On Audacity, Arrogance and Autonomy

The ongoing heartburn over Israel's announcement that they would approve permits for some 1600 housing units in East Jerusalem caused even 'the great' Tom Brokaw during Sunday's Meet the Press to guffaw. He referred to the announcement during VP Joe Biden's meeting with Benjamin Netanyahu as an 'act of audacity'. Apparently, the Messiah and his cronies have the final word in the internal affairs of all other nations. I'm sure this is news to Israel and probably caused them 'great concern'.

The fact is it may well have been a piece of gamesmanship on the part of the Israeli government which has tried, for months, without success to convince the US to take a far stronger stand against Iran. The problem is that this administration has made it clear that any hostile move against any Muslim nation will be viewed as, well, unfriendly and in this current period in our history we don't want to appear, well, unfriendly - at least to Muslim nations.

Even General Petraeus announced his desire to have the Middle East placed under his 'wing'. He expressed frustration over Israel's apparent unwillingness to play nice with their neighbors and then went further saying that Israel's actions were endangering our Warriors. Huh; Based on our obsession the whole 'winning hearts and minds' thing (at the cost of the lives of our Warriors) I didn't think that was a problem.

The interesting thing is that while we are engaged (somewhat) in the affairs of Afghanistan and Iraq, for national security reasons of our own, we find it unpalatable that the Israeli's would dare to act in kind on their own behalf. I have always held to the belief that this country should act unilaterally to protect our borders and our Constitution. I have little patience and zero respect for elected officials and their crony appointees who seek permission from other nations to do so and then act only with half measures. It is the very definition of arrogance to expect others to act on your behalf at their own peril. It is immoral not to act on behalf of our own country with whatever means at our disposal to defend ourselves and our interests.

Israel has a healthy understanding of their enemies because they have a healthy understanding of the history of those enemies and their attitude toward them. Their enemies are centuries old and relentless. Even though there has been a concerted effort to obliterate historical evidence of the holocaust and an all but successful effort to eliminate the atrocities against them by the Muslim world community over the centuries, they remember. One would think that this country's government with it's rich Judeo-Christian history and with men with memories of WW II still alive, that we would re-double our efforts to help secure Israel's friendship. Instead, we push them away and reach out to the single religious ideology that wants us as dead as they want Israel. Curious.

That General Petraeus would dare to suggest that Israel's actions were somehow detrimental to the health and well-being of our Warriors would be laughable if he himself wasn't actively supportive of an unwinnable strategy in Afghanistan and it's brutal ROE. If the good General is truly concerned about the health and well-being of the Warriors under him, he might reconsider the present strategy and clean out his own house before castigating one of the smallest nations in the world for daring to secure their own people and land.

Semper Fidelis;

John Bernard

Strategic Deception or Misunderstanding; Marjah

In an already complicated environment we find this story that suggests some confusion or inconsistency over the area and demographics of Marjah. For me the size and complexity of this particular battle space is not as important as understanding why it might have been represented as something other than what it actually is. Until further clarification is provided I think it wise to assume there might have been a general misunderstanding during one of the briefings and press releases that followed. As for the intentional spread of disinformation, I have my thoughts:

I understand the use of disinformation as a tool of strategy. I also believe that as Americans (specifically) we have an aversion to killing 'innocents'. Reasonable men, however, are going to one day crawl all over the pages of history that have been chosen to chronicle the decisions and actions of this campaign and in the end it will be determined that we either underestimated the enemy or failed to ID him correctly. And if we failed at these, we also will be seen to have failed to respond correctly. The fact that Marines are successful regardless of the sensibility of upper echelon's reasoning is almost irrelevant. The history books are replete with examples of United States Marines overcoming unbelievable odds, decimating the enemy and surviving. The greatest example is at the Chosin Reservoir. The fact that the 1st Marine Division killed an estimated 30,000 Chinese does nothing to mitigate the abysmal failures of the 8th Army and MacArthur's leadership on the other side of the Taebaeks.

The use of biometrics, the 'shutting down' of Fallujah and thus forcing cooperation would seem reasonable in a reasonably defined battle space but the Middle East and Central Asia are anything but reasonable - by western standards. And there-in lies the foundation of the problem; trying to mold the enemy into our image. This same scenario was used by Templer in Malaya with a reasonable degree of success but the players were far different. The Malayan's were largely unsympathetic to the communist insurgency and had no other ties with them. It was a gamble but one that seemed to have a likely hope of success and it did indeed succeed. No, I think the main reason that will one day be concluded for success in Fallujah was saturation. Of course the problem with saturation without a sincere concentration on destroying the enemy (body count) is that it cannot be expected to have a long term success. There is a reason why elements like Al Qaida and the Taliban have been successful where the CT's in Malaya failed; shared history and shared ideology.

The truth we seem to be unwilling to accept is that all of the players there are of the same mind with just shades of variation. Trying to 'turn' the civilian population against the 'insurgency' is about as likely as convincing entrenched citizens of Atlanta that Sherman was a hero. Any discussion about what we should expect once we pull out, in whole, should be tempered by what we are watching right now in their election cycle. There is little doubt that the Iranian influence seems to be gaining traction. The puppet government in place at the moment is highly unlikely to be able to withstand a coup of the kind the Islamic world is known for and capable of. Once the American saturation is completely removed, does anyone really believe stability, in any form we can live with, will remain?

Now move over to Afghanistan and their history. Does anyone really believe that these attempts to sway public opinion away from core Islamic jihadists and toward 'Christian' western forces and governance stands any chance of success; any? The one really great truth I have read in many days is that once we leave, the Afghan's are once again going to be left with the mess yet another outside influence leaves and they know it. They are not likely to do much to damage their future relations with the element that will be left standing; the Taliban.

Point is; as I have said before, we, as Americans have a legitimate right to defend our shores, our way of life and our population with ferocity and without a felt need to apologize for it. The Islamic world has little to hate us for specifically except for the fact we have not subjugated ourselves to Allah. This war they wage - collectively is indeed religious in nature and has been waged, as we all know, since the seventh century. If we then have any reason to suspect a threat to our security, we should respond and respond understanding that all the players, all, at the level of their ideology agree or at least have no particular heartburn with our being destroyed at the hands of Islamic forces. This being the case, we should show at least as much commitment to our own security as they are willing to show to our destruction.

As a Marine, I take personal offense to the wanton destruction of our own forces for the misplaced sentimentality shown to a people who have no regard for life, much less ours. Their plight is theirs. Our security is ours. If these two views are divergent; so-be-it. Any attempt by our elected officials to defend members of another nation while simultaneously bringing undo pain to our forces for the same, places them in violation of their oaths.

Semper Fidelis;

John Bernard

Ambassador Burns on South Asia Strategy a la Camden

Nicholas Burns, The 'Ambassador' to Afghanistan was keynote speaker at the heralded Camden conference this past week and his subject was, of course, Afghanistan. Camden conference is essentially a place for the intellectual elite to pontificate on the complexities of the world fabric, utter unspeakable truths and wisdom and, of course, create a better environment for us lesser beings. As is true with most of these cyclonic verbal events, there is far less substance than salesmanship. Most of what is shared is a greater sense of the majesty of the speaker, his vision and that of whom he represents. Anything bordering on substantive content is not garnered from personal experience as much as from think-tank type clusters. In short; a lot of hot air intended to massage the faithful and curious uninformed. What follows are high lights from this year's event with my comments in red:

CAMDEN (ANDREW bENORE 02/22/21010)— Ambassador Nicholas Burns opened the Camden Conference Feb. 19 at the Camden Opera House with a series of questions designed to frame the three-day discussion of "Afghanistan, Pakistan, India -- Crossroads of Conflict." On Sunday morning, he drew the conference to a close with several themes that developed from talks by diplomats, artists, journalists, scholars and politicians.

His opening questions were:

Will the surge work? Will European allies and NATO produce troop commitments to match the United States? Can Afghanistan establish an effective government? Will Pakistan continue to weaken in the face of aggression? Is the worst case scenario possible -- will insurgents take control of Pakistan and its nuclear arsenal? Will India and Pakistan reconcile? Will Pakistan "adopt a more responsible policy toward Afghanistan?" Finally, he asked, "Will we feel better by Sunday [when the conference ends]?"

On Sunday morning, he answered some of those questions. Like the diplomats and others who spoke at the Camden Conference, his well-organized thoughts were grouped into five themes, which eventually turned into seven themes.

He started by saying that there are vital national interests in South Asia and the Greater Middle East. Burns said the strategic focus of the United States has shifted from Europe to South Asia and the Middle East. He talked about recent involvement with Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and other countries. There is no choice but to engage, Burns said. ( I agree with this)

"I can't get away from the fact that our [strategic focus has shifted]," Burns said. "That is not going to change for the rest of our lifetimes. Looking 50, 100 years into the future, our children's and grandchildren's lifetimes, this is not a distant hinterland. It is actually the core of the 21st century challenges for our country, from a strategic perspective."(Again; this last part is hard to argue with)

His second point was that the fate of Afghanistan "is not a cursory concern." He supported the Obama administration's current strategy of moving away from a military victory and instead trying to protect the people from the insurgency. The new strategy relies less on firepower and more on securing people where they are, and linking that up with economic aid and help with agriculture. (Nothing to agree with here)

"We've taken lots of towns but the lives of the people in those towns have not necessarily improved," Burns said. (And they won't until they decide they want something different - they don't!)

Marjah, the object of recent military action, where the United States is trying to secure the town and keep the Taliban from returning, is an example of the new strategy. (After we telegraphed our coming for weeks; gave the enemy time to leave and then were shackled by ROE if he dropped his weapon in transit to another firing position).

The third point was that there is no military victory possible in Afghanistan. (Here lies the mantra of the deceitful left. The truth is you have no hope of winning if you have already decided you can't - or won't) Many Camden Conference speakers said this.

"The commitment to try to win a conventional military victory would be so excessive in the number of American troops involved that it wouldn't be worth the effort," Burns said. "So I don't think we should, if we fail at 108,000 troops to achieve some victories over the Taliban, be in favor of going to 200,000 troops or 300,000 troops. Forty or 50 years ago we tried that in Vietnam and it didn't work out there."(The fact is we didn't 'try it'. We employed the same schizophrenic non-strategy then that we are now. We were so blinded by the success the Brits had in Malaya and the failure the French had in 1954 that we refused to analyze the reasons for either one. In the end we chose a course of action that history has rendered to the tell of western warfare.)

Burns said if the United States can counter the Taliban and slow its offensive and secure the population, then the U.S. policy could focus more on [diplomacy, reconciliation] (with the Taliban!?), aid, civilian efforts and education (nation building for those who don't want what we have). This can be called a transition to a political-diplomatic phase. Burns said civil wars across the world almost always end in reconciliation (Wait a minute; I thought they have been telling us this was an 'insurgency').

"They almost always end through political talks -- through the government and the insurgents (Revolutionaries???!?; see prior paragraph) compromising at some point on their basic objectives,"(Compromise; we die, they reign) Burns said. "I can't see the Afghan war ending any differently."(Because he is another of the wrong people in the wrong job. Maybe he should seek employment in the shoe-shine industry)

Burns' fourth point was to not give up on Pakistan. He acknowledged that the United States has a difficult relationship with Pakistan but "Pakistan matters."(Because there is very little difference between Pakistan and Afghanistan; look up Durand line in Wikipedia)

"It matters geographically when you look at the map," Burns said. "It matters because of the size of the country. It matters because of its very difficult but symbiotic relationship with India."

Burns said the United States can't ignore that Pakistan sees India as a strategic threat. (The fact that they have exported terrorists to India and killed 200 in Mombay is of little consequence…)In that equation is the possession by Pakistan, and India, of nuclear weapons.

"They have nearly gone to war with each other -- two nuclear armed countries -- twice since 1999," Burns said. "That would be catastrophic -- for them, for the people of the region, and for us. So I think that the United States needs to be engaged in the Kashmir problem, behind the scenes. And I know we need to be engaged in the conflux of Pakistan-India differences that are so important; we need to be the balancer in that relationship if we can."

Burns' fifth point was that the United States needs to build a global partnership with India. With changes in power around the globe, India needs a seat at the international table, Burns said.

"Strategically, in South Asia, the region we've been studying this weekend, India is the keystone country," Burns said. "It's a successful country. It's the second largest Muslim country in the world, and yet the Indians have found a way to weave together a multiracial, multiethnic and multireligion society. (Translation; The Indians don't take any crap) They struggle with it, as we have, but they are moving forward in a positive direction. They want to have this relationship with us."

India will also play a role in dealing with China, he said. Burns said it is important that China's rise -- economically and militarily -- be peaceful.

"India is critical with this big question with China," Burns said. "It's critical for America's engagement in the most important part of the world, the Greater Middle East. India will go a long way in helping to write the history of South Asia -- positively or negatively."

The final point was whether conference participants would feel better on Sunday. Burns was optimistic.(All lefties are optimists; The vast majority of Conservatives are realists. See Patrick Henry's speech 03/23/1775)

"I think in Afghanistan the Taliban cannot overthrow the government, (Technically it would not be an overthrow/coupe; just a slight nudge toward complete Theocracy…Wait, that was what we found in 2001!!!) and the Taliban cannot defeat us," (They don't have to. All they have to do is wait for us to undo ourselves) Burn said, adding that this is necessary to begin the political-diplomatic phase.

In Pakistan, Burns said, he believes the region can move forward.

He also said global leadership by President Barack Obama is a bright spot. (Praise the messiah!)

"I think we've got the smartest, most patient, most skillful, and maybe the most farsighted president in President Obama we've had in a long time," (I have goose bumps just thinking of him) Burns said. "Do we feel better on Sunday at noon? I feel that our president is leading us in the right direction."

Burns' final, final point was that citizens need to show support for the region.(In the form of a scorched-earth strategy)

"It's not just up to [Obama]; it's up to us," Burns said. "If we think that the answer to trouble overseas is isolation, and we've often thought that in our history and we've pulled back, or if we think it's unilateralism -- we're so big and wonderful and strong we can go it alone -- we tried that in 2002 and 2003 and we failed. (We failed because we decided to try to convince the world to try something other than wringing their hands) We have to lead and we have to be engaged."(Send in Americorps)

Burns said he believes in the power of the United States, and people need to back up the president.(I will leave this one alone)

"I do believe in the goodness of this country," Burns said. "I believe in the effectiveness of our government, of our soldiers and diplomats to do the right thing and to be effective. (I believe in the effectiveness of our Warriors) I feel better Sunday."

Bottom line; this guy is a bone-head. Essentially he is on a goodwill tour for Obama and company; espousing the quality and virtue of the man as the reason why all of his decisions will account for a better, more moral and secure America. I don’t know where these people come from but Joseph Stalin would have sold his family to have a few of these guys planted in the US under his tenure. The fact is we are losing the war and not because we don’t possess the ability, the morale, the troops, the training or the materiel. We are losing this fight because we have already chosen (politically) not to win it. When you try to couple nation building in one country with the legitimate safety and security concerns of another, one is certainly not going to be met (‘No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other…’ Math 6:24).

Again; the Afghan people have created their own plight. The Taliban are a domestic problem and the people are not willing to destroy or at least confront them on their own because they are unwilling to assume the risks associated with fighting the tyranny Obama and Company assumes they are under. This is nothing less than a Global Welfare program (defined as someone willing to take something for nothing in return) with no teeth. We provide all of the help and force while unreasonably endangering our men to defend those who will not defend themselves – and I don’t want to hear all the crap about the ANA and the wonderful job they are doing. We are ALL aware of just how miserably they have performed while attached to our Warriors. There have been the few; but just the few who have apparently depicted elements of the heart necessary to win. In the Corps we always talk about the 10%. The 10% who can’t get it together. A historical argument can be made that it is the less than 3% who ever put themselves in harm’s way for the good of others. In Afghanistan it is probably closer to .03%.

Add to this the fact that we have a psychologically damaged President with a decidedly anti-American agenda (sending troops to perform a mission for some other nation, with their hands tied, and with very little discernable value for the nation they represent; us) and what you have is a recipe for unduly high casualties and an eventual pull-out a la Vietnam. The warm and fuzzy lefties in this country have never had the spine to do what needs to be done and they are about to repeat history yet again having killed a good percentage of the best of this generation in the process. And all this guy can do is expound on the virtue of his messiah as the reason why this is all right.

Any Questions?

SF

John Bernard

Of Myths and Legends

I used to tell my kids that if you could describe everyone's life as a book then the final chapter would be entitled 'Myths and Legends'. I told them that we all have a tendency to remember people as larger than life but not to be suspect of or discouraged by that. The fact is we need to emphasize the qualities of a person's life and hold them up as a billboard for the world to see. In a world that continues to plunge ever deeper into the recesses of the pit, people who still have a functional conscience need to know there is a better model to follow.

When I was a kid, I was an aficionado of the Saturday afternoon westerns. There was a lot of wisdom to be gleaned from those 'B' movies and 1/2 hour TV shows. The likes of John Wayne, Randolph Scott and Roy Rogers rode the plains and streets of the old west with guns displayed outside their trousers. These men lived by a code of honor like a modern race of Knights who demanded nothing less of other men . They defended the defenseless, confined evil and selflessly gave of themselves for the same. Some more memorable elements of those codes of honor I still keep with me today:

1. Always take the seat against the wall offering the best view of the room

2. Never face the Sun

3. Always command the high ground

4. A .36 caliber handgun is good but a .45 is better

5. If time permits; get a shotgun

6. It is better to die with Eagles than live with swine

7. Never trust a man who speaks with forked tongue (this was always my favorite)

8. Never expect of a man that which you are unwilling to do yourself

We have come a long way since the days when even the writers in Hollywood understood the simple wisdom of the ages and were willing to infuse it into the story line. We have, in fact, become a land of compromisers. Compromise has become the byline of the elite; a sign of wisdom in a city that no longer shines. It lost its luster so long ago that the current residents can't tell you when the transformation began. Those who choose to work in that city are, in danger of losing their very souls. Here logic has been replaced with convoluted rhetoric; purity with rampant sin; courage of conviction with sleazy backroom compromise; worship of the one omnipotent God has been replaced with the Eastern, New Age, Siren's song that 'all roads lead to heaven'. I wonder how one reconciles these passages from the Koran which are considered the latest and most authoritative:

Sura:9:5 - 'But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans (infidels; Jews, Christians and other non-Muslims) wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem of war; but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.'

Surah 9:29 - 'Fight against those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, even if they are of the People of the Book (Christians and Jews), until they pay the Jizya (a tax on non-believers) with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued (enslaved).

With these from the New Testament:

John 15:13 - Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.

Mathew 5:38 - 40 - ³⁸"You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.'^{[a] 39}But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. ⁴⁰And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well.

The answer of course is clear; only a deceitful person would dare to suggest some basic misunderstanding or maybe they have been spiritually blinded.

From this city the elected, lord from their lofty thrones, in the once hallowed halls of hope and hand down edicts designed to garner support from one sub-culture or another to insure another 2, 4, or 6 years of an illicit career. The fallout from these decisions varies in type, but not intensity. Laws cordoning the rights given men by their Creator, slip the electorate ever closer to the precipice overlooking the pit of slavery. Laws defending the indefensible at a cost paid by Patriots, demoralize and deaden the nerve center of nationalism. Wars haphazardly waged to massage the egotistical needs of lesser men reek eternal havoc on our idealistic youth and rob families of their posterity.

I have no doubt the worshipers of the lords of DC have hope their perverted cowboys, having transformed the countryside into a shining version of their polluted dream, will ride off into a glorious sunset. They have an awful truth awaiting them. On the other hand, down in the depths of my soul I know that the fallen Warrior will ride off into Glory. God speed Warrior! May God show more mercy to the lords of DC than they have shown to those who entrusted them with our sacred trust.

Semper Fidelis;

John Bernard

A Necessary Evil; an Intolerable Blight on the Land

You've heard it said; 'they eat their own' to describe all manner of self-destructive behavior as it pertains to organizations. We've all seen evidence of this kind of behavior and may even have been detrimentally affected by it. It's one of those phenomena that's difficult to explain to a sane person who has been 'off-world' for all of their adult lives because there isn't any rational excuse for it. It is seldom when you can point to a specific case and say, there; they fired Sam to further their career or to grow the company. The sane man might ask, why are we firing Sam when he is one of the best salesmen we have had or why Sam when so many others have done exactly the same thing and even been promoted in spite of it. Most often the answer lies in some base instinct to massage the ego of the person carrying out the 'execution'.

As it pertains to a nation; it is either subversive, politically ideological, diversionary or self ingratiating. None of these are acceptable and in most cases, the victims are the most vulnerable in whatever department of government they are in; those who will not be missed or on whom can be heaped all of the sins of the sitting administration.

It was Thomas Paine who said; "Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one." The government we as Americans are most familiar with, our own, has done it's best to make that statement true, over, and over, again. Almost all departments of government are to blame including the Department of Defense. During those instances when we see this kind of behavior emanating from that department it is most troubling largely because those who serve there (and I am speaking of those who serve in the lower echelons) have absolutely nothing to gain accept the knowledge that they have served their country. These days, however, there are a growing - almost daily listing of instances where upper echelon leadership and/or our civilian elected officials seem to be playing a perverse game of 'pin the tail on the donkey'.

SSgt CM sent this story concerning the discharge of Captain Hill for 'abuse of detainees'. The detainees in question were the enemy, the method he used to encourage them to talk was a ruse in which no physical contact was made with the 'detainees' and, most importantly, the ruse was successful. God forbid. One can only assume upper echelon and the dopes in DC were upset because we won in that encounter.

In another story sent by Andy Bostom, there is yet another possible instance of rogue Islamic adherents attempting to kill American military members on sovereign American soil. The story says that the incident is 'under investigation' which may be code for yet another duck and cover run by the Obama administration and his cronies.

In another story we have yet another travesty, Herschel Smith writes about the investigation into the death of 3 Marines and a Navy Corpsman in Ganjgal last year. As was predicted by Herschel and those of us who have served in uniform could have told you, upper echelon and their civilian masters are insuring they are indemnified by insuring someone else ultimately pays the price for their completely unnecessary deaths. The truth is, the vaguely issued ROE and those who penned that monstrosity are to blame. Those who have knowingly placed all of our Warriors at unnecessary risk for the sake of Afghans who cannot be trusted, are to blame but they have forgotten one of the leadership principles; 'seek responsibility and take responsibility for your actions'. They have instead chosen to seek a sacrificial lamb, a scapegoat upon which to heap their unspeakable sins.

The continued unwillingness to attribute any subversive, aberrant illegal, immoral or unsavory act to the Islamic religion or its Koran is wearing exceptionally thin. Continuing to seek American Warriors to destroy legally and symbolically is also beginning to take its toll on not only true Americans but the Warrior community as a whole.

For those of you who 'serve' at the pleasure of the electorate and for those of you who have been appointed by them know this; God (not Allah), is not mocked. He knows you and has found you wanting. There is a reckoning. For the electorate, 2010 may prove to be a cleansing experience. For the elected and appointed, 2010 may prove to be a waterloo moment. For our Warriors; it will be business as usual because they have no ulterior motives. They signed to serve and always serve with distinction. Once this is over, they will sleep at night. Those of you in DC, may also but your eternal prognosis is not one I envy.

'There is nothing new under the sun.' Ecclesiastes 1:9

In 1949, the British backed colonial government in Malaya suffered a set-back in the year long Counter Insurgency against the CT's (Communist Terrorists) that resulted in a near stalemate. Opportunities to exploit the enemy's weaknesses had been missed largely due to a faulty intelligence network and a lackluster vision from the British government back home. Remember; Malaya was not foreign to the British and the British were not strangers to the Malayan. There was a history and it was not all bad and yet fighting the CT's (an actual insurgency), was extremely difficult in the early days of the 'emergency'.

At the same time, inexplicably, the British government with its sitting Socialist party under the leadership of Prime Minister Clement Atlee, legitimized Mao Tse Tung in China with positive rhetoric designed to court the Chairman. The effect was devastating to the Malayan Brits and the war effort.

Sound familiar?

* * * *

Four days ago a combined force of some 6000 Marines, Soldiers, NATO troops and ANA launched an 'offensive' on the town of Marjah. The local population numbers somewhere in the neighborhood of 80,000 and is comprised largely of farmers. The primary money crop is opium. The Taliban have used the town for R & R, a staging and planning area and have reaped income by 'taxing' the farmers who move their illicit crop toward the Pakistani border and Karachi for shipment .

Approximately 3 days before the Helo's landed with the first troops, small units harassed the Taliban on the outskirts of town in an effort to draw fire and locate firing positions. It should also be noted that the Karzai government estimated some 1000 Taliban remained in the town while the Taliban released word that 2000 were there, dug in and ready for a fight to the death. It now appears that the actual force that remained behind to face our assault may have numbered fewer than 500.

That the Marines and NATO forces would succeed in the narrowly defined mission of liberating the town from Taliban was never in question. Marines never fail. They always follow the orders they are given and complete the mission as detailed. Analyzing what happened a lot further up the chain of command will reveal a lot more questions than answers.

1. Why publicly telegraph for weeks our intention to attack Marjah?

2. Why give the enemy any kind of intelligence information?

3. If the intent was simply to force the Taliban out of Marjah and not to kill them; where did they go where they will essentially be 'neutralized'?

4. If they are not neutralized, when and how to we intend to meet this new threat in a new area(s)?

There also remain the same questions of ROE and its negative effect on our Warriors and their efforts to kill or destroy the enemy while minimizing American casualties. During the offensive , rockets were launched, presumably, at Taliban targets and it has been reported that civilians were killed. General McChrystal's immediate response was to suspend the use of those rockets - indefinitely. Also during the fight, Taliban, or Taliban sympathizers were seen driving motorcycles in the distance aiding the Taliban effort possibly with intel or maybe moving munitions from site to site. The ROE requires a man be armed before our Warriors can engage him. Taliban were seen firing and then dropping weapons, knowing that would essentially, save their lives to maybe fight another day.

The overall effect of this has been to increase the frustration level of our Warriors and little else. (Diana West has done a fantastic job chronicling this battle; read it.) How exactly do you hold an enemy culpable - on any level or by any means if you don't intend to engage him? If in the end your efforts fail to hold him accountable, or bring him to justice, or kill him, what is it that then defines your success? If you say it is the 'friendship and trust' of the people, how long will that last once you abandon them to the fury of an angry Taliban that you failed to neutralize? What prevents the Taliban from returning to the point they were prior to 9/11? What ultimately will have been done to remove the 'clear and present danger' posed by these thugs to the United States of America?

The fact is, if we don't kill the Taliban, they will hide out (in their country Afghanistan), for as long as is necessary and essentially regroup. Once we are gone, they will re-emerge; violently and bolstered in their belief that they successfully outlasted us. Do we really; really believe, for an instant, that the Afghan people under any leadership will ever see anything even remotely resembling a democracy? Is anyone in this country truly prepared to say they truly believe that? Anyone? Remember; we removed Al Qaida from Afghanistan to deny them training/planning/launching facilities. We removed the Taliban from power and now we are courting them to 'participate' with the Karzai government. The entire Afghan population; civilians, government and the 'insurgency' are still Muslim, still hate us, still want us and all 'Infidels' dead and still propagate by Jihad.

And what of our Sons and Daughters whose lives were sacrificed by our government for a cause absolutely no one can identify? What of them? For them courage was not complicated; it was the best of their character. They gave their best and their final measure to a country whose leadership has thus far squandered that gift.

' For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.' Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775.

Semper Fidelis;

John Bernard

Our Schizophrenic Leadership Charges On.............

In the very same morning issue of Military.com, Marine Corps edition dated 01 February 2010, we have two lead stories and the juxtaposition of these two seemingly related stories beautifully illustrates just how completely detached our civilian and upper echelon military leadership is from reality on the battlefield. The opening story is entitled 'Clock starts Ticking on End Gay Ban'. I don't know about you, but I find it disturbing that while men and women are dying on the field of battle largely due to an uncertain strategy driving unethical ROE, we find time to discuss this.

A couple of weeks ago, General Petraeus found Trijicon's practice of infusing Bible Scripture addresses on it's optics 'disturbing'. This is largely due to a standing DOD prohibition barring American Troops from proselytizing in Afghanistan and Iraq for fear of offending them. It should be known, by the way, the Taliban and other Jihadists regularly paint the stocks of their weapons Islamic green and write sura's on them in order to engender the grace of Allah and victory over the enemy (us). http://mssparky.com/2010/01/firm-will-remove-bible-references-from-gun-sights/

So, to translate; we don't want to do anything that might 'offend' Muslims in Muslim-land. Yet by some twisted logic, these present day strategic geniuses, publicly announced their support (both top end leadership in our military and civilian structure) to actively seek placing openly, practicing, homosexual and lesbian Americans (again spelled Infidel) on the battlefield.....I thought Muslims, the Koran, Islam in general and the 'Prophet' found homosexuality an abomination worthy of death? This isn't going to 'offend' our Muslim 'brothers' in Afghanistan and Iraq? Can you say schizophrenia?

Again; Bible scripture addresses, discreetly placed on the side/bottom of optics, infused with the unit nomenclature (which by the way, is a big hit with American Troops) versus announcing the soon arrival of openly practicing homosexuals and lesbians on the soil of a practicing Muslim people. Oh yeah; I want to hire this brain-trust when they retire!

The second story some find 'troubling' and even 'astonishing'. The opening line to this story is as follows; 'Anger, frustration and a hunger for revenge are running high among U.S. Marines as casualties mount on the frontline of the battle against the Taliban in southern Afghanistan' http://www.military.com/news/article/troops-feel-growing-anger-in-afghanistan.html?wh=news&ESRC=marine-a.nl

Gee; you think? Their Commander in Chief, President Obama, their ISAF Commander, General McChrystal, Chairman of the JCS, Adm McMullen and SecDef Robert Gates have sold the entire US military structure downstream and almost gleefully announced and accepted the almost certain prospect of higher American casualty rates in an effort to reduce Afghan civilian casualties. All this in a combat zone where there is very little distinction between combatants and non-combatants and where the non-combatants have shown little concern for or desire to host our Warriors.

In addition, these same 'leaders' have made it clear that victory, winning, Islam, enemy, war and terrorists are no longer part of the lexicon. Then to top it off, Robert Holbrooke announces how gleeful he is that the UN is finally taking Taliban off the UN restricted list and that there will be talks of reconciliation between the seated Karzai administration and the Taliban. He, our President and Karzai are hopeful the Taliban will become part of the governance of Afghanistan again. You think Marines abandoned in this hell might be frustrated; a little?

Hey Geniuses; here's a history lesson for you by someone whose shoes you will never fill:

"When war does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard."
--General Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson

Semper Fidelis;

John Bernard