Reference: Truth, Lies and Afghanistan

04 Inter-State Conflict, 05 Civil War, 07 Other Atrocities, 08 Wild Cards, 10 Security, Articles & Chapters, Corruption, Military, Misinformation & Propaganda, Power Behind-the-Scenes/Special Interests

Truth, lies and Afghanistan

How military leaders have let us down

LT. COL. DANIEL L. DAVIS

Armed Forces Journal,

I spent last year in Afghanistan, visiting and talking with U.S. troops and their Afghan partners. My duties with the Army’s Rapid Equipping Force took me into every significant area where our soldiers engage the enemy. Over the course of 12 months, I covered more than 9,000 miles and talked, traveled and patrolled with troops in Kandahar, Kunar, Ghazni, Khost, Paktika, Kunduz, Balkh, Nangarhar and other provinces.

What I saw bore no resemblance to rosy official statements by U.S. military leaders about conditions on the ground.

. . . . . . . .

Tell The Truth

When it comes to deciding what matters are worth plunging our nation into war and which are not, our senior leaders owe it to the nation and to the uniformed members to be candid — graphically, if necessary — in telling them what’s at stake and how expensive potential success is likely to be. U.S. citizens and their elected representatives can decide if the risk to blood and treasure is worth it.

Likewise when having to decide whether to continue a war, alter its aims or to close off a campaign that cannot be won at an acceptable price, our senior leaders have an obligation to tell Congress and American people the unvarnished truth and let the people decide what course of action to choose. That is the very essence of civilian control of the military. The American people deserve better than what they’ve gotten from their senior uniformed leaders over the last number of years. Simply telling the truth would be a good start. AFJ

Read full article.

See Also:

Marcus Aurelius: Col Paul Yingling, Departing

Berto Jongman: Ha’aretz on Who Will Decide on War with Iran?

05 Iran, 08 Wild Cards, Corruption, Ethics, Government, Military
Berto Jongman

The Iran War: Who will decide?

By Amir Oren

Ha'aretz, 5 February 2012

The War of Independence, the Six-Day War, the Yom Kippur War, the Iran War. That's the sequence Defense Minister Ehud Barak laid out at the Herzliya Conference on Thursday in a speech on Israel's fateful decision.

All for the better, it has been suggested, that behind the wheel as successor to David Ben-Gurion in 1948, Levi Eshkol in 1967 and Golda Meir and Moshe Dayan in 1973 is military leader Barak and his assistant on prime ministerial matters, Benjamin Netanyahu. Barak has been quoted as saying, ignoring the law and the cabinet, that “at the end of the day, when the military command looks up, it sees us – the minister of defense and the prime minister. When we look up, we see nothing but the sky above us.”

The immunity zone that Iran is constantly moving closer towards is meant to limit the possibility of a strike against its fortified and dispersed nuclear infrastructure. The Israeli argument is a global innovation in the theoretical justification for preemptive wars. The intended victim usually strikes preemptively when hostile preparations to act are discovered.

The precedents of Iraq in 1981 and Syria in 2007 teach us that the desire for wider security margins made Israel attack while a nuclear capability was still being acquired. Barak's comments suggest an argument for acting even earlier, at the phase of developing a capability to acquire a capability.

Continue reading “Berto Jongman: Ha'aretz on Who Will Decide on War with Iran?”

Berto Jongman: Seth Jones in Foreign Affairs on Al Qaeda in Iran

04 Inter-State Conflict, 05 Iran, 08 Wild Cards, 09 Terrorism, 10 Security, IO Impotency
Berto Jongman

Al Qaeda in Iran

Why Tehran is Accommodating the Terrorist Group
Foreign Affairs, January 29, 2012

Article Summary and Author Biography

Phi Beta Iota:  There are two competing narratives, neither of which is properly researched and documented.  Narrative A (our tentative preference) has all of these Al Qaeda stories as part of a contrived joint Israeli-led but US supported disinformation campaign to justify armed force against Iran.  Narrative B (equally plausible, but the point is we do not actually know) has Iran — these are Persians, not ragheads — well-prepared to do asymmetric attacks via multiple channels including the remnants of Al Qaeda or Al Qaeda posers.  This would including exploding apartments in Tel Aviv.  We really don't know, and it is a rather important question.

NIGHTWATCH: Iran a New Cuba? Worse, a Pakistan?

05 Iran

Iran: Supreme Leader Khamenei made a significant statement of defiance against sanctions and Israel during a rare Friday prayer lecture at Tehran University. “‘From now onward, we will support and help any nations, any groups fighting against the Zionist regime across the world, and we are not afraid of declaring this,' Khamenei said.

Comment: This threat looks serious. Iran's retaliation for sanctions will be unconventional. The hostility of its leaders to Israel looks implacable. Long before Iran executes the threat, the Ayatollah Khamenei must deal with the consequences of losing Syria as an ally and a bridge to its proxies, Lebanese Hezbollah and Hamas. The threat rings increasingly hollow, plus Iran is undergoing a monetary meltdown which provides a motive for the Ayatollah to appeal to the external threat to shore up national unity.

NIGHTWATCH KGS Home

Phi Beta Iota:  Between the Israelis, the US, and Saudi Arabia, Iran can be put in a very tight box.  One can only marvel at the hubris of these governments, and recollect how the same treatment of Cuba produced Che Guevara, how the arrogance of the British in thinking they new best produced a divided India, with Pakistan the rogue and Bangladesh the cesspool, both suffering for going against Gandhi's wisdom.  Governments stink at geo-politics.  In fact they stink at pretty much everything.  It's time for a mass non-violent uprising of collective intelligence.

See Also:

The Health of Nations: Society and Law beyond the State

The full force of the author's thinking comes into full stride in the concluding portions of the book as he integrates new concepts of international law, history, social relations, and new forms of intergovernmental relations truly representative of the species as a whole and the people as a moral force. He laments the manner in which an extraordinarily global elite has been able to “separate” people from morality and from one another, leading to a common acceptance of five intolerable things: 1) unequal social development; 2) war and armaments; 3) governmental oppression; 4) physical degradation; and 5) spiritual degradation.

THE OPEN SOURCE EVERYTHING MANIFESTO: Transparency, Truth, & Trust

NIGHTWATCH Plus: Syria – Iran RECAP

02 Diplomacy, 03 Economy, 05 Iran, 08 Wild Cards, 09 Justice, 10 Security, 11 Society, Corruption, Government, IO Impotency, Military

Syria a Satellite of Iran? Nah….

NIGHTWATCH: Syria, Iran, and the Regional Context

NIGHTWATCH: US Invades Iraq, Creates first Arab Shi’ite State

NIGHTWATCH: Push-Back on US Across AF PK IR SY

Mini-Me: Smoking Gun Documents on Iran From Israel Mossad?

Josh Kilbourn: Dollar Disappearing, US Sidelined on Syria / Iran

Journal: Turkey’s Emerging Grand Strategy

Journal: Turkey Emergent

Journal: The Rise and Rise Further of Turkey (Along with the Collapse of Israel and the NeoCons)

Journal: Stupid Is As Stupid Does–Israel…Again

Journal: Nuclear War Against Iran…Again

Journal: Here’s a Great Idea–Lets Piss Off Turkey

Iran–and the USA–Blew Arab Spring, Both Irreleva

Iran–and the USA–Blew Arab Spring, Both Irrelevant

Chuck Spinney: Israel, Not Iran, is Central Threat in Middle East

Chuck Spinney: Middle East New Geopolitical Map

Chuck Spinney: Paris-Berlin-Moscow Axis Reinstated

Chuck Spinney: Should We Fear Nuclear Iran or Nuclear Israel?

23 Worst Tyrants/Dictators (Yes, there’s more than 23) and Oops, there’s Saudi Arabia..

Phi Beta Iota:  Does not include relevant book reviews.

NIGHTWATCH: China & Japan Coordinate Naval Patrols — DoD Clueless on Future in Pacific

02 China, 05 Iran, 08 Wild Cards, IO Impotency, Military

Somalia: For the record. India, China and Japan have begun coordinated naval patrols off the Horn of Africa with the assistance of counter-piracy mechanism Shared Awareness and Deconfliction (SHADE), Indian navy sources said. This is the first time that these three have coordinated in this fashion, though all have been engaged in anti-piracy operations for several years.

NIGHTWATCH KGS Home

Phi Beta Iota:  The old US model, of a very expensive and now unsustainable “forward presence” including over 1000 “locations” outside the USA, all prime targets for asymmetric attack, can be contrasted with the new Chinese model, of coordination, using shared information as the “loose glue” for building trust.  The US has refused to entertain these notions since they began in force from 1988.  The U.S. military is not thinking seriously about the future — for example, Hawaii as an autonomous state (if not a free Republic) that evicts all US forces as part of an internationalization and conversion to a Pacific “neutral” zone such as China has been thinking about for at least fifty years.  Boneheads will label this idea insane.  The more intelligent will plan for it.  Put bluntly, the US Navy does not have a clue how to be influential in a sustainable (cost effective) manner in the Pacific or anywhere else, absent big bases, hundreds of billions, and tolerance for zero strategic smarts.

See Also:

NIGHTWATCH: China Leads Multinational Intelligence and Operations Initiative within Mekong River Basin

US Intelligence & Policy on China & Pakistan Lack Consistency & Common Sense (i.e. Integrity)

NIGHTWATCH Extract: China-Iran Rail + China ReCap

NIGHTWATCH Extracts: China-Fiji, China Carriers, Venezuela-Colombia Re-Set

NIGHTWATCH: Syria, Iran, and the Regional Context

05 Iran, 08 Wild Cards

Syria-Iran: The Iranian news agency reported Ayatollah Khamenei on Tuesday criticized the US for interfering in Syria's internal affairs, but said Iran would accept political reforms in Damascus. Khamenei said, “Iran's stance towards Syria is to support any reforms that benefit the people of this country and oppose the interference of America and its allies in Syrian domestic issues.

Special Comment: The NightWatch hypothesis is that a consortium of interests has coalesced to deliver a strategic setback to Iran, not over nuclear issues, but in Syria. In this hypothesis, the nuclear issue is less immediately significant for Iran than the probability that the Alawite government in Damascus is nearing its end.

The Syrian government, which is an ally of Iran, has been key in facilitating Iranian communications with and support to its proxies, Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. If the Sunni Arab opposition take power in Damascus, Iran's connection to the Mediterranean would be broken. Iran's apparent objective of achieving an outlet in the Mediterranean through friendly, Shiite states would be thwarted.

The Sunni Arab interests that back the Arab League and are arrayed against the al Asad government in Damascus seem to have decided that the westward expansion of the Shiite heresy and the proliferation of pro-Iranian states and groups in traditional Arab regions must stop at the western border of Iraq. Their bridgehead in Syria must be eliminated by the installation of a Sunni government in Damascus in order to consolidate the Sunni Arab community, or ummah.

The implications for Iran and its proxies are worth considering. For example, if Iran cannot protect its most loyal allies in Damascus, then its aspirations to regional leadership are not credible, regardless of its nuclear program. The fragility of the Syrian security situation also presents Iranian leaders with the choice of escalating Iran's direct intervention in Arab affairs to try to save the al Asad government or accepting the loss of Syria, including the disruption of the supply route to Lebanese Hezbollah and Hamas.

 

Expect more Iranian support for Damascus and more Iranian Islamic Republican Guard Corps personnel to show up in Syria and in southern Lebanon. The Iranians do not appear ready to abandon Syria yet. If increased Iranian support for Syria does not become apparent, that would mean that Iran has accepted that it cannot prevent the strategic setback resulting from the loss of Syria to the Sunni Arabs. One important unknown is how the Baghdad government might be pressured into supporting Iranian strategic goals.

The international media focuses primarily on the Iranian nuclear program, the UN and the sanctions regime against Iran. In this analysis, the international attention on Iran's nuclear program provides cover and time for Iranian leaders to decide what to do about Syria. Both crises threaten to dim Iran's vision of itself as the regional power in the Middle East.

NIGHTWATCH KGS Home

noble gold