Posts Tagged ‘Military’

General Norman Schwarzkopf, RIP

Thursday, December 27th, 2012

News outlets are reporting that retired four-star General Norman Schwarzkopf has died at age 78.

Schwarzkopf oversaw the liberation of Kuwait from Saddam Hussein during Desert Storm, crushing Iraqi forces in a mere four days. American forces were comprehensively better equipped and better trained than their opponents, and enjoyed unquestioned air superiority, but Schwarzkopf’s plan for liberating Kuwait, including the “left hook” into Iraq, was cleverly conceived and well-executed. If George H. W. Bush had only let him take Baghdad in 1991, much deadly and expensive unpleasantness could probably been avoided.

Syria and Guns

Thursday, November 29th, 2012

OK. Thanksgiving break over.

I’ve come across a couple of blogs from the world of international conflict you may want to take a look at:

  • Brown Moses tracks developments in the Syrian civil War, with a special focus on the ordinance expended and captured there.
  • The Gun follows the more general word of international military arms, including transfer and use in combat.
  • Both are worth checking out.

    Considerations for an Israeli Ground Assault on Gaza

    Thursday, November 15th, 2012

    Stratfor considers the implications of an Israeli ground assault on Gaza, concluding that it would look an awful lot like Operation Cast Lead, Israel’s 2008-2009 incursion into Gaza.

    The biggest difference is that that back then, Egypt wasn’t run by Islamist assclowns.

    This also gives me a chance to link to this totally off the hook article on Israel’s urban warfare tactics in Nablus in 2002. As far as I know, it’s the only useful application of French postmodern literary theory in the history of mankind…

    Israel Pounds Hamas

    Wednesday, November 14th, 2012

    Today Israel launched strikes at multiple Hamas targets in Gaza, including one that took out Hamas military commander Ahmed Al-Jabari. This follows a weekend in which Hamas launched more than a hundred terror rockets into Israel.

    Russia Today provides video of that particular strike:

    Yeah, that’s going to ruin your whole day.

    In retaliation, Hamas fired off 13 more rockets at Israel…all of which were intercepted.

    There’s at least some indications that Israel is about to launch a major ground offensive into Gaza.

    Stay tuned…

    The Obama Administration’s Response to Benghazi, In Easy-to-Understand Graphic Form

    Monday, October 22nd, 2012

    Some devastating critiques of the Obama Administration’s non-response on American officials in Benghazi.

    Bing West:

    A U.S. ambassador is missing and his diplomatic team is desperately fighting off terrorist attacks. Our commander-in-chief and his national-security team in Washington are listening to the phone calls from the Americans under attack and watching real-time video from a drone circling overhead. Yet the U.S. military sends no aid. Why?

    Snip

    Our diplomats fought for seven hours without any aid from outside the country. Four Americans died while the Obama national-security team and our military passively watched and listened. The administration is being criticized for ignoring security needs before the attack and for falsely attributing the assault to a mob. But the most severe failure has gone unnoticed: namely, a failure to aid the living.

    Snip

    For our top leadership, with all the technological and military tools at their disposal, to have done nothing for seven hours was a joint civilian and military failure of initiative and nerve.

    Mary Steyn:

    Obama, Biden, and Panetta met in the Oval Office at 5 p.m. We know Charlene Lamb at the State Department was watching events in real time. It seems likely Panetta was, too — and perhaps even Obama.

    When something bad happens at a consulate on the other side of the world, very few nations have the technological capability to watch it in real time.

    Even fewer have fighter jets and special forces within less than 500 miles — or about the distance from Boston to Washington.

    Yet the commander-in-chief chose to do nothing. He chose to let the enemy determine the course of events, how long the battle would last, how many Americans would die. The only choice he made was to hold a photo-op at their coffins.

    Many Obama partisans continue to downplay the attacks in Benghazi as though they were indeed a mere bump in the road of no particular importance. Therefore, I’ve decided to put the incident in a graphic form that perhaps even they can grasp:

    Mark Steyn Lays Waste to the Obama Adminstration’s Libyan Lies

    Saturday, October 13th, 2012

    Mark Steyn’s comprehensive takedown of all the Obama Administration lies and incompetence in the Benghazi terrorist assault and the murder of Ambassador Chris Stevens is so righteous it deserves a link of its own.

    “The entire reason that this has become the political topic it is is because of Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan.”

    Thus, Stephanie Cutter, President Obama’s deputy campaign manager, speaking on CNN about an armed attack on the 9/11 anniversary that left a U.S. consulate a smoking ruin and killed four diplomatic staff, including the first American ambassador to be murdered in a third of a century. To discuss this event is apparently to “politicize” it and to distract from the real issues the American people are concerned about. For example, Obama spokesperson Jen Psaki, speaking on board Air Force One on Thursday: “There’s only one candidate in this race who is going to continue to fight for Big Bird and Elmo, and he is riding on this plane.”

    She’s right! The United States is the first nation in history whose democracy has evolved to the point where its leader is provided with a wide-body transatlantic jet in order to campaign on the vital issue of public funding for sock puppets.

    Snip.

    Obviously, Miss Cutter is right: A healthy mature democracy should spend its quadrennial election on critical issues like the Republican party’s war on puppets rather than attempting to “politicize” the debate by dragging in stuff like foreign policy, national security, the economy, and other obscure peripheral subjects.

    Snip.

    For most of those four weeks, the president of the United States, the secretary of state, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, and others have persistently attributed the Benghazi debacle to an obscure YouTube video — even though they knew that the two events had nothing to do with each other by no later than the crack of dawn Eastern time on September 12.

    Snip.

    Secretary Clinton linked the YouTube video to the murder of her colleagues even as the four caskets lay alongside her at Andrews Air Force Base — even though she had known for days that it had nothing to do with it. It’s weird enough that politicians now give campaign speeches to returning coffins. But to conscript your “friend”’s corpse as a straight man for some third-rate electoral opportunism is surely as shriveled and worthless as “politicization” gets.

    Snip.

    Liberals are always going on about the evils of “outsourcing” and “offshoring” — selfish vulture capitalists like Mitt shipping jobs to cheap labor overseas just to save a few bucks. How unpatriotic can you get! So now the United States government is outsourcing embassy security to cheap Welshmen who in turn outsource it to cheaper Libyans. Diplomatic facilities are U.S. sovereign territory — no different de jure from Fifth Avenue or Mount Rushmore. So defending them is one of the core responsibilities of the state. But that’s the funny thing about Big Government: The bigger it gets, the more of life it swallows up, the worse it gets at those very few things it’s supposed to be doing. So, on the first anniversary of 9/11 in a post-revolutionary city in which Western diplomats had been steadily targeted over the previous six months, the government of the supposedly most powerful nation on earth entrusted its security to Abdulaziz Majbari, 29, and his pal, who report to some bloke back in Carmarthen, Wales.

    Read the whole thing.

    More Tanks

    Wednesday, July 4th, 2012

    Since July is July 4th, let’s celebrate the day with a glimpse at one of the most impressive weapons in the American arsenal of democracy: The M1A2 Abrams tank.

    (Not my videos, and some have music and/or NSFW langauge.)

    What it’s like inside loading the M1A2’s 120mm smoothbore main gun:

    (Inspiration: The Oatmeal)

    The Egyptian Military and Existential Threats

    Thursday, June 14th, 2012

    Some people have wondered why Egypt’s high court, doing the military leadership’s bidding, just invalidated the Egyptian parliament, even though the Muslim Brotherhood’s popularity, though strong, seemed to be on the wan. I think the simplest explanation is not that they were afraid of losing their grip on Egyptian society (though that’s probably part of the equation), but that the Egypt’s military leadership prefers not be be killed. I don’t mean this in a metaphorical sense, I mean that there was real (and probably justified) fear that a government lead by Muslim Brotherhood would lead, in very short order, to the liquidation of the military leadership. I think they were facing not one but two existential threats.

    First, as shown in Turkey, when a nation’s existing military leadership also acts as an independent power base, islamists are only willing to tolerate potential threats to their own rule as long as they have to. Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s islamist AKP has moved to put vast swathes of Turkey’s previously independent military leadership on trail for blocking Islamist aims in the past. Egypt’s military is just as strong a power center (albeit one considerably less scrupulous than Turkey’s); how long do you think it would take the Muslim Brotherhood to move against the military leadership after they had consolidated power? My guess is not long at all, and the military knew it too.

    Second, if we take the Muslim Brotherhood at their word, it’s obvious they’re itching for another war against Israel. And why not? They regard the “Zionist Entity” as a literal affront against God, one that must be wiped off the face of the earth. Moreover, what better way to tighten control over the levers of governmental powers than with a war against a hated enemy? There are are all sorts of ways to use “emergency wartime decrees” to eliminate opposition figures and seize direct control of businesses and ministries when everyone’s focused on the military action.

    And who would bear the brunt of any war against Israel? The hated military. Win, and members of the Muslim Brotherhood government are heroes to Muslims all over the world. Lose, and it could only be attributable to traitorous disloyalty by the military leadership, which would be immediately purged.

    And make no mistake about: Egypt would lose. Badly. No matter how they may try to spin the 1973 Yom Kipur War as a victory, the Egyptian military got it’s ass handed to it in all four of the Arab-Israeli Wars. The Six Day War was particularly brutal, with Israel destroying all the Arab air forces arrayed against it, most on the ground, and decisively crushing Egyptian forces in the Sinai while taking minimal casualties; they could even have taken Cairo were it not for frantic pleas of the U.S. and heavy threats from the Soviet Union. Egypt lost the Yom Kippur War as well, but actually managed to bloody Israel’s nose in the Sinai, using effective anti-tank tactics to inflict real damage on the IDF before being overwhelmed. This would be pretty much the only instance where an Arab army stood toe-to-toe with the IDF (even temporarily) until the 2006 war on Lebanon, which Hezbollah would survive despite being badly mauled.

    The Egyptian military knows it would lose any war against Israel for the foreseeable future (even discounting Israel’s likely nuclear weapons arsenal), and it knows the best way to prevent one is to prevent the Muslim Brotherhood from coming to power. Strangely enough, in this instance the Egyptian military leadership is actually acting in the best interests of the nation, even if the end result also happens to be saving their own hide.

    France Recognizes Syrian Rebels

    Thursday, November 24th, 2011

    “In a direct echo of previous events in Libya, France has formally recoginsed the opposition Syrian National Council and proposed that international troops should protect civilians.”

    Meanwhile, those rebels are calling for international air strikes against the Assad regime.

    It’s quite possible that the Assad regime could unravel much faster than Moammar Gadhafi’s regime in Libya did, since whole army units have already defected, and Assad is much more isolated from his country’s Sunni majority that Gadhafi was (at least ethnically) from his.

    France Pushing Intervention in Syria?

    Wednesday, November 23rd, 2011

    So it seems:

    Alain Juppe, France’s foreign minister, has raised the possibility that western powers could intervene directly intervene [sic – LP] to protect civilians in Syria from the Assad regime.

    He suggested that “humanitarian corridors or humanitarian zones” could be established to protect those under attack.

    As the Assad regime presses ahead with its attacks on Syrian rebels, Mr Juppé has become the first senior western figure to raise the possibility of such an intervention. He said the issue would be discussed by European Union foreign ministers at a meeting next month.

    Of course he goes on to say that “full scale military intervention by the west in Syria was not being considered.” But I remember hearing much the same thing about the intervention in Libya, and we all know how that turned out.

    France’s sudden belligerence may seem out-of-character, but they’ve been pissed at Assad ever since he had Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri assassinated in 2005. France has a long history of ties with Lebanon, and the Hariri assassination was just the most overt act in Syria’s semi-successful attempt to turn Lebanon into a puppet state. I have no doubt that France would be happy to knock off Assad if they were sure they had NATO (or at least American and UK) backing and could be sure the job was done right.

    In other news, UNSECO’s executive board unanimously elected Syria to a committee dealing with human rights—even though the U.S. has a representative on the committee. Must be more of that Obama Administration “smart diplomacy” we keep hearing about…