be seem to be helpless in the face of Russia’s arrival in Syria and likely arrival in Iraq (the Iraqis have asked) – involves putting US FACs with selected units, and posting US advisors to selected brigades. Lord, please save us from the morons who run American national security policy. This would not have worked back when US intervention began, and it certainly will achieve little now. All the forces the US has trained have failed to work, Iraqi or Syria. US needs to give up these fantasies. If it really wants to clean out IS and other religious fanatics, the only way to do it is to support Iranian militias in combat with air, intelligence, and logistics. It also means making a coalition with the Russians instead of the useless Euros.

·         So now what is it you want to do? Play toy soldiers or win? If the former, carry on. If the latter, do what’s necessary, not what your acutely sensitive mind can accept, as we did in World War II. Please stop making a fool of America.  

Wednesday 0230 GMT October 28, 2015

·         US Navy “showdown” with China So the US Navy upheld freedom of navigation off China’s artificial island in the Spratlys. USS Lassen, a Burke class missile destroyer, sailed within 12-nautical-miles of the island. Editor is so used to the media’s hyperbole that he didn’t even notice the word “showdown” being used by some to refer to the incident. Until reader Mike Thompson commented that the Battle of Midway was a showdown and not the sailing of a single destroyer. The Lassen was accompanied by both a P-3 and a P-8. Since the US Navy is unlikely to have taken any chances, one assumes backup was available.

·         The Chinese reaction was its usual overheated moaning, whining, and threatening. Said China: "The actions of the U.S. warship have threatened China's sovereignty and security interests, jeopardized the safety of personnel and facilities on the reefs, and damaged regional peace and stability" http://www.nbcnews.com/news/china/u-s-destroyer-sails-through-disputed-waters-south-china-sea-n451981

·         To begin with, exactly what are these sovereignty interests? The Law of the Sea says artificially raised islands do not constitute sovereign waters. Otherwise the US could raise an island 12.000001-nautical miles off China’s Dalian Naval Base, giving the Chinese one micrometer worth of space to sail in and out of that facility. So yes, the US did raise its hind leg and piddle on China, but when someone is determined to be piddled on, the piddlers will oblige. By the way, this is the same Law of the Sea that presumably China relied on to send five warships off Alaska, was greeted with a laconic statement by the US: They have a right to be there; they didn’t come close than the limit, move along, nothing to see here. End of the matter.

·         The Chinese have NEVER been this close to the US mainland, unless the famous Admiral Totally-Imaginary-Explorer happened in 933 BC to have indulged in a piddle in what became San Francisco Bay. As far as Editor was concerned, that the US was so casual about this extraordinary event was a sign of America’s decline. The US will say: well, they didn’t intrude, and we can hardly raise a fuss when we ourselves claim freedom of navigation.

·         Wrong. This kind of rationalizing is what symbolizes the sinking of America. Those five ships should have been shadowed to the teeth, and not by an aircraft, either. US should have said the approach was unprecedented (true), posed a grave threat to America (true), destabilized America and posed a threat to its citizens (true), and the Chinese had better think twice about another provocation else next time we’ll be forced to whack them in self-defense (don’t hold your breath).

·         The world’s only super-power does not dignify statements such as “we do it, they do it, no big deal”. How about the US sends five warships without warning, without explanation, to say 20-nautical miles off Shanghai. Would the Chinese be saying” well, they’re in international waters. Don’t know why they came, but they have a right to be here”? No. They would have swarmed the intruders, using giant missile-armed Yellow Rubber Duckies or whatever it is the Chinese have (really, who cares what the Chinese have; aren’t we supposed to be King of the Hill.

·         We said the other say that the China Seas are already lost to the US because we no longer dare to use force to support our interests in the area. We don’t admit this, but if anyone thinks the US Navy will get into an armed confrontation with China west of Taiwan – and soon west of Korea – then they’re smoking something good not available to ordinary people. Sailing a ship inside 12-nm of the Spratly artificial island doesn’t change that.

·         By the way, two Chinese destroyers including one of its newest types trailed Lassen closely. We didn't bother when five Chinese warships sailed close to Alaska. Whose the serious party, China or the US?

Tuesday 0230 GMT October 27, 2015

·         Canada pulls out of anti-IS campaign Last we heard, Canada was part of western civilization, the same civilization that IS and Islamo-fascists have sworn to destroy. It is not good news that Canada’s new Prime Minister elect is going to pull out the Canadian micro-contribution to the war (6 CF-18). Another thing grates: Canada spends just 1% of GDP on defense, whereas the NATO suggestion is 2%. And Canada, on a per capita basis, is one of the richest countries in the world. The charismatic PM elect has said he aims to look more inward as opposed to outward.

·         That’s so sweet. It’s so noble. It’s terribly touching. It makes one want to plant a large boot in young man’s exalted behind. How exactly does one justify looking inward when an existential war is underway? It also constitutes another step in the now seemingly inevitable end of western civilization. If you aren’t willing to defend yourself, you don’t deserve to live. However civilized the Canadians may be – and they are indeed very civilized and very nice people – the world remains a bitterly uncivilized place. No one can simply isolate themselves from the world nowadays.

·         Notice we are saying nothing about the PM-elect’s plan to pull out of the F-35 plan, which is causing no end of moaning and weeping among those concerned about defense. Look, the darn plane is so advanced that one has to ask “where is the adversary?” A new version of the F-18 is likely to be good enough for the threats of the next 20-years, perhaps longer. After that no one is particularly clear on the shape of combat aviation. If unmanned fighters are going to come into widespread use, then why not get an interim fighter? BTW, we’ve mentioned this before, but one of the features of the F-35 is that the pilot has a 360-degree view, also up and down. This is sci-fi stuff.

·         Canada’s “inward” turn and refusal to move defense spending to 2% makes one wonder: the Canucks seem to be counting on a free ride from the United States. Canada is of so great strategic importance to the defense of the United States, that if tomorrow it disbanded its armed forces, it would make no difference to its national security. In fact, Canadian defense is already an oxymoron because its capability is so low. Forget IS for a moment, the Big Hungry Red Bear is pushing as fast as he can into the Arctic. And so are the Chinese. Of course, the Canucks can yawn at these dangers. Good old Sam will come and bail out the Canadians.

·         Stating “You can take it up with my Big Brother” when there is a military threat may be sound politics, but it is caddish and unseemly for a proud people that made more than their fair share in the two mighty World Wars of the 20^th Century. It leaves a bad taste in the mouth, similar to that left when skunks fart in your beer. Canada gain a great deal from the US security umbrella and from the global security the US provides to Canada. One example is the protection against rogue nuclear-attacks. How would it hurt the Canadians from contributing an ABM battalion?

·         And how does it hurt the Canadians to participate in the anti-IS coalition? The benefits are immense. Now, if Canada is saying “the way the Americans are running the war against Islamic extremism is downright moronic, and we are showing our displeasure by taking away our six fighters”, Editor would be very sympathetic to Ottawa. The reality is, however, that the Pretty Face aka Canada’s PM-Elect seems incapable of even such simple thinking. PS: we are not blaming him for his face: given his parents it’s not his fault he’s pretty. Editor would like to see less self-indulgence. The Sixties are over – long ago. Looking inward in 2015? That’s quite hilarious.

Monday 0230 GMT October 26, 2015

·         Israel-Palestine You will have noticed that we have not been mentioning the new spate of troubles in Israel. That’s because there is no solution. It’s a zero sum game. Palestinians are so full of rage that they are making senseless attacks on Israeli at the certain cost of their own levels. So far as we know, 13 Israelis are dead and almost three times as many Palestinians. As an example of what we mean by senseless attacks, consider knife wielders who try and get on buses or attack Israelis on populated streets. Given the very high Israeli security alert and the prevalence of Israeli guns, trying to pull off these kinds of attacks is a near automatic death sentence. But the Palestinians don’t seem to care, meaning that they are now beyond despair and don’t care if they die as long as there is a chance of killing an Israeli.

·         What we find surprising is that the attackers never seem to have guns. Now, with the tight security an attacker is certainly not going to succeed in getting an AK into a crowd of Israelis. But handguns are surely feasible. One would think with all the smuggling that goes on, Palestinians would have some success in obtaining handguns. Apparently not. One probable reason is that the Palestinians are thoroughly infiltrated by Israel or its agents. Palestine, after all, has the population of a typical middle-sized city. There is little going on that the Israelis don’t know. The border crossings are protected so closely, you’d have trouble bringing a pea-shooter across. What about the borders themselves? Well, Israel being the size of a postage stamp and possessing lots of high-technology, the borders are probably better secured than any in the world. It is also possible that Hamas “discourages” guns because they don’t want the Israelis reoccupying Gaza.

·         The source of the trouble, as you know, is the relentless expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank. We are told that since the policy started, the number of people has grown by a factor of 30. This land was seized by Israel in the 1967 War and will, by next year, be home to 400,000 Israeli citizens. This is not the only problem: East Jerusalem is also heavily settled, the population here will also be 400,000 in a couple of years. Israel now has over 8-million people and space is very short. The only alternative is to forcibly take it from the Palestinians, which violated Fourth Geneva. Israel justifies its actions by saying the West Bank is disputed territory.

·         Obviously, land is equally precious to the Palestinians, many of whom have been living there for a hundred years. The Israelis take away Palestine land in the worst possible way. People are given a few days to evacuate, then come the bulldozers to destroy existing structure, orchard, and groves, and the construction crews move in. It is all covered by Israeli forces. The displaced residents cannot just lie down on the ground and sing “We will not be moved”, because regardless of what they do, they will be moved by force.

·         The illegality and cruelty of this process is terrible, but there it is. No one seems to be able to stop the Israelis because the Israelis always pull the Holocaust Card: you all stood by while millions of our people were exterminated like bugs; we will not listen to your protestations of morality. You force the Arabs to take their own, or you take them. It’s not our problem. Naturally, because Western humanism is these days suffused with the idea that the white man is the worst thing that has happened to the world, it’s not hard to stoke the guilt. Aside from the white nations, no one cares half-a-hoot about the displaced Palestinians. The Mideast Arabs have a particular loathing for their unfortunate kin, something Israel never ceases to point out to the white nations, making them feel even guiltier for picking on the Israelis. As for the rest of the world like China and India, they clearly state this is not their problem: they have their own intractable ones.

·         At the end of all this, it is very hard to deny that the Jews began to settle Palestine thousands of years before the Prophet (Blessed Be His Name). They were forced out of the region by the Romans, who were only the first of many oppressors. Understandably, the Israelis reject the notion that they have expelled anyone: from their view, they are only reclaiming their own lands. And BTW, having a continuous 6000-year history allows the Israelis to be first in any debate about the issue of land.

·         The irresolvable problem is that every single one of us is an invader at some point in the past. If you accept the theory of African Eve, the entire world belongs to the descendants of that original group of 20 or so South Africans who left their homes maybe as far as back as 200,000-years, to see what was on the other side of the mountain.

·         None of this debate is of the least interest to the Palestinians, who for decades have been the Wretched of the Earth.

Friday 0230 GMT October 23, 2015

·         When a US Marine wimps out, then it really is all over In all Editor’s born days, he has not heard a US Marine using the word “difficult” as an excuse for not defeating the enemy. One supposes that if one lives long enough, anything is possible. What other explanation for a statement the US Chairman JCS made on October 22^nd? The Chairman, a Marine, said that Islamic State has been difficult to defeat because it is flexible and adaptable. http://rudaw.net/english/middleeast/iraq/221020153

·         So – just to take 1940-2014 – the Japanese were not flexible and adaptable? What about the Chinese and the Norks? NVA and VC not adaptable and flexible? Saddam’s lot and the Shia militias and Taliban were not adaptable and flexible? Did the Marines not defeat all of them on the  battlefield? So what exactly is JCS Chairman talking about? Is he even aware of what he said? And does he think because the enemy is flexible and adaptable, he and his predecessors should get a Get Out of Jail Free card and they are all absolved of all responsibility to fight and win?

·         An analogy. Editor tries to build a 4-bedroom house using the toy machines from Baby’s First Construction Kit. He fails. Is he justified in saying “Oh, jeeze, this is such a difficult job and I cannot be successful at it?” Obviously Editor cannot get away with this nonsense because you all will be shouting at him: “Use the proper tools, moron!”

·         US is the most powerful military nation in the world. It cannot defeat a bunch of rag tag folks that are such losers they have to be promised wives (who are kidnapped, naturally) as a condition of enlistment? Er, not really. US can defeat anyone it wants to. But it apparently does not want to exert itself to defeat a bunch of untrained recruits from 70 countries. We say “does not want to,”, because the alternative is too horrible to contemplate, which is that we cannot defeat a bunch of crazies running around in civilian pickup trucks.

·         There is a false perception that the JCS and Pentagon’s duty is to be guided by the politicals, to make the latter look good. That may be the SecDefense’s duty. For the rest, the military leadership has a single duty: to defeat all American enemies as efficiently and expeditiously as possible. If they are not permitted to do their job, it is the job of the top 100 military leaders to issue a joint letter of resignation. Who do you think will win this one? The President or the military? The military, obviously.

·         Now, when you deliver the occasional love tap from above, adopting a tempo of operations so slow and so effete that the enemy can pull back whenever he wants and adapt before resuming his offensive, obviously you’re not going to defeat anyone. The civil leadership is ignoring every principle of war. And the military leadership, instead of standing up for the country, is enabling the politicals. The Americans, with their usual creative and pithy vocabulary, have a phrase for the results: “Man, this sucks”.

·         Mr. Obama and his close advisors, who are oh-so-smart that they can never remember to unzip their trousers before taking a leak. Then they have the gall to wonder “why are the fronts of our pants always wet? It must be because the enemy is adaptable and flexible”.

·         How is attacking our military policy a racist attack on Mr. Obama? We don’t care if he is green, purple, and orange – simultaneously. He and his are giving this country over to its enemies. Don’t know what you’d call it. Back in Editor’s youth, this was called treason and there was just one remedy. As for the military persons, they need to be busted to the ranks and sent to Leavenworth for hard labor till they die. Why not permit them the dignity of being shot? Because they don’t give a hang about their country’s dignity. They deserve the worst death, and not the best. One way or the other, kill them all, civilians and military alike. That will “encourage” the others to do their duty. This country needs to wake up or soon we wont have a country in the first place, just a confederation of banana republics.

·         Oopsies! We just insulted the bananas and here they come to lay siege to Editor’s house. Readers, if you don’t hear from the Editor soon, you’ll know what happened. Death by being suffocated by a million bananas.  Its not pretty.

Thursday 0230 GMT October 22, 2015

·         Congratulations to Pakistan on its openness regarding its N-doctrine The Foreign Minister has done the world a favor by openly saying that Pakistan will respond to an Indian offensive with tactical nuclear weapons. This is a Big Fat Bluff, because Pakistan does not have workable TNWs, and nor are they particularly useful in small numbers against armor spearheads. Especially as the carrier missile is a tactical-range 60-km. There are several technical issues with all this. Rather than bore readers to death with that, we’ll focus on other issues.

·         Some are aghast that Pakistan has openly stated its doctrine. These matters are supposed to be kept ambiguous. But why? US/NATO openly stated their tactical N-doctrine, and the US has never been ambiguous about its use of these beasties, even going as far as to say US will use them under any circumstances it feels necessary, all the way to an nuclear first strike.

·         Also, Pakistan is a self-declared N-weapon power. So there’s no revelation here. Ambiguity leads only to miscalculations. Better to come right out and say “this is what we will do,” so there is no misunderstanding whatsoever.

·         Why did Pakistan make this announcement? For deterrence, and to squash talk of Pakistan shutting down its N-weapons program in return for America’s 30 pieces of silver. If you’re ambiguous about having the little beasties, how can you deter India from using its overwhelming military forces in a manner that will fall short of Pakistan’s counter-value strike threshold? That is what India’s Cold Start is supposed to do, several hard but shallow punches, seizing a lot of territory – the border with India is over 2200-km, so if you make 5 or 7 or 10 punches, they may go only 10-30 km deep, but could nonetheless gain a lot of ground.

·         BTW, the Indians need to stop their pious hypocrisy about not having a Cold Start doctrine. In our determination not to be seen as aggressive, we make ourselves look weak. If there is no Cold Start, we have no response to shallow Pakistani attacks particularly in Kashmir. Is helpless the way we want the world to perceive us?

·         How does Editor know there is a Cold Start doctrine? Let’s put it this way. Maybe the doctrine is called Start Cold. Or start cold. Or CoLd StArt. The Indians are famous for their extreme nitpicking and legalize. It’s time we started shooting people who engage in this, and time to proclaim: “Yo! We are Big and we are Bad, and you better watch your skinny butt because we’re going to shove it straight out through your mouth.”

·         Also, a mild rebuke to Pakistan. Deterrence cannot be a bluff. You have some suspiciously unreliable N-warheads. No sooner you achieved those, you started hinting about tac nukes. Now you’ve said you have them, you’re talking about sub-kiloton warheads to be used just like a really big artillery shell. You may be surprised, but India is neither bluffed nor deterred. In any case, even if you have them, that’s not going to deter India. It’ll only give the Indians the excuse to use their smaller yield N-weapons. US/West realized long ago tac nukes CANNOT substitute for numbers. Anyway, that’s another story.

·         What Pakistan is doing is channeling the US circa 1950s-early 1960s. Don’t your strategists study these things to know that that doctrine was fallacious? Editor would be happy to enlighten you. Please bring chocolate and be quiet about it, as Editor has no intention of declaring gifts in kind to the IRS. Its not reassuring for your people to be told “our way of deterring India will be to escalate to nukes and kill you all en passant” That’s not a doctrine, its Looney Tunes.

·         The only people who ever got this right was the Soviets. They clearly stated if the west used N-weapons to offset Soviet conventional superiority, they would escalate all the way. Better to strike first than to sit there and hope you can ride out an enemy first strike with your second-strike capability. If you’re going to die anyway, hit first and minimize the damage the enemy can do to you. Of course, this was also a bluff. Should NATO troops cross the Inner German Border going east, we’re supposed to believe the Soviets are going to first-strike the west.

·         Insofar as India has an N-doctrine (India has only one doctrine for every situation; it’s called “ad hoc”), India is doing the right thing by adopting the Soviet posture. India says any tac nuke release by Pakistan will result in an all-out Indian attack. Big bluff too, but there it is. You can understand why pacifists get so scared about N-weapons: it’s everyone insanely bluffing everyone, and shouting: “I’m more irrational than you are.” People say President Reagan followed this policy and frightened the Russians into good behavior. No, no, and again no. He built a huge conventional warfighting capability designed to show the Soviets they had no chance of winning anything, and a good chance of losing everything.

·         So let’s have more openness, please.

·         Correction Major AH Amin writes to say he is not calling anyone a traitor and neither is his source. Editor thinks anyone is trying to sell Pakistan’s N-capability, slight though that may be, is a traitor. Nonetheless, Major Amin wants it clearly understood that is not his word. We’ve said these rumors are wrong, Pakistan’s leaders cannot do a sell-out; the Pakistani people will not let them live.

Wednesday 0230 GMT October 21, 2015

·         Correction on Major AH Amin’s email of October 19, 2015 on US-Pakistan deal to neutralize Pakistan’s N-weapons. Major Amin clarifies that the information did not come from him, but from a retired Pakistan corps commander. This was the email to us: Pakistan close to nuclear deal with USA to sell its nuclear weapons at - KEY RUSSIAN GRU source based in Kabul - offer may include demilitarisation of Kashmir and a Saudi element to re station Pakistani nuclear weapons a very high price. Naturally we thought this was Major Amin talking.

·         Though Major Amin has given us permission to use the 3-star general’s name and also sent a copy of a short letter from him, as an outsider Editor feels it is inappropriate for him to get involved in such a debate, particularly because of his Indian ties.

·         True, Editor is becoming increasingly fuzzy as to what those ties are: he has not been back for almost 26-years and has no intention of returning, even as ashes in an urn. Editor is proud of India, but he and the Government of India stopped being BFFs more than a quarter-century ago. Correction: 45-years ago. That is another boring story that the Editor channels as the Ancient Mariner, bores the heck out of anyone who makes the mistake of what happens, and feels very sorry for himself.

·         For now, he asks readers to accept he does not feel comfortable discussing the internal affairs of the Pakistan military of which he is quite ignorant. All readers need to know that the retired officer hates Pakistani generals who sell their country to the Americans, and feels the current Army chief is one such traitor. You have all the motivation for the story that you need. We add only that whatever Pakistan’s current rulers may be guilt of, our reasoning that Pakistan will never give up its N-arsenal or agree to a demilitarization of Kashmir. Nor will indeed agree to demilitarize Kashmir. We went over this yesterday.

·         That said, two caveats. First, the Pakistan are wily while putting on a bluff “hail fellow well met” act for the Americans, who have been consistently taken in by it for 63-years. There were gaps when America realized it was taken for a ride, but America quickly got right back into bed with the Pakistanis as soon as possible.

·         BTW, this is quite irrelevant, but Editor feels it necessary to say this: the best Pakistani women tend toward the down-right outstandingly gorgeous, have tempers that no man with even one red blood cell can resist, are brilliant, and can bewitch/beguile a dead Grecian statue back to life. Sexist? Not a bit. Pakistani women of the elite have such self-confidence they have no interest in proving they are equal to men: they know they are much superior. Ah, the good old days. Now Editor is feeling very sorry for himself and will burst into tears at any second. Also BTW, American women may love it when their men shed tears, because American women basically want their men to have the psyche of sensitive women and the bodies of men. But if you cry in front of a Pakistan woman, you will be thrown out of there faster than you can reach for a Kleenex. Just the Editor’s usual advice to the young.

·         Back to the first caveat. Pakistan is perfectly capable of making an N-disarmament deal with the US, largely because they have a really small and sort of unworkable N-arsenal. They will retain all the essentials needed for a rapid breakout if necessary. Think US-Iran N-deal. So a fake deal with the US? Very possible. A real deal with Pakistan? The Pakistanis are not crazy, let alone THAT crazy. Whenever Editor tries to explain the actual state of the Pakistan N-arsenal, the Americans say: “and how do you know?” Editor says “how do you know? My intel is better than yours, because I have nothing to gain by manipulating it, whereas you Americans cannot take any intel without dressing up the pig with lipstick and high-heels.” Americans: so frustrating, so emotional, but what the heck, they’re the best folks in the world. At least according to Editor. 95% of the planet declines to share his opinion. So what? 95% are wrong.

·         Second caveat. You should have no doubt that the Americans actually believe they still have the influence they had prior to 1975 and make anyone do their bidding. They are quite capable of forcefully negotiating with the Pakistanis to get an “agreement”. Like they did in 1953-54. Like they did in 2001. The only things Americans of today can do right is plant a dead dandelion and then water it for 15-years, wondering why the darn thing wont come back to life. After all, we are Americans. We can do anything.  

·         Sure we can. Hello, 911? I’d like to report a highly delusional person with the world’s most powerful weapons wandering around and talking crazy. Yes, armed and dangerous. Why ask me how to handle the situation? That’s not my job.

Tuesday 0230 GMT October 20, 2015

·         A rumor from Kabul sent to us by Major AH Amin (Pakistan Army, Retired), who frequents those parts, has it that Pakistan has agreed to transfer custody of its N-arsenal to the US, which will be held in Saudi Arabia. Further, that Pakistan has decided to demilitarize Kashmir.

·         Unfortunately, the rumor comes from a Russian. Two things about the Russians. When they get drunk with friends, they will say anything they take a fancy to saying. And though in the last 15-years or so the US has overtaken Moscow in the art of the Big Lie, the Russians (as also the Americans) are masters of the universe when it comes to disinformation.

·         One of the cardinal rules of intel analysis is that no rumor, no matter how peculiar, should be dismissed out of hand based on a preconceived set of beliefs. By the way, Editor does not know if this rule is formally taught anywhere, but he follows it, and it’s a rule worth following. Naturally the matter then becomes one of resources. No one has the resources to follow-up on every rumor.

·         Fortunately for his readers, Editor has plenty of time to speculate on this because it concerns Pakistan, N-weapons, and Kashmir.

·         To simplify things, a priori the rumor is not credible. Pakistan as a nation, military and civilian alike, will never agree to demilitarization of Kashmir or to hand over its N-arsenal. Any government who even suggests this will be lynched first by the military, then by the civilians. Kashmir lies at the center of Pakistani domestic and foreign policy, and is the excuse for the military to claim disproportionate influence in the country.

·         Nor would demilitarizing Pakistan Kashmir help in any way. India will not agree to any demilitarization even if Pakistan accepted the Line of Control as an international boundary. India is willing for that, but because of geography, it takes Pakistan three-days to return its divisions to Kashmir. India would require three weeks. The only way Indian Kashmir can be demilitarized is if Pakistan willingly returns to the Union of India, undoing partition. Obviously this is not going to happen.

·         We could go through several scenarios showing the rumor is plausible. Difficulty is Editor can go through scenarios at the rate one a minute – that’s when he’s asleep. Explaining and arguing each would require a minimum of 50-pages each. So let’s make a jump here. Assume the Russian source has a logical reason for propagating the rumor, and is doing so on instructions of his superiors, not on the instructions of the 150-proof or whatever vodka runs to. What might the reason be?

·         After going through several scenarios at warp speed while writing these words, the only reason that seems plausible is to discredit the civilian government of Pakistan. All people get high on conspiracy theories, but in Asia you cannot easily beat the Pakistanis at this game. Absurd as the rumor seems to the Editor, it is conceivable that the Russians would gain from sowing internal discord in Pakistan. Why? With the US leaving Afghanistan, the Taliban is again rising, and neither the Indians, nor the Iranians, nor the Russians want that. The Pakistan Army never left Afghanistan after 2001, but its combat units did. The advisors, intel folks, organizer’s, disbursers of cash, planners of tactics and strategy, trainers and so on remained. With the US out, Pakistan will inevitably use the Taliban for an all-out push, and as far as Editor is concerned, they will first take the east and south without much trouble and then go for the rest. The US may have grown bored of Afghanistan, but Pakistan has a history stake in controlling the area from 1947 onward. For one thing, if Pakistan does not control Afghanistan, the Pushtuns will break Pakistan up along with the Baloch. We can discuss this another time, for now keep in mind that Pakistan’s stakes in Afghanistan are unlimited.

·         But how can Russia weaken the Pakistani push simply by spreading rumors about Pakistan giving into the US on N-weapons and succumbing to US pressure to settle Kashmir. Here Editor confesses he just does not know. What is the mechanism? Spreading untrue rumors will not work because everyone is spreading untrue rumors, at some point some proof will have to be given or the Pakistan will dismiss this conspiracy theory as they daily create news one and dismiss old ones.

·         There is one condition under which all this could be true. That would be if the US has finally got its head straight and realized that from the US point, Pakistan’s loose nukes are possibly the biggest threat facing the world today. We don’t mean to imply Pakistan’s N-weapons are not tightly guarded. They are. By loose we mean that (a) radical elements within the Pakistan seize N-weapons for conveyance to the No-Goodnik lot; or (b) make a deal with the Saudis.

·         Now look, we could argue against this all day; we’ll have to leave it for another day to explain why this could or could not happen. Editor’s problem is that this assumes the US has come to its senses and told Pakistan to come up with a solution to satisfy the US on the N-weapons and to end the 65-year fight with India. But – we say this without meaning to be rude – there is no evidence whatsoever that the US has come to its senses about anything, even the simplest of things such as putting out a coherent and timely federal budget. This is a leadership that can’t stop a 2-year old from snatching its lollipop. A bold, forceful, and potentially high-risk strategy to challenge Pakistan on its N-weapons and Kashmir? Let’s just say it’s easier to imagine Editor getting a date this Saturday, or any Saturday. Or any day of the week.

Monday  0230 GMT October 19, 2015

·         Syria Sadly, the reporting of the Russian/Syrian offensive by the western press is just about zero. Part of the reason has to be the Russians are not welcoming of reporters of any stripe. Part may be the western reporters are not about to report from the “enemy” viewpoint.

·         Of course, the way to lose wars extra quickly is to have reporters crawling around the front. Second Indochina was an astonishing example of the freedom to report. As long as you had a press card, you could go anywhere on the battlefield you wanted without minders. Naturally this resulted in honest reporting that was a major factor in the loss of public confidence in the government.

·         By First Gulf the US was sending reporters with minders where it wanted, not where the reporters wanted to go. The minders were unofficial, in that a reporter was first cleared and then attached to a unit. Reporters bond with their unit; the result is hardly objective.

·         In both First and Second Gulf we got a total “Ra-Ra Go Team” sort of reporting. This carried off into total gullibility about the rest of the Second Gulf and Afghanistan, to the extent that the American public (including Editor) was ingesting pure propaganda, and continue to do so. Third Gulf has not seen any journalists with the US forces, though occasionally an intrepid reporter makes it to the front on his own, and all there is to report is non-stop failure. We do get vignettes from reporters with the Arab and Kurd press, but as is to be expected, the reporters are quite circumspect.

·         So all we can report for our readers is a series of disjointed facts based mainly on Russian press releases. The Russian/Syrian offensive is making daily progress; in this third week of Russian intervention no dramatic Syrian results are reported, except for the first time in years Syrian forces are winning.

·         Interestingly, since at first Russia focused on bombing non-Islamic rebels, as these were the most immediate threat to Assad, IS has actually managed to make gains in Aleppo. Now the Russians have started to focus on IS.

·         Apparently Russia flies as many strike sorties in a day as Coalition flies in a month. So we repeat: it isn’t airpower that has failed in Syria/Iraq, but the misuse of airpower. The US air campaign over Iraq/Syria has been enveloped in spastic lethargy, usually delivering pinpricks. The Editor calls this style of warfare as a handicapped elephant hunting game with a BB gun. Yes, surely a BB gun stings, but lethal it is not. Air power does work, as proved most recently in Kunduz, Afghanistan. The Taliban seized control of the city. Then the US put in 60 air sorties in a couple of days, and the Taliban lost control of the city. Aside from the hospital affair, civilians must have been killed/wounded. If, however, your primary aim is to spare the lives of civilians, better to give up war and do needlepoint sitting on the verandah while singing “Kumbyah”.

·         Undoubtedly this splendid little Russian war is giving the Ruskies a chance to test all their weapons systems. The US has been having all the fun since 1991 and has accumulated years of experience on land, sea, and air. The first Russian experience after the Middle East was Georgia, and that did not go well. The Georgians were, of course, crushed. But look: when a dinosaur faints, anything in its way gets crushed. It’s effective, but not elegant, and certainly not the high-tech war the Russians want to show they are capable of. In another week or so, the Russians will have flown their first 1000 sorties, a nice little practical laboratory sort of demonstration. 2015 Syria shows the Russians took the lessons of Georgia to heart and have greatly improved.

·         Naturally the US is grumbling in its unpleasant whiny way, saying well this is no real test because the opposition has no anti-aircraft capability. The Afghans, Iraqis, and Syrians have, of course, the best air defenses in the world. Just kidding. They also have none, and US has gotten a free run in Second/Third Gulf and Afghanistan.

·         The Russians have ample combat experience with their Frogfoots and Fencers, which they used freely in Afghanistan. That was, however, 35-years ago. The airframes are the same, but the electronics and weapon system are different so there is lots to test. This is the first time that the Flanker has seen combat, though we’re not clear if the Russians have deployed the strike versions along with the air superiority version. The Fullback Su-34 is seeing combat for the first time. It’s quite a monster given its 6-ton full-load, and the Russians have been using it to deliver bunker blasters.

·         The Russians did a nice little show with their 26-cruise missile salvo from the Caspian, breaking a US monopoly (the Brits occasionally join the Americans). Russia made two points here: it can deliver a cruise missile strike at a distance, and from ships that are the size of small frigates. So Russia too now has the capability of delivering death remotely at 1500-km ranges. Editor is waiting on a strike from the Mediterranean.

Friday 0230 GMT October 15, 2015

 Turkey and seperatism

·         Turkey is in a worse mess than us outsiders realize. You’ll know about the long-standing Kurd revolt, which is said to have killed 40,000 people over the last few decades. The figure is repeated so often that it is meaningless. Around 2013, the central government decided to make peace and end the war without partitioning the country. But in 2015, a surge in votes for the Kurd party, which attracted non-Kurds as well, left Erdogan without a majority. This frustrated his plan to change to a presidential system with wide powers for himself.

·         Erdogan decided to stoke the fires of Kurdish separatism as a way of discrediting the Kurd party. A new election is planned for November 1 since no one had a majority in the previous government. It remains unclear that Erdogan has created enough mischief to turn the Turkish majority against the Kurd minority. The problem is that he is giving a boost to Kurd nationalism. With Iraq Kurdistan functioning independently of Baghdad, and the Syria/Turkey Kurds having built up significant strength in Syria, Turkey will come under much greater pressure from separatism than before. Now you have a couple of hundred thousand of armed and battle tested Kurds of all stripes running around.

·         Russia has decided to back the anti-Turkish Kurd factions, so there will be no shortage of Kurd firepower if Turkey and the Kurds go to full scale conflict. The Turks are very nationalistic, but all over Europe and the Middle East you see governments unwilling to go the full distance to destroy separatism. Countries like the UK, Belgium, and Spain are not prepared to wage war to keep their countries together. There are separatist pressures in Italy too. Cyprus, of course, has long been divided. Czechoslovakia peacefully became two countries, after vicious wars Yugoslavia became seven. The USSR itself peacefully separated into multiple countries.

·         Earlier the violent separatists had limited patronage from outside powers. Russia has changed all that in Moldova, Georgia, Ukraine, and now Syria. Now Kurd capabilities have grown to the point that a prolonged and bloody civil war may well lead the Turks to say “to heck with it, we don’t want to bear the cost”. Then you could see a breakup of Turkey. Obviously this is not going to happen tomorrow. But when you consider the speed with which Libya, Iraq, and Syria broke up, not to mention the reflaring of separatist violence in Yemen, a Turkish breakup could come sooner than later. (Editor loves this phrase: what precisely does it mean? Sooner when? Later when?)

·         Is the growth of subnationalism not just in Europe/Middle East/North Africa and in parts of Africa a good thing or a bad thing? Editor is ambiguous. The one thing the old centralization did was to reduce/eliminate violence between their sub-nationalities. The super-centralization of the world between the West and the Soviets kept wars limited. Each to her own separate country sounds like it should lead to peace, but there’s no evidence that it has does anything except aggravate violence. Partly this is because even after countries split, there are minorities who consider themselves oppressed by the new majority. That’s why FRY is now 7 countries, and not – like Czech and Slovakia – just two.

·         Folks often ask about separatism in India. They know about the separatism in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Contrary to what the British will have the world believe, they were not the ones who unified the country. Over the last 2000 or more years there have been about ten centralized empires in India, where a single entity controlled the bulk of the sub-continent. So far India has kept separatism in check, often by force. All Editor can say is that if separatism takes hold in India, India will become a region facing perpetual and terrible violence. Fortunately, the idea of “India” is strong, always has been. There is enough flexibility in the Indian political system to let most people work out their grievances without much violence. As India begins explosive economic growth, for at least to the end of the 21^st Century India will hang together.

·         Meanwhile back here in the US, one shudders to think what will happen if sub-nationalism takes hold. There should be no reason for this in the political system the Founding Fathers constructed. The problem is that the central government for years has been accreting more and more power, destroying federalism.

Thursday 0230 GMT October 15, 2015

·         Interesting viewpoint from Israel on police disarming rather than killing Last two weeks, there have been several Palestine attacks resulting in fatalities and wounded, along with some Israeli retaliation. So there is a discussion of how much force the police should use against, say, knife wielders. Editor saw an interesting comment in http://www.timesofisrael.com/as-knife-wielders-are-subdued-questions-on-shoot-first-ask-later/ Police are people too. We cannot ask them to risk their lives to save the life of someone posing a potentially lethal threat. Soldiers, of course, are under orders/training to kill on threat. Neither soldiers nor police are social workers.

·         We can, of course, debate if non-lethal ways of disabling a non-gun threat can be found.  Editor recalls in the past talk about a sticky foam that can disable rioters without harming them. Might it be possible to make a handgun for this purpose? Now, tasers are intended to take down a threat without killing. But tasers frequently do kill people; conversely, people who are tased, even several times, don’t lose a beat. Personally, Editor wouldn’t risk getting within tasing range of a suspect waving around a large knife. He’d run for it.

·         Kunduz hospital attack: was it a war crime? In Editor’s opinion, every mistake on the battlefield does not constitute a war crime. For that there has to be intent and foreknowledge. Mistakes are not in the same category. Nonetheless, US is responsible for the mess it creates when a bombing resulting in civilian death is even called a war crime.

·         West has been bitching about the Russians causing civilian casualties. Can we let our readers in a small secret? No matter how accurately and how carefully you use your firepower, you are going to have dead civilians. Look at the civilian casualties each time a UAV strike is made. Editor says “tough”. If you’re going to fight from between civilians, dead civvies are not the US responsibility, but that of the bad guys. If you attack targets where no civilians are evident, you are doing what we call ineffectual sniping from the air. Pick off a vehicle here, a mortar position there. You end up achieving nothing. And you always end up killing civilians anyway. Better to do it the Russian way – all at once – and get results, rather than drag it out in dribs and drabs.

·         Doing things the US way – high moralizing about how WE take every precaution to minimize civilian losses - leads to the US being abused globally worldwide. Example, the Kunduz hospital attack. As far as we know, Taliban were seen firing from inside the hospital perimeter. The Afghans called in a Spooky strike. No matter how accurate the strike, with the hospital being – what - 30-50-meters? from the perimeter, ol’ Spooks is going to chew everything up something pitiful. Normally, of course, you have US forward air controllers with our ground troops to keep Spooks away a hundred meters or more because this Mommy is lethal in the extreme. But you do call strikes right over your head if you’re as good as dead, as a last hope thing. It seems to us someone, somehow thought if the Taliban immediately outside/inside the perimeter meant the place was going to be overrun in minutes and the strike was called in.

·         The medicos say “rubbish, no one was firing from within”. Please, my children. Given the massive confusion inherent in combat, and how different people see the same thing differently, you should not be so categorical. Are you sitting outside the hospital casually taking pix? Or are you inside trying to save your patients and your workers while a battle is raging outside. The medicos would have had no idea whatsoever what was happening. The FAC could have misjudged the situation. It's hard to be a calm, collected, detached observer when people are around you trying to kill you and each other.

·         As for the hospital’s claim it called several times to say “you’re killing us”, do the medicos think that calls made in a battle are reaching the person for whom they are intended, and those people are able to work out it’s a genuine call, and stop Spooky on a dime? We don’t blame people for thinking this because that’s what the movies depict. But they need to understand its not true in real life. In combat communications never work as they should; when they do work everything takes much more time than us civilians realize.

·         But this situation would not arise if US was not so smug about not causing civil casualties, and now beating up on Russia while we continue to cause casualties ourselves. Editor realizes these are inevitable. But then don’t be hypocritical. Tell the world “we do our best, but in war, particularly insurgency, civilians are inevitably going to die.”

·         And where exactly does Doctors Without Borders get off demanding an independent inquiry? IS it because white Europeans were killed. DWB, how about some condemnation of the people that are causing this situation, the Taliban? No Taliban, no CI, no civilians get hurt. Sorry to be so hardline, but Taliban is US’s enemy. It’s noble (and Editor says this sincerely) to treat all casualties. But then DWB has to take its chances along with everyone else. They cannot deserve extra-special treatment. Special treatment, sure; Geneva prohibits attacks on hospitals, even those of the enemy. But extra-special treatment when a fire support request was called in because Afghan Security Forces believed Taliban were inside the perimeter – next step, overrun the compound? No, sir, and sorry about that.

·         We are supposed to be appalled that several wounded were burned to death in their beds. Hmmmm. Does DBW believe that war means tagging your enemy with a paint-ball gun and yelling “You’re out!” Alas, no. People die or are mutilated in horrible ways. Always were, always will be. Get over it, DBW. (PS: continue the good work: if Editor had a spare dollar, he’s send it to you.)

Wednesday 0239 GMT October 14, 2015

·         Aarggh! Editor forced to defend President Obama While Putin did not say “Obama has mush for brains”, he implied it when he said some of Putin’s partners had mush for brains.   http://www.firstpost.com/world/vladimir-putin-slams-us-on-syria-crisis-our-partners-have-mush-for-brains-2467356.html Though it kills Editor to say this, even Putin must talk logically. We all know Obama has brains. The problem is he has no sense, and like many very bright people, is so convinced of his own perceptions that he feels insulted if questioned. He needs to resign the presidency and go to Harvard Law School to teach. He cannot continue as US president without further grievously harming the country he swore to defend.

·         Obama, like a hard core doctrinaire individual, first concluded that Mid East/Afghanistan type wars are unwinnable by military means. So he has made minimal provision for the military, and so we are losing, further reinforcing Obama’s belief that he is right. He’d likely have done a lot better for his country if he had less brains.

·         Now, of course, Putin’s irritation is easy to understand. He says, for example, that his partners “do not have a clear understanding of what really happens in the country and what goals they are seeking to achieve.” This is absolutely true.  Putin complains that when US began accusing him of bombing the Iraq opposition and not IS, he asked for the US to designate targets from the RusAF. Obama refused. Then Putin asked to be told where NOT to bomb. US refused. So Putin shafts Obama coming and going, Obama allows this, and so yes, Putin could conclude Obama is mushy and does not know what he wants.

·         Now, having brains and using them purposefully are two different things. That’s the reason we label the US administration as morons, idiots, and clowns. Putin can call Obama an idiot, moron, and a clown, but he cannot challenge Obama on brainpower. Obama is likely much smarter than Putin. So Putin has to use a narrowly-focused plan which is not a thing of beauty and of desire. Its an ugly, ugly, plan, relying on brute force.

·         The thing is, because Putin is less brainy than Obama, Putin is winning and Obama is losing.  If Obama knew how to use his intelligence, he would understand from the first that its not that military force cannot solve issues. WW I, WW II, Korea, Vietnam, First Gulf etc were all about use of force, and the reason why in some cases it did not work is that the force was applied in an intellectually ineffective manner. That whole graduated response thing that we have been talking about the last week. Obama needs to be smart enough to understand intellectual talk cannot solve issues. Particularly when every single last person that we want to subscribe to a negotiated settlement is screaming and crying for use of force. Because yakking does not break anyone’s back. Force does, because the guy refusing the negotiated settlement, is using force to break his enemy’s back.

·         Please note: Putin has not used graduated response. The Russians discarded that intellectual theory for nuclear warfare. Just like Hitler, Stalin and yes, even Lincoln and Roosevelt, Ho Chi Min, Kim the First, Mao and so on Putin knows you hafta go for broke if you want to win a war. And he understands, just like every great general, that time is of the essence. Slap the enemy silly, and give him no time to recover; just go slapping him till he falls apart. Putin’s intervention in Syria has been terribly crude and improvised. But had he waited for the perfect plan (intellectually) Assad could well have been defeated. But for Obama, 400 people have to stage a vigorous debate about the perfect plan before he can even put a toe into the water. Since it’s a closed debate – Obama has said we have to start with the assumption force won’t work, it’s not a real debate. So obviously the solutions are going to fallacious. Only a really smart person cannot see that. Putin wants only results. He does not give a hang about being seen as an intellectual.

·         Mr. Obama might notice that Putin gets to wrestle bears and fabulously fit lady gymnasts. Obama gets to become more constipated and gray with each passing day. But we repeat that’s because he doesn’t have mush for brains. If Putin has what he has because he’s not that smart, Editor would love to blow off Mr. Obama and cavort with Mr. Putin and his bears and ladies. Obviously.

Tuesday 0230 GMT October 13, 2015

·         In the Mideast Clown Parade led by Chief Clown America, the west now warns that Russian cruise missiles could endanger civil airliners in the region. We were always told that the idea for cruise missiles was to come in low, hugging the terrain. Otherwise the cruise is just a slow, easy target at altitude. Nonetheless, let’s accept there is a danger. The US, of course, is very careful to avoid civil airliners or collateral air damage when it fires cruise missiles barrages. Not.

·         This is just another pathetic attempt to delegitimize the Russian intervention. There is only party that is an illegitimate player in Syria, and that is US/NATO. The Russians are present by invitation of the accepted Government of Syria. There is no UN sanction to overthrow Assad. The US/NATO are aggressors plain and simple. Lest readers misunderstand, this does not bother Editor one little bit. He’s incensed that the US is playing at war instead of fighting a war. Failing on almost every count, the US is now leading a campaign to bad mouth Russia, which happens to be achieving results within days of entering the war. Bad-mouthing and saying “we just wait till Putin hangs himself” is the petulance of an impotent old man. It demeans our great country. To the US Administration we say: “Stop it before we whack you with a limp noodle and hurt you so bad you’ll run crying to Mama”.

·         As an example of its massive resolve in Syria, following Russia’s arrival, the US has airdropped 50-tons of small-arms ammunition to US-supported rebel groups. If the rebels carefully conserve their ammunition, this might be enough for 1000 men for 10-days of fighting. If the drop includes stuff like rockets/launchers and mortar bombs, then it will suffice for half-that-time.

·         There’s two ways of looking at this. One, the US has so few rebels left that that is actually a substantial amount of ammunition. Or two, the US Administration is composed of brainless people who have managed to impress themselves with such a large (not) number.

·         Meanwhile, the Washington Post of October 12, 2015 tells us that the US has been supplying several “dozen” TOW missiles via Saudi to its rebels, and that the program has been very successful. There are careful guarantees to insure the TOWs are not diverted; for example, the canister has to be returned before a missile is issued in exchange. If this is working, it is a good idea. But, problem dudes and dudettes: these are the same rebels Russia is focusing on eliminating from the battlefield. Remember what we’ve been saying about time on the battlefield? This is an example of how we’re misusing time. We think we have all the time in the world, so after four years we’ve supplied some ATGMs. The Russians are now going to kill the groups that have the missiles.

·         Just a reminder: we’ve been reading about the likelihood that the new T-90 tanks the Russians have sent to Syria have an ATGM defense system. While the defenses are a very good thing to have, the first line of defense is to attack forward enemy troops with maximum firepower and kill them before they get a chance to fire. Editor’s intuition is that the Russians are using FAEs (or thermobaric) weapons in Syria. These cute little fellers have the same impact as a small tactical nuclear weapon. If you use a MLRS battalion to accurately hit a tank or mechanized battalion, you wipe out that unit. Russians are said to have used these weapons in Ukraine.

• And why exactly is the US complaining the Russians are targetting anti-Assad groups? We're refusing to aid anti-Assad groups too, we want to support only anti- IS groups. This is one reason we havent been successful, because the rebels do not consider the IS to be the primary problem. They see IS as an ally against Assad, and they'll deal with IS after Assad goes. Moreover, what have the Turks done except bomb our rebels? US needs to stop this hypocrisy now.

Monday 0230 GMT October 12, 2015

·         Syria III (Concluded) So please to notice that since the end of the Korean war in 1953, when the US decided to intervene somewhere, it was under no time pressure except that generated by internal factors. Of course, the existence of the Soviet Union severely limited our ability to intervene as we wanted. We could do nothing about Hungary 1956 and Czechoslovakia 1968. We got stymied in Cuba in 1962. But in Second Indochina, 1961-1975, we ambled around at our own pace, time was not a consideration. Had China decided to take us on we would have leveled China. No pussy-footing this time, unlike during the Korean War. Had the Russians taken us on we’d have leveled Russia, except we’d have been levelled in turn. With China and North Vietnam as their proxies, the Russians saw no advantage in getting directly involved.

·         The fall of the Soviet Union changed that. We could intervene anywhere we wanted and take as long as we wanted. Thus the war for Afghanistan and the wars for the Middle East became our version of smacking charging rhinos with dandelions. No one could hurt us, there was no time pressure. We could replace our failing strategy with the next failing strategy, and then the next and the next.

·         Until that ugly-pugly bull-dog, Putin. He whacked Crimea and set out to whack Ukraine before we could blink. Ukraine was not part of our alliance system. Though we were preparing to bring it into our system, we were so startled by a Russia we thought finished that we fumbled. Lucky for us, so did Putin. He could have taken Kiev while we were cogitating with our rear ends, as has become the rule since 2008. But his nerve failed.

·         There was nothing he could do to stop us in Second or Third Gulf, so we ambled around with a little of this and a little of that, no hurry, just a beautiful summer’s day walk in the park. For Syria, at first he thought he had no option except to join us politically and hope for a seat at the post-Assad table. Sometime around mid-year he realized that the US president was not just a paper tiger, he was a paper limp noodle. In one of the most remarkable reversals of fortune of our times, Putin came from having zero cards to holding the winning hand. He not only became an important factor in Syria, he is in the process of shoving the United States entirely out of the game. It is now falling to us to decide if we will follow Putin, or of we’ll pick up our chipped lonely marble and walk away. It’s all quite amazing, and it shows the US is a complete ass.

·         Putin has, in two weeks, destroyed US credibility worldwide. He has not just taken the lead in Syria, he’s working to take over our allies, the Iraqis and the Syrian Kurds. The Syrian Kurds say they would welcome his help, because the US is giving so little. Iraq says it would welcome Russian air strikes, again because the US is doing so little. Putin is even kissy-facing with Israel! If this continues for much longer, we can say goodbye to our Gulf/Mideast supremacy. This was earned with great effort and equally great brilliance. Putin, of course, will be returning Russia to the position it held before 1973 when the US blew Russia out of Egypt.

·         Obama has forgotten, if he even understood in the first place, that time wasted cannot be regained. And of course, Putin is hardly our only problem. China is a rising power and it has all but pushed us out of the China Seas and the First Island Chain. Just one statistic Editor learned yesterday: China is building dams in 73 countries. Seventy-three countries. The US used to build the dams for others. No more. The entire developing world bar India is coming under China’s economic influence.

·         Now, we can sit here all we want, bitching about how Putin will learn his lesson in Syria and how the Chinese economy is not doing all that great. But has it occurred to Americans that we’ve already lost when all we can do is sulk, whine, and complain? Though Obama is primarily responsible for our current decline, Bush contributed to it by wasting American power in Afghanistan and Iraq while achieving nothing. Earlier, when Clinton fled from Somalia because of two-dozen American deaths, he set the stage for the last 20-years of decline.

·         Nature abhors a vacuum, they say. When the Baby Boomers came to power they created a vacuum by systematically destroying America. Putin, despite having an economy one-ninth the US’s, has stepped into Europe and the Mideast. China has stepped in everywhere else.

·         Putin began bombing on September 30. The Syrians wasted no time and got their ground offensives going. Ten days later the Russians/Syrians have started retaking parts of three provinces. The US has been in Iraq for a year. We have achieved – what??

0230 Sunday October 11, 2015

·         Syria II Yesterday we argued that the US is losing in the Middle East because it has failed to adhere to the principle of time, meaning seeking, achieving, and maintaining the initiative. It has chosen to act as if time is immaterial. It has also applied the non-principle of minimum force. Of course, right-sizing the force employed is also a military principle. But what is meant by that is not smacking charging rhinos with daisies, as we have been doing with Islamic fundamentalism, but employing the required force to win, leaving other forces free for deployment elsewhere. To this can be added a homely expression: to win you have to kill the enemy faster than he can regenerate. This can be incorporated into the time thing; and of course, we haven’t been doing this also.

·         We became arrogant about basic principles because with the fall of the USSR, we assumed that just because our major adversary was out that we had nothing to worry about, again, ever. From Gulf One we came to the thought that military action would now forever be casualty-free. The loss of over 6000 troops in Iraq/Afghanistan convinced us not that we have to go in with maximum force and win fast, but that we must fight our wars with a zero-casualty target as our first priority.

·         Why we think this is unclear, because the American public has never shied away from casualties, it got upset about Second Indochina because we took enormous casualties for no gain in return. That’s reasonable, isn’t it? The public has not complained about casualties in Afghanistan and Iran because it supported the ousting of Saddam and it supports the battle against Islamic fundamentalism. The public’s complaint, if there is one, is that we achieved and continue to achieve nothing. This casualty-free thing has in effect become an illogical mind construct of our ruler, and it creates a self-fulfilling prophecy. Because we are willing to risk zero, we achieve zero, and the public gets mad because we are achieving nothing. So instead of drawing the correct conclusion – go big, go win – our rulers have drawn the wrong conclusion and become even more risk averse.

·         This last did not happen without a context. The context is that in 2008 this country got a president who not only spends so much of his time fighting phony intellectual battles in his own mind that he forgets he is not the King’s philosopher; he is the King. On top of this all he is a pacifist. Which is fine, but had he declared himself a pacifist in the first place, he would not have been elected. He snookered the American public into thinking because he wanted peace, he would be victorious in peace. That meant fighting for peace, not lying in the Washington Beltway I-495 and letting 20,000 cars an hour run over him. Moreover, he is not a pacifist because he believes it is wrong to kill. That at least is a high-minded principle that can be admired even if one does not agree with it. He believes in non-use of force because he believes force does not work. His evidence? He whacked the charging rhino with a daisy; it did not stop; therefore charging rhinos cannot be stopped.

·         Except they can, with the right tool, i.e., a 308 rifle bullet or better still, a 410 shell.  So our Prez is not just a philosopher, he is not an educated one. And he rules America. This is a lethal combination. To us. What the Prez has been doing is firing shots at various parts of our own anatomy, not at the enemy’s.

·         Meanwhile, time who waits for no Prez, has been inexorably advancing. We destroyed Libya in 2011 with no follow up; the only thing you hear from Libya is the advance of IS. We ignored Yemen, and all we hear is the new civil war between Iran’s proxies and ours. We are no longer losing, but we are not winning either. We thought we had stabilized Lebanon. That nation is falling apart. Jordan is coming under very severe pressure crated by conditions we set in motion. We bashed our ally Israel to make “friends” with Iran. We “supported” our ally Iraq to have achieved nothing except stalling IS’s march to Baghdad. And we’ve done that not because of something we did, but by our inaction allowing Iran to take over Iraq. A good part of Afghanistan will fall to the Taliban because our “ally” Pakistan backs that insurgency. With the US gone, Pakistan will again be free to send additional advisors and combat units to that unfortunate country, as it did in 1994-2001. As for Syria, no rants needed. Our “success” of four years is there for everyone to see.

·         Enter Putin. (continued tomorrow)

Saturday 0230 GMT October 9, 2015

We were without I-Net/phones for 72-hours

·         Syria I The Russian intervention in Syria is pushing forward. Washington’s reaction grows more bizarre. The problem is that Americans have, for at least last 14-years (Afghanistan, Second Gulf, Libya, Syria, Yemen among other places) have become so used to bizarreness that most of us don’t see what a desperate situation we are in.

·         When the US struck Iraq in 2003, we unleashed changes that sent us on the road to irrelevance in a region we basically have owned since 1973. US intervention in the region is premised on the assumption that time has no cost. In other words, we can simply toddle along at our own pace without consequences. We toddled in Iraq 2003-11, Afghanistan 2001-2015, again in Iraq 2014 and continuing, and Syria 2014 and continuing. Ditto Libya 2011-present. Yemen was not our direct doing, but while we whistled as we ambled along, time sucker punched us.

·         Napoleon repeatedly said that in war time is everything, that time lost can never be won back. Had he been familiar with modern day terminology, he might have said that if you let the enemy get inside your decision-making/action cycle, you lose the initiative, with all the negatives that brings. For 14-years we have let our adversaries get inside our strategic decision/action cycle simply we thought we were so great, ordinary rules that govern human don’t apply to us.

·         To go back to Second Indochina, there is a simple explanation for why we did not succeed. The US was operating from a base of faulty logic called graduated response. We match our commitment to be just a bit more than the enemy’s. We keep upping the pressure until he sees the error of his ways and comes to the negotiating table or capitulates.  The logic was faulty on two grounds. First, it conceded the initiative to the enemy, and that makes a war unwinnable. Second, it assumes our logic is the enemy’s logic. We won’t go into how this school of thinking originated, but it was intended for nuclear warfare and by the middle-1960s people realized it was unworkable. Somehow it did not occur to us that it was just as unworkable for conventional warfare.

·         With graduated response you let the enemy have time to adapt to your latest response. Then he counter-escalates. When you’ve dealt with that, you respond with more force. Instead of squeaking “Uncle!” he adapts to that and comes back again. And so it goes. As the foreign power we got tired of this before North Vietnam did, and the rest is history.

·         Colin Powell realized this. When he was told to prepare for First Gulf in 1990, he made it clear the US would strike first with all possible force, and destroy the enemy before he could adapt. For example, the coalition mustered four-times the air numbers Saddam had, and of course, each of the Allies’ aircraft was far more capable than his. So when Powell opened his offensive, he struck not with an air superiority of 4-1, but more like 10-1. At that, he maintained the air war for 66-days. It was hitting a fly with a pile-driver. The result was the ground phase lasted 4-days, and the US lost less than 300-dead, about the number of traffic fatalities in the same number of days. Powell started by closing in with a death grip, and he simply squeezed tighter and tighter without relieving pressure once.

·         By 2003, the US had forgotten this most basic principle of war: strike hard, strike fast, and strike to destroy. Our powers that were misinterpreted the reasons for our victory. They attributed it to high technology. Actually it was mass plus high technology. So we went in with half the needed troops, and certainly we destroyed Saddam Mark 2, which truthfully was no feat at all since all he had was an armed shamble. While Rummy Rumsfeld and Gang took a feel-good pause and were busy congratulating themselves, the enemy struck back with an insurgency we had not anticipated, but that Saddam had planned for after his first defeat. We stabilized the situation, but the minute we left, it was a disaster.

·         Continued tomorrow.

Tuesday 0230 GMT October 6, 2015

·         Syria Either the Western media is making up stories about Syria or the Russians are. Editor realizes our self-righteous media will blast suggestions it is making up news. True, it doesn’t actually invent stories out of whole cloth (mostly), but its gullibility to government handouts is well-known. Which presents a paradox, because the western and specially the US media spends time telling us government is lying, but then has no hesitation in running government lies.

·         This our problem. Russian media, such as http://sputniknews.com/middleeast/ is telling us the Russian air attacks have been launched in support of Syrian Army ground offensives, and that these are taking place. For example, at Dier-el-Dor. But there is no word in our media about Syrian ground offensives.

·         We say Russia is not attacking IS, but anti-Assad fighters such as Free Syrian Army. But the Russians say both the Kurds and FSA stand ready to work with them against IS, and that Russia is destroying its share of IS targets. What makes this issue really complicated is there no meaningful FSA left. They have defected to fundamentalist groups or deserted. So what is there for Russia to bomb? Then the American Government does not like to mention that our “ally (think Austin Powers) has NOT been attacking IS, which depends on Turkey for support. Instead Turkey has been launching hundreds of sorties against the Kurds – who are our allies. So what exactly is our government saying: it’s not okay for the Russians to bomb the few remaining FSA, but it’s okay for our ally Turkey to daily bomb our allies the Kurd?

·         Then we have our great O, who has been to Harvard. This august institution is in Boston. In Boston, we are told, the Lowells talk only to the Cabots, and the Cabots talk only to God. Obviously our Royal Preziness is a Cabot, because he is so sure he is right about his Mideast policy, which consists of Do Nothing. So our Prez berates the Russians for getting into a quagmire in Syria. Instead. He believes, they should follow his lead. Which has resulted in a quagmire in Iraq. Oh, BTW, our Iraqi allies have said they welcome Russian airstrikes if the Russians would offer. Why so? Could it be because Russian airstrikes actually kill bad guys whereas ours – as has been repeatedly alleged by the Not Friends of America have been running a sham campaign?

·         Meanwhile, the US, backed by its minions in NATO, who are best at coyly hiding behind the eagle and urging the eagle to let the enemy have it, warns Russia against its air campaign in Syria. But the Prez has just said he plans to do nothing about the Russian intervention. In any case, what can he do? Fight to the last Ukrainian in East Ukraine? Direct Giant Farts at the Kremlin in the hope Putin and Co suffocate and die? Actually, at least that would be a plan. Instead, our Prez indicates he is waiting for the Russians to see the error of their ways. They were in Afghanistan before they saw their error (they actually had won); we spent 14-years in Vietnam before we saw the errors of our ways (though by 1972 we had won, and then decided to just walk away). Dare we talk about our 14-year effort in Afghanistan, with the same result? The Government ruled all provinces except for a few districts in some provinces. We won. So we decided to go home and now we are going to lose.

·         Not to forget that we won World War II, but decided to let Moscow have half of Europe instead of A-bombing our way to the Urals, setting up the greatest and most ruthless enemy the US has ever faced for 45-years – and even today. Not to say Korea: we didn’t want to go to the Yalu because the Chinese would react. Er, weren’t there four Chinese army groups already fighting us in Korea?

·         Anyway, no point in replaying the grievances of us old men, allegedly rendered irrelevant by the fall of the USSR and integration of China into the world system. Editor would laugh except it hurts too much. Our point is, don’t we need some objective reporting in Syria/Iraq to tell us what’s going on? Instead we’re getting “Marka Good” followed by thumps to our puny chests and “Ow!Ow!Ow!”, and followed by “Ruskies Bad”, and running away when he gives us a steely eye.

Monday 0230 GMT October 5, 2015

·         A short diversion to Afghanistan: Kunduz Readers know that last week Kunduz fell to the Taliban, the first provincial capital to do so since 2001. We haven’t covered this because compared to new developments in Syria, we consider Afghanistan worth no news coverage.

·         There are 10,000 US forces left, mostly training, support, and Special Operations. It is hardly a secret that the US failed at training Afghanistan security forces and that operation would collapse when the US left. Well, it has collapsed.

·         Editor does not see a return to 1994-96, when the Taliban came out of nowhere and took over 85% of the country in two years. BTW, Editor learned only yesterday that the origins of the Taliban lie with Prime Minister ZA Bhutto, who was executed by the Army Chief after the latter staged a coup in 1977. This means that Pakistan did not respond to the chaos created by the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan in 1989, but predates the Soviet invasion in 1979. This suggests a very long-term plan to take Afghanistan as a means of extending depth against India, which split the country in 1971. The Pakistanis deserve full credit for a very bold and long range plan, which succeeded until the US intervened over Bin Laden.

·         Nonetheless, it is likely there will be a situation in which the Taliban (aka the Pushtoons) become the rulers of East and South Afghanistan. A complete take over in unlikely because Russia and India, among others, will become much more activing in arming the North and West than was the case earlier. The non-Pushtoons earlier gave in to the Taliban because they were tired of the warlords. Now, however, it is the Pushtoons have become the warlords disturbing everyone’s happiness. It is hard to judge at this point what significance, if any. Lies in the arrival of other radical Islamic fundamentalist groups such as Islamic State. Will they be a major factor in limiting Pushtoon expansion or will they be irrelevant.

·         Why did US fail? For one thing, we cannot care more for a unified Afghanistan than the Afghans. We succeeded in building viable armies in ROK and RVN because the people we became patrons too were fiercely anticommunist and willing to fight. In Afghanistan you see the same problem as in Iraq and Syria and Libya and Yemen. Tribal and sectarian loyalties dominate. In Iraq, for example, we’d said the Shias are not interested in battling Kurds and Sunnis. They can have a nice, smaller country of their own as they have lots of oil. Perhaps it is better these countries split, though that is, of course, a complicated question. Only thing for sure is that the locals will have to make these decisions, not us. The current boundaries of states in the Middle East were drawn by Europeans; it seems impossible to believe that modern sub-nationalism can exist within those boundaries. Think FRY, even USSR, Belgium, Spain, UK and so on.

·         Meanwhile, the best way of understanding why the US can no longer train foreign armies is to look at the British in Imperial India. You had a tradition of warfare- Editor has never understood why Westerners think Indians are pacifists or even peaceful. You had a tradition of subjugated locals joining the armies of the conqueror.  With the British, you had British officers leading and living in the field with the natives. They took the same risks as their troops during war. The standard of living gap was much, much closer than is the case for US and its protégées today. The British used simple administrative, training, and operational systems that the natives could excel at. The British had the same weapons. They took immense pride in their Indian troops. Socially, there was "us and them". Not so in the field. "It was always "we". We could go on. Perhaps one day we will.

Friday 0230 GMT October 2, 2015

·         Wait a minute: if US cannot win by airpower alone, how can Russia? A valid question posed by someone we know, but all it shows is this person is clueless of what they speak. Iraq/Syria 2014-2015 does not represent the failure of US airpower deployed on its own instead of in conjunction with land forces. It represents the misuse of airpower.

·         US airpower in the current Mideast war is marked by three conditions. First, is an insane determination to avoid civil casualties.  Airpower, even with guided weapons, cannot be precise in discriminating between combatants and non-combatants. Nor can artillery. Nor can infantry. When an enemy fights from within a civilian population, refusing to drop bombs if there are civilians around is tantamount to shooting yourself in both wings, the fuselage, and the tail. You can still fly, but you won’t fly effectively.

·         Second, US use of airpower has been astonishingly limited. Strike sorties are but a handful each day. Ten-twelve sorties is a heavy day, and normally enough only to support a single battalion in combat. Plus the US has a habit of counting the kill of one mortar squad or a position held by five men or a truck as an accepted outcome of one successful sortie. This is not fighting from the air, this is sniping from the air. Snipers can cause a lot of trouble, but they don’t win battles.

·         Third, the demented determination not so suffer even 1 casualty, be it a forward air controller or a pilot, leads to risk avoidance that hasn’t been seen in warfare. Could you win a boxing fight if your primary concern is to avoid even a single punch from landing on you? You get the point.

·         As far as we can tell, the Russians have 34 fighters in Syria at this time, presumably with many more to come.  US alone has about 200+ air force and navy fighters in the war zone. Ten sorties a day is good going for the US. In their first day the Soviets flew 16 sorties, and in their second they flew 8 – there could have been more. Do the math and see who is serious and who is not. The Russians could care less about civilian casualties. As far as they are concerned, if the enemy is hiding among civilians, it’s the enemy’s fault, and it’s just too bad for the civilians. Its not clear if as yet the Russians have deployed FAC, but for the type of bombing they’ve done for the first two days, they don’t need FACs. They have been sending a minimum of one pair of fighters against a target set, but in at least one case, they dropped 20 guided-weapons on a target. Footage and fotos of Russian explosions show multiple explosions at a time. This means the Russians are not sniping: they’re obliterating their targets. And there is just so much of that an enemy on the ground can take.

·         The essence of any type of warfare is to kill the army faster than he can regenerate and with fewer total losses. US has only been flirting with the idea of air war. It deserves undiluted condemnation for this completely lackadaisical attitude. Its neither magnificent, nor is it war. Its target practice. You cannot blame the principle of relying on air power, only the executor of that principle. The workman is at fault, not the tool.

·         Further, the Russians are going to be backing up ground forces. Iran troops have been pouring in to undertake joint offensives with Assad forces and Syria. The US keeps pathetically whining the Iraq Army should be doing the ground thing. Well, the Iraq Army is refusing to compete, and what is Washington going to do? Continue whining, apparently. The Syrians, Iranians, and Hezb don’t shrink from ground fighting.

Thursday 0230 GMT October 1, 2015

·         Bad, bad, bad Putin: US whines he is not implementing our game plan Why has this once great nation been cursed with an overabundance of clowns and fools who masquerade as our leaders? Is the Big Fella Upstairs punishing us for hubris, or for our total focus on a hedonistic life without heed to God’s laws or our duties to humanity?   Forget God and humanity. We no longer give a paper drinking fountain cup for our own not-so-well-off citizens, which is rapidly coming to include the lower 80%. But whatever the reasons, the clowns and fools are running amok in Washington.

·         Specific example. Russia yesterday attacked 8 target sets in different locations in Syria. Putin seems to be wasting no time, unlike our Great Leader, who thinks time is an unlimited quantity. In war, BTW, time is considered the most important winning weapon. The US response?

·         Our SecDefense goes on TV, to announce with no passion but with much weariness, as if talking to a hopelessly unruly child, that Syria is not bombing where the US believes IS to be, and is instead bombing Assad’s enemies. Oh dear us! How rude of Putin! How misguided!

·         Before we proceed to blast our SecDef, who after all is only the front-person for the Obama Clown Parade, we need to clearly tell you that from what we hear, the SecDef really is bright (as opposed to the Administration’s pseudos who think they’re all Double Mensas (360 IQ) and smarter than the rest of America put together. He is said to be a straight-shooter, and no one’s court jester. He says “Emperor has no clothes” even if it upsets the Emperor, who indeed has clothes but made out of clear Saran Wrap.

·         So the reason we are blasting him is not that he is poltroon and moron, but because we are angry he is degrading himself in the service of an unworthy master. Who is not – shockingly – the American people. If even people of courage and integrity can be bought over by the ruling power, and so easily, there is just no hope for the US.

·         Russia is not playing the game we want Russia to play. Oh dear. But didn’t Russia clearly say that it is intervening on Assad’s side, and that the US-led bombing campaign is illegal under international law? Didn’t Russia say “let’s defeat the extremists and then we can discuss Assad”? Isn’t the Russian definition of extremist anyone trying to overthrow Assad? BTW, a point of note directed at those concerned with legalities. (Editor is not one of them as he is an extreme hard liner. How many divisions does the UN have, that sort of thing.) The US has no legal mandate for its intervention in Syria. Only the UN Security Council can give that, and it has not. The US does have a legal mandate to intervene in Iraq. That’s because the internationally recognized Government of Iraq requested our intervention. Similarly, Russia also has a legal mandate because Syria is its announced ally of many decades and the head of the Syrian Government asked Moscow for help.

·         So just where does the US get off, complaining that Russia is not fighting the war we want it to fight, and somehow Russia is being mala fide for following its own game plan?

·         Let us go back a step. For 3-years, Russia pulled along with the US on Syria. It has entered Syria only because the United States, in an amazing failure of leadership, has failed to move the needle on Syria. Indeed, we have made things worse because the situation is becoming more chaotic by the day. Oh, says the US now, that’s because Russia has entered Syria. Wrong and wrong. The chaos is a consequence of our intervention without a plan, a workable ideological rationale, or the weapons to fight to win. Moscow is not adding to the chaos, it is fighting to bring stability after which it will sit down with us and talk regime change. By what moral authority are we intent on overthrowing Assad, particularly after our failure in Libya, Egypt, and Iraq, not to speak of the Yemen cesspool?

·         The extreme hypocrisy of the US lies in that we are ourselves are not attacking Assad, because like brain-dead folks who keep hammering their thumb instead of the nail, we too have realized that Assad’s departure will only open the way for another – and worse – civil war. And that could be followed by yet a third. Russia is doing our business by giving us an out on Assad, and giving us a chance to rectify our mistakes.

·         So please, Washington, cut the poo-poo. We don’t need our country to create more messes globally. Editor would much rather we kept the Russians out by fighting to defeat IS and its allies, and keeping folks like Turkey out. BTW, has the US realized the Kurds neither want to, nor have the capability, of  ruling Syria. They’re looking to carve out a homeland to which they draw Turkish Kurds, splitting Syria and leaving it in a state of  chaos. Let’s not mention the effects the Kurds are having on Turkey. Putin is only doing what we lack the guts to do. Lead, follow, or stay out of the way. We cannot lead, so let us let Putin try his luck. His intervention may work, it may not. But at least he has a plan. Us? We got nothing except our toes up our backsides.

Wednesday 0230 GMT September 30, 2015

·         Pootin wants to go Tootin but does he have the floose? Floose (Flus) being Arabic slang for cash. There seems to be an expressed belief among some American analysts that Putin’s adventure in Syria will soon become a misadventure because he is short of cash. He has sacrificed his economy for the sake of his Ukraine adventure, and more bad behavior of this sort will cost him more. The implication is This Too Will End Badly.

·         But are Putin’s economic woes a consequence of Western embargoes imposed on account of Ukraine or because of the drop in oil prices? In mid-2015, Russia was producing (rounded off) 11-million bbl/day. With oil at $50 (and likely going lower) versus $100 (and going higher), Russia is losing $200-billion/year, or more than 10% of its GDP. In 2015 sanctions will cost Russia $80-billion http://money.cnn.com/2015/04/21/news/economy/russia-ukraine-sanctions-price/ By contrast, sanctions are going to cost Euro 100-billion in 2015 to Europe alone, equal to 2-million jobs http://europe.newsweek.com/russian-sanctions-could-cost-europe-100-billion-328999

·         So US-Europe alone are likely losing almost twice because of sanctions as is Russia. Now, of course, matters are not so dire for either side, because trade finds other channels. Just back of envelope, if we say Russia will suffer $50-billion net loss in 2015, that’s only a quarter of the oil price decline. So it is not Putin’s bad Ukraine intervention costing Putin money, but the oil price drop. That has nothing to do with his Syria intervention, so we can put that theory aside.

·         What is the cost of Russia’s Syria intervention? We’d have to do a lot more analysis to give a figure. But say Russia sends 20,000 military to Syria (it seems to be about 2500 now). After reductions, it will spend $57-billion, or 5% less than planned, and will still spend 25% more than 2014. Twenty thousand troops is 2% of the Russian military. Assume that combat deployment of troops will be five times the cost of keeping them at home. Then Russia will spend perhaps $5- for 20,000 troops. BTW, Russia is spending 3% of its GDP on defense. We’re not going to get into official vs actual spending because the US also spends a lot more than its official 4% of GDP once you count everything

·         Can Russia afford $5-billion/yr? Obviously it can! That anyone should doubt it shows how sloppy is the analysis of those Americans who believe the intervention will somehow pose insurmountable costs. (Further hint: like US, Russia prints its own money. Think deficit financing.)

·         At this stage we don’t know what form Russian intervention will take. Does it plan only on protecting, say 4-5 bases in Syria? Then ten thousand would be more than suffice. Does it plan to diligently attack ISIS? Could be done with 20,000 including advisors, with air being the bulk of the effort. Having – say – 5-7 elite brigades for fire-fighting duties could be done within a 20K ceiling. We can probably rule out a US Second Gulf type intervention, which would require much more. Why? We’ll discuss this another time.

·         But, some will say, air action alone is not doing the job for the US. Why should it work for Russia? Sigh. Think, ye doubters, think! US is failing because it launched maybe a dozen attack sorties a day, has no FACs, and is terrified of civilian casualties. None of this will be true for Russia.

·         Note, BTW (refer our Twitter feed) that the Russians have begun practicing “air assaults” – meaning assault via fighter aircraft with 150 fighter aircraft at a time. This is going to blow serious holes in any large IS attack if repeated in Syria. Do it a dozen times and IS will have a definite problem. We could be doing the same thing. For example, had we used B-52s over Kobani, Mt. Sinjar, Tikrit, or Fallujah/Ramadi, how long would IS be fighting conventional warfare? Not long, we think. In our case it is not disappointing results from using airpower. It is expected results for misusing airpower. Editor does not think the Russians will follow us in this respect.

Tuesday 0230 GMT September 29, 2015

·         More Happy Happy Joy Joy: Putin shafts the United Stated again It has come to this: Editor, who has been staunchly anti-communist all his life, and who believes Russia should be broken up so that it ceases to be a threat to the west, is dancing the Happy Dance at Putin’s latest ploy to pluck feathers from the Eagle’s tail. That is because Editor thinks America has become so totally useless, it needs repeated stomping so that it can one day hopefully return to reality.

·         So everyone knows Russia has entered Syria to defend Assad and attack Islamic State. Until recently, the Russians supported US policy in Syria, i.e., Assad needs to retire, though of course the modalities were different. When Russia saw America is making a huge mess of the entire Mideast, and that so pathetic is the US war against Islamic State that the latter keeps getting stronger, and that the chaos in the region well past the point of being dangerous, Putin decided to bid the US adieu and step in himself.

·         So what has he done now? Made a bid to become the leader in the war against fundamentalist Islam, relegating the US to the position of a liveried servant positioned as a footman.  Putin has reached agreement with Iran, Iraq, and Syria to share joint intelligence on Islamic State and other horrors. This is just a first step in pushing the US into second-rate status in the region.

·         Nature, they say, abhors a vacuum. Given that the US Government’s head is now a perfect vacuum, free of any thought, purposeful or random, and given that the US intervention – Libya, Egypt, Iraq, Syria and so on – has been vacuous, naturally another power has to take over.

·         But here is the insult to the United States: those fatuously vacuous American leaders have been pushed to the margins not by another great power, some worthy rival. No. It is being pushed aside by a country whose GDP is now probably less than that of India, one of the poorest countries in the world. So it is not that we are beaten up by second-raters. We are being beaten up by fourth-raters. That is how low we have sunk.

·         Does this bother America? Not a bit. We are so arrogant and have such a high opinion of ourselves that no brutal reality can intrude on our hubris. We’re the greatest: who says so? We do.

·         To Editor, as an Indian, one of the truly frightening thing about Obama’s Mideast policy (and China policy) is how perfectly it mirrors India’s fatal habit of talking big but doing nothing. You see, if you don’t talk big and do nothing, the gap between words and deeds is small, and will generally be overlooked. But if you shoot your mouth off all the time about great you are, then people notice that you sitting on the privy, heaving and scowling and grunting ad thrashing and cussing and hours later expelling a quantity of product an anorexic mouse would be ashamed to claim. America’s rulers assume we own the world, no one else can take over, and everyone has to do things at our pace.

• Apparently Iraq, Syria, and Iran disagree. The Iraqis are openly saying the US is a failure. Instead of asking why they think so, we shoot back: “well you’re a failure too, nyah nyah.” That’s fine, but does it not bother Washington that we are going nowhere in our third Iraq intervention? Does it not bother us that the same Assad who we had dismissed as a goner has become strong again thanks to Russia, thus negating what we did/are doing to replace him? Does it not bother us that Super-Pest Iran has no fear of us and is instead working with our enemy? Nope. It does not. We’re not only has beens who think we’re Number One, we don’t even care someone else is taking over our sphere of influence in the Middle East.

Monday 0230 GMT September 28, 2015

·         Pakistan blames Afghanistan for Peshawar air base attack offers evidence and says it will hold Kabul accountable.

·         Since we’re writing about Pakistan, Editor has to roll out his usual caveats. The Indians used to believe Editor was a Pakistan agent, the Pakistan used to believe he is an extreme right-winger and Pakistan hater. Obviously when both sides have it in for one, one must be doing something right. Editor’s position is actually simple. If you recognize Pakistan’s right to exist, then right or wrong, whether it worked or it didn’t, Pakistan has to right to order its national security the way it wants, and there’s no right/wrong about. Now, there may as many as three Indians who believed that Pakistan has no right to exist because Partition was a fraud forced on India by the British to suit their interests, and Nehru and Jinnah conspired with the British to make a back room deal to partition the country to further their personal interests. This deal has no legitimacy because it was never submitted to a democratic vote of the people.

·         The other two people are dead, so there’s Editor left, unless after he left India he inspired some youngster or two to his view point. Nonetheless, what Editor believes is totally irrelevant, because the Government of India accepts Pakistan as an independent country. Just as US and India look to their own interest in foreign and military affairs, so does Pakistan and there’s no right/wrong about it.

·         So this short rant is NOT an anti-Pakistan screed. It only points to the irony of Pakistan insisting it will Afghanistan responsible for the latter’s terrorist action. Editor considers both US’s and India’s attitude toward Pakistan to be hang-worthy treason, but that is a separate matter altogether. Hopefully everyone is clear about what Editor has to say.

·         The irony is that Pakistan is blaming Kabul for not controlling its border when it repeatedly tells the US that it cannot control its side of the border despite 800,000 ground troops and paramilitary in its armed forces. Afghanistan has perhaps 300,000, and is busy fighting a full-blown insurgency against the Taliban – and it is losing. To say the Pakistan Army is ten-times as effective as the Afghan army may be overly modest. Pakistan says it must keep the bulk of its forces against India. The reality is that if Pakistan shifted everything it has west of the Indus, India would not move one meter into Pakistan. We have the precedent of 1962, when India withdrew all its plains forces except an armored division to the Northeast to fight the Chinese. Pakistan did not move an inch. Any thoughts it might were squashed by the US. Similarly, the US has only to post observers on the Pakistan side of the border and promise India America will react with maximum force if India crossed the border, and Pakistan could move 100-brigades and 150,000 paramilitary entirely to the west.

·         There is a bigger irony is, of course, that Pakistan created the Taliban to take over Afghanistan – for its own strategic reasons. That strategy still hold true. Pakistan does fight the Taliban – the minor factions that oppose Pakistan. If Pakistan sealed the Afghan border against the Taliban, the Pakistan Taliban would die and there would be no question that Pakistan could block the few tens of thousands of anti-Pakistan Taliban that now shelter in Afghanistan.

·         Pakistan has refused attempts by the US to hold Islamabad accountable for the over 14-years of attacks against Afghanistan, and India’s attempts to hold it accountable for over 35-years of open and covert war. Please note: we are not blaming Islamabad for acting in its own interest. We are blaming the craven yellow panted rulers of India and Afghanistan for having less spine than a jellyfish and letting Pakistan get away with murder – actual murder in the sense of killing tens of thousands of Afghanis, Indians, and Americans.

·         This is like the aluminum saucepan calling the aluminum baking tray white.

Friday 0230 GMT September 25, 2015

·         India to sign helicopter deal during Modi’s visit to US Prime Minister Modi is in the US and is expected to sign the long deferred deal for Boeing helicopters, 22 AH-64E and 15 CH-47, with 11 options for the first and 7 for the second. http://goo.gl/BQrgA3 What’s interesting about the deal is that India approved it three-years ago, but did not sign, ostensibly for lack of funds. Boeing, after several price extensions, threat to increase the total by 40%. Which finally got GOI off its duff.

·         But this habit of delaying continues: the deal for 145 M777 light 155mm guns has not been signed for five years after its clearance. The manufacturer did raise the price eventually, sending GOI into an unhappy sulk. Meanwhile, Pakistan is upgrading 400 130mm guns to 155/45 standard with help from China. We too were supposed to upgrade our long obsolete 130mm inventory with Israeli help, but about 6-years ago this contract was suspended because someone alleged the Israelis had paid a bribe to get the contract. The charge was never proved, incidentally. But in India, just as happened with Rama and Sita, an accusation alone sufficed to convict the accused. No need to mention that India is now on its 5^th round of RFPs for new guns, nothing having come of the previous four.

·         Indians, it is said, have no concept of time because (a) the universe is born and dies an infinity of times; (b) we die and are reborn at least one-bazillion times. Just kidding: actually we are reborn one-bazillion raised to the one-bazillion times. So what’s the hurry, mate? It turns out the ancient Indians are likely right on the infinite cyclical universe; and rebirth is a logical outcome of the belief the soul is immortal. This has not been proved scientifically, as yet. The problem is that the world seems to move in real time. Indian attitudes toward static time are well suited for the pre-industrial era, where in ancient India and Egypt, millennia passed as quickly as the life of a fruit fly. But since we have decided we are going to function within a Western framework of time, then time does matter. Refusing to act when needed leads to unpleasant consequences, and so it has been with our defense modernization. The lack of which has created the world’s largest junkyard of obsolete weapons in the world subsumed under the heading “Indian military power”.

·         Us Indians are expert procrastinators. But in a western context, that being the context we have chosen to function within, extreme procrastination is a mental disease because it leads to the non-functioning of a person. We also have a habit of mistaking the word for the deed. If we said it, it has happened. Now, this seems to have worked fine for God, from whose words came the universe. Us Indians are one up on the west in this regard, because we believe that the universe takes form from the dreams of the Ultimate Consciousness, whom we call Brahma. Our snarky western friends should resist snarking, because increasingly it seems we exist within someone’s computer simulation, i.e., the Master Game Player’s dreams.

·         Again, however, India has to decide in which framework it functions: its own or the Western. If it is the Western, then we blooming well had better stop procrastination and ACT.

·         The new helicopters, it is said, are for the mountain strike corps, as are the M777 guns. Time for an “Oopsies!” because we just cut funding for the second new division of the new 17^th Corps, on grounds of funds shortage. Well look, folksies. If we continue wanting a first-class military on a defense expenditure of 2% of GDP, then we will every year be short of funds. Editor has done work on this at the prodding of defense journalist and analyst Arun Shukla, and believes 6% is a more realistic figure given our security environment. US also spends 6% - a lot of stuff is under budgets other than the official DOD budget.

·         Meanwhile, journalist Sandeep Unithan of Indian Today stumped the Editor by asking: “But where exactly are we going to use the mountain strike corps?” Actually there are to be two, but that’s another story. You see, Editor is a simple person. Thirty years ago General K. Sundarji posited a requirement of 19 mountain divisions against China. According to Editor’s studies, he was absolutely correct. So as far as Editor is concerned, it doesn’t matter where we are going to use the mountain strike corps; based on China’s growing logistics capability in Tibet, we need those three mountain divisions, regardless of what you call them.

·         Sandeep, however, has a point. An offensive option against China-in-Tibet means getting behind Chinese forces in the north, threatening envelopment or a thrust that will force the PLA to leave the border, for example, an attack on Lhasa. Editor has been saying for some time that China is mechanizing ALL except specialist land forces. If we gain the plateau, our mountain infantry will be counterattacked by Chinese mechanized forces, and that will be the end of the matter. True that GOI has authorized three new armored brigades for use against China. But that will not help much when ALL Chinese forces in Tibet or tasked to Tibet become armored and mechanized brigades.

·         Editor has a solution for everything, except his lack of a date on Saturday night. So he has a solution for this problem too, starting with a new 13^th Corps with two mechanized divisions, one partially mechanized division, and an independent armored brigade for Ladakh south of the Changchemo River, in addition to the second mountain strike corps. To repeat: that’s a start. (14^th Corps to shorten its AOR to north of the Changchemo with two new mountain divisions alongside 8^th Division.) That’s seven new divisions just for the Ladakh sector, including serious spending on airmobility. And that means Big, Big Bucks. Which we have, BTW. You wanna play with the Big Boys, you gotta spend like the Big Boys. There’s no shortcut.

Thursday 0230 GMT September 24, 2015

·         Back to the Iraq Clown Parade Readers lately haven’t heard much about Iraq in our daily rants. That’s because nothing is happening. Remember that offensive against Ramadi that was starting? It’s still starting. It’s going nowhere because, among other reasons, there’s only two Iraq Army anti-IED teams left in the whole army, and Islamic State is a master of IED belt defenses. And remember the offensive against Mosul that was to start the summer? WashPost said on Tuesday that this may have to be deferred until Obama leaves office, which will be January 2017.

·         So obviously Editor is not going to brag “I told you so”, because to have foretold these developments is as hard as forecasting “The sun will rise in the East tomorrow and set in the West”, or “Tomorrow we’ll be a day older”.

·         The US, of course, is never short of solutions. Having been forced into a stand-still, the US has rolled out a new solution: get IS out of its Raqqa, Syria, headquarters. US solutions are inevitably beautifully worded. Those fellers in the Hill may not know bull poop from rat poop, but they know how to write beautifully. Having failed in the direct approach, the US will now try the indirect approach.

·         And who is going to liberate Raqqa? The Kurds, of course. They’ve seized 17,000 square-kilometers of Syria in recent months. We’re going to arm them, train them, and support them from the air all the way to victory. How is this going to help in Iraq? Well, presumably with its head cut off, IS will collapse. Did anyone tell the US that IS now has two heads, one of which is in Mosul? Apparently not. Did anyone tell the US that any expansion of Kurdish-controlled territory is going to bring Turkey directly into the war – against the US? Yes, the US knows this and has written it off as one of those details that can be ignored because the situation is so complex it makes our heads hurt. Anyone knows when you are faced with such a situation, you have to simplify matters by just pretending that inconvenient facts don’t exist.

·         To deny US airpower has helped the Kurds advance is to be churlish. It has helped. And who else is flying strikes against the very same Kurds we are backing? Turkey, of course. So you see the problem. If Turkey crosses the Syrian border, it will be whack the Kurds and take pressure off the IS, these are not objectives we share. Besides, haven’t we failed in the Kurd training/arming thing? Yes, we have, but it will be different this time. How different? Don’t know, but we said it will. And nothing will change because IS will slip out of Raqqa like rats on a sinking ship and set up shop elsewhere. With Russia entering the war, IS has to face a revived Assad. But that’s okay, because regardless of what we say, we now understand Assad has to stay.

·         So what happens if IS is pushed out of Syria with IS maintaining a big chunk of the east? That will be good for Syria but make no difference to Iraq, because then Mosul will become the primary HQ.

·         The fatal flaw in US’s Iraq policy from the start has been the decision that we will not take casualties, so the Iraq Army must carry the load. Twenty-one months have elapsed since IS first pushed into Anbar, and the Iraq Army has yet to perform. There is no indication that it will in the future. The Iraqi Kurds have made it clear they have no interest in joining an offensive for Mosul.  That leaves the Shia militias. We’ve often wondered if the Shias will fight for Mosul and Anbar because these are not their areas of interest. The answer has been given: they won’t. So either US does the fighting or it goes home.

Wednesday 0230 GMT September 23, 2015

·         Syria: It gets even better! UK Financial Times reports that 2000 Russian troops are headed for Latakia. The article http://goo.gl/Un3nHN is behind a paywall, Zero Hedge Blog has a summary http://goo.gl/xpfQcE “Three western defense officials agreed that the Russian deployment tallied with the numbers needed to establish a forward air base similar to those built by western militaries in Afghanistan.”

·         We don’t know who these officials are, which is a break for them, else we’d have to give them 20 strokes with a limp noodle for not knowing their business. Latakia is not a “forward” air base, it is an expeditionary air base, but we’ll let this go. Readers need to be aware of the distinction, though. An FOB is something you build to support forward deployed troops. An expeditionary base becomes the air bridgehead to support an intervention. It’s an order of magnitude bigger.

·         More details: NY Times says at least 2 and perhaps 3 SA-22 systems are at the air base. Sigh. More limp noodle beatings are required. The word in Russian may well be “system”, but these are actually batteries, each consisting of several SAM systems. There are now 500 Russian marines present, which indicates a battalion. There are now 15 tactical transport and attack helicopters. The number of T-90s has reached nine, which is still short of a company, but is nonetheless better than seven.  With weapons, less is never more. The only thing that is better than more weapons is even more weapons.

·         Meanwhile, one of the US’s brilliant geniuses, aka John Kerry, SecState, issued another inane statement that has become the hallmark of this administration. Obviously he is not to blame, some idjit must have briefed him. “The U.S. military has assessed that the type of Russian aircraft in Syria is consistent with protecting their own forces, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said on Tuesday” http://goo.gl/8UCoEs

·         Step back for a second. The bulk of the USAF consists of F-15s and F-16s. Their arrival anywhere means the US is ready to fight offensively. No one would conclude from the arrival of these two types that they are “consistent with protecting their own forces” because the aircraft are multi-mission. The arrival of F-22s might be termed defensive, though of course you need air control to protect your attack aircraft. And though of course the F-15s and F-16s are normally used for this role, F-22s being as rare as hen’s teeth.

·         So. Now military sources are reporting 4 x SU-30, 12 x SU-24, and 12 x SU-25. The SU-30 is a multi-mission aircraft, offensive or defensive, but yes, it’s likely they’re there for air defense. But the SU-24 is an F-111 analog; i.e., it’s a heavy, long-range strike fighter. You use it when you want to drop 4-tons of nasty bombs, and it is not a force protection aircraft. Same with the SU-25 is an A-10 analog, used when you want to go kissy-faces with enemy ground troops and armor. And yes, the marines and T-90s are consistent with base protection; but if you’re inducting Hips and Hinds, this suggests you are loading for bear.

·         Er. Awkward metaphor that. The Russians are bears, after all. But you get the point. And oh, the irony of it all! Russia has come to save America from its own foolishness. So the arrival of Russian forces has caused a rapid reevaluation of US Mideast strategy, right? Yes it has. And the new strategy is just as moronic as the old policies. More tomorrow

Tuesday 0230 GMT September 22, 2015

·         Happy Happy Joy Joy – Russia starts Syrian drone flights Is it morally right to be beaming with joy and happiness at hearing the news that Russia, one of America’s two mortal enemies, has kicked the US in the pants? Moreover, in the front of the pants, not the rear? When you have a US Government that is smug over its brilliance that its verbal poop will choke Manhattan’s largest sewer, and when that Government shows not the slightest remorse for the years on years of mistakes it has made, and in fact believes that it has been so right that there’s no need to change course, then “yes”. Anything that brings real pain to this brain-dead government, regardless of who delivers the pain, is an opportunity for song, dance, and mirth. Bravo, Russia! Do it again!

·         Reuters reports that the Russians have begun UAV flights over Syria. More fun and games: 24 additional fighter jets have arrived, evenly divided between Su-24 Fencers and SU-25 Frogfoots. http://news.yahoo.com/exclusive-russia-starts-drone-surveillance-missions-syria-u-130705583.html Patrick Skuza tells us that the first batch of 4 SU-27 Flanker jets that appeared at the airbase south of Latakia are painted in Russian, not Syrian, colors. This suggests they are not part of the equipment that Russia is pouring into Syria. Of course, this is not conclusive. Perhaps Russia is in such a rush it is drawing down on its own stocks to supply Syria and has no time to repaint the aircraft and assign new serials. On the other hand, even if Syrian pilots are to fly the first four, it does not seem a good idea for the Russians not to repaint the aircraft, because each time one of these things is photographed in the air, the US will go “Oh the bad bad Russians are directly fighting for Assad.”

·         You also have to wonder: within days the Russians have sent three different types of fighters to Syria. The country already flies the Fencer, but as far as we know the Frogfoot and Flanker are new in Sy.A.F. service. Most air forces would not be able to induct two different types of fighter within a few days. To say nothing of the drones that have arrived, plus new transport aircraft. And the Yak-130 trainer/fighter just started arriving last year.

·         Let us waste a few words on US strategy in Syria. (a) No need for us to intervene, the rebels will install a democratic regime and we’ll step in to help. (b) Not working: Assad hanging tough, we’d better start training rebels. Besides, IS and AQ growing like weeds. (c) Not working: Islamists defeat our rebel groups, keep expanding. Besides: Oooopsies! If Assad goes, IS/AQ take over. Better train new forces to fight IS/AQ and leave Assad alone. (d) Oh no, say it isn’t so: air strikes not stopping IS/AQ which continue to gain ground; new training program implodes, perhaps 60 trained, who quit. (e) Start new training program to get Syrians to be FACs for our strikes.

• Political plan changes from Assad magically overthrown, to “let us wait it out, Assad will go, we’ll step in”.

·         The military plans were, and continue to be, complete bosh. As for the political plan, you may want to protest: when others have fought to depose Assad, mainly Islamists, why on earth are they going to let us come in to reap the spoils? See, by asking such fantastic questions, the answers to which are obvious, you are overlooking the Giant Genius Minds who formulate/execute US policy. After refusing to intervene with our own ground troops in the war, are we going to commit troops to take on IS/AQ? We aren’t doing it in Iraq. Why should we do it in Syria? So the political policy will also end up as Giant Fail.

·         Meanwhile, the Poots has slyly asked the US to join him in exterminating IS/AQ. We share a common goal he says, why not coordinate? So what does the US do now? “No thanks, we’d rather you stayed out and let IS/AQ win”? Or “Goody, we’ll let the Rus finish off AQ/IS and then move in to finish them off? Small problem: with IS/AQ squashed, Assad will be riding high. Its him we’ll have to finish off. But-but-but – doesn’t that put us back to what we weren’t willing to do to begin with back in 2011? And wont the Russians fight back to defend Assad the same as they’re doing now?

·         Hmmmm. US is not caught on the horns of a dilemma. In a strange twist of horn topology, we are now simultaneously impaled by both horns, each poking us in a painfully sensitive place. This is not an easy maneuver to achieve. But our Government is so brilliant it has done just that. Problem is, it’s neither Assad nor the Russians shrieking in agony. It’s us.

Monday 0230 GMT September 21, 2015

·         US concludes it/NATO cannot defend the Baltics Apparently the Pentagon has been using a war game to arrive at this conclusion. The game consists of two different rounds games in two days. It has been played 16-times with 8 different teams, and the US without or without NATO has lost all 16 times. http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/09/18/exclusive-the-pentagon-is-preparing-new-war-plans-for-a-baltic-battle-against-russia/

·         Okey dokey. Between you, the wall, and the Editor, unless he sees the game being played he cannot say it was either realistic or fair. When the US is being “transparent”, you should be on maximum alert for fraudulent studies pre-planned to give a desired result. That said, the article cited above gives clues of some of the assumptions used.

·         A key assumption is that the extremely lethal US airpower will be neutralized by Russian SAMs. Personally, Editor doubts this unless there is a caveat that the US cannot risk casualties in any substantial numbers. If that is an assumption, then yes, Editor will agree. The next assumption is that ground forces have been run down to the point that it will be a month or more before US-based troops start arriving. This Editor has no trouble accepting, as US draws done to 33 brigades plus 8 Marine infantry regiments. You don’t want 82^nd Airborne Division or a couple of Marine regiments facing Russian armor without air supremacy. You really will need your own armored and mechanized forces. Currently US has programed equipment for one heavy brigade, with personnel being quickly flown in. There are only two light brigades in Europe.

·         Truthfully, all this induces Editor to repeatedly slap himself to try and stay awake. What is the big news here? Anyone can figure this out. The US has assumed for 25-years that Russia and China can be brought around to see the world as America does, one result being there will be no war with these two military giants. We’ve already bashed US for its extreme arrogance and wishful thinking in making this assumption; no need to repeat ourselves.

·         The one thing that stood out, as far we are concerned, is that the US is considered a tactical nuclear option. Americans. Having the attention span of a midge, seem to forget we have been down this route before and decided it was a bad idea.

·         After WW2, US doctrine became massive retaliation. No need to maintain scores of divisions and fighter wings, if one Soviet solider crossed the Inner German Border we would use tactical weapons. Wouldn’t the Soviets retaliate? Oh, but we were so wonderful that we would control the escalation ladder – graduated response – with plenty of pauses between steps to allow the Soviets to rethink further escalation. This all made perfect sense as long as US was wargaming playing both sides of the board.

·         The Soviets, however, made it clear that if one tactical weapon was fired, they would go all the way to massive retaliation. Indeed, multiple US/NATO wargames showed exactly the same result: despite all efforts for graduate response, within a few days the situation went to total nuclear war.

·         Accordingly, the US decided it had to have a solid conventional option for the defense of Western Europe, and began rebuilding its conventional forces.

·         So how come the US is considering a tactical nuclear option? Haven’t we been through this before and discarded the idea as unworkable? Indeed, isn’t the reason we haven’t sent troops to Europe to get the Russians out of Ukraine precisely that we fear the Russians will escalate to N-weapons?

·         We are thinking of an N-option because we are less smart than an earthworm. Mah Fellow Markins (as LBJ used to say) this is where your tax money is going. To pay for fools, morons, and poltroons, who after pooping use the toilet paper to blow their noses their noses instead of wiping their backsides, and think their job is done.

·         We’ve said before: there is only one solution, the 18 solution. 18 army divisions, 18 full strength tactical fighter wings to support, and 18 carrier battle groups. This will account for the Russians and the Chinese for perhaps three decades. Don’t want to spend the money? Then become isolationist pacifists, and suck our thumbs.

Friday 0230 GMT September 18, 2015

·         Editor makes rapid reversal on Russia-in-Syria That’s because evidence has emerged that the Russians may only be speaking truth when they say equipment to Syria is for its military, and yes, there are Russian troops in country, but are there only to help train the Syrians.

·         Reminder to young people on how intelligence analysis works You draw inferences from facts based on what you known at that time. When additional information arrives, you modify the analysis to accommodate that new information. Sometimes that new information destroys your earlier analysis, and any decent analyst knows s/he cannot let her/his biases get in the way of changing an analysis.

·         So what is the information leading Editor to say “Russia’s explanation can explain the events”? That is Syrians say they have deployed in combat new attack helicopters and other weapons from Russia.

·         Editor was following this line of thought: why in the middle of a desperate situation would Russia supply new, more complex, more sophisticated armaments? For example, why not T-72s and BMP-1/2s, which Syrians are totally familiar with?

·         First, if Syrians say they are flying new Rus attack helios, they could just as well be using T-90s and BTR-82s and so on, stuff that has been reported as being in Syria, and assumed to be manned by Russian troops.

·         Second, the deadly Occam’s Razor, which Editor has always interpreted to mean “The explanation that requires the fewest number of assumptions based on available facts is most likely to be true”.

·         Third, the burden of proof lies on the accuser, not the accused. Simply put, we cannot follow familiar US logic which says “Rus-Syria has to prove us we’re wrong, not the other way around. Until then, they’re guilty of lying to us.” No need to go into why this is not a viable method of analysis.

·         So yes, the Syrians could be saying they’re using new Rus equipment, but they could be lying. The impartial analyst needs more evidence that the Rus-Syrians are lying before making a ruling.

·         Okay, says US, how do you explain the 200 Russian marines at Latkia, the expansion of the airbase south of the port, the Russian fighter, the video of Russians in the combat zone conversing in Russia, the expected arrival of the new missile/gun SAM systems?

·         Can be explained. Russians plan to increase support for Assad. They need better air bases – for themselves. They need the Marines for self-protection.  Ditto SAM defenses – who knows when US/West/Turkey decide they don’t like Russian actions and decide to bomb Rus bases in Syria? Okay, what about the Russian fighter over Syria. Syrians with Russian advisors may be flying those planes for training. As for the Russian speakers, look, if US was running training exercises with anti-Assad rebels, wouldn’t you get video of uniformed Americans speaking American and playing with American toys?

·         Does this means Russian troops are NOT fighting in Syria? Actually it doesn’t mean that. They could. But it’s for the US to prove that, not the Russians-Syrians to disprove that. Tomorrow new evidence may arrive to buttress the US position. But tomorrow is not today. We know what’s happening today; we can’t say what will happen tomorrow. When it does, we’ll reassess by producing the simplest framework that can explain the new data.

Wednesday 0230 GMT September 17, 2015

·         The State of the United States Part II Yesterday we mentioned that America has become dysfunctional because regardless of political party, the American elite has a one-point agenda: what is mine is mine, and what is yours is also mine. We argued that the rise of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders shows that Americans are fed up of business as usual, and are wakening from their cheap-beer-and Reality-TV coma to protest. We further argued that if the 2016 election were held today, it is unlikely either anti-establishment candidate would win. But if the disaffection keeps building, we may well see a revolution in November 2016. Last, we said it didn’t matter if these two rebel candidates have no governing experience as such; all they need is to recognize their limitations and appoint good people as advisors, and they will make good rulers.

·         You might think from this this Editor is saying “Okay, maybe the revolution wont come in 2016, but surely it will come by 2020 or 2024”. After all, the haves are not suddenly going to stop looting the have-nots, which really now is 80% of America. Some calculate its 95% of America, and still others say its 99%. So things will only get worse, with reach year bringing the revolution closer. Ergo, give a few more years and we’ll have the Big Bang.

·         Problemo, dudes and dudettes. The President of the US does not run the country. Europeans and Asians somehow think he has terrific power because fir four years he cannot be un-elected.  In the parliamentary system, common worldwide, a government has to resign if a money-bill is defeated. Theoretically – assuming elections could be held instantly, there’s nothing to stop a new election every other month. The US calls itself a democracy, because people get to vote every four years for a president, every six years for a senator, and every two years for a representative. Supreme Court justices are cleared by the Senate, but then can rule until they are carried off to the cemetery. But the US is actually a republic. The key point is that the majority does not automatically rule. The wise Founding Fathers distrusted majorities, which can so easily become mob rule and oppression. The entire US system has been carefully constructed to slow-down government decision-making. The Prez is only one of a triumvirate that guarantees things cannot be done in haste.

·         Even if you have an angel as the president, the Supreme Court has nine women and men that have strong, sometimes fanatical, ideological views. They do not face voters, they are invulnerable to pressure groups. They set course they want to set course, and often – frankly my dear, don’t give a darn about what the majority thinks. The Supreme Court is set up that way, and it works brilliantly. Then there’s the elected representatives. Because of way the American systems works now-a-days, to get elected you need vast amounts of money, mostly for buying media time and the rest for your staff.

·         Now, suppose your Editor were a rich man. As a poor man he might be willing to give $5 to a candidate simply because the latter is principled. But a rich man gives money so he can make more money. Your Editor would not be handing over $500,000, or $5-million, or $50-million for any other reason. The Koch Brothers, conservatives, are giving $300-million for this election. They will want a quid for their pro. All the elected folks have to sell their souls or else they get no money. No money no win. Simple. And money corrupts. The folks taking money might say they need it to get reelected. But being human, they also take money because they want money for themselves.

·         So even if the President gets elected because he is a person of principle, the House and Senate is elected thanks to vested interests. Moreover, once the new President is part of the establishment elite, his mind-set changes. So just having an honest, principled person as Prez solves nothing. And it’s a matter of time before he himself becomes corrupt.

• So there you have it. Donald or Bernie as Prez will solve nothing. But it’s a start. And the Prez gets to speak to America anytime he wants, free of charge. An honest Prez can get his message to the people: lets change this whole stinking corrupt system. It can work, until of course it doesn’t. You see, democracies need to be continually renewed. Any system based on ideals need renewal. A new way of doing things is not a panacea. But if it takes 25-years to put in place, it can deliver for 50-years before it starts becoming corrupt again. At which point you need another revolution. So revolution has to be continuous

Wednesday 0230 GMT September 15, 2015

·         The State of the United States is not good. But something odd is happening. Remember we have been raving and ranting about the need for a revolution? That it’s not a question of this GOP policy or that Democrats policy, but that the entire elite is rotten to the core and needs to be overthrown? That only the people can do this and the people are sitting in a coma numbed by cheap beer and reality TV?

·         Well, it seems the people are not just unhappy but most importantly are expressing dissent. If you understand how totally smug and conformist Americans are, this is a Very Big Development. What’s happening is the two anti-establishment candidates, Trump (GOP) and Bernie Sanders (Democrat) are beating the pants off the usual suspects. Trump is way ahead of his field; every day that goes by Bernie cuts into Hilary’s lead and may soon overtake her.

·         To put this in context, please remember that Trump is so off the wall, says so many bizarre things, that in normal times he should get perhaps a 3% approval rating. The man makes no sense each time he opens his mouth. As for Bernie, the man is a socialist, not just a lefty Democrat. In case our foreign readers don’t know: in the US socialists are loathed and hated about the same as communists. To say you are a socialist candidate is not just to be a Dead Man Walking, it is it to be a Dead Man in his Grave. Normally Bernie types would get even less than 3% approval.

·         But apparently the American public is so angry with the establishment,  the political analysts are actually having to deal with the possibility that these two men may be the nominees for 2016. And it’s not because the US public likes the context of what they’re saying. It likes that the two are anti-establishment. This is “we’ll elect clowns rather than the establishment candidates because even clowns are better than what we now have.”

·         So what is Editor’s famous instinct saying? As of Wednesday 0230 GMT September 15, 2015, the two non-conformists have enough muscle to scare the bejinks out of the establishment, but not to win. HOWEVER: remember the wave effect. If a wave takes hold, then within months the impossible may become possible. It last happened to Hilary 2008. Obama was a nobody (and still is a nobody). Hilary was cruising the highway on automatic pilot, calm, low key, just driving to her coronation. Out of nowhere appeared Obama who had NOTHING to recommend him except he was black and not establishment. (Qualifier: he was down-and-dirty Chicago establishment; but unless you lived in Chicago, you didn’t know that. Our reader Mike Thompson does live in Chicago and has been warning us since 2008 that Obama is just another dirty dawg in one of the most corrupt political establishments in the US, and that just because he was black whereas the other dirties were white made no difference.)

·         Obama generated a wave (all engineered by white establishment advisors, of course) that he was going to be different. Hilary went down in flames, and lo, the voice came from on high “Bama, you be just as dirty a dawg as the white politicos”. And it was so. We are still almost 14-months from the election, which is an eternity in politics. Anything can happen. So predictions based on the now are pointless. But if this wave builds, there could be a political earthquake.

·         Before you shudder at the prospect of the Donald or The Bernie as US president: please to remember for all the personality-driven media circus, yes, even YOU could make a great American president. The caliber has been so low for decades that truly anyone can do the job. All it takes is the ability to say: “I am an idiot, I am clueless, but I will put together a great team and they’ll do the great work. Regardless of what comes out Donald’s mouth, he knows his limitations and he know how to assemble a functioning team. And the thing about Bernie is that he is a real humble New Englander; as such he has zero pretentions about Bernie as God.

·         To be continued tomorrow…..

Tuesday 0230 GMT September 15, 2015

·         Wazzup, Pooty my Dog? Quick explanation. In ethnic American Black speak, “my dog” is a term of affection, as in good friend. Ever since Putin began his Syria buildup, Editor has been feeling quite warmly towards this young man. Warmly? Well, for one thing he’s kicking the US administration in the teeth; this administration is so pretentiously useless it needs even more of a beating to bring it to its senses. For another, it’s become clear that the only way to save Syria and the Mideast is to save and strengthen Assad. Again, to repeat, Editor was all for deposing Assad, but he became disillusioned at the way the US was going about things, i.e., making things worse every day.

·         So pragmatically, Obama needs to be kicked off his sand hill in the playpen, and other people need to take the lead. Readers may disagree, but it seems to Editor Washington is actually breathing easier now there’s an adult in charge and Russia may be able to save America’s bacon. (My gosh, how culturally insensitive can Editor be? But please be reasonable. Jews and Muslims ban pork from their religion for practical reasons clothed in religious ordinances. Pigs are the garbage vacuum cleaners of 3^rd world countries and also probably carry many hot climate diseases. Yet, if you visit an American hog farm, the conditions are far, far more sanitary than for 80% of Indians and 90% of the Mideast refugees. The hogs are fed good, clean food, live in clean accommodations, and have vets constantly monitoring their health. So maybe this pork ban thing needs to be reconsidered. But we digress.)

·         Latest snippets from Russia-in-Syria. Russian cargo planes are arriving at the rate of two-a-day bringing in “humanitarian aid”; this is more than double the rate just a couple of weeks ago. The airfield near Latakia naval base is being strengthen and expanded, which allow more flights, higher payloads, and an operating base for Russian fighters. Seven T-90 tanks have appeared, which suggests there are more than just 200 naval infantry. We’ve previously mentioned that several Pantsir S1 (SA-22) close defense self-propelled batteries are moving. Obvious they are not coming to protect Assad against the non-existent rebel air force. They are likely there to stop Turkey from expanding its anti-Assad air operations, which truthfully the Turks have not been undertaking. They are still hammering Kurd rebels with an occasional fake sortie against Islamic State. The missiles and the presumed influx of fighter aircraft will compel the US/West/Turkey to curtail air operations to terms dictated by the Russians (take that, you dumb American bunnys!) Russian wheeled APCs with Russian troops are already participating in combat operations. In a very humanitarian way, of course.

·         Meanwhile, Germany has suddenly choked the refugee flow. It was very grand to say Germany can take in 5-million refugees over 10-years, but suddenly the realization has struck that some or many might be radical Islamic “refugees” coming over as Trojan Horses. How did the Germans figure this out? Well, for one thing IS has been broadcasting this is what it is doing. Even the thickest-headed German can get that point. It is so refreshing to see Europe in complete disarray over the refugees’ thing! It is just so lonely as an American seeing the US mess up again and again. You Euros always think you’re so superior to us. But here is conclusive proof that you Euros are also complete morons, nyah nyah nyah!

·         Editor had a thought: if Western Europe is short of people, why not give a subsidy of $30,000/year for your folks to have more kids and to bring in settlers from Eastern Europe. Why bring in Muslim refugees who don’t share your cultural values and are already making demands that not enough is being done for them? Been to France lately? Ten percent of Frenchies are Muslims. And the culture is already falling apart. Racism? Absolutely. Editor is from India and we sure as heck won’t want the equivalent of 1% of our population arriving annually as refugees – 12-million/year – regardless of their color.

Friday 0230 GMT September 11, 2015

·         Something is afoot in Syria but both Russia and US deny it The evidence: four An-124 flights have come into the airbase at Tartus, where the Russians have their naval facility. The An-124 is the world’s largest military cargo plane, capable of lifting 150 short tons. Two tank landing ships have also docked. Pre-fab housing for upto 3,000 men has been seen. Airport flight control equipment has been seen.  10-12 Russian wheeled APCs have been seen at Tartus. BTR-82APCs, the latest in Russia’s inventory, have been seen inside Syria. Russian troops speaking to each other in Russian have been seen. A Soviet fighter has been photographed over Syria. There are strong rumors that the Russian naval brigade in the Black Sea is moving to Syria.

·         The Russians deny everything. This is just humanitarian stuff, they say. As for weapons to Syria, well, we have a long-standing agreement on that. Advisors with Assad’s forces? Have we ever denied we have a few? Russia to station fighters in Syria? Light, tinkling laughter: you Americans are just so wildly imaginative. The Americans deny everything. Those military persons may be there just to protect the equipment the Russians are bring in.

·         Okay. So we have a tangled situation with both parties going “There’s no one here except us meeces”. An analyst is left with no alternative to analyze.

·         First, if this is all routine stuff, why is the US desperately seeking to close Southern Europe airspace to Russian military flights unless they are first inspected? BTW, Greece has refused to comply with the US demand, and Iran has gleefully given the Russians overflight permission. Of course, please to note that those flights will have to overfly extreme northern Iraqi airspace. This brings up interesting questions, which we will have to leave until more facts emerge.

·         Second, we are approaching the end-game in Syria. Assad is being pushed back to coastal Syria. What exactly might be the point of Russian combat advisors at this juncture? Even if we assume that with Russian and Iranian help Assad can hang on to the coast, does this meet Russian objectives for military facilities in the Mediterranean? It is difficult to see how. In our humble opinion, to protect its coastal facilities, Russia would probably need a 200-km buffer zone. Soon Assad may not have this. Damascus itself is under threat from anti-Assad rebels and Islamic State. Whoever takes Damascus could claim to be the Government of Syria. We think it’s doubtful that whoever has the capital and the biggest chunk of the country will be rushing to sign alliances with Russia.

·         What Syria needs most at this stage is airpower AND Russian ground forces. We could go into the complexities, but briefly, currently western and Turkish airpower has the free run of Syrian airspace and this is not doing Syria any good. Ground troops are needed to garrison strategic areas. Remember, Assad’s Alawites are a small minority in Syria. His army cannot go on taking the casualties it has been.

·         Also please note, Russian airpower and garrisons are NOT going to need to fight anyone. With Russian fighter flying regular air patrols over Syria, both Turkey and the west get knocked out of the picture. Our lot is not going to risk getting into incidents with the Big Bad Bear. Similarly, if a Russian brigade appears at a major city, there is no need for it to fight anyone because no one is going to risk a confrontation with Moscow. And if Islamic rebels want to fight Russia, is the US/West going to stop the Russians? Obviously not. They’ll soon be hoping the Russians save them from the coming mess – the real mess, when Assad falls.

Wednesday 0230 GMT September 9, 2015

·         US-Iraq: Snafued as usual The word Snafu comes from World War II. The polite expansion is Situation Normal All Fouled Up. So it is with the latest in the dismal tale of the third US intervention in Iraq. The first two were 1991 and 2003-11; the third began in 2014 and continues today. This third intervention began, and remains, the action of a mindless zombie that cannot be moved from his path. Because you can’t kill something that is Already Dead, the US-Iraq zombie cannot even be killed. He just ambles along, without a plan, without a reason, achieving nothing, repeating the same old lies about Iraq that have characterized the operation from the beginning. No one questions him, because if they did, they would realize how amazingly moronic the US national security establishment is being. They might then even blame the President, Congress, intelligence, and the Pentagon for launching the Walking Dead into Iraq.

·          From time-to-time the media does awake from its lethargy and ask: “What the heck is going on?” but then the arms of Lethe again reclaim the media. No more than anyone else can the media face the reality of all the pointless things the US has done in history, this intervention may be the most pointless of all. Editor is baffled at this avoidance behavior on the part of the American elite and the American public. It’s not just that the intervention is a zombie, we the people have also turned into zombies neither knowing what we are doing, nor caring.

·         A quick recap of the latest. The Iraq Government’s push to retake Ramadi in Anbar from Islamic State has stalled before it ever got going, and no one knows when Ramadi will be retaken – if ever. Moreover, no one is bothered: neither the Government of Iraq, nor the Shia militias, nor Iran, nor the Anbar Sunnis, nor the reset of the world, and certainly not America.

·         The US’s third Iraq intervention was predicated in the three conditions. (a) Zero US casualties. (b) The Iraq Army was to do the fighting. (c) The Sunnis were to be given a role in the government and trained/equipped to fight Islamic State. Well, the US has achieved the first goal. The first condition was contradictory. As of today no one has figured out how to fight a war with no casualties. A goal of zero losses can be met only by taking zero risks. Which means zero achievements.

·         As for the Iraq Army doing the fighting, this was a complete fantasy and Editor has been saying so from the start if this intervention. Indeed, things are much worse than Editor could ever have imagined. For all practical purpose, there is no Iraq Army, and wherever it has been used, even the new US-trained units, it has failed miserably. The Iraqis don’t want to fight for their country. They didn’t in the period 2003-11. Put aside all the lying the US Government did, the Americans did ALL the fighting. So Editor remains confused as to what the US thought had changed this time.

·         As for the Sunnis, why on earth does the US believe the Shias will make a meaningful place for them in the power structure? Had it not been for the US, the Shias would have killed/expelled all Sunnis from the Shia provinces. Indeed, as surely General Petraeus himself knows, his strategy worked only because the Sunnis were ethnically cleansed from Shia areas including Baghdad. Those Sunnis that remained were told clearly that if they raised their heads from the ground, they too would be eradicated. Anyone with any familiarity with the sectarian rifts in Iraq knows the Shias will not let the Sunnis rise. As for Sunni militias fighting IS – heaven bestow patience – this was a joke in the second intervention and has remained a joke since. The US armed, trained, and protected the Sunni Awakenings. The minute the US left, Baghdad gutted the Sunni militias through neglect. Why did the US think, when it came back, that it could force Baghdad to again do what the Shias don’t want, arm and pay Sunnis? No one seems to know.

·         The US got a few hundred Sunnis trained, perhaps even a couple of thousand. Baghdad has refused to arm or support them, and that’s the end of that. US also overlooks the simple reality that with its troops gone, no one is left to protect the Anbar Sunni civilians from Islamic State. The Shia militias are not going to do it, obviously.

·         The war continues, and the Iran-backed Shia militias have achieved some success. Tehran is simply waiting for the US to get fed up and leave – again. Then Iran will openly do what it is doing right now, which is running the war with a secondary aim of getting the US out of Iraq.

Tuesday 0230 GMT September 8, 2015

·         China has two new aircraft carriers under construction according to ROC (Taiwan) intelligence. One new carrier was expected; two simultaneously under construction is a surprise. One CV is being built at Dalian, where the existing CV, Liaoning L16, was extensively rebuilt. The other is at Shanghai. With two yards, it may be presumed that China will build these capital ships in pairs.

·         Which means that China will have three carriers by 2020 – the expected completion date, though not necessarily the in-service date – and not two, and possibly five by 2025, not three. The implications for the US are obvious to the average Jane, but it remains to be seen what the US Government’s reaction will be. Probably nothing, because the US now lives in a world of its own, comfortably detached from reality.

·         Now, three carriers and then five will not mean the US Navy is to be swept off the World Ocean, obviously. But obviously the day when the US Navy no longer has the freedom of operations with impunity inside the First Island Chain is rapidly approaching, and the day the US is forced outside the Second Island Chain is near. A two-carrier per 5-year building capability opens the possibility that by 2035 the PLAN will have nine carriers. Perhaps even the US Government can understand what that means, given that we are pegged at 11 carriers.

·         Some details. ROC says the ships are about the same size as L16, which means about 60,000-tons and roughly in the class of the 8 Forrestal-size carriers that provided the US Navy’s core striking power through the Cold War. Now, the Chinese recently showed a model of a new carrier, labeled L18. The Chinese are fond of using models to tease the global military community as a previous of delights ahead. Chinese blogs have taken the size of the model aircraft to estimate a displacement of 100,000-tons, going head to head with the current classes of US CVNs. Naturally there is a presumption that the L18 class will be nuclear powered.

·         So are two carriers under construction for the PLAN larger than ROC estimates and nuclear-powered? This could be argued both ways. It may be that the L18s will be the next pair after the current under construction. It also may be that the model airplane sizes have been deliberately exaggerated. In Editor’s opinion, jumping straight to CVNs may be too ambition a step for the PLAN. On the other hand, we are talking engineering issues, and the Chinese have becomes the world’s leading engineers. CVNs would certainly impress the world because they are superpower weapons, and would signal that China has arrived on the naval world scene with a big bang.

·         Ironically, China allegedly displayed its new hypersonic anti-carrier missile at its recent 70^th VJ anniversary, sparking off the usual media frenzy “Is this the end of carriers?” Clearly the Chinese don’t think so, and it is indeed not so. For many reasons we have discussed earlier.

·         Two “By The Ways”. First, coincident with the victory celebrations, a PLAN task group entered the Bering Sea after concluding exercising with the Russian Navy, and grazed US territorial water. As far as Editor knows, this is the first PLAN task force that has appeared off the United States. No detailed analysis is required of what this means. Second, the Chinese certainly helped defeat the Japanese, but it was not the communists who did this. The brunt of the 8+ year war was borne by the Nationalists. Clever Mao spent that time building up his Red Army and achieved his victory in 1950. The alleged Communist victory may matter to the Party and its followers, but it should make no difference to us. The Chinese are the Chinese, regardless of political belief. As such, it was ungracious for us not to participate in their victory day celebrations.

Wednesday 0230 GMT September 2, 2015

·         Russia to intervene in Syria? So here we have a news story from a newspaper you may never heard of, but is usually reliable  http://freebeacon.com/national-security/russia-deploying-air-force-contingent-to-syria/ The Free Beacon says that Russia is preparing to intervene in Syria. It will send fighter aircraft to attack Islamic State and a ground contingent to protect its assets, which obviously include Damascus and Assad.

·         Now normally we might mention this as a rumor on our Twitter feed. But there is a seamless internal logic to the possibility. Start with the irrevocable truth that the US has completely messed up in Syria. The IS/fundamentalist cancer is spreading; US air strikes are achieving nothing; the folks that are fighting IS and Assad are the Kurds, whom Turkey has put under serious attack. The US has realized that it was a mistake to want Assad gone, because what follows is worse. (Guilty admission: Editor was all for US deposing Assad.) But after having demonized Assad, US cannot turn around to its public and say “Sorry about that, but we need Assad”. So US policy has become even more conflicted and therefore even more ineffective.

·         Is this situation continues, IS will likely be the winner, Assad’s Syria will likely be reduced to a rump, and an endless war will be put into place. So far Moscow has been more-or-less publically following the US/Allied line. Which has lulled everyone into thinking that Russia has no influence or ability to do anything. Conversely, it has always been apparent that Moscow was not willing to lose Assad and live with a chaotic Syria. The conflict is spilling over into Lebanon and Turkey; the Gulf regimes, on the one hand happy to support their co-religionists against the Shias, and on the other hand realizing that IS will come for them after Syria. Without getting too complicated about it, we need only note the Soviets spent a generation busting through the West’s containment on its southern front (Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, etc). Russia is not going to sit by and watch the loss of “its” MidEast. So far, after 1973 USSR had to give way to the US, and it has been helpless after 1990 to stop the destruction of its influence.

·         If the Russians send air and ground troops to Syria, they achieve several things at one strike. They discredit the US, which is already discredited. They save Assad. They signal Iraq and the Mideast that perhaps, after all, tying their stars to the US was not such a good idea. And BTW, Iraq and the Mideast are getting pretty darn fed-up with the US for different reasons, most of whom have to do with Iran’s advance.

·         They force the US to either stop bombing Syria, or to restrict its operations. Think of the complications that result when a dozen Russian fighter squadrons plonk themselves down on Syria! Their ground troops first save Damascus and then destroy IS. Unlike the US, the Russians have no problem with collateral damage; with them it’s “Kill them all and let God sort them out”. Which when you think of it, is the only way to wage war.

·         It becomes “Up, Russia”, and “glug glug glug” as US goes down the latrine. Which in all fairness it is managing pretty well without the Russians.

·         Editor’s first reaction to this news, assuming it is correct, was anger that the Russians have made such a clever end run around the US and destroyed US standing in the region. That was followed by anger that the US Government has once again been proven so ineffective. Then we thought about. What is wrong if the Russians now try and sort out Syria/Mideast? Islamic State and other crazies have to be stopped. If the Russians do it, since we’ve failed, why should we object? If they succeed we gain. If they fail, okay, we’re no worse off than we are now.

·         So Editor’s words to Moscow are: have at it, fellows. After all you all are Christians too. And IS/fundamentalists are the existential threat, not the Bear frolicking in the Baltics and Ukraine. The American motto is “Lead, follow, or get out of the way”. We’ve conclusively shown we can’t lead. Give someone else a chance.

Tuesday 0230 GMT September 1, 2015

·         America Then and Now So Senator John McCain had one of his usual fiery encounters in Congress. A new Commandant nominee for the US Marine Corps was being quizzed; these things are normally sedate affairs and a formality, but they don’t call McCain a maverick for nothing. So the good Senator went all free-fire-zone on the hapless would-be Commandant. You can read about it at http://breakingdefense.com/2015/07/marines-cant-stay-ready-without-new-hardware-neller-tells-sasc/  There was a comment on this episode in another discussion, which Editor has been unable to retrieve.

·         McCain was demanding that the Commandant nominee explain, to McCain’s satisfaction, why Forward Air Controllers were not being assigned to support fighters in Iraq and Syria. It’s unfair for McCain to be beating up a 3-star Marine officer (shortly to be 4-star) because the Marines are not involved in the Mideast shenanigans, and this officer does not make US policy. But when the good Senator loses his temper, he doesn’t give anyone a pass.

·         The comment made what might be the Commandant nominee’s case if it was permitted for him to comment on government policy. FACs work in teams of a dozen soldiers who need support. This is putting hundreds of US troops in harm’s way. How will the American public react when they see video of collateral damage caused by US aircraft? And how will the public react if an American is taken captive and then burned to death, also on video, as is the Islamic State fashion du jour?

·         Once – America Then – the US public would have reacted to civilian casualties with brevity, something like “tough donuts” or something ruder. As for a US soldier being captured and executed in grisly fashion, the public would be screaming for revenge.

·         US troops were fighting in Iraq until 2011 and are still engaged in Afghanistan 2013. Doubtless the public gets upset when collateral damage occurs, but that was not a factor in the Afghan and Iraq wars. People understand bad things happen in war. As for US troops being captured, well, somehow they managed to avoid that, more or less. So the issue did not come up.

·         When we speak of America Now, we’re really speaking of a tiny, tiny fraction of Americans now, the folks who have declared that war should now be fought without a single US death. Does the American public share this formulation? In Editor’s opinion, it does not. Maybe the Editor reads the wrong media, but to him it seems that each day this IS imbroglio continues, the more hatred IS generates.

·         The US president would have only to issue a simple two-point statement. Point One: we are engaged in a civilizational war; the threat is existential; and we must respond with all our might, and we will suffer casualties. Point Two: innocents will die because despite the accuracy of our weapons, the enemy fights from within the civilian population, but he cannot be given a pass just because we value civilian lives.

·         The wonderful thing about IS as an enemy is that you don’t need to generate propaganda about how evil it is. Every other day IS provides us with the images we need to make us wrathful.

·         The problem with Editor’s proposal is that the country is functioning without a strategic leadership that is prepared to put America first. The most important thing is the President’s image. He wishes to be cast as a man of peace, everything else is secondary. He uses public opinion as an excuse not to act, but he is out of touch with his public. Moreover, the president is not supposed to fly like a helpless dandelion in the wind. He is supposed to decide what’s right, and carry the public with him. If he cannot carry the public, he still has to do what’s right for the country and take the consequences.

·         If instead the president says each day in rote fashion that these issues cannot be decided by force, he sets himself up to fail. And he encourages the enemy to become bolder. If the president was really as sensitive as he seems to claim, he’d see that it’s wrong to deny IS and Islamic fundamentalist what they say they so dearly want: death in jihad against the West. He should kill them because that’s what they say they want. Dear president, please be kind to the fundamentalists and wipe them off the face of the earth. Don’t say it can’t be done because of course it can. If you pussy-foot it cannot be done. But contrary to what some think, war is indeed THE answer. Declare war and save not just the West, but the Muslim victims of Islamic fundamentalism.

Monday 0230 GMT August 31, 2015

• Royal Navy deployments from Todd Croft

HMS Ocean completed BALTOPS and returned to UK, is current high readiness flagship.

HMS Bulwark returned from Med refugee patrol, is probably in short-term maintenance.

HMS Albion is in major refit, and will be operational in 2016.

Atlantic patrol: HMS Lancaster, RFA Lyme Bay, RFA Gold Rover

Med Patrol: HMS Enterprise (survey ship)

Indian Ocean: HMS Duncan, HMS Richmond , RFA Fort Victoria

Home Patrol: ??

Ice Patrol and Survey: assigned ships -  HMS Echo, Enterprise, Gleaner, Protector, Scott

Other ships are in maintenance or training.

1 x SSBN on patrol

1-2 x SSN on patrol

• Prime Minister Modi’s Political Strategy Editor had asked readers why a small group of MPs were able to stall Parliamentary proceedings, blocking critical legislation. One reader replied that the PM does not have a majority in the Upper House and will not get it until election in 2017. Upper House candidate are dissimilar to the US Senate in that they are not elected by popular vote, but  by the votes of the state legislatures. So he can get bills through the Lower House (directly elected by popular vote), but the controversial ones will not pass the Upper House.

• Meanwhile, he sees the Congress-led obstruction in the Lower House to be of advantage. The speaker of the house, nominated by the ruling party, can eject disorderly members. The PM, however, lets the disruption continue because it discredits Congress’s reluctant leader, Rahul Gandhi, and his party. Though it is now a rump, with just 46 seats (less than 9% of the Lower House) this scion of the Nehru family and the party command significant affection among Indian voters. In a parliamentary system, small shifts in vote can mean major changes in the Lower House. So it is to the PM’s advantage that Congress and its allies are stamped with the “Do nothing, know nothing” label. India is very anxious for change and folks are getting increasing irritated with the obstruction.

• The PM is not up for election until 2019. With both houses under his control, we will start to see major, very rapid passage of legislation in 2017-2019. Which will lay the basis for another Modi victory in 2019.
• Incidentally, Editor has been following Rahul for the last 25-years. Calling him a moron is to insult morons. He is beyond clueless about politics and his own country. Moreover, he doesn’t want to be a leader. He wants to be left alone. He somehow has the impression that by spending days and nights with villagers he will get votes. In the last three decades the Indian voter has become quite sophisticated and is not interested in this “man of the people” dog-and-pony show. The voter wants things done. Moreover, in Editor’s opinion the man-of-the-people plays badly because we still look up to the Emperor to do things for us. A man-of-the-people is just another loser. Every ruler of the Nehru dynasty has been a patrician and was wildly popular. The man-of-the-people is a terribly condescending construct created by a man that is definitely of the people.
• The Congress was wiped out at one go because Mrs. Sonia Gandhi insisted in pushing her son forward, in place of her brainy, charismatic, and politically savvy daughter. She is not of-the-people, but she is wildly successful at drawing huge, adoring crowds. For one thing, she speaks the Indian vernacular pithily and fluently. Hwee has great empathy with the poor precisely because she herself is a patrician and does not pretend otherwise. Poor Rahul speaks the vernacular abominably, even worse than the Editor. Mrs. Rikhye IV never ceased to point out to the Editor that no one in any part of India understood a word he said

·         It is still not too late for Mrs. Sonia to retire Rahul and let Priyanka run the party. But Mrs. Sonia is nothing but an Indo-Italian Tiger Mama with a male offspring who is a limp wimp. Mother love and sexism run wild. Enuf said. 

Thursday 0230 GMT August 27, 2015

So what just happened between the two Koreas? – II

·         China and the US enable the DPRK’s unacceptable behavior. China’s position is easy to understand; the US perhaps not so easy to understand. If DPRK becomes a failed state, it will get taken over by ROK, and China will end up with an economically dynamic, democratically elected government right on its border.

·         Also, ROK is a close US ally, so this will result in a major geostrategic setback. After all, China fought a savagely brutal 3-year war against the US precisely so that the latter should not be sitting on its border. China lost anywhere up to 750,000 killed and as many wounded. Though the Chinese like to claim much less, given the unlimited firepower at US’s disposal, the higher end is plausible. Remember, China had just emerged from a civil war that cost it 7.5-million dead. And while the Soviets made sure no one forgot their 20-million war dead, China also lost that many people on the war with Japan. A million-and-a-half casualties in a limited war is no joke. By comparison, India has lost about 16,000 killed in all its wars since 1947. This includes the true figure of 6000 in 1962. We still claim thousands missing from that war, but since the men didn’t return, they clearly died in that war.

·         It’s easy to understand why China supports DPRK. That doesn’t mean China likes the DPRK, because its rulers have become crazed, murderous, and unpredictable. China needs stability on its borders. China is forced to tread a fine line between smacking DPRK to behave and giving the US any chance to create mischief in the peninsula. Still, on balance, it’s unhelpful for China’s ally to keep blackmailing its patron: “If you don’t give us food, power, raw materials, industrial goods and so on, we’re going to start a war and then you’ll be sorry.”  

·         But precisely why does the US put up with this behavior? The piddling little state makes a weekly mockery of the United States and the principles for which it stand. Every time DPRK insults the US, as it did in the last 10-days or so, the US comes up with learned rationalizations about how DPRK doesn’t mean what it says. The US acts “mature” and either lets the matter pass, or gives in and sends aid.

·         Here’s a conundrum. US attacked Saddam to liberate Iraq. It attacked Libya to liberate the country. It returned to Iraq to save the country from Islamic State. It went to war with Syria because Assad was a tyrant. Sorry to tell you, Washington, but the greatest tyrant in the modern world is Kim Baby Face. He, his dad, and his grandfather are/were responsible not just for 150,000 political prisoners who are subject to death through torture and starvation, by subjecting them to a slow death, every now and then the regime lets millions of people starve to death because the regime is unwilling to weaken its hold  on power.

·         People throw the word “genocide” around rather loosely these days. Stalin, Hitler, and Mao committed genocide. And the Kims join their august company. You must remember that DPRK has 25-million. Each million killed through deliberate neglect is 4% of the population. Additionally, about half the population at times has to live on half the minimum survival ration. And DPRK is not the Horn of Africa: it is a fertile country.

·         So how comes the US is always gassing about other people’s crimes against humanity and ignoring DPRK? Shouldn’t the US be assembling a coalition to invade and free DPRK? Instead the US keeps ignoring this tyranny, and enabling its N-program by refusing to attack it. Why. The US says it doesn’t want trouble with China.

·         Fair enough, but then let the US announce to the world that it believes only in situational ethics, and that it will intervene only when it is 100% sure the costs will be insignificant. In other words, we beat up the weak, we let the powerful alone. But then please stop with the hypocrisy that we stand for liberty, justice, and the American way. We stand for nothing. And please believe the Editor when he says were the US to say this openly, 50% of the anger the world has toward American will vanish.

Wednesday 0230 GMT August 26, 2015

So what just happened between the two Koreas? - I

·         US and ROK stage annual exercises. DPRK gets mad and utters the usual blood-curdling threats. US-ROK get mad and give DPRK the finger. DPRK gets mad and plants a mine killing two ROK soldiers. ROK gets mad and starts blasting capitalist news and music via loudspeakers into DPRK. DPRK gets mad and starts firing artillery into ROK, first time in 5-years. ROK gets mad and does its own escalation.

·         The world holds its breath: is this IT? Is there going to be war? Next thing you know, DPRK and ROK and giving each slobbery kissy-faces. DPRK expresses regret, which in their terminology is one step less than an apology. That is, it’s a pretty severe back down. ROK promises to stop with the broadcasts. Both sides promise negotiations and better relations. Angels barf and nightingales poop in celebration.

·         There’s your answer: no this is not IT: no war. At least not until the next time. Because as long as DPRK exists, there will always be a next time. This country is not just the worst violator of civil rights in the world, it is the most highly militarized. It is said to have N-weapons, which it regularly threatens to use. The last time was Monday a week ago, when it demanded US-ROK calls off their exercises. Its baby-faced ruler is a psychotic who when not threating US/ROK is busy executing his own comrades he feels are a threat to him.

·         So what just happened between the two Koreas? There’s the la-la land explanation and then there’s the reality. The la-la land explanation is put down elegantly and succinctly in this article. http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/08/24/what-the-blow-up-between-north-and-south-korea-may-really-have-been-about/ Read and then use for house-training your new pangolin or whatever.