Search results for syria

Who benefits when the world attacks Yemen? Al Qaeda and the Elite.

May 1, 2015 Al Qaeda, Big Banks, Big Brother, Big Government, Congress, Constitution, Department of Defense, Economy, Energy Security, Global War, Iran, ISIL, ISIS, Liberty and Freedom, Military, Military Industrial Complex, News and Intelligence, Obama, Organization, Support, and Advice, Police State, Politics, Prepper Organization, Resistance to Tyranny, Surveillance State, Taliban, Terrorism, Yemen Comments Off on Who benefits when the world attacks Yemen? Al Qaeda and the Elite.

Who benefits when the world attacks Yemen?  This is a question that policies makers should have asked before allowing the president to start another foreign war.  In fact, it was asked and the answer was Al Qaeda.  Being that Al Qaeda would be the ultimate winner, one must wonder what kind of treason allowed this war to proceed.  In spite of this knowledge, the United States still backed an Arab coalition in a completely unjustified offensive war against Yemen.  The purported purpose was to bring back the ousted president, but anyone with half a brain would immediately know this was preposterous.  Yemenis are not going to ever accept a president that used a foreign militaries to kill its citizens to regain power.  Thus, knowing that the US was aware that by weakening the Houthi rebels they would by default strengthen Al Qaeda and still not achieve their stated goal, one must look deeper to reveal very disturbing consistencies in US Foreign Policy.

To recap, since the ouster of Yemen’s president widely seen as a US puppet, Saudi Arabia has overtly and the US clandestinely bombed Yemen.  The Houthis still retain power and the population is even more aligned against the ousted president than before the war against Yemen was unleashed.  Further, AQ broke into a prison and released 300 terrorist prisoners.  Al Qaeda has also made significant territorial gains and seized military bases containing weapons stockpiles.  In the meantime, a humanitarian disaster has ensued with thousands of civilians being killed in the bombing raids and fighting while many Yemenis are starving to death.  This operation by any bar has been a total failure and is becoming a humanitarian disaster.  However, no one in the media or Congress is calling out President Obama, the Nobel Peace Prize recipient, for starting an unconstitutional war, losing it, and killing thousands of innocent people all while aiding our enemy.  Why? Read more

Global Updates

April 20, 2015 Al Qaeda, Big Brother, Big Government, Department of Defense, Department of State, Domestic Terrorism, Drought, Energy Security, Food and Water, Global War, Iran, ISIL, ISIS, Military Industrial Complex, New Cold War, Obama, Police State, Politics, Survival Gardening, Syria, Terrorism One comment

In addition to my more in-depth posts, I will be routinely adding short bulletized points to keep our readers up to date on global issues.  If you would like more details on a specific issue, please post to comments or email me directly at LMS.

April 20, 2015

  • US sending warships to “prevent” Iran from providing arms to Houthis in Yemen.  The US has greatly contributed to the crisis in Yemen and engaging in a stand-off with Iran over support to each country’s respective proxies is a losing card for the White House to play.  The US (aside from special interests) has nothing to gain from this conflict.  The only possible winner will be AQAP (Al Qaeda).  Yemen’s US backed “president” in exile will never be able to return to “effective” power after using foreign militaries to bomb and kill Yemeni civilians.  Further, the Houthis, which pose no threat to the US will be weakened, but not pushed from power.  The US will no doubt dupe itself into another disastrous conflict.  The end result will be prolonging the chaos in Yemen and AQAP gaining significantly more power.  Just as I warned, the proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia/Qatar in Syria would eventually engulf the entire region and turn hot.  If the US policy in Yemen was to create greater Middle East conflict, empower Islamic extremism, and further destabilize global oil markets, it has achieved its objectives.
  • US arrests suspects attempting to join ISIL.  The US acts as though this was a great crime fighting/anti-terrorism win; however, it is a sign of deeper problems that have been self-inflicted.  Minnesota in particular is a hot bed of Islamic activity because of the suicidal domestic immigration policies that favor and actually import tens of thousands of people into the US annually from countries known for radical Islamism such as Somalia.  In short, it is a self fulfilling prophecy that has been used to justify an unnecessary domestic spy/police state and draconian legislation such as the “Patriot Act.”
  • Iraqi military backed by US and Iran fails to retake key cities from ISIL.  Contrary to rosy claims by the Obama Administration, the Iraqi Army has only scored marginal victories against what appears to be a far more dynamic and better led ISIL force.  Specifically, government forces were able to seize some key areas around Tikrit, but have so far failed to effectively secure the city.  Further, while the Iraqi military was focused north in Tikrit, ISIL has appeared to have shifted its fighting strength to the Ramadi area where it has gained ground in recent weeks.  As predicted, the violence and bloodshed in Iraq will continue and grow as long as the proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia continues to burn.  As one side gains ground, the other side will bolster its support for its proxy until the conflict has grown so big and so violent it will directly involve its original sponsors.  The end result will be a disaster for both the Middle East and the US.
  • Drought in California continues at record levels.  If you haven’t planted a large garden this year, plan to pay more…a lot more, at the grocery store.  As warned in previous articles last winter, food prices have continued to rise.  This price inflation isno where near at its peak with beef prices skyrocketing.  The conditions that continue to cause price hikes will persist.  Crops largely grown in California will see some of the largest spikes such as nuts and lettuces.
    • http://www.lastminutesurvival.com/2014/02/19/californias-water-shortage-will-lead-to-a-spike-in-food-prices-and-economic-peril/
    • http://www.lastminutesurvival.com/2014/02/24/the-impending-food-price-crisis-time-to-plant-your-survival-garden/
    • http://www.lastminutesurvival.com/2014/02/24/feds-withhold-water-to-california-farmers-for-first-time-in-54-years/
  • High taxes and over regulation finally ruining Virginia.  Northern Virginia, an area historically known for its strong economy and growing population has begun to feel the pressure of increasingly socialist governmental policies.  Naturally, the region draws on people working for the federal government and the big bureaucracy mindset has metastasized across the Potomac into the Commonwealth of Virginia.  High taxes, oppressive regulations, and stifling over population have all been the result.  This caustic bureaucratic recipe has led to a fed up population that is now leaving in droves.  Ironically, many of these people leaving were responsible at the ballot boxes for the socialist turn in governance.  Perhaps they learned their lesson and will not repeat their same mistake in the future, but that is doubtful.  As the population growth levels out and then begins to drop, local governments will soon realize budget deficits are growing and they are unable to provide the services originally programmed.  Without undoing what has become a socialist style of governance in the enclave, Northern Virginiais doomed to double down on its current failures and create another communist utopia on the banks of the Potomac.
    • http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/washington-area-population-increase-slowing-down-census-figures-indicate/2015/04/19/34683ab0-d7b5-11e4-8103-fa84725dbf9d_story.html

By Guiles Hendrik

 

 

 

Peace with Iran will lead to war: Part 2

April 2, 2015 Al Qaeda, Danger Alerts!, Department of Defense, Department of State, Exclusive Story, Global War, Iran, ISIL, ISIS, Israel, Military, Military Industrial Complex, News and Intelligence, Obama, Oil and Gas, Syria, Taliban, Terrorism Comments Off on Peace with Iran will lead to war: Part 2
Hardened Iranian Nuclear Facility at Fordo(w)

Hardened Iranian Nuclear Facility at Fordo(w)

Last week I discussed why peace with Iran was the preferred option.  I outlined a number of salient points uninformed talking heads in the media and well paid Israel lobbyists such as the former US Ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, will never bring up.  In short, the costs of a war with Iran will far outweigh the costs of accepting a turbulent peace.  Even a successful war against Iran will be a Pyric victory and cause an economic collapse in the US.  Further, even if Iran did test a nuclear weapon, we would still have plenty of time to exercise the war option should it be necessary.  Unfortunately, even if the US does manage to broker a peace deal with Iran, war is now close to a certainty.  In the event of a war with Iran, there will be dire implications for the US.  Today I will discuss why war is now imminent, how it will likely be initiated, and the catastrophic effects on the US you must prepare to endure. Read more

Peace with Iran will lead to war, but not why you think: Part 1

March 26, 2015 9/11, Afghanistan, Al Qaeda, Department of Defense, Department of State, Energy Security, Global War, Iran, ISIL, ISIS, Israel, Military, Military Industrial Complex, New Cold War, Obama, Syria, Taliban, Terrorism, Uncategorized Comments Off on Peace with Iran will lead to war, but not why you think: Part 1
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, right, speaks with Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif in Geneva, Switzerland, in January. Kerry will meet again with Zarif this weekend in the Swiss capital as March deadline approaches. (Keystone/ Martial Trezzini/file/Associated Press)

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, right, speaks with Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif in Geneva, Switzerland, in January. Kerry will meet again with Zarif this weekend in the Swiss capital as March deadline approaches. (Keystone/ Martial Trezzini/file/Associated Press)

Over the last decade, I have produced many papers and articles analyzing events in the Middle East and their geopolitical impact for academia, commercial publications, think tanks, and government agencies.  I stand by my track record as one of the most prescient in the business.  To that end, predicting chaos in the Middle East has been easy, but combining the what (violence) with the who, when, why, and how are the far more demanding predictions.  One the worst case scenarios for a broad outbreak of violence in the Middle East has been the possibility of a major war between Israel and Iran.  This conflict would immediately go regional with the on-going proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia pulling in the remaining Middle Eastern countries.  Once it goes regional, it will be nearly impossible for the U.S., Europe, and Russia to remain on the sidelines.  I have described in detail how this would likely play out as well as how it could be prevented in previous posts (see a partial list below).  I am writing today again with a dire warning for anyone willing to listen.  The most recent events occurring across the Middle East are now signaling the worst case scenario of a major conflict with Iran will come to pass as I have previously predicted.  This first article discusses why war with Iran is unnecessary and must be avoided.  Part II will discuss why even with an Iranian deal, war is inevitable and the dire consequences we can expect.  Read more

NATO Declares War in Afghanistan Over!…But forgets to inform the Taliban

January 6, 2015 Afghanistan, Al Qaeda, Congress, Department of Defense, Department of State, Exclusive Story, Global War, Military, Military Industrial Complex, News and Intelligence, Obama, Politics, Syria, Taliban, Terrorism One comment
After over a decade of fighting, the Afghan War ends in strategic defeat for the US and NATO

After over a decade of fighting, the Afghan War ends in strategic defeat for the US and NATO

On December 28, 2014, the US and NATO declared an end to the mission and therefore the war in Afghanistan. A Taliban statement from Zabihullah Mujahidon, a Taliban spokesman, left no doubt to how it was interpreted according to Reuters.

“ISAF rolled up its flag in an atmosphere of failure and disappointment without having achieved anything substantial or tangible.”

Washington may not like the statement and downplay it, but it doesn’t change the reality that the statement is accurate.  Not so ironically, the US and NATO have been mute over the success of the war.  No celebrations, no parades, no victory speeches…the absence of all of this should signal that our leaders know it was a failure.  In fact, not only did the combined force of NATO and the US not achieve a decisive victory over the Taliban, they suffered a strategic defeat.  Read more

George W. Bush was Still Wrong on Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq

November 3, 2014 Al Qaeda, Department of Defense, Department of State, Global War, Iran, ISIL, Israel, Military, Military Industrial Complex, News and Intelligence, Obama, Politics, Syria, Terrorism Comments Off on George W. Bush was Still Wrong on Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq

I have warned for years that the Syrian Rebels and now ISIL have chemical weapons.  However, that notion was dismissed repeatedly by the mainstream media until the State Department inadvertently admitted that ISIL used chemical weapons on the Kurds.  Of course that major revelation caused at least a few people to raise the question of the origin of these said chemical weapons.  Realizing a major scandal was about to erupt, the White House went into full damage control mode and immediately set about working with the New York Times to put out a story to redirect and mislead the public.  The Times story claims ISIL’s chemical weapons came from undestroyed Iraqi stockpiles, which as I will show, is a patently false claim of historical revisionism. Read more

Putin versus Obama Part II: Who is the better leader?

September 23, 2014 Energy Security, Exclusive Story, Global War, Military, News and Intelligence, Obama, Oil and Gas, Putin, Resistance to Tyranny, Russia Comments Off on Putin versus Obama Part II: Who is the better leader?
US President Barack Obama (L) holds a bilateral meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin during the G8 summit at the Lough Erne resort near Enniskillen in Northern Ireland, on June 17, 2013. The conflict in Syria was set to dominate the G8 summit starting in Northern Ireland on Monday, with Western leaders upping pressure on Russia to back away from its support for President Bashar al-Assad. AFP PHOTO / JEWEL SAMAD (Photo credit should read JEWEL SAMAD/AFP/Getty Images)

US President Barack Obama (L) holds a bilateral meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin during the G8 summit at the Lough Erne resort near Enniskillen in Northern Ireland, on June 17, 2013. The conflict in Syria was set to dominate the G8 summit starting in Northern Ireland on Monday, with Western leaders upping pressure on Russia to back away from its support for President Bashar al-Assad. AFP PHOTO / JEWEL SAMAD (Photo credit should read JEWEL SAMAD/AFP/Getty Images)

In my on-going series analyzing the growing rift between the US and Russia, it is important to evaluate a nation’s leadership.  Specifically, let’s look at the qualifications and performance to date of Presidents Putin and Obama.  Before we go any further, it is necessary to lay down a few ground rules of the debate.  First of all, I want to dispel the myth that a person can be of mediocre intellect, but a good president as long as they have a good staff.  This oft stated notion is a ridiculous excuse used by political parties to mitigate criticism that their brainless candidate is not up to the task.  Further, it is true that no one man has total control of a government, but to say that the leaders of Russia and the US have their hands tied and do not have real power would be a poorly informed lie.  In fact, both presidents have substantial power and influence over both foreign and domestic affairs and craft geopolitical strategy that affects the world.  If there wasn’t truth to this, then why would we ascribe so much prestige upon leaders like Thatcher, Reagan, Lincoln, and Washington?  Due to the real power and influence presidents wield, it is important to assess who has demonstrated the ability to more effectively lead and use that power.  Based on that evaluation, you are better able to analyze and predict the actions and ultimate outcomes of any potential or on-going political conflicts between the US and Russia. Read more

Putin versus Obama Part I: Are they really so different?

September 23, 2014 Congress, Energy Security, Global War, Obama, Oil and Gas, Putin, Russia Comments Off on Putin versus Obama Part I: Are they really so different?

obama-putinMuch of the rhetoric behind the push to create a new Cold War centers on Russian President Vladimir Putin.  The complicit media and the Obama Administration have pulled no punches in smearing President Putin and casting him as the most evil of tyrants and a political thug imprisoning opposition, seizing assets, enriching himself on the government’s dime, and intimidating reporters and political dissidents.  In fact, much of this is probably true; however, before we cast the first stone and judge Putin as evil incarnate and start World War III, perhaps some national retrospection of our own actions and character would be in order.  Let’s step back and evaluate America’s actions and consider whether or not we may have lost the moral high ground and then,…just perhaps, should rethink our policy, attitudes, and actions toward Russia. Read more

THE NEXT 9/11: We are not prepared for how ISIL will use advanced military weapons to attack US targets

September 5, 2014 Danger Alerts!, News and Intelligence, Syria, Terrorism Comments Off on THE NEXT 9/11: We are not prepared for how ISIL will use advanced military weapons to attack US targets

The Obama Administration has knowingly allowed ISIL to gain strength and capture more and more territory inside of Iraq and has set the stage for a second 9/11 style attack against US targets, which may in fact be the US Embassy Baghdad.  The White House looked the other way for years because the US, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar, in particular, were covertly arming, training, equipping, and advising elements of what it falsely believed was the Free Syrian Army (FSA) in Syria.  This organization of what became ISIL occurred at US sponsored bases in Jordan, Turkey, and now Syria proper.  However, the FSA was in the complete control of Islamic extremists from an early stage (http://www.blackboxwire.com/2013/09/09/media-missed-the-biggest-coup-in-the-middle-east-and-it-wasnt-in-egypt/).  This CIA created rebel army then quickly grew too big for the CIA to control as many insiders warned would happen.  As extremists took over the remaining “moderate” elements of the FSA, advanced weapons covertly provided to fight Assad, such as the US made Stinger missiles, were seized and retasked for the fight in Iraq.  With the covert backing of the US, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar, ISIL gained enough strength and organization to become a formidable light infantry army and capture large swaths of Sunni controlled areas of Iraq.  This fight was originally justified as necessary to build a cross border sanctuary for the anti-Assad forces fighting in Syria, but in reality turned out to be the genesis of a new terrorist state.  With the capture of territory that included Syrian and Iraqi military bases, ISIL fell into control of a large number of advanced military weapons that supercharged their fighting ability beyond what the CIA intended or could control.  At this point, some advisors took refuge in that ISIL may not have the technical knowhow to maintain and fully operate systems such as fighter jets, air defense systems, and M1 Abrams tanks.  However, this is a false logic that breeds a false sense of security because ISIL certainly has the skills to use these advanced weapons asymmetrically in attacks never before possible.  The US national security establishment is simply not prepared to deal with this increased level of state-like terrorist organization. Read more

Islamic extremism and what lies ahead? Part I: Iraq

September 1, 2014 Uncategorized Comments Off on Islamic extremism and what lies ahead? Part I: Iraq

Over the last few years, I have written many posts and provided consultation on the situation I predicted would materialize in the Middle East and North Africa as a result of US policy blunders.  In short, I predicted that our policies would lead to the creation of an even greater Islamist enemy that would destabilize the entire region and likely lead to a multi-front regional war for hegemonic dominance between Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Israel.  I predicted we would be forced to recognize the Kurds, that Iraq would breakup and return to sectarian violence, that we would support false flag chemical attacks in Syria to try and ignite a war, and that our proxy army in Syria would back fire and become our worst enemy.  Further, I detailed how this conflict would continue to increase in intensity until it no longer was proxy war, but a direct full-fledged war between the belligerents with global implications.  As my previous analyses have come to pass and been proven accurate by current events down to the most specific details, it is time to expand and update what one can expect respective of the impact of Islamic extremism. Read more

The O’Reilly “Fiction:” Setting the Factor Straight

July 2, 2014 Al Qaeda Comments Off on The O’Reilly “Fiction:” Setting the Factor Straight

Against my better judgment, I decided to watch a segment of “The O’Reilly Factor” on Fox News to hear his points on the latest developments in Iraq. In O’Reilly’s defense, he has been a brilliant talk show host and highly successful writer and businessman. However, at the end of the day, O’Reilly is still a journalist with limited real world expertise on many of the topics he provides commentary on. Specifically, O’Reilly poses as an expert, but is totally lacking in experience when it comes to matters of military application and foreign affairs. O’Reilly has never served in combat, is not an intelligence analyst, and so far has not demonstrated himself as a policy maker. So to no surprise, when I tuned in, O’Reilly was expounding his usual pompous, ill informed, bomb them all rhetoric with respect to the Islamic extremist army dubbed ISIL or ISIS. Within thirty seconds of listening to O’Reilly’s poorly informed diatribe, I remembered why I had stopped watching Fox. As such, I feel as though Fox News and Bill O’Reilly needed some better informed input to ensure Fox lives up to its “fair and balanced” moniker and openly challenge O’Reilly to a debate on Iraq policy.
First of all, I want to make it clear we lost in Iraq. Bill O’Reilly is still grasping to a false reality and believes we actually accomplished strategic objectives (won) in Iraq before our retreat. The fact the US was defeated is tough to deal with, but nonetheless fact. It in no way diminishes the honor of our veterans. Suggesting otherwise to those that cannot dissect honor from the success or failure of an army in battle is ridiculous. The notion that loss in battle or war dishonors our troops is no more logical than suggesting soldiers of losing armies across thousands of years of recorded history had no honor. For example, the many British army units fought with the utmost honor in the American Revolution, soldiers fighting for the Confederate Army during the American Civil War fought with great honor, and Rommel’s Afrika Corps has been distinguished again and again for its honor by historians, but all of the above armies ultimately lost their respective wars. In fact, honor is not hinged upon whether one wins or loses, but in how one conducts himself in combat. Iraq was never pacified and never made safe for Americans, but we maintained our honor. The US certainly isn’t calling the shots across the nation now. The end state achieved was a strategic setback for US interests across the region by strengthening our foes. No matter how much the Obama Administration whitewashes our retreat from Iraq, the enemy was still fighting and still holding ground when we left.
For those of you who did not fight in Iraq and have not visited Iraq since our retreat, you should know that Mosul was never pacified and maintained its status as a hotbed of Al Qaeda (AQ) activity. Neither President Bush nor President Obama finished the war. To the present day, Mosul has been a part of the ratline of jihadists making their way to fight in Syria. In fact, US intelligence has been well aware that Mosul has been a key staging point for AQ training and equipping jihadists en route to joining ISIL for years. Mosul has also been effectively “no-go” territory for westerners and has been controlled since before the US retreat by Sunni extremists. As such, the fear and panic that ISIL has “captured” Mosul is overstated. It is true they kicked out the token government forces, but the Iraqi military never controlled anything beyond the ground below their feet hiding behind the walls of abandoned US military bases. Beyond kicking out the token Iraqi forces, the only difference appears to be ISIL formally cemented their previous control of that city and surrounding regions with the execution of anyone supporting the Iraq government. So, if O’Reilly was consistent and well informed, he would have recognized that Mosul and neighboring cities like Tikrit with a large presence of Sunni extremists “falling” to ISIL was not in and of itself a game changer.
Second, O’Reilly fails to remember that it was the Sunnis, during the “Awakening,” that allied with US forces to fight the Shia militias attacking and killing Americans daily. In fact, I distinctly remember Sadr’s brigades of Shia militia backed by Iran attacking US military personnel with zeal throughout the war. I also remember the Shia going from house to house in what was originally mixed Sunni-Shia neighborhoods of Baghdad and ethnically cleansing the population. The Shia death squads brutally murdered any Sunni they found and turned Baghdad into a Shia city. However, it is now the Sunni extremists that O’Reilly has repeatedly called “savages” that deserve to be bombed. I would argue to O’Reilly that both factions have lived up to the pejorative term savage and have demonstrated their eagerness to kill Americans before their fellow Iraqi time and again and as such, we should be happy to leave them to their demise. In short, they are getting what they deserve and I see no reason Americans need to be again placed in the line of fire and paying to “save” savages that want us dead while they are busy killing one another.
Third, O’Reilly has totally forgotten that it was Maliki and the Iraqi government that refused to grant the US a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) that would have protected our troops and allowed them to remain in Iraq beyond their set date of retreat. True, President Obama used the SOFA as a means to justify the US retreat out of Iraq, but nonetheless, the Iraqis wanted American forces out of their country. O’Reilly should perhaps volunteer himself for military service in a country that he is not invited and where killing, even in self-defense, will be deemed murder. Perhaps he does not realize the very real legal dangers our troops will be faced with as they return to Iraq. O’Reilly’s insistence on the deployment of military forces creates a conundrum for the troops because they are being deployed outside of war, to a sovereign nation, and violating its laws. Does O’Reilly actually believe Maliki’s word that our troops will now receive immunity and that President Obama will do whatever is necessary to ensure Maliki is held to his word? I think not.
Third, O’Reilly just doesn’t seem to get the fact that the war as fought under Bush was a disaster and later under Obama was also a disaster. I guess O’Reilly missed the fact that when the war began, Saddam Hussein was killing extremists for free and had nothing to do with 9/11 beyond being the fall guy for Saudi Arabia. It was Saudi Arabia, not Iraq, which was responsible for carrying out a state sponsored act of war against the US on 9/11. This fact is why Representative Walter Jones from North Carolina wants the classified 9/11 Report released so that the public will know the truth and the lies perpetrated by the US government. If US strategy was effective, there would be LESS, not more extremists. Of course it is overwhelmingly clear our strategy failed judged by this bar. O’Reilly also seems to forget that by toppling Saddam’s regime, we created the vacuum that allowed these extremists to flourish to the point they now occupy their own autonomous Islamic state. When this point is made, O’Reilly flies into defense mode and charges the person as an “apologist.” O’Reilly solely blames the Islamists, but fails to recognize the very clear order of events of cause and effect leading to this situation. O’Reilly can believe what he wants, but is not allowed to create his own facts and cherry pick from his arbitrary timeline of events. For example, O’Reilly makes the point that we invaded Iraq to rid the country of Saddam and for humanitarian purposes. On this point alone, O’Reilly must have deleted his memory files much as the IRS seems to have deleted emails. We did not invade Iraq for the purposes O’Reilly states. We invaded Iraq because we were made to believe that Iraq was an existential threat that possessed weapons of mass destruction (WMD) that it would not turnover to U.N. inspectors, was going to use the WMD against the US, and was supporting AQ. Nothing short of creating this existential threat would have brought American into the war. As the invasion kicked off and the contrived lies became clear, the Bush Administration had to save face. The Administration then made a deliberate policy decision to change the motive for the war effort to regime change and humanitarian issues. As such, O’Reilly’s stated purpose for the war is completely fictitious. Further, O’Reilly has chided every democratic administration for humanitarian military operations, but somehow thinks he can hang on to that rationale to defend the disaster Bush created in Iraq.
O’Reilly claims we did Iraq a great favor by ridding the country of Saddam, but again, suspends logic by implying that a full invasion was the only way to “rid” Iraq of Saddam. O’Reilly has to know that there were numerous opportunities and plenty of other options to eliminate and or contain Saddam and any threat he could have possibly posed to the US. In stating this, O’Reilly totally undermines the deaths of near 1,000,000 Iraqis throughout both wars with Iraq. More importantly to me, he also dishonors the American veterans that fought in Iraq by incorrectly believing that perpetuating political lies and propaganda he somehow brings honor to their unnecessary injuries and deaths. Only by telling the truth and prosecuting the political liars within our own government that sent them out to fight a senseless war would he actually do these honorable men and women justice. However, O’Reilly continues to pander to his establishment masters to the disgrace of all who served. Although the likes of Karl Rove, Donald Rumsfeld, and Dick Cheney may applaud O’Reilly, Bill becomes vile in the eyes of veterans those traitors sent to an illegal war. I am positive that very few of the million dead Iraqis posed even the slightest threat to America and would be much happier if they were alive for starters. I am also confident that the thousands of Americans who lost loved ones or that were horribly wounded would also be better off alive and well today, even if Saddam was still in power. No matter what O’Reilly believes from his ivory tower about how we improved the lives of the average Iraqi, the millions of wounded, displaced, starved, and dead would find comfort in knowing the US would never come to “help” Iraq again.
Fourth, our bombing didn’t work, yet, O’Reilly is adamant about the positive effects “heavy bombing” would have for the US against ISIL. O’Reilly seems to think that if we just carpet bomb one more convoy we will win. He seems to “know” that our pilots can positively identify targets flying at nearly the speed of sound or faster and often from above 35,000 feet as long as the “bad guys” are in the open desert. I would laugh, but he is actually serious…and using his own words, a buffoon. I guess he fails to understand how the fact ISIL is operating with the same US provided military vehicles that the Iraqi military is using can complicate targeting. If perhaps, O’Reilly had actually served in combat as a Joint Tactical Air Controller, he would know that his line of logic is ridiculous, but since he did not, let me enlighten him. Just because there is a convoy of trucks with guns in the Middle East does not positively identify the convoy as “bad guys.” In fact, the factions fighting often look indistinguishable even from the ground and much less so from the air. Without good intelligence and legitimate boots on the ground observing, identifying, and marking targets for air, O’Reilly’s airstrikes will not only be futile, but 100% counterproductive. I also think that O’Reilly must have somehow shelved the knowledge that ISIL possesses “Stinger” missiles. Even though I would argue that the likelihood is the bulk of these man portable, surface-to-air missiles are advanced Soviet designs smuggled into Syria by our very own CIA from Libya (hello Benghazi), the missiles nonetheless exist and pose a significant threat to our aircraft operating at low altitudes. I wonder if the loss of an American pilot and an F-16 is worth it to O’Reilly?
Finally, O’Reilly went on to say that ISIL does not recognize the Iraq-Syrian border and that we must pursue ISIL into Syria. I do not disagree that the border has long since ceased to exist and that to prosecute an effective campaign, you must not allow the insurgent sanctuary. Too bad we didn’t use this same logic in Afghanistan where even the dullest of officers recognized that to decisively defeat the Taliban, one must either secure the border or cross into Pakistan, but I digress. Moving back to bombing ISIL in Syria, O’Reilly completely demonstrates his hypocrisy and wins the award for pinhead. Time and again, O’Reilly has been on air demanding President Obama support the rebels in Syria and has attacked the Administration repeatedly for not doing enough, yet, he fails to realize that he is simultaneously demanding we bomb ISIL and support ISIL. O’Reilly is naïve and or ignorant if he fails to make the connection that we have been covertly organizing, arming, training, and equipping the rebel forces in Syria to fight President Assad and it is these same forces, which are now rampaging throughout Iraq. The savages that O’Reilly demands we bomb are the savages we created just like in Afghanistan and Libya. In fact, if we bomb ISIL at their points of origin as O’Reilly suggests… in their training camps in Syria (Jordan and Turkey too O’Reilly), I wonder if he realizes we will be killing American special forces and CIA ground branch officers currently training these terrorists. So I ask O’Reilly, who are the good guys and who are the bad guys because I am very confused.

By Guiles Hendrik
All rights reserved.

The Disintegration of Iraq: US Military Action in Iraq neither Wise nor Suitable

June 23, 2014 Syria, Terrorism Comments Off on The Disintegration of Iraq: US Military Action in Iraq neither Wise nor Suitable

As the hordes of American/Saudi/Qatari sponsored terrorists race across Iraq in what appears to be a blood orgy of Islamic extremism of the worst sort, Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki has appealed for help. Maliki’s forces, to include two divisions of American trained Iraqi soldiers, have broken and fled leaving all of their equipment behind to the attacking extremist army. Although, I believe the takfir blitzkrieg will be blunted once it hits Shia neighborhoods as it presses its advance into Baghdad and initially bypass the city for key oil infrastructure, it is clear Maliki has lost control of what used to be Iraq. In spite of the incompetence of the White House and senior advisors, this occurred exactly as we have been warning and predicted over a year ago.

See:

http://www.blackboxwire.com/2014/03/17/pm-maliki-accuses-qatar-and-saudi-arabia-of-waging-war-against-iraq/

http://www.blackboxwire.com/2014/01/31/the-rise-of-the-islamic-state-of-the-levant-as-iraq-fractures-so-does-the-middle-east/

http://www.blackboxwire.com/2014/01/10/as-we-predicted-syrian-and-iraqi-civil-wars-merge-as-president-obamas-claims-of-a-defeated-al-qaeda-crumble/

http://www.blackboxwire.com/2013/05/12/iraqs-descent-back-into-violence/

http://www.blackboxwire.com/2014/02/05/the-other-shoe-drops-syrian-kurds-declare-independence/

http://www.blackboxwire.com/2013/09/09/al-qaeda-rebels-in-syria-begin-killing-kurds/

http://www.blackboxwire.com/2013/09/09/media-missed-the-biggest-coup-in-the-middle-east-and-it-wasnt-in-egypt/

Now that Iraq has fully disintegrated, the Kurds are now effectively independent, the Sunni areas are consolidated under extremist Sharia rule, and the Shia areas are left relying on Iran to save them from being completely massacred and conquered. This critical juncture has policy makers grappling with whether or not to send in US military support to which I emphatically warn is a horrible idea. I say again, INTERVENTION IS A HORRIBLE IDEA!

Now that Iraq has collapsed, many in the US are demanding the US military again be deployed to defend “gains” previously made in Iraq. These individuals are the same hacks that never fought in a war and led US “strategy” to a complete failure in Iraq and Afghanistan. In fact many of these snake oil policy makers hid from reckless wars like former Ambassador John Bolton and profit handsomely from the industry of war. Further, when one hears Senators Lindsey Graham and John McCain expound upon how the US must bomb the extremist army before it seizes Baghdad, consider these are the same senators that also demanded that President Obama do more in Syria to arm this very same army and bomb President Assad. Ironically, it was Assad that has been fighting this extremist army from the beginning and pleading for help from the international community. Further, it was Russia that warned the US that this army was in fact composed of radical extremists, but we ignored them and called them liars when it was the US that was lying. After all, we knew from the beginning the army was made of jihadists because the CIA’s ground branch is what organized, armed, and trained this army. If you do not see the obvious hypocrisy, bias, lobbyist dollars, and stupidity all wrapped up in US Middle East Policy, you should remove the blindfold now and engage your faculties of logic.

The problem with the logic of intervention in Iraq is multifaceted. First of all, it completely ignores the fact that just across the Iraqi border to the west in Jordan, Syria, and Turkey, the US is covertly and now clandestinely (yes, these are different) arming, training, and equipping these terrorists to fight Syrian President Assad, which I have argued from its covert beginnings could only end bad. Second, to believe an overthrow of Maliki’s government somehow translates to lost gains presumes one actually bought into the White House’s lies and propaganda respective of accomplishing anything decisive in Iraq. The reality is the US was strategically defeated in Iraq and used the hand over and pullout as a face saving maneuver to explain its retreat. I would invite anyone that disagrees with the notion of US defeat in Iraq to attempt to walk through Iraq without being killed, kidnapped, or imprisoned. Note that we will see this strategic defeat repeated in Afghanistan. However, in Afghanistan, it will be to greater American detriment since we are currently planning on leaving 10,000 personnel in that country to be captured in killed by the Taliban when they launch their offensive to regain power shortly after the US reaches the 10,000 level of troops. Third, Iraq refused (to no angst of President Obama, who was looking for an excuse to pullout) to agree to a status of forces agreement (SOFA), which would have provided legal protections to any potential future US forces stationed in Iraq. Without a SOFA in place, US personnel could be tried under Iraqi law. As a soldier that potentially would have to kill an Iraqi in self-defense, the prospect of being tried for “murder” in Iraq made any future garrisoning of troops in Iraq untenable. Finally, it is insane to think that the US can drop a few bombs and stem the tide of events in Iraq. Events have long moved beyond the effectiveness of a few bombing raids. We spent a decade vainly trying to subdue Sunni extremists while simultaneously being attacked by Sadr’s Iranian backed Shia forces. Both sides hate us and have proven they prioritize killing Americans above killing each other. To this end, American intervention would only waste more precious blood and treasure that we can ill afford.

To avoid another quagmire, it would be best to stop aiding terrorists in Syria as a reasonable start. We should then be quite content to let the factions fight it out amongst themselves while reinforcing the Kurds and letting Assad press the extremist army from the west. In particular, the Kurds have access to ample oil, are better fighters than the Arabs, have a functioning government and infrastructure, hold a strategic geographical position and are welcoming of US bases, have proven to be pro-American, and are religiously moderate. The US Department of State, for reasons that in all respects appear to be a systemic ethnic prejudice, has persistently degraded US relations with the Kurds and at every opportunity placed Kurdish interests far below Sunni and Shia interests in Iraq. If there was ever a time to change policy and embrace the Kurds, now would be it. Finally, the US must address and stop Saudi Arabia. Saudi funding is the true catalyst of the Islamic extremist movement. The US has turned a blind eye to Saudi actions far too long and it is time the US demands Saudi Arabia stops the exportation of Wahhabism and capture, kill, and or arrest the senior Saudis responsible for the export of terrorism. Continuing to ignore the Saudi gorilla in the room is tantamount to knowingly fighting the wrong adversary while simultaneously claiming to be confused why they real enemy is still growing stronger and able to attack you. After all, it is no surprise that since the “War on Terrorism” began, Islamic extremism has done nothing but expand and strengthen. Might that have something to do with the fact we are fighting a faux war against the wrong enemy? Mark my words, until someone dismantles the Saudi extremist industry, the threat of Islamic extremism will continue to spread and grow. Radical sharia law is already upon our doorsteps, but for reasons of political correctness, ignorance, and or lobbyist dollars, our government has been derelict to the point of treason addressing the growing existential Saudi threat.

By Guiles Hendrik
June 22, 2014
All rights reserved.

As gas prices prepare to skyrocket, thank President Obama and the Saudis

June 19, 2014 Economy, Energy Security, Oil and Gas, Terrorism Comments Off on As gas prices prepare to skyrocket, thank President Obama and the Saudis

I would like to advise our readers that now would be a good time to buy any fuel you may need for the coming months in bulk if you have the option. At the least, you might as well fill your gas cans and fuel tanks because the price of gas is not going to be getting any cheaper anytime soon. Due to the support provided by the United States (Authorized by President Obama) and Saudi Arabia (Qatar and Turkey to lesser extents), we have armed, trained, and equipped the largest Islamic extremist army of modern times and unleashed it on the Middle East. This army is now massacring thousands across Iraq and Syria to include countless Christians. The actions of this terrorist army will soon come home to haunt Americans that were too apathetic and or foolish to demand President Obama and Congress cease support to terrorist rebels in Syria.
As Iraq implodes, it is the Saudis and Qataris who are handsomely profiting from the spike in oil prices. The spike is a result of Obama’s schizophrenic foreign policy disaster that made it all possible. As America’s badly battered economy faces another blow it can ill afford you now must spend even more money you don’t have to just fill your gas tank, remember it was President Obama and his pals in Saudi Arabia that hooked you up. Oh, and just in case you didn’t catch it, the US government is using your tax dollars to fund terrorists that want to kill you. President Obama is claiming the US needs gun control while using your tax dollars to hand military grade advanced weapons to 100% ardent, hardened, American hating, terrorists. To add insult to injury, this is all being done while simultaneously the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is chasing domestic boogiemen at home. Remember, DHS is claiming you, your veteran uncle, and your 90 year old grandmother are potential terrorists so you must be subjected to total surveillance and physical searches that in the extreme could be considered forcible sodomy. Don’t worry though; this is all for your “security” and to “protect” you.
As I write, the extreme of extreme Islamists forces are massacring their way to Baghdad. To date, the Iraqi army has been totally routed and has fled leaving all of the weapons and equipment for the enemy. The true test of the Islamist army will be when it begins to enter Baghdad and the first all Shia neighborhoods. This army is not immune to the same carnage any army would face in urban combat where the fighting is up close and brutal. As such, I expect the onslaught to be stalled in Baghdad and perhaps even to bypass Baghdad for key oil infrastructure. Nonetheless, the Sunnis have defeated and subjugated the Shia in Iraq before and it is likely they could again. Even if the extremist forces are halted entering Baghdad, they will most likely turn the thrust of their advance to the east and bypass Baghdad. This will allow the army to seize and or destroy key oil infrastructure. This all but guarantees disruptions to production and that the cost of oil and therefore fuel is about to skyrocket.
What can be done about this for now is most likely nothing. We can watch and enjoy the spike in gas prices as our contracting economy shrinks even faster. However, I would recommend you take a whopping five minutes out of your day and cut and paste an email to your two senators and one representative in Congress and demand Congress freezes any form of support or aid to the rebels/terrorists fighting Assad and now campaigning in Iraq. You may also want to call into your favorite talk radio show and discuss these topics. Finally, come November, vote out every single incumbent and replace them with independent representatives.
By Guiles Hendrik
June 18, 2014
All rights reserved.

Failed Launch of Russian Rocket Carrying Advanced GPS Satellites No Accident

June 13, 2014 News and Intelligence Comments Off on Failed Launch of Russian Rocket Carrying Advanced GPS Satellites No Accident

Understanding geopolitical maneuvers implies recognition that timing of events globally are not coincidental. The latest example is the failure of the latest Russian rocket launch carry highly advanced satellites to bolster Russia’s own GPS array so that it does not have to rely on US military satellites and infrastructure. This failure of a proven Russian rocket system only days after Russia announced it was ceasing space based cooperation with the USA is not accidental. Instead, this was the latest take down in a growing number of high profile cyber attacks launched by the US and perhaps the first major military strike against Russian in a new era of warfare.

Ominously, the Russia’s cyber capability is advanced and capable of significant attacks on a large scale against targets inside the US unlike countries such as Syria and Iran. One should expect Russia to see the launch failure as a clandestine military attack regardless of whether or not it actually was. Again, perception is reality and Putin cannot afford the public perception that Russia’s vaunted space program is incompetent. In retaliation, Russia will strike back. Whether Russia uses cyber warfare or not is yet to be seen, but Russia will exact a price for the loss. As I have warned, Russia recognizes that Afghanistan is an easy place to exact revenge and bleed the US so the US military should not expect a smooth retreat this year. Further, our military space launches and vulnerable satellites may become logical targets for Russian retaliation so don’t be surprised if months from now our satellites experience failure or a new NGA satellite being launched fails to make it to orbit.

Washington is playing a dangerous game with Russia but fails to recognize the US has far more to lose. Even more disturbing is the fact that the White House has repeatedly been outmaneuvered and beaten by Russia on every foreign policy initiative and appears paralyzed under Obama’s leadership to decisively act. US policy makers have shown no ability to differentiate between the capability threat of countries like Iraq and Iran and those possessed by Russia. The White House appears drunk on hubris and forgets that it cannot bully everyone on the playground. Historically, this hubris has led to strategic miscalculations of massive proportions leading to events like World War I. Even in the best case scenario, the US gets beat geopolitically and another chunk of America’s little remaining influence and prestige is eroded away. As such, expect to see a continued resurgent Russia and a waning US.

An Open Letter to President Obama and Congress on US Policy toward Ukraine and Russia

April 21, 2014 Global War, Politics Comments Off on An Open Letter to President Obama and Congress on US Policy toward Ukraine and Russia

As the United States races forward to develop policy to deal with the escalating crisis in the Ukraine, many citizens have been left totally uniformed respective of our regional interests and policies toward it. As a concerned citizen, I am respectfully requesting a pause to allow professional debate on the subject before the Administration effectively locks America into another Cold War with Russia. I, like many Americans, remember the days of the Cold War and do not wish to return to the fear of nuclear annihilation, incredible levels of defense spending, and never ending guerrilla wars across the globe.
Sadly, logic rarely plays any part in policy development and seems to have had almost no impact on the current administration’s policy decisions.  Further, as a mere voiceless citizen amongst the masses, I have little reason to suspect my voice matters or will ever be heard in front of our policy makers. As such, I risk being labeled a radical for daring to demand answers to critical questions all Americans should be concerned over as President Obama and the US Congress steer our nation toward a head on collision with Russia.  America, as every nation, has made many mistakes in its past.  Can we not, at least once, learn from these mistakes and try to get a policy right?  Rather than simply complain and point out the failures, I will offer solutions.  To that end, I recommend an initial, vigorous, public debate to inform upon and explore all policy options before our political knee jerk reactions land our nation in very dire waters. 
I am of the mindset that sanctions are the extreme extent of economic warfare, which is inextricably linked to waging warfare in the classical sense. Therefore, a declaration to destroy a nation’s economy is, in effect, the same as war. To assume otherwise is a dangerous oversight in respect to high stakes political brinkmanship. Perhaps the Russian oligarchs will still have steak and caviar, but sanctions will mean joblessness, hardship, and starvation for millions of Russians.  These deprivations upon the public amount to little difference from a shooting war.  Russia intimately understands this, but unlike Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya, Russia has the ability to effectively fight back against global bullying. Before walking further down this treacherous road with Russia, a formidable adversary I must add, I would like the President, Congress, and ultimately the American public to definitively answer and defend in open debate the following elementary questions:
What and specifically, whose interests are being served by our involvement in the Ukraine?  What vital national interests are at stake?  What will we receive in exchange for our involvement in Ukraine?  What are our policy goals in respect to Russia and Ukraine?  What end state do we seek by sanctioning Russia? What is the timeline by which we determine success in our policy?  How far are we willing to go to achieve those goals?  Will we commit to military action should sanctions fail to achieve our policy goals?  Are we willing to risk nuclear war?
What is the projected global economic impact of sanctions on Russia for the US economy?  Are sanctions our only tools?  What price is the US willing to pay for enacting painful sanctions on Russia?  If Europe won’t support sanctions, why should the US?  Do we truly have a global economy?  If so, wouldn’t hurting the Russian economy also hurt the world economy?  If Europe is correct that sanctions would hurt the EU’s economy, wouldn’t it by default also hurt the US economy?  Can the US economy afford more negative economic pressure?  Is sanctioning Russia over Ukraine worth billions of dollars in losses for the US economy?  How many dollars in losses are we willing to endure to achieve our policy goals in Ukraine?  Will one billion dollars in loans be enough money to stabilize Ukraine?  If not, how much are we willing to spend and what will we expect as a return on investment?  What is the actual probability the US taxpayer will be repaid for the loan to Ukraine?
Why can’t Ukraine fight for itself?  Isn’t Ukraine a European issue?  Why must the US fight Europe’s battles?  What are the historic consequences of intervening in Europe’s civil wars?  What is the historical precedent for American success in this type of intervention?
Who are the leaders in the Ukraine that we are now supporting?  Did they not take power through a violent overthrow of the elected Ukrainian government?  Who supported that revolution? Could the Russians have viewed this as a threat? If the tables were turned, would we approve of similar action on our borders? How do we decide who is and isn’t the legitimate government in the Ukraine?  Who are we to decide which coups, in a string of overthrows and power grabs, are legitimate after unilaterally deciding the formerly recognized Ukrainian government was illegitimate?  How do we know the current regime in power in Kiev will work toward America’s best interests?  If the leadership we back in Ukraine becomes unpopular and fails to deliver positive change, will we continue to back the regime?  If the leadership we back in Ukraine is itself overthrown, what is the potential damage to US interests in the region?
Will sanctions actually achieve our goals by altering Russia’s decisions or just further alienate a rather large and powerful nation?  How long are we willing to continue sanctions before we assess policy failure or success?  If sanctions fail to have the desired effect, what are plans B and C?  What is the cost of inaction?  What would be the benefits to supporting Moscow over Kiev?  Have we even considered supporting Moscow?  What are the Russian grievances?  What does Russia have to gain or lose in Ukraine?  How far is Moscow willing to go to defend what it considers its vital national interests in Ukraine?  How much pain is Russia willing to endure to achieve its policy goals respective of Ukraine? Are we willing to inflict that amount of pain to force our will on Russia? How much pain will doing so entail for the US?
Are we as a nation prepared to step firmly back into a new Cold War landscape for the indefinite future?  Is the US willing to play the game of chicken to its full conclusion?  If not, why should we engage in the dangerous game of brinkmanship in the first place?  What retaliatory measures will Moscow take in response to sanctions?  Where and how could Moscow feasibly hurt America the worst?  What are the implications of Moscow shutting down the Northern Supply Route to Afghanistan during our planned retreat in 2014?  What are the implications of Moscow authorizing advanced weapons sales to countries like Syria, Iran, and China?  What if Moscow attacked the US militarily?  What would be the most likely course of action for Moscow?  What would Moscow’s most dangerous course of action be?  Do Americans realize further escalation could lead to the deaths of many Americans across the world as Russia begins to retaliate?  Is this something that America considers an acceptable loss?
I would argue that if these very basic, yet critically important questions were honestly answered and publicly debated, the policy decisions respective of the situation in the Ukraine would be patently clear.  What Americans would realize is that intervention in Ukraine is not in our vital national interests.  The US could only derive a net loss to our global geopolitical stability, security, and strength.  The public would see that US actions will be ineffective, counterproductive, and ultimately futile.  Americans would not be willing to pay the true price of a reckless intervention.  
Perhaps, I am an unbending ideologue for asking that basic logic to be applied to our policy decisions.  Maybe, I am just a blind and backwards isolationist for wanting to avoid more foreign conflict.  Certainly, I must be a cold pragmatist for the mere insinuation that one should place American interests before foreign interests.  We might as well assume I am also greedy for suggesting I am not willing to have more of my tax dollars looted to pay the debts owed to foreign banks by foreign elites.  No doubt I am also unpatriotic for not rushing to arms to support military intervention in the Ukraine.  If so, then I stand guilty as charged. 

Sincerely,
Guiles Hendrik
April 20, 2014
All rights reserved.

Contact: Please send questions or comments to guileshendrik@gmail.com

Russia Laughs at Obama’s Red Line in Russia: What’s Next for Relations?

March 23, 2014 Global War, News and Intelligence Comments Off on Russia Laughs at Obama’s Red Line in Russia: What’s Next for Relations?

President Obama and his Secretary of State John Kerry have to be the laughing stock of the foreign policy world.  In less than a year they have managed to draw two “Red Lines” only to have them almost immediately ignored, crossed, and forgotten.  With this track record the word impotent comes to mind in reference to US Foreign Policy and particularly President (Carter) Obama.  Not to be trifled with, President Obama and his partners within the EU managed to order the assets of a handful of Russians frozen, obviously leaving Putin quaking in his finely crafted leather shoes.  The act is almost comical in that it seems to show even less resolve than if Obama and the EU had done nothing.  After all, freezing the non-existent US assets of a couple dozen Russians long after they hid and/or offshored anything of value can only be viewed in one of two ways.  Either the US is as weak as it appears or the US never intended to truly oppose Russia’s aims to annex Crimea and this is all political show so that they can say they “stood up to Putin.”  Further, at least one of victims of Washington’s sanctions appears to have nothing to do with events in the Ukraine and everything to do with Russia’s Christian grounded stance against homosexuality, which at least someone high up in the Obama Administration took exception.  This random list of targets unrelated to the events in the Ukraine undermines any shred of legitimacy the sanctions purportedly were imbued with.  Either way, Putin has to be concluding that at this point the US and the EU have zero resolve when it comes to actually opposing Russia’s annexation of Crimea.  Nonetheless, Putin, the same man that would order a former Russian defector assassinated with a rare radioactive isotope placed in his cocktail in a fine London bar, is not likely to take Obama’s cheap shot lightly.

Now that Washington has proved it couldn’t resist taking a cheap shot, what can we expect Russia’s response to be?  First of all, Putin has shown that unlike Obama, his actions speak for themselves and he doesn’t need to talk.  Since Washington and the EU attacked Russia financially, it is likely Russia will respond financially.  Last week, Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov declared that any sanctions introduced by Washington against Moscow will have a “boomerang” effect.  Senior Russian Presidential Advisor, Sergey Glazyev, one of the individual’s sanctioned by Obama’s executive order, suggested Russia would dump US treasuries and walk away from the US Dollar as a reserve currency.  It is questionable how much of an impact this would have, but it certainly wouldn’t help the US economically and add to the growing list of countries dumping the US Dollar as the world’s reserve currency.  American businesses operating in Russia may also suffer retaliation in the form of their assets being frozen, confiscated, or shutdown.  Further, Russia has the ability to call in billions in debt from the Ukraine and cut supplies of gas to the Ukraine and EU.  Cutting gas supplies to the EU would certainly hurt Russia too, but this logic is fundamentally flawed if one believes that it will deter Russia.  Russia is renowned for its ability to suffer austerity.  In fact, one of the critical failures in US-Russia policy has been the inability of our senior policy makers to recognize Russia’s ability to endure extreme hardships and willingly cut off its nose, leg and hand to spite its face if it means victory can be assured.  The US and EU are not willing to go to those extremes so, by that fact alone, Russia will prevail in any developing economic stand-off.

Respective of Russian natural gas and oil, I produced a paper a half a decade ago that looked into the future political ramifications of Russian geopolitical power as Western economies waned and Asian economies waxed.  What became apparent was that once Russia completed pipelines in its east that could link their large gas and oil fields to China and coastal ports in the Pacific, Russia would gain significant leverage in what had previously been a status quo relationship with Europe between supply and demand.  Until recently, Europe has always felt safe in that at worst, Russia would only cut gas supplies during a political crisis for a short period of time because Russia needed the money as much as Europe needed the gas.  However, with pipelines now directly extending supply to China, Russia is more than able to divert supplies from Europe, southeast to China.  This is a game changer, which increases Russia’s geopolitical maneuver space.  China welcomes this and is happy to buy all of the petrol resources it can obtain from Russia so that its supplies are more reliable.  Further, China will be likely to back any move that drives Russia to sell to China at more favorable rates, which to date, have been below what Russia was willing to agree to sell at.  China would also see the advantage of a marginalized Russia that dumps the US Dollar and is willing to trade directly in their respective currencies.  Remember, China seeks to replace the US Dollar as the world’s reserve currency and sees that transition as critical to achieving super power status and eclipsing the US.  Considering the above, it is highly likely that China will not just quietly support Russia, but actively back Russia against the US and EU.

Russia also has the ability to increase the sale of military weapons to countries such as Iran and Syria.  In particular, the S-300 air defense system would be a highly sought after leap ahead in technology for both the Iranian and Syrian militaries.  This system alone would be penetrable by American airpower; however, it would significantly increase the complexities and cost of carrying out any type of air attack against either nation.  Russia could also dangle the idea of selling an even more advanced S-400 air defense system, which if fielded, would mean that US would be at a high risk of losing significant numbers of aircraft in the event they attacked any nation using the system.  Respective of countries such as Israel, the S-400 would make it all but impossible for them to successfully carrying out an air attack making any suggestion of the sale of the weapon system a serious threat.  Respective of the civil war in Syria, Russia could begin sending ship loads of various weapons and even advisors and troops to support President Assad.  This would tip the balance in favor of Assad just as his army is gaining ground on the rebels making it possible to achieve a decisive victory.  Ensuring Assad’s victory would have the added benefit of snubbing Washington while stopping Qatari efforts to build a gas pipeline to Europe that would reduce the European reliance on Russian gas.

Finally, among numerous options for retaliation, Russia has the ability to make NATO’s withdrawal from Afghanistan extremely painful.  First of all, Russia has the ability to shut down all supply routes to and from Afghanistan from the north.  This would disrupt NATO’s ability to sustain the current forces in Afghanistan and retard efforts under way to retreat with all of its equipment in tow.  Further, it would force NATO to pay premium prices to Pakistan to move all of its equipment out of the country via Karachi.  The Karachi route is extremely dangerous and once it is clear that the US must use this route, the Taliban could concentrate its attacks along the entire stretch of this road network.  Even darker is Russia’s proven, albeit very covert ability to provide the Taliban with substantial support and weapons.  Should the Russians decide to really make life a living hell for the US, expect to see the Taliban suddenly supplied with more sophisticated weaponry capable of destroying armored vehicles from long range or even engaging NATO aircraft and drones.  Imagine what NATO’s retreat from Afghanistan would look like as troop numbers dwindle and the remaining isolated outposts begin to be overrun, supply convoys are wiped out by sophisticated  laser beam riding anti-tank weapons, and aircraft are suddenly being shot down by the modern Russian equivalent of the Stinger missile.

In truth, the US is far more exposed than many realize.  Should Washington decide to ratchet up pressure on Russia by continuing to try and subvert Russia’s historic sphere of interest, expect Putin to begin playing cards he has so far politely held in reserve.  Putin’s trump cards are for, let’s say, more uncivilized forms of diplomacy, which Washington now seems to want to engage.  Obama’s thug style Chicago politics may have worked within the confines of the decrepit US political system, but Barry will be sorely mistaken if he thinks he even remotely approaches a match for Putin in the global arena.  As Putin has repeatedly demonstrated with very little talk and decisive action, Washington is a paper tiger that not just lacks teeth, but a functioning brain.

 

By Guiles Hendrik

March 23, 2014

All rights reserved.

PM Maliki Accuses Qatar and Saudi Arabia of Waging War against Iraq

March 19, 2014 9/11, Al Qaeda, News and Intelligence, Terrorism Comments Off on PM Maliki Accuses Qatar and Saudi Arabia of Waging War against Iraq

As we have reported for some time, the US support to Al Qaeda affiliated jihadist groups waging an insurgent war in Syria would cause the conflict to spread beyond Syria’s borders. Specifically, we pointed out that the Qatari and Saudi backed insurgents would threaten the Shia dominated (Iranian leaning) government in Iraq. This came to fruition after anti-government militants seized control of the city of Fallujah in December. Since then Iraqi forces have been unable to get the city back from the rebel fighters. Further proof of our predicted regionalization of the war came recently after Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Maliki accused Saudi Arabia and Qatar of declaring war on Iraq and supporting global terrorism. The Iraqi leader blamed the two countries for orchestrating the latest wave of bloody violence to hit Iraq this year, which continues unabated and at levels not seen since the height of the bloodshed during the US occupation. Of course you will never hear this in a White House briefing or on the CNN and Fox propaganda networks.
Prime Minister Maliki placed the blame for the increasing terrorist violence in Iraq on Qatar and Saudi Arabia in an interview with France 24. He said both countries are supporting extreme sectarian groups within Iraq, with a view to destabilizing the country and are “attacking” Iraq through Syria. “I accuse them of inciting and encouraging the terrorist movements. I accuse them of supporting them politically and in the media, of supporting them with money and by buying weapons for them. I accuse them of leading an open war against the Iraqi government,” said Maliki, adding that Saudi Arabia and Qatar not only supported terrorism in Iraq, but also sponsor terrorism worldwide. Maliki made it clear that Saudi Arabia and Qatar are causing the violence when he said both countries are “buying weapons for the benefit of these terrorist organizations.” Maliki also echoes our warnings over US policy supporting known terrorists in Syria when he warned the Gulf States that their support of global terrorism “will turn against them.” Let’s consider for a minute that the leader of Iraq just squarely blamed Saudi Arabia and Qatar for terrorism worldwide. If it is true, would it not mean the entire war on terrorism has been one of the largest and misguided scams? How can it be that after a decade of fighting terrorism all around the globe that US intelligence and our leaders missed evidence that showed Saudi Arabia and Qatar were supporting terrorists? After all, aren’t Saudi Arabia and Qatar solid allies and friends of the US? The fact is Maliki is a politician suddenly caught in a rare candid moment of truth telling and the US has for decades turned a blind eye to Saudi Arabia’s blatant and deliberate support to terrorism against Americans.
If only the US government was as honest as Maliki we might actually make some headway against Islamic extremism. It should come as no surprise that one of the primary reasons we have been unsuccessful in the war on “terrorism” is because we have never attacked its real epicenter within Saudi Arabia. In fact we have criminally turned a blind eye to the terrorist acts of the Saudi government, which have led to the deaths of thousands of Americans. According to the leaked and still classified congressional report on 9/11, senior Saudi government officials were directly involved in the funding, planning, and execution of the 9/11 attacks; yet, our government has covered it up and kept it from the American people that deserve the truth. Instead of attacking Saudi Arabia for carrying out an act of war against the US, the US falsely accused and attacked Iraq under false pretenses. Instead of telling the truth to Americans, two presidents have now sent Americans to fight and die in foreign lands far removed from the real problem. Unlike Maliki, the US government has consistently misled and lied to the American people to protect THE terrorist state of Saudi Arabia. In the land of laws, this is called aiding and abetting terrorism and it is still a federal felony crime. This is nothing short of treason.

By Guiles Hendrik
March 14, 2014
All rights reserved.

The Rise of the Islamic State of the Levant: As Iraq fractures so does the Middle East

February 1, 2014 Al Qaeda, Iran, Israel, Syria, Terrorism Comments Off on The Rise of the Islamic State of the Levant: As Iraq fractures so does the Middle East

Al Qaeda(AQ) is more powerful today than it was over a decade ago when then President George W. Bush declared his nebulous, ill-fated war on terrorism. Ironically, one could strongly argue it was the war against AQ that made AQ more popular and resilient than it could have ever hoped to be autonomously operating in the shadows. Nothing is more demonstrative of this than the situation today in Iraq. AQ has become a conventional military force and effectively dissolved the border between Iraq and Syria merging it into the Islamic State of the Levant almost completely absent of media attention in the west. In fact, in its first major test as a state like entity, the Iraqi Army conducted a full scale assault on the AQ held portions of Ramadi and Fallujah only to suffer a decisive defeat leaving AQ firmly in control of the traditional Sunni areas of Iraq. The ramifications of this transformation of AQ from a stateless terrorist organization to a conventional army with a defined geographical territory right in the heart of the Middle East are extremely dire even if the Western Media has all but ignored the disaster borne of Bush and Obama’s failed foreign policies.
President Obama has cited again and again how AQ has been defeated and dismantled, yet AQ has repeatedly proven the president either ignorant or a liar as we predicted. As a result of the US conducting its insane policy of intervening in the Syrian Civil War (not to mention creating the war) and then providing military grade weapons to AQ aligned rebels in Syria, AQ fighters now have a conventional military capability compliments of the US taxpayer whether directly supplied by the CIA or indirectly via Saudi Arabia and Qatar. In fact, the heavily armed AQ rebels have crossed into Iraq for sanctuary and taken over large stretches of the western portions of Iraq. As I warned, the insurgencies in Syria and Iraq could merge and create massive unrest in the Middle East. This perfect storm has emerged. With the firepower supplied by not just the US, but Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Turkey, the AQ elements are not stopping in western Iraq and instead have pushed on toward Baghdad. The Shia controlled Iraqi government has so far been unable to retake the areas already captured by AQ and has now been defeated in direct conventional combat operations in both Fallujah and Ramadi. If the Iraqi military is unable to check the advance and growth of the AQ Army, it is indeed possible that portions of Baghdad will be captured by AQ. This in effect will mean that Iraq has effectively splintered into three autonomous nations, one Sunni, one Kurd, and one Shia as I have predicted for years. It will also herald the emergence of the AQ organization, the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, into the actual Islamic State of the Levant.
Even if Baghdad is not taken by AQ the situation is already quite dire. An all-out sectarian proxy war has begun between Iran and Saudi Arabia. The battlefield to date has been confined to the Middle East, but it soon will spill over onto other continents with Africa already suffering the worst from growing Islamic extremism. Each side has gained victories and neither is done fighting. Iran has so far managed to maintain its ally Syria against the concerted efforts of the US, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Jordan, and even Turkey. Iran maintains strong influence over the Iraqi government, which remains predominantly Shia. Iran has also diplomatically outmaneuvered the US, which based on the accomplishments of Secretaries Clinton and Kerry should not come as any surprise, and forced a deal over its nuclear program to include reducing sanctions. However, Hezbollah leaders have been assassinated in Lebanon and AQ backed Sunnis have taken over western Iraq.
This sets the stage in Iraq for a winner takes all fight that will become very bloody. Iran has strategic interests in maintaining its newly minted proxy government in Iraq, compliments of the shortsighted US policy that toppled the Sunni-Baathist regime of Saddam Hussein. In particular, the Iraqi government allows Iran to move weapons and troops through its territory to support President Assad’s forces in Syria and is colluding with Iran on oil production to undercut Saudi oil revenues. However, Iraq’s government is vulnerable so Iran will support the Iraqi military with Iranian units against AQ. Iran is well aware that by defeating these AQ elements in Iraq, it will severely weaken the rebel forces fighting its traditional ally Syria. Saudi Arabia knows that an Iranian win in Syria or Iraq will most likely mean a strategic win across the board for Iran. Saudi Arabia will view a nuclear Iran with control of both Iraq and Syria as an existential strategic threat that it won’t be able to ignore. As such, Saudi Arabia has to escalate the proxy war it in part created by doubling down and backing the AQ aligned Sunnis in an attempt to weaken Iran. This will lead to greater, prolonged bloodshed throughout the Middle East, a disintegration of borders, and further destabilization of Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Yemen.
Dangerously, almost any conceivable conclusion to the Iran-Saudi proxy war now seems to point to greater war in the Middle East that will be difficult to deescalate. A stalemate or major breakthrough in favor of Iran may force the countries into direct conflict. Saudi Arabia may also lobby for and overtly support a devastating Israeli strike against Iran, which will have global repercussions. It will also signal Saudi Arabia to move forward with purchasing its own nuclear weapons from Pakistan setting off the dreaded cycle of proliferation across the region. However, if Iran is defeated, the results could be far worse. An Iranian defeat means an AQ victory. In the event of victory, AQ will solidify what amounts to the Islamic State of the Levant. This newly emerged state will turn on the corrupt regimes that spawned it and attack Jordan, Yemen, and Saudi Arabia potentially toppling those regimes. Further, AQ would solidify their control of the region and make it effectively off limits for any US interests short of another war. The new Islamic State of the Levant would be a breeding ground for attacks against the US and a safe haven for terrorists that have emerged into a legitimate army. Saudi Arabia, in particular, will be very vulnerable to the AQ fighters and could be destabilized to the point oil production is severely disrupted. Israel will come under even greater pressure as the Palestinians receive increased support from AQ leadership. These are just a few of the first order regional effects without even touching the greater global implications and how it would affect major powers like the US, Russia, and China.
The US will regret that it armed, trained, and equipped AQ elements in Syria for short sighted policies designed to undermine Iran. The ramifications of the chain reaction Washington’s policy set in motion will be dire and far reaching. Already, the world must begin to recognize it created a defacto AQ state in the Levant even if the western media has not grasped this new reality. Nonetheless, one cannot predict with certainty how this will end, but one can be certain that much greater blood will be shed before this new regional war concludes.

By Guiles Hendrik
January 31, 2014
All rights reserved.

The Next Manufactured War: China and the Pacific Theater Take Center Stage

December 11, 2013 Big Banks, Big Government, Department of Defense, Economy, Exclusive Story, Federal Reserve, Global War, Iran, Military, Military Industrial Complex, News and Intelligence, Politics Comments Off on The Next Manufactured War: China and the Pacific Theater Take Center Stage

As we have exhaustively written and warned in previous articles, a new war will need to be manufactured to continue to justify the continued redistribution of billions of taxpayer dollars to the military-industrial complex financed by the big banks.  The titans of the defense industry and the loan sharks of the banking world cannot afford peace and will stop at nothing to create fear and war to ensure their wealth is secure.  The United States economy has not made a true comeback as has been touted by the media and falsified government reports and soon the bubble the Federal Reserve created will have to be deflated.  To keep the public distracted and the money flowing, a new plan to create fear, instability, and possibly war in the Pacific has now begun.

It is becoming increasingly clear that no matter what deal is or is not struck in Afghanistan respective of continued troop deployments, NATO and the US forces are going to be forced to retreat within the next 12 to 18 months.  The Taliban’s (Pakistan’s) strategic victory is all but assured now, which will make future occupation by U.S. personnel impossible.  Further, the movement toward war with Iran by way of Syria has been temporarily checked by Russia until Israel can build enough clandestine support behind the scenes to sabotage any future peace deal or unilaterally attack Iran.  As such, the military-industrial complex has turned back to its fear mongering and war propaganda to begin conditioning the public that North Korea and China are again dire threats that must be stopped at all costs and that war could break out at any moment.  Of course this hyperbole is used to justify the “need” for new advanced weapons, continued funding of obsolete, redundant, or unnecessary defense systems, and to generally control the masses.  As a nation we have witnessed this ploy over and over resulting in unnecessary wars from Vietnam to Iraq that have cost millions of lives and trillions of dollars worldwide.  The wanton destruction wrought by these industry power plays can’t be understated.  For example, as we reported in the spring of 2013, North Korea was rebranded as a strategic missile threat overnight and then only weeks later forgotten after the defense-aerospace industry scared Congress and the public into refunding their missile defense programs that have been wasting billions of tax dollars and were rightfully on the sequester chopping block.  The fact that the bankers and defense propagandists nearly started World War III didn’t matter a bit because no matter whether or not war broke out, it was you and I that would have to bleed, pay, and die for their fortunes.  This process of fear mongering and dangerous brinkmanship is a trademark defense industry ploy used to make sure you continue to write them checks for billions of dollars without question.  Without question, it is one of the most diabolical, destructive, despicable, and immoral of all lies repeatedly pushed on the citizens of nations.

Fortunately, the American people have to some degree grown war weary and have been sensitized to the lies of war propaganda.  This is good and bad.  It is good in that the simplest of lies will no longer suffice to convince the American people to once again go to war and bleed and pay for the elites to become wealthier.  However, the elites recognize this and will conduct even more aggressive and despicable acts to create the conditions for war.  For illustration, just this year in Syria, a false flag chemical weapons attack was launched against innocent civilians in an attempt to frame the Syrian regime and justify the US becoming involved in yet another war in the Middle East.  It is important to note that this attack using weapons of mass destruction was resorted to after numerous lesser attempts to “convict” the Syrian regime in the minds of the public and precipitate a war had failed.  This included launching mortar rounds into Israel and Turkey, launching air attacks into Syria directly from Israel, directly providing training and weapons to known terrorists operating in Syria, repeatedly violating Syrian airspace so that they would shoot down a NATO jet, and persistently trying to brand the radical Islamic jihadists of the revolutionary forces as a peaceful, unified, pro-US, Free Syrian Army.  All of these acts were designed to either directly or indirectly illicit a defensive response from Syria, which Washington could then spin into an act of “aggression” to justify retaliation and war.  The Syrian example is just one of many illustrating to what deranged extremes our hijacked government will go to to force the US into another unnecessary war and is a cautionary tale of things to come.

Relative to the recent wars in the Middle East, a war in the Pacific promises to be far more devastating and has the real possibility of involving nuclear weapons and electromagnetic pulses designed to wipe out all unshielded electronics.  However, “devastating” translates to windfall profits for the defense industry and their financiers on a scale not seen since World War II.  A war or even the threat of war with China would mandate trillions of new defense spending financed through loans to the US government (ironically, this new debt would probably be bought by China).  New high tech weapon systems would have to be fast tracked into service and even more draconian surveillance and cyber warfare systems would also be justified to “protect” the homeland.  The Defense Department would once again get a blank check unlike any before from Congress to pursue an entirely new portfolio of overpriced defense programs, many of which, would target the American people as much as foreign entities as the current “War on Terror” has demonstrated.

The march toward war in the Pacific will be far more costly and devastating than even the worst case scenarios for the Middle East if allowed to move forward.  Not only will the US suffer a total economic collapse, but unprecedented death and destruction if the game of brinkmanship is overplayed and China and or North Korea call our bluff.  China is not an ally of the US, but is also not any more of a threat than we decide to create.  If you want to check China, it will be best done through effective economic competition and by strengthening our freedoms and liberties at home.  Runaway defense spending will only weaken the US.  Stop giving China preferential trade status, stop creating massive debt at home, stop educating China’s military scientists, stop allowing China to steal our most sensitive secrets, stop providing China and North Korea aid, and hold the line on our sphere of influence.  At home we have to cut taxes on citizens as well as reduce the overwhelming bureaucratic weight of endless regulations and taxes on businesses.  We need to protect our workers, our products, our technology, and our industry by not undermining them with imbalanced trade deals favoring offshoring and overseas manufacturing.  We also need to secure our borders, dismantle the surveillance state, cut the size of government, wean the population from state dependencies, and become as individuals and a nation much more self-sufficient.  Cutting the Defense Budget will go a long way to neutralizing the financial influence the military-industrial complex has over US policy and would strengthen, not weaken the security of the US.  All of these actions will go far toward reigning in massive and unnecessary spending and debt.  The media must also be returned to its watchdog status of the government and be purged of its recently assumed role as the public relations arm of the political parties.  No American interest is served by a biased media.  Failure to provide honest, unbiased, and factual news to the American people will lead to further deceit, loss of liberties, degradation of our quality of life, and potentially devastating wars.

Once again we are here warning the public of what is transpiring behind the scenes and are the first to bring it to you.  The best way to battle this latest escalation toward war is to become informed, know the facts, and make sure others are educated as well.  Neither the media nor the government can lie to you if you independently have sought out and found the truth.  Take this truth to the internet, the airwaves, the cable news programs, your local clubs…anywhere you can find an audience.  By exposing the lies and replacing them with knowledge and facts you can collectively disrupt and stop the plans of the defense and banking industries and their puppets within the government.  Those of you who serve the government; especially in the military, have an obligation to the American people and the Constitution to also speak out, to refuse to become an active participant, and to stop these unconstitutional and thus illegal and immoral actions.  Only through action can we overcome these true threats to the US, the gravest of which, have originated internally.

By Guiles Hendrik 

December 11, 2013

All rights reserved.

The Forgotten War: Afghanistan 12 Years Later

October 18, 2013 Military, News and Intelligence, Terrorism Comments Off on The Forgotten War: Afghanistan 12 Years Later

America’s war against Al Qaeda terrorists in Afghanistan began over 12 years ago last week.  This grim milestone came and went with no media coverage even as some of America’s best men and women were killed there in combat this week.  Now, in the lead up to a complete US military withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2014, it is blatantly clear our pessimistic analytical forecast for Afghanistan has proved accurate.  Today we will recap the state of affairs of the War in Afghanistan and what to expect in the coming months.

The Obama Administration is quick to broadcast anything it can spin as good news.  The opposite is true of bad news so it is telling that it has maintained a near total media blackout on Afghanistan.  Making President Obama’s whitewash of the dire state of the war even feasible has been a complicit media and their absolute dereliction of a social responsibility to be the watchdog of the government.  This is the same biased media that broadcast images from the Iraq War around the clock during the Bush Administration, but now suddenly has nothing to report respective of the on-going Afghanistan War.  The truth the Obama Administration and his media henchmen are hiding is that the war has gone horribly wrong and the US is rapidly retreating in defeat.

I for one hate the notion of defeat and am incredibly ashamed of even the notion that the US could allow itself to be defeated in a war.  One would think that our nation’s leaders learned something from the Vietnam catastrophe, but then again, most of our leaders on both sides of the aisle were draft dodgers, cowards, potheads, and never served a day in the military.   Considering this, one should not be surprised to find out the Taliban are alive and well.  Not only have the Taliban weathered the full onslaught of a combined US, NATO, and Afghan military force for over a decade, but they are now more numerous, control more territory, and are better armed, trained, and equipped than they were when the US entered the war in 2001.  The Taliban still have the will and capability to fight and still take to the battlefield.  By any measure of warfare, if an invading army is forced from the battlefield and ultimately from the land which it invaded while the opposing army still holds that ground, the army that retreated was defeated.  If the media and the Obama Administration were honest and upfront with the American people, they would report that they never so much as fully secured a single province in Afghanistan.  As quickly as the US has handed over these still contested provinces to the “Afghans,” they have been taken over by the “Afghan Taliban.”  The latest sign of this came on September 13, 2013 when Taliban insurgents nearly overran the US Consulate in Herat, Afghanistan.  Not only was this attack just 48 hours after the anniversary of the attack on the US Consulate in Benghazi, but it was in a far western area of Afghanistan that previously was thought to be immune from Taliban influence.  Soon there will be no more US military forces in Afghanistan to come to the aid of these diplomatic enclaves.  When that day comes in just a few months, the US will be forced to quickly withdraw its last remaining diplomats in defeat.

Afghanistan has been an unsustainable war from the very beginning due to the lack of genius in our senior military officers, our unwillingness to pursue the actual enemy into Pakistan, self-defeating strategies, and the ultimate failure to recognize the strategic importance of sealing the Afghan-Pakistan border.  Our failure to neutralize and or destroy the Taliban safe haven across the border in Pakistan, has allowed the Taliban to wait out the US just as they did the Soviets.  Inside Pakistan’s safe haven, the Taliban fighters receive arms, training, funding, and sanctuary from the Pakistani government…the same government we give over $5 billion in annual aid to (read self-defeating strategy).  While the Taliban organize, train, and equip in Pakistan, the US has spent over a trillion dollars vainly setting up forward operating bases all over the desolate wasteland where the sole mission has become clearing roadways of improvised explosive devices so that the troops can get supplies to their remote bases so they can clear the roads so they can get in supplies, etc. etc. etc.  At no point in this ridiculous slow bleed strategy did our troops ever come close to strategic and decisive gains against the Taliban.  Instead, we spent and bled our nation to defeat without the Taliban having to do more than push an occasional button on an explosive device produced in Pakistan or shoot one of our soldiers in the back while dining together.  This absolute disaster of a war is a testament to the massive amount of money the US taxpayer has been forced to waste on a military bureaucracy so large and unwieldy that defies description.  Until the Department of Defense (DOD) can show that it can actually win a war the budget should be slashed, slashed some more, and then cut in half again.  If the politics won’t allow for a war to be fought, then we shouldn’t fight wars and waste money on our massive and dysfunctional military.  We don’t need smart bombs, we need leaders with the will to fight and win.  That said, without any doubt, for probably under what the DOD spent in a week on the Afghanistan War, a small contingent of country boys sporting nothing but scoped deer rifles, good leadership, and freedom of action could have decisively defeated the Taliban and ended the war in Afghanistan in just a few months.

Not only is the war unsustainable for the US, but also the Afghan government.  Over a hundred Afghan soldiers a week are killed, many times more are wounded, and even more defect to the Taliban.  The situation is so bad that the Department of Defense made it official policy to no longer report the number of Afghan casualties out of fear of losing all moral in the Afghan National Army.  Remember too that the mauling the Afghan military is incurring is with the help of NATO/US forces in Afghanistan to include air support.  Once the US and NATO pull out, the Afghan National Army will face total defeat as it dissolves into a more formalized Taliban Army.

Collapse is now imminent in Afghanistan.  Perhaps six months to a year separate the current state of affairs from a Taliban takeover of most of the country.  As the US accelerates its withdrawal, the Taliban will begin to operate more overtly in Afghanistan seizing at first greater footholds in the regional villages and towns and then overwhelming major cities.  Kandahar may again be one of the first cities to fall to the Taliban as soon as the spring of 2014.  Once Kandahar and surrounding provinces fall fully back into the Taliban’s (Pakistan’s) hands, it will only be a matter of months before Kabul falls under heavy attack and is overrun.  President Karzai will most likely do what he did before and flee his country to save his own skin.  This time though Karzai will flee with over a billion dollars (compliments of the US taxpayer by way of the CIA) hidden away, rather overtly, in Swiss and Dubai bank accounts to live out his days in Europe as his countrymen suffer the aftermath of his corrupt regime.  One can only hope he is forced to stay and weather whatever consequences the war may bring as the captain should either save the ship or sink with it.  In the interim, Afghanistan will exist as the world’s premier narco-state with President Karzai the undisputed cartel leader.

Make no mistake that any notion the US will be able to maintain a footprint in Afghanistan once the pull out begins is an illusion.  I can’t say for sure whether our leadership in the US is just that dumb to believe we will be able to stay (they are building a billion dollar embassy in Kabul) or is simply lying to provide top cover while we retreat.  Nonetheless, the result will be the same.  Think Saigon circa 1975.  To say the least, we will be lucky to have an exit as orderly as the Soviets.  If we are so lucky, it is only because the Taliban correctly assessed that it was in their best interests to simply let us leave as soon as possible while saving up their strength for a full offensive.  Once NATO has gotten out of the way, the Taliban will move to finish the civil war they started before the US invasion.

As the last troops retreat out of Afghanistan in defeat the military-industrial-complex will be faced with a dire situation.  The situation will be one of reduced budgets and no pressing war to sell their wares.  This means the titans of defense will lose billions of dollars and tens of thousands of Americans will be put out of work.  As such, we predict the military-industrial-complex will work closely behind the scenes with Congress to engineer a new war before the complete end to operations in Afghanistan.  The most likely candidate for this will be a war with Iran via Syria.  This war, as we have repeatedly warned, will be a complete disaster on a scale unprecedented in American history.  In fact the consequences could be so dire that historians may very well point to the folly as the end of the Republic.

Please remember our troops on the ground fighting in Afghanistan…they are the real victims of bad leadership, yet bravely stand their posts.

By Guiles Hendrik

All rights reserved. 

« Older Entries   Recent Entries »