This Blog was started with a very narrow focus and that was elevating the conversation about the ROE as it is presently in Afghanistan and using it as a launching point for further conversations with our Legislators. I think it is obvious to everyone that the ROE is just an outgrowth of a larger more ominous problem and that is the current administration's vision for future operations in Afghanistan. A single strategy COIN (counterinsurgency) doctrine is now in full play there and it only needs the blessing of the President to keep it that way. While some elements of COIN may need to be employed as this war progresses, it is short-sighted to believe it is the single way to win. We have a very small window of opportunity to speak to our congressional delegates and effect the change that is necessary to move away from COIN and back to the more critical ‘chase and kill’ strategy.
The enemy is insidious and single-minded in his mission and we must be equally intent in our resolve to meet them on a battlefield of our choosing. Theirs is to kill all apostates and unbelievers and ours needs to be in kind. Short of that and we will find ourselves on the wrong side of this fight when history is written.
A few days ago I recommended a book that is a must read for all who are fully engaged in this fight. You all need to follow this link to Andrew Bostom’s website and his book, read the preface and purchase the book. http://www.andrewbostom.org/loj/ I have read many books on the history of Islam and Mohammed but have never found so comprehensive a book. If you have been reading, you will find this the one-stop manual you have been searching for. If you haven't started; this will save you hours of searching.
Semper Fidelis;
John Bernard
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Monday, October 5, 2009
Killing of Non-Muslims and Apostates
You need to read this excerpt from Dr. Bostom's Blog. It offers illumination from an expert on the subject, of what we have been saying in 'laymans' terms. His book 'The Legacy of Jihad' is a must read. http://www.andrewbostom.org/blog/2009/09/22/why-do-78-of-pakistani-muslims-favor-killing-%e2%80%9capostates%e2%80%9d-from-islam/
Sunday, October 4, 2009
'You will Know Them By Their Fruits..' Matthew 7:16
Yes, I know I'm taking liberties with Holy Scripture but the discussion of fruits is meaningful here because of the cause and effect relationship as it pertains to COIN and ROE. This scripture tells Christians we can identify one another by the fruits of the Spirit; 'But the fruit of the Spirit is: love, joy, peace, long-suffering, kindness, goodness, faith,' (Gal 5:22). If you read the balance of Matthew 7 you also find those things which are the antithesis of the 'good fruit'. Even though there are those who do not ascribe to the truth of the Bible, it is a good academic read anyway. It is also instructive in its purpose to drive people to recognize good versus evil, right versus wrong, etc. The concept of seeing the 'fruit of your labor' is not lost on the vast majority of our western society. We are raised to work hard and that hard work reaps reward and that reward can help us live a more fulfilling life.
This war in Afghanistan is a case study in such arguments. It provides us with two protagonists in a religious war that will redefine the world as we know it and as it has been defined by recorded history. Make no mistake; this is a religious war. The first great mistake made in prosecuting this war has been the lack of political courage in identifying the enemy. The second was the lack of wisdom in correctly identifying the conflict as religious. Our delicate American sensibilities don't allow us, as a nation, to even conceive of the possibility of two nations fighting over religious ideological differences much less being party to it. We are not given a choice however. For if this war was thrust on us by the intrusions of Islamic forces from abroad over the past 30 years, we must also recognize the reasons for their attack. They have given us the reasons for their attacks over, and over again. We are the enemy to Islam and therefore to them. The fact that there are apostates in their midst and around the world that choose not to agree with that statement does not remove the fact that there are larger numbers of them who do.
In the weeks that followed September 11, 2001, our intelligence agencies and those from around the world identified the forces that exported the agents that carried out that final insult that awakened the 'sleeping giant'. Once identified, our government decided to find them and destroy them as well as those who offered them shelter and comfort. If this was not a justifiable response to an unprovoked attack then there never will be a legitimate reason to go to war - ever! The reason that some, lacking intestinal fortitude, were and are repulsed by this war is because of the religious overtones. They should be afraid; very afraid. In traditional wars, peoples send out their government trained, armed and uniformed forces to attack or repulse a like trained enemy. Hostilities continue until the coffers run dry or one side or the other can no longer bear the pain. This war is different. Only one side has a legitimate cause. One side fights as a nation, for their survival, the other based on warped ideological obedience. For that side, there will never be a cessation to hostility because that is a core tenet of their ideology. They live to fight and die for Allah. There is no earth-bound reason and therefore no earthly power restraining them or guiding them in their conduct. As a Christian nation (sorry Barrack) we are constrained by our faith and the governing forces placed there by the electorate and God.
General McChrystal has bought into the argument that there are those in the Islamic culture of Afghanistan that want what we have and need and want our help. He is wrong, and, to quote yet another scripture, 'he has left his first love.'(stolen from Rev 2:45 describing the cold heartedness of the Ephesians to the Church) has been telling us that his real concern is for the safety and well-being of another people at great cost to his own. The General's first responsibility is to his oath as it is for all sworn and elected officials. He has determined that the protection of a foreign entity, be they friendly or not (I dare say the events of the past several weeks say, not) is far more important than the lives of the Americans fighting in that foreign land. The latest example can be found in this link http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8289200.stm. This is a quote taken from the article that should make every American angry: "In a statement, Nato's International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) said that tribal militia launched attacks on foreign and Afghan military outposts from a mosque and a nearby village."
The General is flirting with treason as defined as an act of disloyalty toward the sovereignty of this nation. Willful destruction of the uniformed forces of this nation certainly seems to qualify. This is a question for Constitutional lawyers and history however. Looking at the successes and failures to judge this new strategy is a far more valuable use of time. Remembering that closer one on one involvement with the Afghan people and the ANA and ANP is the center piece of his new strategy, it only makes sense to use recent events as a gauge of success. There has been an uptick in the number of treacherous acts by Afghans working closely with Americans since the General hit the ground in June 2009. These don't appear to be a problem for him though. He is still selling his tripe. It doesn't appear to be bothering the fair one in the White House either, who seems to have time for everything except discussing the war effort or the interminable hell he has abandoned our Warriors in. Our elected Representatives and Senators are oblivious to the insanity being perpetrated against our Warriors by their superiors. They see everything through the prism of the next election cycle. This is the answer for their silence. No one who was concerned on any level, knowing that time will make the difference between a Warrior coming home to the waiting arms of his loved ones, or in a box, would refuse to act to change the current course of this war. I am wondering what would be the appropriate number of US Marines and Soldiers, killed through treachery, allowed by the ISAF Commander before Congress thought it appropriate to act? Shame on all of you for your cowardice!
Expecting Congress to change their focus from themselves to any of us is a waste of hope. Hoping to change their minds through a groundswell of public indignation is proving to be challenging. Waiting for this ISAF Commander to decide to cede his position or for the President to become involved enough in the affairs of State to recognize his responsibilities as an American President is equally challenging. The tide is shifting in this country though. My prayer to God is that he mercifully protect our Warriors as they continue to display the honor and courage on the battlefield that is the hallmark of Real America while we continue to struggle with the forces of evil spawned inside the DC beltway.
Semper Fidelis
John Bernard
This war in Afghanistan is a case study in such arguments. It provides us with two protagonists in a religious war that will redefine the world as we know it and as it has been defined by recorded history. Make no mistake; this is a religious war. The first great mistake made in prosecuting this war has been the lack of political courage in identifying the enemy. The second was the lack of wisdom in correctly identifying the conflict as religious. Our delicate American sensibilities don't allow us, as a nation, to even conceive of the possibility of two nations fighting over religious ideological differences much less being party to it. We are not given a choice however. For if this war was thrust on us by the intrusions of Islamic forces from abroad over the past 30 years, we must also recognize the reasons for their attack. They have given us the reasons for their attacks over, and over again. We are the enemy to Islam and therefore to them. The fact that there are apostates in their midst and around the world that choose not to agree with that statement does not remove the fact that there are larger numbers of them who do.
In the weeks that followed September 11, 2001, our intelligence agencies and those from around the world identified the forces that exported the agents that carried out that final insult that awakened the 'sleeping giant'. Once identified, our government decided to find them and destroy them as well as those who offered them shelter and comfort. If this was not a justifiable response to an unprovoked attack then there never will be a legitimate reason to go to war - ever! The reason that some, lacking intestinal fortitude, were and are repulsed by this war is because of the religious overtones. They should be afraid; very afraid. In traditional wars, peoples send out their government trained, armed and uniformed forces to attack or repulse a like trained enemy. Hostilities continue until the coffers run dry or one side or the other can no longer bear the pain. This war is different. Only one side has a legitimate cause. One side fights as a nation, for their survival, the other based on warped ideological obedience. For that side, there will never be a cessation to hostility because that is a core tenet of their ideology. They live to fight and die for Allah. There is no earth-bound reason and therefore no earthly power restraining them or guiding them in their conduct. As a Christian nation (sorry Barrack) we are constrained by our faith and the governing forces placed there by the electorate and God.
General McChrystal has bought into the argument that there are those in the Islamic culture of Afghanistan that want what we have and need and want our help. He is wrong, and, to quote yet another scripture, 'he has left his first love.'(stolen from Rev 2:45 describing the cold heartedness of the Ephesians to the Church) has been telling us that his real concern is for the safety and well-being of another people at great cost to his own. The General's first responsibility is to his oath as it is for all sworn and elected officials. He has determined that the protection of a foreign entity, be they friendly or not (I dare say the events of the past several weeks say, not) is far more important than the lives of the Americans fighting in that foreign land. The latest example can be found in this link http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8289200.stm. This is a quote taken from the article that should make every American angry: "In a statement, Nato's International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) said that tribal militia launched attacks on foreign and Afghan military outposts from a mosque and a nearby village."
The General is flirting with treason as defined as an act of disloyalty toward the sovereignty of this nation. Willful destruction of the uniformed forces of this nation certainly seems to qualify. This is a question for Constitutional lawyers and history however. Looking at the successes and failures to judge this new strategy is a far more valuable use of time. Remembering that closer one on one involvement with the Afghan people and the ANA and ANP is the center piece of his new strategy, it only makes sense to use recent events as a gauge of success. There has been an uptick in the number of treacherous acts by Afghans working closely with Americans since the General hit the ground in June 2009. These don't appear to be a problem for him though. He is still selling his tripe. It doesn't appear to be bothering the fair one in the White House either, who seems to have time for everything except discussing the war effort or the interminable hell he has abandoned our Warriors in. Our elected Representatives and Senators are oblivious to the insanity being perpetrated against our Warriors by their superiors. They see everything through the prism of the next election cycle. This is the answer for their silence. No one who was concerned on any level, knowing that time will make the difference between a Warrior coming home to the waiting arms of his loved ones, or in a box, would refuse to act to change the current course of this war. I am wondering what would be the appropriate number of US Marines and Soldiers, killed through treachery, allowed by the ISAF Commander before Congress thought it appropriate to act? Shame on all of you for your cowardice!
Expecting Congress to change their focus from themselves to any of us is a waste of hope. Hoping to change their minds through a groundswell of public indignation is proving to be challenging. Waiting for this ISAF Commander to decide to cede his position or for the President to become involved enough in the affairs of State to recognize his responsibilities as an American President is equally challenging. The tide is shifting in this country though. My prayer to God is that he mercifully protect our Warriors as they continue to display the honor and courage on the battlefield that is the hallmark of Real America while we continue to struggle with the forces of evil spawned inside the DC beltway.
Semper Fidelis
John Bernard
Another Great Piece by Diana West
This gets back to the question of whether or not you can better someones plight - without their explicit desire. Common sense would suggest no but we aren't living in that realm anymore now are we.?
http://feeds.feedburner.com/dianawestblogs
http://feeds.feedburner.com/dianawestblogs
Saturday, October 3, 2009
Diana West Blog; new entry
This is a good analysis of the enemy and our increasing inability to see him and meet him on a field of battle of our choosing. US Political will for combat is non-existent at the moment. It is 1970 all over again. Blog "Losing" Our Way to Victory
Stars and Stripes Article.
The Stars and Stripes interview hit today. http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=65149
Thursday, October 1, 2009
McChrystal's Folly
We have been listening to General McChrystal for some time now. His doctrine has become his mantra; integrate, integrate, integrate and, oh yeah protect the 'innocent' civilians - at all cost. The problem is the cost is the lives of the sons and daughters of the United States of America. I don't mean to sound like I am disregarding the contributions and sacrifices of other NATO Nations but frankly; they aren't our concern. The welfare of soldiers from other nations should be the concern of those nations whom they represent.
The General's premise is that there are factions that are easily identified as friend or foe and that we need to defend the defenseless innocents of Afghanistan - at all cost, to assure their willing cooperation in the future and, along the way, build a whole new infrastructure for them. This makes for nice dreams but is just that; a dream. He cannot point to a single instance of general support for a non-Islamic force, on Afghan territory in the entire history of Afghanistan. All one might be able to do is find isolated incidents of occasional support in some remote corners of the operation of the time.
The fact is that all parties within the borders of Afghanistan agree with one another on the only level that really matters here and that is religious ideology. They are all Islamic and while you can make the case that some are more loyal to the tenets of the faith than others, the fact remains that they have more in common with one another than they do with the 'Great Devil from the West'. When they do show support or at least cooperation it is a matter of convenience. All they understand is force. If you are the strong man in the back yard they will support you. If the Taliban has the upper hand (controls the battle space), they will support them.
The General's premise is at least naive if not irresponsible especially where he is more than prepared to test his theory with the lives of our sons and daughters. Sorry General; unacceptable!
Sometimes the best way to look at something is to compare it to an analogy. I have been in the woodworking trade for quite a number of years and the work we have engaged in and completed is varied. At the moment we are building a Timber Framed home. When you first look at the blank piece of paper that will eventually become the drawing and try to merge the desires of the customer with structural engineering requirements, it can be daunting. The truth is though that all properly detailed drawings and the buildings they eventually become, start with a single line. If you think the frame is complex, you should see all of the mechanicals that are required to heat, power and plumb the house and how they are impacted by the massive beam construction that is the hallmark of a Timber Frame. Even though there are complexities to the frame and the mechanicals that will require a great deal of thought and planning, they don't negate the importance of the greater element; the foundation. Without the foundation; the building, set on soil will eventually rot and fall.
Prosecuting a war within the borders of a country as complicated as Afghanistan is daunting to be sure. Trying to plan every element of the Operation as well as the individual responsibilities of all the resources necessary for a successful operation takes time, focus, experience, knowledge and tenacity. However; underlying all of the layers of complexity is the original mission, which is its foundation. The foundational mission in Afghanistan was given in the Prior Commander in Chief's mission statement as it was delivered to the American people eight years ago; confront and destroy Al Qaida, deny them training ground, battle space and bring to justice those who would offer them safe harbor and aid. Just like building a Timber Frame, there are many complex issues that must be addressed. True; those things which must be addressed on the battlefield are more complicated and prone to change but that is the nature of warfare. Even though there are challenges on the battlefield however, you cannot lose sight of the original mission and in this case it was clearly stated; to destroy Al Qaida and those who would harbor them.
The changes General McChrystal wants to institute change the very foundation of the operation from destruction of the forces that would do harm to the United States of America to one of safeguarding the Afghan civilian population at all cost. The General has become so mired in the complexities generated by the mission that he has forgotten mission itself. He said he no longer wants to concentrate on chasing and killing the enemy (kinetics), but instead wants to concentrate on building relationships with Afghan population?! Not only does this distract our forces from the core mission but it actually places at risk the possibility of success. The ROE issue is an example of how off track this operation now is. The ROE is intended to safeguard the population by limiting fire - all fire whether initiated by us or fired in our defense, if civilians are in the area. Close Air Support and Artillery are pretty much nonexistent for fear of collateral damage (dead and wounded civilians). The ROE in effect, further endangers our Warriors by allowing the enemy to command the battle space because they no longer have to fear reprisals. They hide among the civilian population and engage us with indemnity, endangering us and the civilians we are now suppose to be safeguarding. This self-destructive policy also allows the insurgents greater freedom to set IED's and ambushes because they are afforded greater freedom of movement. In essence we have turned over control of the battle space to the Taliban. The locals are not inclined to help us because they see the Taliban as the stronger force and the one they are likely to be stuck having to deal with long after the dust of this war has settled.
Take a look at the Defense Departments (http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/) listing of the fallen since July 1st 2009 and know that the vast majority of those combat deaths can be directly attributed to the ROE and the change in the focus of effort away from a 'chase and kill' strategy to one of protecting the populace. For those of you who want an explanation that is simpler, here it is: We were fighting a war to destroy the enemy that has made it clear they want to destroy us. We are now engaged in nation building and social engineering that assumes the beneficiaries even want what we are offering. They have had hundreds, if not thousands of years to improve their lot in life and have not seen fit to do so. Inserting ourselves in their personal and governmental affairs is both arrogant and incredibly naive. We need to get back to the business of taking care of this country's security affairs regardless of the hypotheses of this current crop of politicians and their appointees. By the way; let us remember that our Warriors are exactly that; Warriors - not peace keepers. If we need peace keepers then let the UN provide them.
This war is going to be lost on one front and one front only; at home. It is going to be lost at home because the American people are going to lose all confidence in our government's ability to prosecute this war. This is not a military problem; it is a political problem. The daydream that we are engaged in right now is just that; a daydream. It is an experiment in social engineering with a population of people who hate us ideologically and who don't want what we have. We MUST get back to the original mission as stated, to locate Al Qaida and kill them, deny them training ground, battle space and to hold those who aid them in their attempts to train and export violence accountable.
Sounds simple enough to me. Now all we have to do is remind our elected officials what they swore to protect and defend...
Semper Fidelis;
John Bernard, 1stSgt, ret
We have been listening to General McChrystal for some time now. His doctrine has become his mantra; integrate, integrate, integrate and, oh yeah protect the 'innocent' civilians - at all cost. The problem is the cost is the lives of the sons and daughters of the United States of America. I don't mean to sound like I am disregarding the contributions and sacrifices of other NATO Nations but frankly; they aren't our concern. The welfare of soldiers from other nations should be the concern of those nations whom they represent.
The General's premise is that there are factions that are easily identified as friend or foe and that we need to defend the defenseless innocents of Afghanistan - at all cost, to assure their willing cooperation in the future and, along the way, build a whole new infrastructure for them. This makes for nice dreams but is just that; a dream. He cannot point to a single instance of general support for a non-Islamic force, on Afghan territory in the entire history of Afghanistan. All one might be able to do is find isolated incidents of occasional support in some remote corners of the operation of the time.
The fact is that all parties within the borders of Afghanistan agree with one another on the only level that really matters here and that is religious ideology. They are all Islamic and while you can make the case that some are more loyal to the tenets of the faith than others, the fact remains that they have more in common with one another than they do with the 'Great Devil from the West'. When they do show support or at least cooperation it is a matter of convenience. All they understand is force. If you are the strong man in the back yard they will support you. If the Taliban has the upper hand (controls the battle space), they will support them.
The General's premise is at least naive if not irresponsible especially where he is more than prepared to test his theory with the lives of our sons and daughters. Sorry General; unacceptable!
Sometimes the best way to look at something is to compare it to an analogy. I have been in the woodworking trade for quite a number of years and the work we have engaged in and completed is varied. At the moment we are building a Timber Framed home. When you first look at the blank piece of paper that will eventually become the drawing and try to merge the desires of the customer with structural engineering requirements, it can be daunting. The truth is though that all properly detailed drawings and the buildings they eventually become, start with a single line. If you think the frame is complex, you should see all of the mechanicals that are required to heat, power and plumb the house and how they are impacted by the massive beam construction that is the hallmark of a Timber Frame. Even though there are complexities to the frame and the mechanicals that will require a great deal of thought and planning, they don't negate the importance of the greater element; the foundation. Without the foundation; the building, set on soil will eventually rot and fall.
Prosecuting a war within the borders of a country as complicated as Afghanistan is daunting to be sure. Trying to plan every element of the Operation as well as the individual responsibilities of all the resources necessary for a successful operation takes time, focus, experience, knowledge and tenacity. However; underlying all of the layers of complexity is the original mission, which is its foundation. The foundational mission in Afghanistan was given in the Prior Commander in Chief's mission statement as it was delivered to the American people eight years ago; confront and destroy Al Qaida, deny them training ground, battle space and bring to justice those who would offer them safe harbor and aid. Just like building a Timber Frame, there are many complex issues that must be addressed. True; those things which must be addressed on the battlefield are more complicated and prone to change but that is the nature of warfare. Even though there are challenges on the battlefield however, you cannot lose sight of the original mission and in this case it was clearly stated; to destroy Al Qaida and those who would harbor them.
The changes General McChrystal wants to institute change the very foundation of the operation from destruction of the forces that would do harm to the United States of America to one of safeguarding the Afghan civilian population at all cost. The General has become so mired in the complexities generated by the mission that he has forgotten mission itself. He said he no longer wants to concentrate on chasing and killing the enemy (kinetics), but instead wants to concentrate on building relationships with Afghan population?! Not only does this distract our forces from the core mission but it actually places at risk the possibility of success. The ROE issue is an example of how off track this operation now is. The ROE is intended to safeguard the population by limiting fire - all fire whether initiated by us or fired in our defense, if civilians are in the area. Close Air Support and Artillery are pretty much nonexistent for fear of collateral damage (dead and wounded civilians). The ROE in effect, further endangers our Warriors by allowing the enemy to command the battle space because they no longer have to fear reprisals. They hide among the civilian population and engage us with indemnity, endangering us and the civilians we are now suppose to be safeguarding. This self-destructive policy also allows the insurgents greater freedom to set IED's and ambushes because they are afforded greater freedom of movement. In essence we have turned over control of the battle space to the Taliban. The locals are not inclined to help us because they see the Taliban as the stronger force and the one they are likely to be stuck having to deal with long after the dust of this war has settled.
Take a look at the Defense Departments (http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/) listing of the fallen since July 1st 2009 and know that the vast majority of those combat deaths can be directly attributed to the ROE and the change in the focus of effort away from a 'chase and kill' strategy to one of protecting the populace. For those of you who want an explanation that is simpler, here it is: We were fighting a war to destroy the enemy that has made it clear they want to destroy us. We are now engaged in nation building and social engineering that assumes the beneficiaries even want what we are offering. They have had hundreds, if not thousands of years to improve their lot in life and have not seen fit to do so. Inserting ourselves in their personal and governmental affairs is both arrogant and incredibly naive. We need to get back to the business of taking care of this country's security affairs regardless of the hypotheses of this current crop of politicians and their appointees. By the way; let us remember that our Warriors are exactly that; Warriors - not peace keepers. If we need peace keepers then let the UN provide them.
This war is going to be lost on one front and one front only; at home. It is going to be lost at home because the American people are going to lose all confidence in our government's ability to prosecute this war. This is not a military problem; it is a political problem. The daydream that we are engaged in right now is just that; a daydream. It is an experiment in social engineering with a population of people who hate us ideologically and who don't want what we have. We MUST get back to the original mission as stated, to locate Al Qaida and kill them, deny them training ground, battle space and to hold those who aid them in their attempts to train and export violence accountable.
Sounds simple enough to me. Now all we have to do is remind our elected officials what they swore to protect and defend...
Semper Fidelis;
John Bernard, 1stSgt, ret
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)