A cycle of dishonor

The testimony of many troops today seven years after the invasion of Iraq and those facing a longer term in Afghanistan claim to have feelings of being forgotten. Afghanistan was not a story in the media as widely reported as was Iraq for many reasons however fighting had been consistent, challenging and bloodier than combat in Iraq however coverage was limited in nature. Of those cases of extreme behaviors involving charges or violence or murder appear to be the focus of the media as though these cases are the norm and not the exception. Some critics of the military may generally accuse the services of conducting training which leads to this behavior and it is organizationally acceptable which is not true however merits further investigation as to why it still happens. War naturally affords access to events and activities which the average person would not be exposed to and may have a close relationship with how the new stressors are managed by the individual and not the whole military. This is not strictly a case of mental health issues such as PTSD but may also be factored into the hypothesis that personnel who are non-compliant with general or specific rules of conduct are:

• Mostly linked to having a sense of isolation from leadership and popular support for the war,
• Their own personal social values in conflict with their new environment and lastly,
• The relationships amongst personnel within units in the field.

Shocking displays of cruelty or violence by our troops as documented in cases such as the My Lai massacre shows a parallel between isolation and poor leadership as culprits. Attempts by the media to explain such behavior pointed at the proliferation of draftees in the armed forces, lower education and social standing which were irrational standards of comparison. In the interviews conducted of several veterans belonging  to the C Company, 11 Infantry Brigade for a television documentary[1] the overall tone was of great regret and shame for their part in the killings. Some of the soldiers claimed to have felt alone and without support from the outside world and that they felt they had acted for a variety of reasons but not self-defense. Blinding destructiveness was attributed to their training however some soldiers realized what was being asked of them and took different action. While one soldier shot himself in the foot to avoid following Lt. Calley’s orders to fire on innocent villagers, others defied orders and faced possible disciplinary action.

A soldier interviewed blamed his training to kill partly for his behavior as some form of inevitable outcome but felt great pain in what he had done. He was also suicidal and taking medication to keep him from panicking; his mental condition deteriorating from his experience. Conversely another soldier in the interview (Harry Stanley) clearly stated that he knew the difference between a lawful order and an unlawful one – a clear understanding of military procedural code – and that his fellow soldiers should have been also aware of their situation. The statement that was most revealing of his thinking was that for the soldiers who engaged in mass murder must have known they were doing wrong and should have brought with them the same values; whether they learned it from their upbringing at home, religion, school or even from strangers. Stanley felt justified in disobeying orders because the orders were in collusion with the established core values and was prepared to face consequences, calling the entire affair ‘immoral.’

Once the soldiers who dissented realized their unit would not be engaging V.C. elements but unarmed civilians many continued killing while a minority took appropriate measures to avoid participation. The culmination of the four-hour massacre followed by a simple lunch break showed the men had been desensitized to what they had done. Of the surviving villagers who were eventually rescued by an American helicopter pilot showed the tense encounter between military forces fighting two different wars; one remaining on the straight honorable path while the other functioned in its own world. How one small group of soldiers can work totally separate from their original mission objective compared to the rest of the Army was again based on their leadership and their unit cohesion. It is of little surprise why the civilian world finds these acts of great cruelty hard to understand; the hero and anti-hero clashing almost to the point of American drawing arms on Americans. The discovery of the crimes committed by the members of C Company was reported by a conscientious soldier after learning from members of the company. His reporting of the massacre was based on the rejection of their acts and embracement of core values which had been violated.[2]

“Why didn’t I just walk away?” “The answer to that question was I wanted to be part of the team. I wanted to be a respected Corpsman, but that is no excuse for immorality.” Hospital Corpsman Melson J. Bacos asked before being sentenced. [3]

The case of the shooting of an Iraqi man by a Marine patrol in 2006 mirrors this dichotomy between the honor code and isolationist behavior partly similar to the My Lai case. In this instance the Marines had been on edge about being under attack by an unseen enemy and following the recent killing of one of their friends by insurgents. William Calley refused to admit after his sentencing that he valued his troops’ lives more than that of their enemy and of his frustration at the onset of attacks from an enemy which they could neither see or identify as justification for ordering the massacre. The disturbing fact is that Calley only served four days before being transferred to another base then eventually pardoned by President Nixon. This is the extent of the disparity in sentencing seen by the public and also military personnel that is confusing. Executions of personnel under the UCMJ though well-documented, are not carried out often with the exception of cases in the past 20 years such as fragging (murder); rape malingering, desertion or sedition. A problem with public relations and the military services is the perception that justice is not swift and military personnel can and will act in ways unbecoming. It is not surprising to see this misconception grow on both sides of the spectrum; morality can take on many guises in many organizations not necessarily considered honorable as state previously. The conflict of good and evil only held by a thin line; continues to the present day.

It is difficult to fathom the motivation for the Marines who shot an unarmed Hashim Ibrahim Awad after losing the trail on a known terrorist, replacing one innocent man to make up for the loss of another target Even more egregious was to cover their crime by staging it as the aftermath of an insurgent attack. The testimony from the only dissenter, Hospital Corpsman Melson J. Bacos showed not only a lack of regard for the life of an innocent man but of honorable conduct in general. The Hospital Corps holds the highest set of standards in caring for the lives of Marines and sailors. Bacos – if no one else in the squad had the moral strength to stop the murder – had an additional obligation to take action because of his position but chose to look the other way. What that action would entail depended on whether he felt, as the men of C Company; he was in danger of being killed himself or merely afraid of not being respected by the others. Bacos obviously chose to fit in rather than follow his instincts and internal morality. He was not unaware that what took place was wrong; he chose to observe as consolation for not stopping the murder.[4]

The cause of these brief moments of immorality though not the norm, will always shock both the public and other service members regardless of the level of stress. Troops are vulnerable to a myriad of socio/economic problems as would most civilians however we have a more complex set of dynamics when dealing with combat veterans. Not only the active duty forces suffer from sudden changes of environment but those servicing in the Reserve components face even greater difficulties at home. One of the main problems of the Reserve forces is the loss of jobs due to prolonged periods of deployment and structurally the Reserves are not equal in addressing issues as do the Active services.[5] Motivating an all-volunteer force which feels neglected or marginalized to maintain a sense of purpose and discipline is difficult. Research has accurately identified poor performance, lack of discipline and suicidal behaviors to poor leadership across the board. Still many leaders do not appear to make the connection between the break-down of the soldier following the breakdown of the institution. The war has been rushed because of politics; and the drawdown will show that the ‘exit plan’ when rushed will do the same.

After the Gulf war many personnel returned home separated from their units and unable to deal with any personal or professional issues they had at the time as a group. Originally the military came out with the idea of conducting mass psychological screenings as people arrived back home. To those personnel right after the war – including this author – felt pushed into undergoing psychological screening en-masse upon demobilization. One point to examine was the reaction of most people who were not keen on this treatment as pre-deployment screenings had not been conducted thus for a lack of background or baseline information on service members. This was hardly a proper approach to study or mitigate mental health problems since the Gulf War was a short mobilization carrying the same types of issues we encounter in troops engaged in years of extended combat operations. Though there are numerous resources for all commands and units to access information on mental health screenings and monitoring; there is no standard approach to be used in all services.

Generally U.S. forces are considered some of the most ethical and moral forces with a reputation for espousing human rights. Countries which abide by the Geneva Conventions are an example of proactive attitudes in establishing a set of rules of war designed to prevent and identify the maltreatment of military persons and innocent civilians. Violations of this honor code are addressed by the participating nations accordingly though not all human rights cases are a matter of public knowledge. There is a strong connection between misconduct and lack of accountability. Recently the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen examined how the military services are reactive to negative events rather than proactive in preventing them altogether. His belief that the disparities between the all-volunteer force – less than one percent of the total U.S. population – and the rest of the country have grown far apart and calls for more accountability.[6] Drawing from his experiences as a young officer during the Vietnam War, Mullen was candid about pointing out that leaders are not always right nor are they held wholly accountable for their actions and that of their subordinates. To Mullen, there is a great divide between the military and the rest of the country.

Mullen further emphasized this point by quoting an opinion piece by Richard Cohen[7] on how the US knows little about wars and the people who fight them. Cohen has a valid point that unlike our drafted armed forces that fought in Vietnam, had a draft been in effect for the Iraq war, the public’s support would have been more difficult to attain. This brings up the argument that misconduct amongst draftees could be attributed to recruits who were from underprivileged backgrounds and education null. A Heritage Foundation study conducted in 2008 on enlisted and officer demographics in the military revealed that our armed forces personnel are disproportionately represented from high-income backgrounds. American troops are more educated than their peers in the 18 to 25 years and enlistments from these areas have been on the rise since the September 11 2001 attacks.[8] Mainly, America’s military people are informed and educated enough to know how to conduct themselves and something else must be the catalyst of misconduct.

There must be a sense in the mind of the soldier that at some point in time there will be an end to the war, either winning or losing though losing is not an acceptable standard. Though an unscientific observation on the part of the soldier in peril, knowing that there is less media coverage back home on what goes on in the war must be a low blow to morale. Notice how military-friendly propaganda adverts and movies today take on a less positive representation of military people compared to WWII’s. Great all-American symbols of power and justice are missing from society, further driving the civilian and military sectors apart as there is little or no connection with the war or how we were drawn to war. References to the 9/11 attacks has faded considerably over the years to the point that it has been removed from recent memory. Today, many personnel serving in the military were young children when the attacks took place. This fact may contribute to lack of connection with the reasons for the war, waning support in the media and confusion about their role altogether.

Jaffe points to the lack of recognition of the sacrifices made by our troops now that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are approaching ten years. During his state of the union and two years into his first term, Mr. Obama only referenced our troops and the war effort in six sentences.[9] Mr. Obama’s accounts about the war have been equally brief and lacking in affection in comparison with other presidents. In his last state of the union address in 2008 given by President Bush[10] carried over with greater optimism in the face of adversity. Perhaps his social capital – as he had eight years to cultivate – also carried greater confidence in having a national security policy that clearly defined our presence in Iraq and Afghanistan. His speeches also emphasized a general objective of success – winning – in the war on terror; elements which are missing from Mr. Obama’s speeches.[11] Soldiers have a much wider access to the worldwide web, cellular phones and other technologies even in remote locations than it is believed by the public. Sentiments regarding a weakened economy, anti-war protests and crime and unemployment are not lost on service members. These problems could also add to their long list of stressors. Images of a president who delays meeting face to face with his top field commander in a war zone 90 days give the impression that he lacks regard for their well-being and respect for the military.

Losing Control

Our military’s social capital has been further eroded by the reduction in force of military chaplains and the advent of mental health clinics in theatre. Naturally because of the stigma of being perceived as crazy military personnel often avoid talking about emotional distress. There is also tension of serving in a war zone – in garrison – versus those engaged in combat operations. The misconception that life on the FOB (Forward Operating Base) is easy and field operations is cause for resentment and occasional rivalries but most disturbing is the perception that life in the ‘rear’ is easy. Bases are subjected to harassing fire such as mortar or rocket attacks, car bombs and IEDs and other threats cause a separate set of stressors. There’s much expectation either way for the person in uniform who also has a family life and other things to worry about. The amount of stress goes up; the level of confidence they’ll pull through a crisis goes down.

Not only have the incidence of suicides increased in the past three years, non combat-related deaths other than suicide are also on the rise. The Army’s Chief of Staff General Chiarelli has strong words for this tragedy in that leadership or lack of it is the culprit. Chiarelli believes the Army has been so focused on training for combat that it has neglected its own accountability and often gives personnel too many allowances leading to high-risk behaviors. This is a double-edged sword in that the environment is known to be inherently dangerous yet there is a reactive movement by base commanders to drive reactive safety measures. The pressure from following such rules has done little to encourage responsibility but rather antagonized service members. There is such a thing as cuddling of personnel and focusing on enforcing soft policies over that have no relevance to discipline and good order. An example of a hated policy at home and overseas is the wearing of reflective gear between the hours of low visibility. The wearing of the gear was basically enacted because of a high incidence of non-combat deaths.  Troops encounter death and dismemberment by speeding in tactical and non-tactical vehicles – top the list – falls, are run over by other vehicles crossing roadways, etc. If we looked for a root cause initially we would find it in the lack of situational awareness, especially on FOBs which are lacking in lighted areas where soldiers often walk onto roadways without looking.[12]

Driver error is also a factor which is why personnel hate the wearing of the belts because it is viewed as unnecessary. In addition to the rise of accidental deaths substance abuse can be found as a serious contributor to erratic therefore the introduction of safety gear as instrumental in saving lives is less than appealing. Military brass cites an unrelated New Zealand study on the benefits of reflective gear and comparisons with accidental deaths stateside which is difficult to quantify unless the study is based on war zone conditions.[13] It is little wonder that troops often break rules out of pure boredom and reluctance to conform to what they see are trivial and unrelated to their work. Base commanders are more concerned it appears, with minor endeavors than with training and mentoring personnel.

Soldiers who have completed several tours of combat carry the burdens of adapting to a new set of dynamics in adapting to home and family then returning to an overseas post. The advent of domestic violence, random criminality and other erratic behaviors at home has not stopped units from deploying personnel with serious behavioral issues. Military units are sorely in need of filling combat and support positions and must weigh in the benefits of rotating personnel to war zones for the sake of national security against upholding the law. The main problem is that military personnel are not afforded the right to due process as their civilian counterparts. In the case of the US Army, many believe the service has the right to move people at will regardless of their behavior. This is a problem both for the units in factoring in potential issues in discipline. It is hardly comforting to imagine a soldier committing a felony such as personal crime to show regard for his fellow soldiers. The only way to gauge this adaptive ability is to test it in real life.

While some violations of law could be considered minor to a soldier’s future performance others involving violence could equally affect unit performance. For one service member who deploys for the good of the service one has to consider whether the individual can regain self-discipline and become a good example to others.

The Forgotten Warrior

“Their struggle is your struggle,” he told the ballroom crowd of former Marines and local business people. “If anyone thinks you can somehow thank them for their service, and not support the cause for which they fight – our country – these people are lying to themselves. . . . More important, they are slighting our warriors and mocking their commitment to this nation.” Lt. Gen. John Kelly

Another assault on a soldier’s psyche can take place at home after multiple deployments. Incidents involving violence against war veterans though not necessarily targeted for their service, can take place because situational awareness is diminished. Many a soldier has returned to their hometowns only to find themselves victims of crime. The soldier appears to believe that having survived combat that urban environments will not pose a security threat. Military units are faced with many challenges in rotating their personnel for each tour often placing soldiers with severe problems back into combat. Mental health, marital problems and previous criminal activity are factors which follow the soldier to the field.

Armies and their soldiers are a reflection of the societies they originate from even down to the subcultures within the military services. However a reflection of our society – whether good or bad – the military services effectively shield their world from others in order to function as one. That the organization is composed of individuals from diverse backgrounds is one small part of what makes it unique from other organizations, including communities in the civilian world. Often a young recruit would hear the warning prior to enjoying the first leave from training to bear in mind the uniform represented the organization and that infractions which brought about dishonor or collective shame would be swiftly prosecuted. Many a uniformed person has been instructed to behave with honor as we are all ambassadors of our country. It is with this concept in mind that this essay begins to explore whether our armed forces are lacking in ethical and moral qualities and what causes this shift in attitudes.

Military cultures are honorable in their own right with catastrophic assaults on its institutions which often challenges its overall membership as being generally troubled. Naturally, the old saying that one bad deed could wipe out many other good deeds rings true and for every rare event that takes place. To outsiders this issue often appears as the normal standard. This is the main issue at hand; perception based on misconceptions about military life in general. Protecting the weak, espousing principles of justice and honor, which is worthy of self-sacrifice as well as exacting accountability from those who dare violate this code. While civilians living in cities or villages maintain the rule of law, establish governments and maintain specific mores which guide their societies its people do not all work towards a common goal.

This is the fundamental difference between civilians and military people in that they generally lack the same goals and do not always work together towards a goal and the main proposal of this essay that higher moral code of conduct are a reflection of the cultures they serve and the higher the regard for civilian populations and the rule of law the higher the incidents of consistent positive and ethical behaviors will be exhibited. Only when the situations encountered in combat are of such great ambiguity is the professional ethic of the soldier challenged. How the soldier deals with decision-making that is both moral and ethical depends on his environment, situational security and what is at stake. Clearly, there are two sets of moral standards at play, whatever values the soldier was reared on and those inculcated during the basic training and subsequent assimilation into military life. At some point in time these two sets of values, though very similar in nature, there will be difficulty in making a moral decision under the stresses of combat that will go against personal beliefs.[14]

In essence, militaries are the soul of their respective countries as they are the institutions most likely to advance social, political and diplomatic agendas as well as the pride of an entire nation. This is a very interesting concept to examine as media and popular opinions have incrementally become more critical of the military services as never before since the advent of the global war on terror spurred from the 9/11 attacks. If we compare attitudes towards military forces during different periods of conflict the decline in discipline and regard for others is more evident. Though codification of conduct is found in military oaths, the rules of war and inspired by the US Constitution, the individual is still expected to serve within the confines of honor, diligence in assuming his duties. The concept of professional socialization may serve as the foundation for a soldier’s state of mind and sense of duty to his country may also have originated from the society he affirms to protect.

However disconnected civilian populations are perceived to be from their military institutions, they are still cohesive when the need arises whether it is a matter of fending off a common threat or as a matter of national honor. To understand the nexus between a country’s essence and its army we should examine why they identify with each other in the first place. Knowing merely that armies fight for the political and diplomatic interests of its people is not sufficient in explaining how these institutions are based on a strong ethical framework. Take the Greek code of honor to hubris to wrath to revenge according to Lendon’s work on the reasons for the Peloponnesian war which was basically a battle for total supremacy. In this case the Athenians sought to establish themselves as being of a higher level of honor and excellence over the Spartans; a sentiment clearly shared by the mainstream population. One could hardly imagine the Greeks as anything but competitive in their very culture which translated into the military culture as well.[15]

The source of this seemingly magical concept of power was based on what was considered to be glory which was made palpable and somehow separate from its possessor. Literally honor and glory could be captured by one man from another even in the course of war. More interesting is the measure of restraint within this national honor code in that domestically most people would deal with interpersonal disputes sometimes with violence however resorted often to mediation. Conversely this restraint did not translate well when dealing with external actors and states, as the Greeks were quick to manage disputes with other states with the sword and not give it a second thought. Following any significant event of violence and misconduct the reaction from the public is somewhat detached from the realities of society in comparison with those of a soldier under the stresses of combat. While a person of same age and matching demographics could face public scrutiny differently a soldier is expected to behave under a higher set of standards.

Today, the issue of unethical, reckless or even murderous behavior in the battlefield could possibly be attributed at the loss of connection between the country, its people and its army. The question at hand is whether ethics and sensitivity training given to modern troops as we wage wars in two theatres will curb bad behavior. There is one point of contention in that while there is a wide support for troops from the mainstream population that to those deployed there is a significant disconnect with its culture of origin. Unlike the Greeks who made the attitude of defending the collective honor a matter worthy of war; today the sense of social disconnect between the two is significant. Perhaps this detachment from society is much more than the traditional military culture that causes most of their current troubles involving abuses to prisoners of war, sexual assaults or general misbehavior. Putnam[16] aptly describes the importance of social capital as the element which makes individuals engage in altruism and be active in making social connections. Though Putnam’s research struggles to identify the main culprit in the decline in social participation over several decades, he lists many issues we are even marginally acquainted with today:

• Growth of the welfare state
• The 1960s (to include the war in Vietnam, the Watergate scandal)
• The revolt against authority
• Technology (television, video games)
• Economic hard times
• Women entering the workplace

The connection between countries, their culture and their militaries are deeply ingrained in their national interests. Cohesion however can also function in the same way for groups with less than honorable endeavors – criminals, terrorists, etc. – who would espouse a similar code of conduct for themselves.  The incidence of changing social mores and attitudes has been in decline since the end of WWII with a dip in respect and admiration for the armed forces during the Vietnam conflict. Even as the U.S. entered into the first full mobilization of troops since Vietnam during the Gulf War twenty years ago, due to the brevity of these operations – previous conflicts fell under police actions or irregular warfare such as deployments in Granada, Panama etc. – these wars are different at home than abroad. In the face of unconventional warfare, environment and prolonged combat missions are not the same of our grandfather’s wars. One element present in this equation is fatigue, physical and psychological exhaustion and an even greater need to belong.

The Psychological Impact of Training for Survival

“I am sick and tired of war. Its glory is all moonshine. It is only those who neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, for vengeance, for desolation. War is hell.” William Tecumseh Sherman

Just as the testimony given by the men of C Company in reference to the great remorse they felt after committing such heinous acts, the element of mental conditioning was often brought up. The belief that military indoctrination was to blame for their actions though each soldier was fully aware that what took place the day of the massacre was considered wrong even by other soldiers and by the civilian population. There is some merit to their claim; the object of training is to prepare the individual for survival and performance within the scope of a hostile environment. Conversely, those soldiers who refused to obey the commands to kill innocent villagers and the only wounded soldier – due to his inflicting a gunshot to his foot – avoided falling under the assumption that orders were always lawful.

Fear, terror, post-traumatic stress, battle fatigue, whatever we consider stressors linked to erratic behavior or use of poor judgment may be the internal conflict between the honorable self and the well-indoctrinated mind. Dave Grossman’s revealing assessment on the perils of training soldiers points at the emotional effects encountered in the act of killing that is universally rejected by men but who are pushed to perform due to their conditioning. While surviving combat is the objective of the training what remains within the soldier’s mind may not be functional upon returning home. Clearly the bonds formed during training and subsequent assignments to units can be considered even stronger than most marriages. If these bonds could afford soldiers the ability to fight for longer periods of time and increase their chances of survival then the same could be applied to men who fought for the wrong reasons.

The men also defied the contention that conditioning had afforded them the ability to ignore wrongdoing as though under a spell and continue to carry out their mission. Soldiers also know as part of their training that there are a time when challenging an unlawful order is the lawful thing to do and acted accordingly. The horror of realizing that they would not be engaging an armed enemy but a village of unarmed civilians for reasonable people the men should have conducted a search of the area for V.C. elements; secured the area and moved on. Why the men killed indiscriminately going against military core values as well as personal values remains a mystery; but they did it as a unit even if they were wrong. The conflict lies in whether the soldier kills motivated by group pressures involving regard for their comrades, respect for their leaders, concern for reputation and the urge to contribute to the success of the group.[17] Over many generations, serious contradiction in values are frequently tested within the armed forces in the form of policy changes such as women in submarines; the repeal of don’t ask don’t tell, and the reduction in force of the chaplain corps to name a few.

Self-destructive behaviors

The US Air Force announced in 2010 that it would be eliminating out 15% of its chaplain corps personnel in order to fill combat positions and to maintain only the needed personnel for all job positions. The cuts will take place within the next two years at a time when divorce rates are on the rise as do suicides. Chaplain counseling referrals are important still because they are another social layer military personnel can access that is not associated with mental health problems. In many cases speaking with a spiritual advisor rather than a clinician is potentially more beneficial than addressing the problem in a mental health clinic. As discussed before, personnel will often skew opportunities to talk with a therapist or psychologist in fear that they will be labeled as unfit to serve.[18]

One trend encountered in Iraq is the increased consumption of energy drinks which at first glance appears to be benign but illustrates behaviors similar to drug addiction. Soldiers have these products available at post exchanges and dining facilities practically in equal quantities as water. Water consumption has suffered because of higher consumption of other substances and has a psychological foundation. This is no different than drinking coffee – a much widely consumed drink – to maintain alertness however soldiers consume these beverages at all times of day or throughout the day. In addition to medical conditions developed from this alarming consumption – kidney, gallbladder and dehydration to name a few – commanders do not recognize this escapist behavior. Soldiers are also killed more often due to accidents involving vehicles and weapons discharges or workplace conflicts with other soldiers than from direct combat. Whatever the stressors involved, each individual must reconcile the principles instilled in them through training and select the solution they deem appropriate. Sleep deprivation during combat ops can escalate this environmental response and the individual may survive with no further conflict however that outcome is not guaranteed.

Mental health screening centers are open in Iraq, defying common sense in that personnel under treatment are allowed to carry a weapon – even if taking medication – and remain in theatre. The case of Sgt. John M. Russell, who was convicted of shooting four fellow soldiers and one sailor in a stress center at Victory Base, illustrates the negative connotations in treating personnel in-theatre. It is unknown whether Russell was being treated for mental illness – since he had never been assigned to actual combat – or due to some disciplinary problem which required counseling.

Whatever the cause, the incident spurred on changes in dealing with persons who are in this type of stress, and also brings up the possibility of leaders trying to discipline personnel by using mental health referrals. As in Russell’s case, being sent to a mental health clinic for any reason may eventually work against that unit’s performance and well-being of its personnel. The lack of preparedness is not unusual on the FOB as it is exemplified by the attitudes outlined by General Chiarelli of giving personnel a pass on some behaviors then trying to hold them to higher standards. Assignments on forward bases though not considered combat – are still stressful places and the perception is that in the rear the safety factor is higher; a common misconception. This means that spiritual counseling – which affords a service member complete confidentiality – could go become more difficult to access when needed the most.[19]

Replacing traditional values including access to clergy for mental health approaches has a higher chance of developing more substance-dependent individuals. Increasing mental health treatments versus offering counseling more in concert with the serviceman’s personal values may be counterproductive. Stress clinics are unsuited for treating psychological casualties perhaps because there are many facets to mental problems for which modern psychology is not yet prepared to treat.

Ethics training is not a new development in the military services yet it has been absent from the ranks for generations and regaining importance since the beginning of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan  It is puzzling that as we struggle with our own moral dilemmas that other countries may benefit from our example. American culture is often misperceived yet emulated worldwide, even by detractors who consider us a bad influence. There is a concerted effort by the US to secure a more stable region for African countries by providing military professional instruction to their armies. An even more significant initiative is to assist these countries in changing attitudes of rape as a tool of war. Rape is not an organizationally sanctioned tactic in general as believed by some anti-military circles however it is widely used and a clear example of how ethics training could be effective in molding forces into protectors of a country and not destroyers. This is of course easier said than done however it is equally interesting to see that US forces have been tasked with showing the armies of African countries about reducing and eliminating rape as a tool of war.

There is no doubt that sexual assaults are a serious problem and the services are actively being prodded by the congress as well as independent organizations to take preventive measures. Overseas the proliferation of television and radio adverts about sexual assault prevention, reporting and counseling. Sexual assault prevention programs are well-established throughout the services and are structured to work at the unit level supported from the top.  U.S. forces enjoy a more stable environment than soldiers in African countries where the nexus between securing the homeland and protecting its people are lost in translation.

While the US is a very moral country, one must reflect on the amount of effort and investment involved in teaching another culture not to rape or to engage in human rights abuses. The focus is placed on foreign armies and their use of rape as a tool while US forces are in need of the same attention even if the numbers are not as high as those of African countries such as the Democratic Republic of Congo. US AFRICOM is in a difficult position of indoctrinating foreign troops with western morality while suffering some of its own. Perhaps the same studies conducted in Africa on sex assaults should be conducted with US troops if the problem is indeed worsening.

It is wise to notice that of those nations where rapes are predominant the level of professionalism is lower – less training, mentoring and accountability – than those of the western militaries. Little is known on data and mitigation plans published for male on male rapes. For these statistics are monitored but heavily guarded by the US Army mainly because the effects of such cases coming to light are far too shocking for the victims. The US military can be considered to be in the forefront of tackling sex abuse yet it is neglecting to investigate its root causes.

To teach an entire continent that violence against innocents is an egregious act that has eroded the relationship between the warrior and the soul of a country is quite a feat. The US military also has to deal with its own problems stemming from sexual assaults in its ranks yet it is encouraging news that we can still inspire other militaries to become defenders and not aggressors of the state. This will be a daunting undertaking though; with a six percent rate of sexual assault committed by military personnel, the rest are attributed to the militias which are numerous and culturally difficult to reach. A total rehabilitation of a foreign culture seems an unnecessary endeavor since we continue to face changes in attitudes within the public and military sectors in American life. There is a need to continue to deliver the message to military personnel of all ages about reporting inappropriate behavior and exercising self-control but the trail does not stop with the rank and file. That is where leadership comes into play.   

Leading by example 

The concept that the public will scrutinize the behavior of military people down to the lowest ranking soldier emphasizes the importance of grooming moral and ethical troops. Former Commandant of the Marine Corps Gen. Charles Krulak’s paper on leadership exemplifies the individual Marine as prepared to assume positions of authority at any level. Krulak also expanded the concept by calling it the “Strategic Corporal” which is built on moral character and must be present in order to build ethical leaders. The Marine Corps’s approach to leadership is to instill core values, pride and professionalism in the recruit or officer from day one. The removal of leadership killers like micro-management and encouraging mentoring to him, are paramount in allowing Marines to improve even from their failures. The idea is to prepare personnel to be able to make decisions even in times when their values are tested as they face the ambiguities of combat.[20]

In contrast, Robinson pointed to the perils of training personnel to be so moral as to actually develop the perception of moral superiority from the nation they serve. The key in this case would be to develop ethics programs matching personal backgrounds and culture while avoiding training personnel in elitism. He makes Admiral Mullen and General Chiarelli’s case in citing Andrew Bacevich’s The New American Militarism. In a poll conducted by Bacevich in 2003 officers general officers had voiced concerns over the perceived moral superiority felt by military personnel. With two thirds of personnel polled who believed military personnel have higher moral standards than that of the country they served brings the problem to full circle.[21] It is possible that we are over-socializing people within an organization to believe they are so detached from the rest of the country. One could loosely conclude that military personnel have been trained to be too moral – but only within the scope of their social and professional boundaries.

Regarding ethics classes for deploying personnel, on average they last about a week depending on the military unit mission, resources or agency and they cover topics ranging from personal protection, situational awareness, terrorism, basic local customs, etc. Robinson brings up a good point in that when dealing with multinational forces; cultural standards will differ, calling for standardization of ethics. This is the same argument of training foreign armies not to use rape or massacre non-combatants; no single country will see all things moral with the same set of eyes.

Conclusions  

At minimum pre-deployment classes, literature in the form of leaflets with country information and even pocket foreign language phrase books are distributed to troops. Clearly this is a good initial gesture in preparing troops for deployment to foreign lands during war or peace to assist them in understanding the culture of the country. However well-intentioned this approach is inefficient and leaves many gaps in attitudes towards people of other countries and other Americans. One could use the example of ambassadors in uniform at the beginning of this essay to explain how unprepared troops and our society are when engaging other countries in war.

If we consider our military services to be an extension of American society then the education about countries hostile to the U.S. as well as our strategic partners should be of a wider scope than a week-long class. To be even more inclusive the American educational system should have continued to address foreign language studies in high schools and the deeper understanding of the cultures as preparation for contact with the outside world. In general Americans leave the educational system unprepared for the advent of foreign travel, relations because we lack understanding of other cultures.

Though morale amongst the more elite units remains strong the disdain for even suggesting that restraint – a moral trait already in practice – can be regulated is even stronger. While the objective is never to attack civilian populations in a war zone, incurring civilian casualties is inevitable though it can be avoided in higher numbers. The issue with changing the rules of engagement has been polarizing since the resignation of General McChrystal and the return of General Petraeus to the battlefield. Focusing the rules of engagement more on protecting the populace has the right feeling yet it is erroneously applied as it increases the likelihood of incurring more casualties on our side. This is yet another stressor added to an already demanding role in Afghanistan where our forces face a non-conventional enemy and a completely different set of rules.[22]

Combat troops must be able to discriminate between the threats and the non-threats in the field, which is part of their training. However imposing the untenable burden of holding fire even while facing certain death themselves to save innocents is unconscionable. It is a sad reality that both wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have been guided mainly by legal experts more than by field commanders who still must request permission to engage viable targets. This is done for fear of involving innocent parties which so far is not as effective as one would expect. We send men and women to war and after all their training they are not allowed to perform their duties to match their training but to accommodate other agendas once on the ground.

It is not news that for the most part military personnel discover that one set of standards is practiced back home while a different standard rules in the field. However procedural differences we may experience while deployed they are not a blanket excuse for misconduct or mismanagement of troops. On the contrary, if the principles by which we train military forces were allowed to remain consistent and leaders expected to mentor and be held accountable for their personnel, we would see more encouraging results. Military service for many young people has had consistent positive impact on their behavior in general and a greater influence in their lives post-service. By introducing challenges to old standards of conduct and policy to mirror those of the civilian world, we are dangerously treading water.

Using the military services as the environment for testing social experiments we have built the foundation for more behavioral problems in the future. If we are a mirror of society, then as its mores decline so do the mores of the military and without a common frame of reference regarding ethical behavior. While no program can address all facets of human need or concern follow-up training and accountability mechanisms must be in place in order to ensure compliance. The dismantling of the military culture to afford other sectors of society access is a devastating way to weaken our ability to fight, and perhaps an unintended consequence. Even rumored policy shifts like the story of the restraint medal – meant to reward a soldier’s effort to avoid killing innocent civilians – can easily derail an already strained fighting force into thinking its sacrifices are no longer relevant.

If you were the US where would you stay, in Iraq or Afghanistan and why?

I’d say if given a choice, Iraq would probably be a better option.

There are two important elements that we are ignoring in fighting wars on two fronts:

• Clear mission objectives
• Completion timelines

Unfortunately we are experiencing great strains in our national security capabilities to fight insurgencies operating both in weak and fairly stable countries. We are practicing a doctrine of telegraphing our strategies to our enemies which poses greater dangers to troops on the ground. There is no clear long-term plan to stay in Afghanistan at least from what I can see however Iraq, though touted as a done deal, troops out by December 2011, is still very much the focus on the US government and one has to ask why?

If we observe carefully there have been many visits between Joe Biden and Nouri al-Maliki over the past year to discuss our future ‘relationship’ which means we’re here to stay. The level of diplomatic interactions between Iraq and Afghanistan are quite different; if we’re leaving Iraq then the focus should be more on Afghanistan yet this is not the case.

The building of the new US embassy compound in what is left of the Green Zone two years ago was the first sign that the US would have a long-term presence in this country. Furthermore Obama’s order to phase out military troops is not a complete truth; there are still thousands of US troops in support and advisor roles who will be here for a while. The US State Department’s initiative to take over many of the military outposts as they are vacated by military troops is meant to replace the troops with private security personnel is a red flag. The interesting factor is yet to be explored as the Iraqi government screens and approves of security contractors and they all basically function under one label. I don’t know how that will fare over time; state must be positioning itself to conduct sort of a peacekeeping mission shifting away from the occupation force approach. That is up in the air right now.

There is one conveniently interesting set of events like the return of the Muqtada al Sadr, now a newly minted Jedi coming home to stir up the political climate. His rhetoric points at a run for office or a power-grab in Iraqi government as he has clearly stated he’s willing to work with the current Iraqi administration. This political shift will certainly make Iran’s open entrance into the equation much more attractive because al Sadr will have Iranian support even if they do not agree on religious grounds. This is a strong trend also used by terrorist groups; outsourcing security, operations, political activism, assassinations and so forth. Iran is already in Iraq and could use a stronger ally as al Sadr campaigns for a piece of the pie. Lastly, the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) states that the Iraqi government has the option to request that troops or security remain in country if needed. This is not something that the media broadcasts but it is a telling detail that while we’re leaving there is room being made for us to stay. The SOFA once meant more protections for US military and civilian personnel yet that provision was changed after the US – not the coalition – returned power to the Iraqis. This meant that Iraqi laws apply on the spot without the benefit

Iraq has many advantages that Afghanistan lacks:

• Though ruled under a dictatorship, there was a semblance of a centralized government and more receptive to a federalized government model
• The concept of being Iraqi was stronger even amongst people of rival ethnic and religious groups – they had more of a national identity
• A strong economy and trade relationships with other countries (not isolated) and a rising middle-class
• Their infrastructure may be in shambles however many programs implemented via state department and NGOs are steadily engaged in reconstruction
• There is a visible change in the attitudes of Iraqis regarding the growth of businesses, banking industry

Why not Afghanistan

Afghanistan has three elements which makes it a less desirable area to continue the deployment of troops:

• Lack of infrastructure to create a stronger economy over time
• A long-standing resentment against the US and westerners for abandoning them after the Soviets were ejected from their country and
• Lastly their tribal culture will continue to weather any foreign influence/interference in local affairs

It doesn’t matter whether Afghanistan has potential to become a more stable country. Changes regarding security, the harboring of Taliban fighters and porous borders which allow intrusions from Pakistan’s intelligence services are too disruptive of what we are trying to accomplish there and is a never ending battle. If we want to eliminate this issue then we’ll have to enter into a fight with our sort-of-friend Pakistan. Do we want to do this? India is a friendly state and emerging economy and rivals Pakistan so we’re treading in rough waters trying to keep either side from taking a path which could result in actual conflict with the US in the future. Pakistan is waging its own internal war against domestic terrorism – though there are plenty of other foreign influences at work – and could use our help. It’s a no-win situation. This region is too unstable to slow or stop harboring of terrorist elements which is always a threat to global security.

Centralized government models are not feasible in Afghanistan at least not for another generation plus the Obama administration has already pushed to keep its promise of a pullout. This spells more trouble ahead for our troops fighting the Taliban because security will definitely be challenged on their way out. This theatre of operations was ignored by media for a long time and there were many calls to strengthen troop numbers which did not happen until after this past elections and even then numbers are insufficient. Now we’re both in a hurry to pull out merely as a political move yet we’re still sending more troops. How a 1,400 contingency of Marines – as DOD is currently looking to cut personnel numbers within active duty members – will work towards stabilizing Taliban-controlled areas is questionable. Since the Obama administration chose not to augment troop numbers as recommended the chances of mitigating the continued growth of terrorist networks are slim. The objective at hand appears to be nation building which really has less to do with the GWOT than anything else and has gravitated far away from the original purpose of retaliation for 9/11. The conditions overall are not ideal at all for this endeavor and since this is still a shooting war security is not guaranteed either from the afghans themselves or from coalition forces.

Sources:

Iraq, Iran to open a free zone in Wassit http://www.iraq-businessnews.com/2011/01/11/iraq-iran-to-open-free-zone-in-wassit/

Can federalism stabilize Iraq?

http://www.twq.com/04spring/docs/04spring_brancati.pdf

Contours of a large and lasting American presence in Iraq starting to take shape

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/12/AR2011011204225.html

Rush for results in Afghanistan may undermine aid goals

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-South-Central/2011/0113/Rush-for-results-in-Afghanistan-may-undermine-aid-goals

U.S.-Japan ties should deepen, Gates says, citing threats from China, N. Korea

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/13/AR2011011306736.html?hpid=moreheadlines

Iran’s Role in Collapse of Lebanese Government May Serve as Warning for Iraqis

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/01/12/irans-role-collapse-lebanese-government-serve-warning-iraqis/

The many times I complained that some people in Iraq I observed acted like the meal in front of them could be their last, that is exactly how they are wired. They’ve gone through food shortages, tyrannical rule or religious persecution – just about the things Americans have not experienced – and try to put myself in their shoes.

What if I couldn’t work and had to depend on others? Living alone who will look after me? Many questions come up this time of year and if personally I don’t thank the All-Mighty for what I have which I take for granted, at least I’ve made an effort I just wanted to share some of the wonderful moments experienced through these traditional rituals, even in a war zone. This is a brief tribute to those who fight and those who look after them; but mainly the many ways that people celebrate. The problem with these big holidays is that everyone works harder before and during the day than the rest of the year. Still, there’s always room for some funny moments.

The week began with a positive note as the new quilts arrived at the Stables. This place is like those old westerns – hardly a soul and tumbleweeds are a tumbling. Maybe not the kind we have at home but some are actually pretty and peppered the rather dull landscape with a splash of color.  Striker or what’s left of it is nothing like what I described in my post on NoVacancy blog “The Story of the Quilt” Frankly, watching troops depart theatre is both joy and sadness. They are our reason to be here; to take care of them so as they go it brings home the reality that we are indeed in a final transition. It is eerie to enter the old Stables building and see no one sitting at the receiving desk or passengers lounging on the couches or wrapped in one of the blankets provided. There is only a large coffee maker left there and boxes of MREs have been shipped over to East of the VBC where the transportation yard was relocated. All that is left is the building and offices. And the quilts.

The new and outgoing Mayor Cells were scheduled to open the first shipment of quilts and did so about 30 minutes before everyone else showed up. When we got there Natali was in the process of unpacking them and so was Gunny – and the rest of the staff – who were searching for a nice spot to display them on. Of course she runs a tight ship and things have to look good so she said hang them anywhere you want now; it’s her job to redo the quilts once the audience is gone. Hammer in hand I was invited to hang a Navy-themed quilt , one of three which earn special mention here – so you know I’m biased – but you may view the rest of the collection here . I will update the quilt arrivals later on.

Now on to Thanksgiving!

I got the knock on my door around 2130 hours after I had retired for the day. My colleagues took a couple steps back and away from my door perhaps expecting me to lash out. I told them sorry, there’s no Halloween candy left. They smiled. Boss says to call him. I cursed. They chuckled. I cursed some more. Why? As I put on shoes the boys chuckled some more and remarked; “See, I told you she’d come back to the office!”

Not only would be facilitate a VIP visit to our dining halls on turkey day once, we would do it twice (rehearsal and performance) to make damn sure nothing goes wrong. And one thing Mag, there can’t be any hiccups.

I was like, um, haven’t even had that holiday meal yet. The corporate bosses wanted to see how the troops would be fed so it was a show nested inside of another show. The stuff that goes on behind the scenes as the great feasts are being prepared for the troops sometimes turn out to be good experiences. Still, I went back to my quarters, stressing over the next day’s events.

I was having several eye-twitching moments…that vein on my forehead protruding dangerously.

Our meals, for camps far removed from the main Victory Base I have to say are the best. There was word of an open pit roast pig soiree held at the transportation yard but too far a drive. Food stories start to flow in. Smaller camps hold their own dinners; mostly the military leadership prepares the feast for their troops. These affairs are not held in large and crowded dining halls but in smaller camps away from the flag pole. Civilian camps do the same and sometimes combine them. Then there are the rounds; people go from dinner to dinner and sample different foods and mingle with other people. Work continues though at some point everyone finds a quiet spot and enjoys these treats. The farther away from the flagpole we are the better, everyone agrees with that. They’re also out of the way from media coverage – though the last two times we had a big traffic jam it was because of the VP’s visit. This time no one came out to visit. Maybe they’ll clog up traffic for the Christmas holiday. I say ‘away’ from coverage not because good stories are not desirable for publication but because recent history showed that VIPs create more trouble, slow down the process and many people frankly end up not getting a decent meal because of enhanced security.

Everyone is doing something, cooking or donating food for a holiday meal. Sometimes most people make their rounds and collect food along the way. By the end of the day there are too many sources of good chow and not enough stomachs to handle it. Cows have it all don’t they?

The dining facilities at one special forces camp and Sather Air Base left us very impressed. These are probably the best meals and decorations I’ve seen in a long time. One of the soldiers came up to our group asking if we had taken pictures of the place and we said yes. He was beaming with enthusiasm at the thought of the big holiday dinner and described how the staff always went above and beyond to make the experience wonderful. This was no exception. The staff had to be coaxed into a  – perhaps their only break of the day – as they cleaned up the place. (This visit was done at breakfast time)

I made a brief stop to talk with the Mayor early in the day between breaks from an already hectic morning to see how he was doing. This is a let your hair down moment for the boss to cook for his troops and civilians. These units will be home for Christmas so this last holiday had to go without a hitch. Many got a decent chuckle today. The outgoing Mayor of Striker (now Cropper) invited everyone to a home-cooked holiday meal at the old medical building – we have a surplus of empty structures since our DFAC was closed – and word got out that he’d be doing the cooking. The biggest attraction was the use of a stove purchased by Saddam for his mother to cook the meal on which was a rare treat.   The Colonel said someone at general quarters didn’t want the old stove around and he exchanged the thing for a newer model. I wouldn’t mind owning one myself. We wondered how much it cost Hussein to ship it from Italy.

I promised to stop by during the evening meal. I didn’t know if I’d make it for the meal itself or to take pictures – as I always do – but wanted to see if that turkey he was planning on frying would turn out alright. I don’t recall ever having fried turkey before. That and our heavy equipment and warehouse people had put on a feast back on camp. Now that was a meal sure to be excellent (due to previous experience) and with any luck we would be able to stop by and collect some vittles.  Which happened much later in the afternoon.

Turkey stuffed with jambalaya was new to me but some of the best I’ve had. Fresh cucumbers and radishes from the Iraqi market were a bit hit with some of us (produce often arrives from Kuwait frozen) and baked beans spicy enough to make hair grow. Friendly chatter then back to work.

Off to the air base. The grand entrance at the air base well worth the wait even for people who don’t like big crowds but the decorations alone made up for the traffic jams. There was food everywhere. The staff barely had time to stop and chat, running the first round of the lunch hour with military precision. There were a lot of smiles. Mind you, my colleague and I went over there to take pictures and get some salad…yeah I know that’s bullshit but I actually did get salad and other things. The food was fantastic but we got some snacks always keeping in mind our private meal invite back ‘home.’ Facing too many options and getting hungry, we made out with samples then vowed to return for dessert during the evening meal. Sweet potato pie dreams…

Well it’s the end of the day per se and everything went well today even if it looked like we would crash and burn (no chance). I waited impatiently for the shift to end so I can have some private time with a slice of sweet potato pie and a cup of tea. I took a walk down the street to see how the Mayor’s party was going. Tired is not the word to describe my condition but it was a good day. Nothing says ahh like success. The phone stopped ringing and emails stopped popping in my inbox. Boss is very very happy. I’m very very tired. The protruding vein on my forehead was receding slowly as night fell.

The meal back at the Mayor’s was a success for the exception of the deep fryer (the Colonel had planned on frying a turkey as well) the deputy said as she washed dishes in the back of the kitchen. So much for that fried turkey and so much for my appetite. There was a good turnout. I bid my goodbyes and headed out. The lady at the air base said their sea food chicken gumbo was better than ever. I said sure, they serve it once a week, it’s good.  She insisted that I have some. So gumbo would be my nighttime meal…and pie. Perhaps her enthusiasm over this weekly fare was fueled by the occasion but I figured why not?  Exhausted from a long day doing escorts and taking care of other duties colleague and I drove back to base again.  

This is how some of us spent our holiday. Happy Thanksgiving.

And yes, the gumbo was better than ever.

Base closures in a war zone can be very challenging. We’ll see what the gods of destiny bring us.

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Just a quick post to catch up on this week’s goings on (more positive than health care guy in my other post).

Gunny Sizemore insisted that I stop by sometime during the day by the stables to meet a certain gentleman who was passing through Stryker before heading to Afghanistan. Gunny mentioned that I would like the guy, a retired Navy man and Vietnam veteran embedded with our troops as a combat photographer. I sipped my coffee more to help my mind not drift away from the class we were there to attend that morning but promised him that I would make the effort to visit him. I don’t turn down an invitation from Gunny mainly because the people he meets on the job are sometimes just too amazing not for one to be curious. I’ve known of many a retired soldier or wounded Marine to leave home and deploy once more to fight in the war. This is what great warriors do and they have my deepest respect however, I find it amusing that every person he describes to me is an impressive, sometimes rather menacing guy who’s been through hell and makes people stand back when they enter a room. He talks about tough men who inspire many others and I have to believe him. The hard part is hoping I don’t piss someone off as I’m not the most pleasant person to know.

Around 0800 C. and I returned to the office and grabbed my mug, got a coffee refill and headed out taking advantage of things being quiet but Gunny said he had not spotted his guest and figured he was still asleep. I would return later on if he called me on the radio and promised him to come back.

When I got the call he asked me to come in the office and he gave me a background on this person and showed me a picture. At least the picture matched the description; the guy did look like a tough old guy. I figured anyone who fought in Vietnam could be enjoying life elsewhere but those who choose to come here or Afghanistan to document the war seem to me never stopped their service. About half an hour later, Mr. Wade walks up to the office window, says hello and starts off to use the phone because he was waiting for word about his travel. I just leaned on the counter, waiting for the introductions; I wasn’t going to come out and say anything. The complaint that the post office people refused to mail his package was based on the fact that the postal service here is set up for military and US contractors and even when he showed his passport and other papers (as he is an embed) he was refused service so he came back lugging a small box and placed it on the counter. He would have to handle that matter later; the phone call was more important. What was even funnier was the man didn’t even miss a beat or noticed me at all. I just smiled. I like grumpy people.

Gunny managed to get him calmed down enough to convince him that the package would be taken care of and he did. A call to his assistant and managed the issue while waiting for the call Gunny insisted Mr. Wade comes back into the office and he turned to me and made the introductions. The handshake was nothing to write home about; his look was more like why-am-I-meeting-you than anything else. I made sure to tell Mr. Wade that I was actually there to meet him at Gunny’s insistence and mentioned my Navy service. I’m not going to go ad-naseum about the discussions that made Mr. Wade take a liking to me but we all had a decent laugh. He was more relaxed then and wanted to stick around. One thing that happened to Mr. Wade was the IED attack he survived in 2008  during one of his last patrols before rolling off his assignment. My short visit turned into a much longer deal with management showing up and meeting with Mr. Wade and the party grew once two young soldiers who work the Liaison desk who asked who the man was and after Gunny explained what he does they stuck around. Mr. Wade showed us several of his videos and at some point his call came through and he stepped out and told us that he would be heading out in the morning then took a seat and continued to talk about the videos without missing a beat. After the videos (and I had planned to take pictures anyway) we all posed with him as much as I hate being in pictures I didn’t mind. He’s an American doing more than documenting what goes on in the war; he is doing what many of us would like to do and return to service in some other way. Mr. Wade was very thankful to management of how he was treated at the Stables – which I guarantee is the same treatment everyone else receives – was the important thing about our visit making his stay before his march into the unknown are more pleasant experience.

Mr. Wade is en route to Afghanistan and I’ll keep track of him and his adventures.  Look forward to hearing from your deployment, Jim.

Jim’s embed history

Co-founder of Veterans against union busters

2/30 Infantry “WILD BOARS” BATTLE OF THE TRAFFIC CIRCLE 3.30.08

1/6 Infantry JSS UR & JSS Sadir City Iraq 2008

1-35 Armor Regiment FOB CASHE Iraq 2008

5-1 CAV Bravo Troop, Charlie Troop TIMMIAGE AMBUSH 1.7.08, Iraq

82nd Airborne, 82nd BST  FOB HAMMER, CASH, JSS SALLI, Iraq 2009

1-158th Infantry Afghanistan 2009

1-77 A.R., Camp Adder, COB SOTO, JSS UR 2009

4-2 Inf. Alpha Troop JSS AL Amir Iraq 2009

1ST CAV 3-227 Bravo, Fox Troop JSS Taji, Iraq 2009

The CIA has a daunting task in Afghanistan and sometimes a sign of success, as is the case with a COIN approach is that retaliation is a powerful weapon the enemy is not afraid to use. A lot of the CIA’s problems could be attributed to bad publicity, as this causes a decline in public support of an agency designed to keep things from the public. This is not to say that the entire system is compromised to an extent because of all the constant reforms between administrations that do not allow the IC to make progress or even get around to implementing changes.

Where a minority of Americans may be fully aware of this conundrum – and I say this considering the average person has little or no knowledge of the nature of intelligence work – the ruling majority puts sufficient pressure on officials to force the disclosure of declassification materials aimed at making research easier. The administration is spearheading what appear to be strangely illogical projects put on hold long ago because of lack of importance back on the table. The inappropriateness of announcing added rights to foreign police forces, disclosing strategy on a national stage before deploying troops and other slip-of-the-tongue moments can be either incredibly incompetent or deliberate. There is little room for a gray area here. What is happening today is the result of bad policy and lack of understanding that information is more important when it is not made public. This should be a time for restraint but we are fast approaching the limits of reasonableness with the disclosure of information.

Why exactly is the botched bombing of the Delta flight the CIA’s failure? If the information is collected, analyzed and delivered to the appropriate parties then it is up to the end user to take action. The nation’s indications and warning system may not be perfect, as it is composed of people sifting through information and making it all make sense for decision-makers – but it is alive and well. There are scores of intelligence personnel working these cases but in spite of all their efforts producing timely intelligence is a daunting task. It is reported that the president had prior knowledge of the potential threat of an attack during the holiday season yet the attack went on as planned. The fortunate fact that the bomber failed to complete his mission due to a technical problem does not downgrade the situation. The Customs and Border Patrol have finally admitted there was a second arrest of a passenger after bomb sniffing dogs were brought on the scene. Obviously the existence of a second suspect elevates the magnitude of the attack.

And yes, it would have been just the kind of impact the bad guys achieved on 9/11 had it been successful on Christmas. Recently a story broke out that Britain’s MI5 had intelligence on Abdulmutallab’s extreme views since 2006 however held on to the information to protect his human rights and privacy. There are always two sides to any coin.

Umar-Farouk-Abdulmutallab

When laypeople point fingers at intelligence for failing to perform its job there is a great deal of ignorance involved, and that includes many lawmakers. The U.S. indications and warning system may not be completely efficient but if given proper attention at the cabinet level these warnings can actually be factored in to fit theoretical scenarios that will be stored for use in an emergency. Maybe the players are different than those in real life but at least there would be some sort of strategy available. There is nothing more frustrating than trying to work a problem without some background information. In the absence of concrete idea of how to proceed, the knee-jerk reaction is to blame intelligence.

The CIA chief is fighting back; something that could be good or bad, depending on how much trust one can put on him. The ball was dropped by the administration, not the agencies and if so, why? The successful attack on a CIA Forward Operating Base (FOB) in Afghanistan has dealt a huge blow to COIN operations in theatre. Now the CIA loses much needed personnel plus they have to fight for its reputation at home. In addition to this tragedy one must stop to examine the very possibility that prisoners released from GITMO who may have had access to photographs of CIA operatives provided by their attorneys could be apt to use that information to further identify more officers in the field. How information is shared between agencies will always be something that needs to be integrated so that the specific organizational mission of each agency is not compromised but intelligence useful to others can and will be made available. This is an old problem. As police do not like to reveal their information sources on the street to say, federal agencies because that could compromise the sources’ security, so do intelligence (civilian and military) people.

General Jones’s contention that the intelligence failure report will shock the public is rather fascinating. Considering the fact that the information on the bomber’s potential threat was known by White House staffers but was not disseminated promptly due to holiday absences. Furthermore, and this is the reason many people miss so many things all the time – because they do not read carefully and thouroughly – General Jones cited research conducted on the intelligence errors everyone is talking about and something hit me. In one article there was a brief mention of an assessment from the Center for a New American Security. This private national security think tank is something of a contradiction, so it merited further investigation. The CNAS was founded by former Hillary Clinton advisor Michele Flournoy, who switched battle tents when Clinton’s campaign began to die down and has been on Obama’s payroll since, scoring the post of Under Secretary of Defense for Policy. She and Kurt Campbell, the Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, co-founded this think tank. The list of illustrious people such as John Podesta (gag), Secretary of State Clinton and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. Flournoy is someone to watch. She has been a strong advocate and campaigned heavily in 2009 for the closure of GITMO and for transferring some of the prisoners to the United States.

Her argument, after facing staunch opposition from many in the Congress, was that since the U.S. exptects other allied countries to take prisoners then it should take on some in order to do its fair share. She said this to the Chicago Tribune in 2009. Flournoy calls herself a ‘progressive centrist’ who believes that the U.S. (okay, Bush) made a mistake in calling Iran part of the Axis of Evil because Iran had extended support followin the 9/11 attacks. I must have been distracted that day, dodging airborne attacks, panic in the streets and burning buildings because I do not recall that. She thinks the U.S. should engage Iran and Syria in dialogue and would  be happy to re-regulate and reform the Intelligence Community because we do not have a infrastructure capable of handling national emergencies.

SIDE NOTE: That’s strange. Mr. Obama needed three months of silence and reflection before he announced to General Stanley McChristal of his Afghanistan troop surge plan yet it took him a day or so before he ordered the deployment of Navy ships and US Marines to help in the relief effort in the embattled Haiti.  If that is not a national and international emergency response capability, then what is? We have the sound infrastructure in place for that and for intelligence work; the problem is lack of accountability.

Ms. Flournoy also advocates the expansion of duties of the National Security Council, which General Jones leads. I do not know what that means because this is the body of minds closest to the president, so if they need more involvement in the decision process what does that mean? When General Jones said that Americans would be ‘shocked’ at the intelligence errors involved in the panty bomber case that is cause for great worry. These guys do not know any different. The current NSC is not George Washington’s War council, not by a long shot.

Which brings us to the next problem. As Ms. Flournoy said, it is our fair share to bring the terrorist animals to U.S. soil as a gesture of good faith. But what about the impact of having to host criminal trials The U.S. Attorney General brings to the table a two-pronged dilemma affecting national security and it appears that he is either unaware of the negative consequences. One is the prisoner transfer and the other is trials of these terrorists in America.

The 9/11 trials

This is by far the biggest story affecting both law enforcement and national security and has extensive consequences. The debate over whether the 9/11 terrorists should be afforded civil rights under the U.S. Constitution and tried in civilian criminal court or treated as enemy combatants and tried by a military tribunal. Recently Virginia Representative Jim Moran (no one knows why he thinks he must issue an opinion) wrote for the Washington Post this weekend in favor of conducting one trial of a high-profile terrorist and perhaps more to follow. This is equally and dangerously disturbing.  When the enemy has a better grasp of how to use its oponent’s laws against them we’re in for a long battle.

Loose lips sink ships

The declassification of documents transparency: telegraphing our national security strategies

What happens when transparency means revealing how we do business on the war on terror versus the transparency of the work done by the Congress right now? There is little or no use for declassifying what are called historic documents. I’d call this whole thing a historic mistake that will have greater repercussions in the present and will continue in the future. Not just disclosure of documents but of processes and tactics as we can see in GITMO detainee releases. While AG Holder worries about giving these terrorists due process, they are planning their future return to combat operations. This is a proven fact that these individuals, once released, return to combat to kill more troops. We have every power to hold them but instead we give them privileged treatment. There is a terrible price to transparency when it goes all wrong. Let’s look at the war on terror. 

What happens when transparency means revealing how we do business on the war on terror versus the transparency of the work done by the Congress right now? There is little or no use for declassifying what are called historic documents. I’d call this whole thing a historic mistake that will have greater repercussions in the present and will continue in the future. Not just disclosure of documents but of processes and tactics as we can see in GITMO detainee releases. While AG Holder worries about giving these terrorists due process, they are planning their future return to combat operations. This is a proven fact that these individuals, once released, return to combat to kill more of our troops and even infiltrate our forces as informants and interpreters. They are called recidivists now as one would refer to career criminals and not classified as enemy combatants. We have every power to hold them but instead we give them privileged treatment. There is a terrible price to transparency when it goes all wrong. Let’s look at the war on terror.

In Mexico, as federal troops are being deployed to fight drug cartels in the countryside the decisive strategy has spurred on an even greater wave of violence. This is a gruesome example of what transparency can do if used incorrectly. According to Mexican law, the names of people who are part of Special Forces working drug cases but in this case the president made the choice to disclose the name of a young sailor who died during the raid which killed high-profile drug scumbag Arturo Beltran Leyva. After all, even Mexicans could use a good dose of hero worship given their dire situation. Soon after the young hero’s name was announced, cartel members tracked his family down and killed them; this is the wrong transparency. CIA officers killed in Afghanistan and disclosure of field agents during the 9/11 trials could deal a terrible blow to clandestine operations in support of the war on terror. This is not just new people but also many retired military and CIA have returned to duty to fight in the war; their identities could be revealed as a consequence of the 9/11 trials in NY. It would behoove us to remember that all this does is open the door to a whole new set of vulnerabilities that the U.S. will not be prepared to mitigate. 

Part V: Relinquishing our sovereignty

Sources:

Cockup, Conspiracy or Just Plain Confusion? Sorting Out Olberman’s Segment on Flight 253

http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/01/richard-wolffe-says-white-house-sees-flight-253-fallout-as-intelligence-lapse.php?ref=mp

Ex-CIA agent: Threat from Al Qaeda greater now than on 9/11 (VIDEO)

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/01/03/ex-cia-agent-threat-from-al-qaeda-greater-now-than-on-911/  

Don’t worry; it’s only $400-$600 million to try terrorists in NYC

http://biggovernment.com/tag/ksm-trial/

US knew of airline terror plot before Christmas

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/29/obama-systemic-failure-allowed-terror-suspect-board-flight/

Chicago O’Hare to install full body scanners

http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local-beat/ohare-airport-security-full-body-scanner-80286952.html

CIA rejects charge it failed to share bomb suspect intelligence

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.0b9d18298e2dbb867621b1953baa5023.01&show_article=1

Officials: Somali Tried to Board Flight With Explosives Last Month

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,581459,00.html

Spy chiefs turn on president Obama after seven CIA officers are slaughtered in Afghanistan

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1239941/Spy-chiefs-turn-President-Obama-seven-CIA-agents-slaughtered-Afghanistan.html

Report of 2^nd man cuffed from Flight 253 confirmed

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=120803

Are planned airport scanners just a scam?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/are-planned-airport-scanners-just-a-scam-1856175.html

Anti-terror official stayed on ski trip after learning of failed bomb plot

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/01/07/anti-terror-official-stayed-ski-trip-learning-failed-bomb-plot/

National Security Adviser Says Airline Bomber Report Will ‘Shock’ Americans

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/01/07/national-security-adviser-airline-bomber-report-shock/

Eric Holder and releasing GITMO enemy combatants

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/01/23/pay-attention-to-eric-holders-law-firm-and-gitmo-detainees/

Detainees Shown CIA Officers’ Photos at GITMO will probably return to combat at some time in the future, once released, and identify these operatives in the field.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/20/report-detainees-shown-cia-officers-photos/

Mystery surrounds new Obama order on classification

http://www.politico.com/blogs/joshgerstein/1209/Mystery_surrounds_new_Obama_order_on_classification.html

Hit men kill Mexican hero’s family

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126149866534701603.html

CIA Officers Are Killed in Afghan Attack

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126219691445210575.html?mod=WSJEUROPE_newsreel_world

Bomber Who Killed CIA Members Reportedly Invited onto Afghan Base

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,581676,00.html

Detroit suspect watched since 2006

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=121976

Law enforcement acting ‘stupidly’

Things don’t look as romantically rosy for law enforcement as it did back in 2001. There seems to be a decline in public opinion or even the portrayal of police in general in the media. So far the smaller federal law enforcement agencies have escaped great scrutiny. The U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, America’s top cop, is hardly a popular guy. In fact, he is probably the most damaging spokesman for law enforcement. His statements regarding his office’s expert ability to try Khalid Sheik Mohammad on U.S. soil rather than allowing him to be tried by a military tribunal has sent shockwaves throughout the country in disapproval. It’s not that Americans do not want the man tried but to bring him back to the scene of the crime will have greater consequences than bringing bad memories of the attacks. That and the fact that considering the quality of the defendant’s usual company the possibility that an increased flow of people into the city will increase those conditions found in terrorist activity.

There is a concept in both police and security work that is actually common to both ends of the professional spectrum. Threats are ever evolving and searching for ways to counteract security measures. If we have a situation that requires more security at one place then resources are moved to cover but that also causes a gap elsewhere unless a city has unlimited resources and personnel and that is not something ever seen. Most invariably there will be a gap in security, a sector of the city or town that cannot be protected but that is usually has a lower threat level (low crime area for example) and will lose that coverage. The change could be for one day or one hour of one month. The timeline actually poses another problem; if police cannot cover some areas because they have been diverted to a more important event then who is watching?

The KSM trial will draw resources in New York, probably command police volunteers from other jurisdictions, National Guard units and other federal law enforcement. The fear and concern of the citizens of NYC is legitimate. The Alexandria Virginia trial of Zaccarias Moussaoui caused such logistical issues but this is not about traffic jams or the inability to secure a parking space at the strip mall down the road. A sudden change in the security management must be something planned ahead of time and must function in such a way as to prevent situations from getting out of control. These are not predictions but a basic contingency plan. Scenarios such as hurricane Katrina spurred on such a massive deployment to establish or restore law and order. This has to happen quickly and personnel must be prepared to handle civil disobedience and violence to name only two. The recent quake in Haiti is a prime example of how quickly law and order can end and expose and entire city to threats imagined.

Law enforcement acting ‘stupidly’

We are undermining the authority of the states to administer the rule of law. Cops can’t do their jobs without fearing the president’s judgment or create bad publicity. A case in point is the story of Harvard professor and close friend of the president, Henry Louis Gates. The much-publicized incident of mistaken identity, clearly an honest error, stirred up race relations all over again. The president’s remarks that the police had acted stupidly in spite of the fact he did not possess all of the details of the case shows a willingness to tear down the reputation of a police department, its personnel and their mission. The police did their jobs according to the law and remained professional. Nothing more could have been asked of them but stern commentary from the president escalates the situation from reasonable and launches it into a theatrical production. The responding officers were both black and white and possibly one of another ethnic background, all professionals. Still, the police are portrayed and bumbling fools who cannot discern a burglar from a scholar. The constant criticism of law enforcement agencies may be detrimental to their functioning and the performance of police officers and the public’s perception of authority.

The Secret Service and party crashers

The Secret Service has been targeted with image-damaging publicity since the nighttime incursion of the Salahis as they managed to dodge some of the tightest security in the world and crashed the Obama’s first big social event. This is not normal as most people see that but as I said in a previous post I wasn’t convinced the USSS had dropped the ball on their own as I believed it was a White House staffer who broke protocol. This incident was then followed by a seemingly innocent event attended by a couple who were detoured from the White House tour and into a private breakfast for veterans. No big deal, no one got hurt. That is not the point and that is not a joke. Regardless of how many Americans feel about Mr. Obama, he holds the office of the president and all necessary measures must be taken to protect him. Just as we pay attention to dry runs conducted by terrorists on commercial flights, we should be wary of impromptu appearances by people who just want to gain notoriety into the president’s inner circle. To protect the president is to protect America’s stability. Even though in security there is no such thing as one hundred percent mitigation of threats at this level of security picking out those who belong versus those who do not should not be difficult. The Secret Services’ code is to maintain professionalism and protect information and even if they’re face with their own extinction; the service will continue with its mission. If people working at the White House cannot follow protocol and protect the president then who can be trusted?

Money woes

While DHS spends money on technology other areas needing security with less fancy equipment remain unattended. Many states are experiencing a shortage of security personnel and police due to funding problems and that includes courthouses and security for judges. It is inconceivable that courts have little or no force protection measures in place or personnel to enforce them because of budget cuts. With all the massive spending on domestic programs  why are many city and local law enforcement forces getting smaller? There are courthouses with security equipment but no personnel to do screenings and judges who must provide their own security by carrying concealed weapons. Where did everybody go? Specialized training and weapons cost money and also need public support as police undergo the transition from old fashioned law enforcement into a national police force designed to combat domestic terrorism which is pretty much another type of war. Clearly there should be other options available to help make up for smaller budgets.

Budget cuts across the nation are baffling since so much money went to upgrade police and other first responder capability. Here’s a disturbing window into the future for police recruitment in the face of budget cuts and perhaps a. For those who always wanted to be a cop move to Chicago. There is an initiative to eliminate the police entrance exam altogether to give minorities are better chance of passing and being hired. Things are looking up for law and order after all; the arrival of fairness in the absence of aptitude will help maintain the peace. Everyone gets to be a cop now. Maybe the Salahis will join the police force too. No wonder law enforcement is starting to look like the Keystone Cops. This is a bad state of affairs.

Airport security

One note about TSA; there is a difference between smart security and security. While one assesses, plans and implements protective measures and stays fresh by reviewing every approach used, the other becomes stale and routine and basically ineffective because it fails to grow with and around the threats. This is not to pick on TSA and its employees but to point out the logistical issues encountered by the agency. Airport security can be, like most security environments, adjusted to meet or exceed potential threats or it can be designed to remain static (which would make little or no sense). The emplacement of security technology, from biometrics to x-ray machines to the low tech ID check personnel must be constantly trained to maintain their knowledge base. In fact, it takes much more skill to read body language, conduct field interviews of travelers (cops do this all the time) and using empirical observation if working a static post. Why the TSA allows people to go through checkpoints and remain there for any period of time is beyond comprehension.

Many of the security practices we see at airports do not seem to keep passenger safety in mind. The last thing anyone in this business should want is to let people who have been screened to remain in the same area where the screening was conducted. This goes on all the time; passengers linger in line, putting on shoes or belts and security officers do not guide them through to leave the area. When a real emergency hits and officers at these checkpoints go into lockdown the first ones to be in danger will be those stuck in between. TSA seems to miss a lot of small details that are crucial to preserving order and protecting the passengers because ultimately their purpose is to protect people and prevent threats from entering the country.

Instead what often see is limited vision and training and controlled execution of security measures. In English, where we run out of the human element – common sense – we make up the difference by introducing technology to balance things out. Whole body scanners get 50-50 approval/rejection in the country especially after the Christmas Day attempted bombing. Again, this is sliding the security scale much higher than before believing the security we had before was dysfunctional but we do not examine how it was managed. It is almost as though no one thinks of matching the technology with the impending or potential need; that or purchase technology because other cities have it and the money is there. High tech is desirable as long as it is a complement to well-trained individuals but does not build a good public image of police and when something does not work well it shifts blame to the gadget.

Crisis management

Filling the gaps in security is most important now more than ever. Personnel must be trained to cultivate a keen search and surveillance skills and be trained and certified in these areas. The introduction of events such as natural disasters – hurricane Katrina and the recent quake in Haiti – can pose great challenges to domestic security with the deployment of special police, medical and military personnel to those area and drawing attention and coverage from others. This is a calculated risk. Many Guard and Reserve personnel are first responders (cops, firefighters and medics) which will help deplete an already taxed force at home. Lastly, when we see in the news that DHS will increase travel security that only means restrictions instead of careful monitoring of well-established criminal or terrorist behaviors which is a very narrow scope of search. There are many declarations from the agency that more Air Marshals will be deployed on flights.

That is the first problem; we like to telegraph our weaknesses in the media that we do not have sufficient numbers of personnel to fly these missions. Sending Marshals on every flight imaginable will never be feasible or reasonable. People who fly are like combat troops; they need rest and they must be rotated out of duty before returning to the mission. The service has many problems to deal with from within but also flushing it with more agents in a hurry will not wholly cover airline safety. There is no discussion anymore on pilots carrying weapons onboard to help supplement the shortage of Marshals. That happened only because many Marshals were making mistakes on and off duty that made the agency look bad therefore pilots had to be enlisted to fill in as well. Which is it? If the Marshals are not good enough and we have to depend on the pilots then a commercial pilot’s mission changes.

The airline should have its own armed security personnel and not depend on federal agents to perform the job. Airline personnel are well-trained to handle emergencies; this is crucial in the survival of their business. Fatigue in this business is deadly. What TSA has done for years is subject these agents to long hours and many equally restrictive rules from within that get in the way of conducting their missions with few rotations. Flying is not an easy environment for security. How the agency is going to send more agents on flights quickly seems more wishful thinking. If fully-trained Marshals are not available the government has the option of outsourcing these position and filling them with personnel from other federal or even local agencies. Again, one would have to rob Peter to pay Paul to fill in gaps that just keep opening every day mostly due to mismanagement and not directly due to personnel negligence.

Part IV: The Failures of Intelligence

Sources:

Does Obama regret saying the police acted stupidly? Nope.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/The-Vote/2009/0724/does-obama-regret-saying-the-police-acted-stupidly-nope

Could this be the beginning of a national police force?

Secret Service drops the ball allow party crashers in without being cleared

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/26/white-house-party-crashers/

Police May Scrap Entrance Exam: Report

http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local-beat/chicago-police-scrap-entrance-exam-80790827.html

Having lost her deputies, judge packs a gun

Courthouses across nation struggle to pay for justice — and security

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34793838/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts

The FBI’s annual report & justification for budget

http://www.justice.gov/archive/ag/annualreports/ar2003/p2sg1.htm

NJ boy, 8, on terrorism watch

http://wcbstv.com/local/8.year.old.2.1425568.html

U.S. takes charge in Haiti with troops – aid

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34867185/ns/world_news-haiti_earthquake

U.S. to further raise airline security, official says

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34864969/ns/us_news-airliner_security

TSA: Security fails to spot gun at Montana airport

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100114/ap_on_re_us/us_airport_security_breach

Eh, maybe, maybe not. Perhaps we’re not looking at this story objectively. In fact, there is too  much emotion involved in how people are reacting to the possibility that this international law enforcement organization could become a centralized police power. Unless there is such a drastic plan in place, it just isn’t feasible but some things are always worthy of investigation. INTERPOL’s purpose is to serve as a hub for information sharing, intelligence, training of law enforcement agencies worldwide. It’s no different than cops back home; when a call takes them to another jurisdiction they call ahead and ask the guys at the other end to be on the alert. INTERPOL is pretty much like that; it helps agencies track statistical data as well, assists in the search for fugitives and their apprehension. INTERPOL in that context is not a bad thing. The fact is that amending EO-12425 is not as significant in itself because there are some other elements missing at this time.

If you look at INTERPOL from a different perspective, say, how could they actually accomplish having all of these powers that we are so afraid of then we must see how that is structured. One of the agency’s accomplishments in 2009 was the successful introduction of the INTERPOL passport. This passport is designed to function just like any other passport however it has been enhanced to afford expediency for teams or individuals who are invited to any of the member countries, all 188 of them, to pass through customs and passport control without interference. I suppose these individuals must be thoroughly vetted before being given such easy access into a country. The US sends plenty of FBI people overseas to assist in counterterrorism investigations all the time but I am sure that these teams can get expedited passage with their credentials. Still, law enforcement travel is tricky so countries track these individuals. Does such a passport mean fast entry but how about monitoring movement in country? Maybe there is something in the language of INTERPOL’s Secretary General that got me thinking:

 “When member countries ask INTERPOL for assistance to prevent, investigate, or respond to any terrorist act, serious crime or natural disaster, the safety and security of their citizens may depend on INTERPOL being in place as fast as possible,” said Secretary General Noble.

“That a person is travelling with an INTERPOL passport for official business should be all the information a country needs in order to grant them access. By agreeing to waive visas for INTERPOL passport holders, member countries will ultimately be assisting themselves,” added Mr Noble.

INTERPOL is entering the much needed aspect of police peacekeeping and peace-building operations. You’ve probably heard the term peacekeeping more in relation to police actions such as the intervention in the Balkans of the 1990s. I am saying ‘much-needed’ for a legitimate reason. The importance of an international police force that will help military elements establish and maintain the rule of law in occupied countries has been debated and suggested for many years. The invasion of Iraq in 2003 at first appeared to be beneficial and it was expected that the population would be cooperative. The intention is always to establish the rule of law as soon as combat operations are stable or stop in order to assist the local people re-enter a period of rehabilitation. War is stressful and disrupts the normal lives of people; that’s a given. Stability operations in Iraq went awry five weeks after Coalition troops invaded. Forget the search for Saddam Hussein; the changes going on in Iraqi society took place quickly and violently. Suddenly Iraqis were left with the euphoric feeling of freedom from a tyrant then moved on to the realization that without those social and political controls they could do what they wanted.

This is a good thing because there is a need for a dedicated constabulary to deploy not only in peace time but during the stability phase following the cessation of military operations. It is also the stuff the U.S. is attempting to do in Iraq and Afghanistan; to rebuild their countries from the bottom up. The International Criminal Court – which seeks jurisdiction in the U.S. as it has in other countries – would be more involved in American law and order at all but then it needs an enforcement branch in order to be effective. At any rate, something is missing in the equation. The ICC goes hand in hand with the UN (under war crimes tribunal, not for the persecution – prosecution of individual parties but of countries) and INTERPOL is wrapped nicely inside that circle. The question is how realistic is the possibility of these forces deploying to the U.S.

Theory:

Get acquainted with these terms; stability operations or nation building.  

To have a foreign police force deploy to the U.S. it must be due to an invitation by that country or international police authority for them to come. What is different here is the absence of a crisis big enough to warrant such an invitation. After all, that is what happens to other countries, such as it happened in the Balkans, Iraq or Afghanistan where political and military instability threaten the stability of neighboring states or faces total collapse. Given the number of small incidents occurring nationwide after the Delta flight attack, a power grid shutdown during winter, an outbreak of the flu in Florida, civil disobedience, etc. could be considered emergencies or crises that can be handled by a peaceful people and there is no need for an international intervention. What if the economy collapses?

For that matter, what about the KSM trials in New York and the possible trials of other terrorists on U.S. soil? The unknown elements of security threats have not been explored for these scenarios beyond the logistical issues that come with coordinating law enforcement, corrections and courthouse protection, not to exclude issues with traffic and a higher volume of human traffic into these venues. Maybe as events accumulate over time things will not look so good for us. Scattered terrorist attacks may give the perception that we are in such trouble that we must outsource our security from others as we have done before. If such a police force is vetted so have passports that allow them to enter any member country easily, does the U.S. have any input on their background?

Worst yet can someone’s background be falsified? Are we sure those cops are really who they say they are? Can terrorists infiltrate large police forces with legitimate passports?

Just wondering.

Sources:

Executive Order 12425

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/executive-order-amending-executive-order-12425

Order on Interpol inside U.S. irks Conservatives

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/31/world/31interpol.html

The White House press release of executive order establishing the council of governors

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/president-obama-signs-executive-order-establishing-council-governors

OBAMA WATCH CENTRAL
Obama gives foreign cops new police powers in U.S.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=120363

http://www.interpol.int/

http://www.interpol.int/Public/ICPO/PressReleases/PR2009/flashPR2009118/PR2009118.asp

Someone's got an actual war plan

The indecisiveness in giving the go for the troop surge in Afghanistan as badly needed has reinforced the foundation of weakness in our military capability or at least the perception of weakness. One thing that previous presidents did not practice as much was transparency. Of course transparency means many things to many people however transparency ends when it comes to the process of sharing information and in telegraphing our every move to the enemy. Transparency can sometimes shed light on what needs to remain quiet and cover what needs to be public. The U.S. military services are under the political gun in that after the Abu Ghraib scandal and CIA rendition programs were made public that everything the military does must be heavily scrutinized and overall the price for doing what troops were trained for but instead their service could be considered at some point to be a liability and not an asset.

It doesn’t help that members of Congress such as Jack Murtha or Harry Reid can make claims of misconduct of our troops and that the war on terror is lost. The Tokyo Roses are alive and well. Here is the trend: if you are a bad guy and get caught, complain about being abused and possibly avoid harsh punishment. The lone survivor gunman of the Mumbai terrorist attacks is an apt pupil of the Abu Ghraib scandal. After engaging in histrionics and affirming he was ready to go to the gallows and face his punishment, he recanted his story. Obviously, his confession must have been obtained through torture. This is the same guy who was captured on video smiling like a kid at a candy store after slaughtering innocent people. Given this example, every bad guy who wants to have an easier time in prison and perhaps avoid harsher punishment will use the abuse strategy and shift blame on their captors. A different fate awaits the heroes who capture them.

A good example of what happens when strategic information is publicized is the situation with the Taliban. In Afghanistan the Taliban is taking the lead in using the proposed troop build-up as propaganda to encourage Afghans to turn against foreign troops; so much for winning hearts and minds. Two things that should be of great concern must be examined here; the role of the combat troops on the ground and their handling of prisoners and the troop movement and pull-out timelines. Senator Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky), the Senate Republican Majority Leader, recently visited troops in Afghanistan and met with military leadership. Though morale and professionalism are high amongst our troops commanders are concerned about the disparity in treatment of enemy combatants. The FBI has been known for reading prisoners Miranda Warnings prior to interrogation, further confusing those who are entrusted with conducting interrogations or even taking custody of these prisoners.

In spite of all this negative treachery back home, the good guys scored a big win this week with the dismissal of the Blackwater shooting case, angering Iraqis. Well, Iraqi forces are guilty of committing plenty of abuses of the Iraqi people but no one wants to showcase their faults. Rules of engagement for troops have changed, endangering their lives and limiting their tactical and strategic effectiveness. The Iraqi police are better armed and trained and ready to go join insurgent groups for part-time and kill American troops. Before long no one in the military will know what their purpose is and may cause breakdowns in discipline. It happened to the Soviets in Afghanistan and so this is an important issue to tackle before we create thousands of living casualties in disease or mental illness or in their treatment when they return home. Many military personnel go home and change uniforms just to come back and continue to fight in private industry. So they make more money, so what? They fight in support of uniformed troops and augment our forces and their time in service and training are actually invaluable so yes, they are paid more. At least their skills are kept on our side of the fence. Attacking the reputation and role of contractors is unwarranted and only meant to lower our expectations and damage the reputation of the armed forces. Their companies make the investment to re-train, house, and transport these individuals into combat and they are worth it.

Here is the trend: if you are a bad guy and get caught, complain about being abused and possibly avoid harsh punishment. The lone survivor gunman of the Mumbai terrorist attacks is an apt pupil of the Abu Ghraib scandal. After engaging in histrionics and affirming he was ready to go to the gallows and face his punishment, he recanted his story. Obviously, his confession must have been obtained through torture. This is the same guy who was captured on video smiling like a kid at a candy store after slaughtering innocent people. Given this example, every bad guy who wants to have an easier time in prison and perhaps avoid harsher punishment will use the abuse strategy and shift blame on their captors. A different fate awaits the heroes who capture them.

Navy SEALS and other cases of prisoner abuse

Our enemies are getting a nice break from their evil deeds plus a good dose of justice. The case of the US Navy Seals sucker punch heard around the world has the trappings of upper leadership selling out. The fact that the Seals successfully captured the animal is not being recognized and the case to prosecute them is moving quickly enough now that Petty Officer 2nd Class Jonathan Keefe, of Yorktown, Va., and Petty Officer 1st Class Julio Huertas, of Blue Island, Ill will be tried in Iraq after all. The killer mastermind of the Blackwater ambush Ahmed Hashim Abed will get the unfair chance to play his game at home. In contrast, 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammad will be tried in our judicial system – and projected to cost millions of dollars and stretch over the next five years – and play his game on our turf but with more advantages.

What a spectacle that will be in the Iraqi press! Even though this is a military Courts Martial the current Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) may end up working against the SEALS because any alleged crime committed by either military or civilian foreigners can be prosecuted by the Iraqis. This trial may not give the media enough access as the KSM trial will which should raise many questions about the fairness of their treatment. Before the U.S. handed over sovereignty to the Iraqi government the SOFA at least offered legal shelter and a liaison for anyone accused of a crime or any other offense; not designed to forgive bad behavior but to prevent a U. S. citizen from being tried under a foreign power’s constitution. Why? Without the SOFA in place that means an American could suffer unusual or extreme punishment, torture or incarceration without a trial and perhaps be denied representation. Justice does not mean the same thing in Iraq as it does at home.  Come to think of it, this is an election year in Iraq (December) and the troop pullout in progress is even more politically charged. Like many political campaigns Iraqis will have many expectations and an anti-American sentiment can only fan popular opinion on whether they want a U.S. presence there.  

A Lone Ranger

The case of the Navy Seals and many others such as the Lt. Michael Behenna (US Army) are examples that armed forces at war are impacted by events and news from home, poor foreign policy and the restrictions placed on field commanders to show restraint in engaging the enemy unless the right elements are present. This is a war, not a police action. The choices available to these soldiers and sailors are limited and must be assessed on the spot which is something most people could never relate to let alone the amount of stress that places on troop performance. Lt. Behenna was convicted of premeditated murder of a known Al Qaeda operative in Iraq. The Lt.’s mistake was to value his own life over that of a known terrorist. The prisoner attempted to kill Behenna who instead killed him in self defense. Behenna is serving a 20 year sentence and his case was again reviewed by a military clemency hearing held on January 7^th in Arlington Virginia. His parents and girlfriend managed to get some quality time with the panel to request a reduction of his sentence. The man should go back to combat, not prison. There are many other service members going through similar situations. Terrorism is been rewarded while punishing valor. This has to have a great impact on morale and performance but somehow we have enjoyed the blessing of the pride and professionalism of the all-volunteer force to fight for our freedoms. However true, one must wonder just how long before that too breaks down.

Part III: Keystone Cops and Harvard Robbers

Sources:

Blackwater dismissals risks hurting Iraq relations

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126229226969112429.html

Mumbai Gunman says he’s ready for gallows

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,534342,00.html

Mumbai Gunman recants confession: alleges torture

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,580524,00.html?test=latestnews

Rules of engagement changes affect military effectiveness

Penalizing military for doing their jobs. There will be a clemency hearing held on January 7 2010.

http://www.chandlerswatch.com/2009/12/07/new-information-on-the-lt-michael-behenna-case/

Visit Michael Behenna’s defense page

http://defendmichael.wordpress.com/

Lt Behenna’s parents attend his January 7^th army clemency  board

http://newsok.com/edmond-parents-urge-clemency-for-lt.-michael-behenna/article/3430356  

Obama’s Iraq Plan has December elections as turning point for pullout

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/26/washington/26troops.html?_r=1

Referendum on SOFA could boot U.S. from Iraq in 2010

http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=63314

It is in the mass movement across the border that affords many other people, classified as Other than Mexicans (OTM), the access they seek. The revolving door border situation is attributable to many causes, most of them political, however the tasking rests on the overburdened shoulders of federal and local law enforcement. Population control is the issue not being handled as millions of aliens move about the country virtually undetected or unreported.

Open U.S. borders are isolated and remote areas which pose a security threat that most countries would mitigate quickly and effectively through consistent enforcement and prosecution. Were the process reversed, as has occured to a small number of individuals visiting Mexico, one violation of local law will swiftly result in jail time. To Mexicans it is a duty to protect and preserve their sovreignty. The same attitude and political foundations must exist in a country inorder to protect it. Aliens move about with ease, unlike back home where someone with a uniform can and will stop them to demand to see their ‘papers.’

So far in the United States, that is not a reality and if ever implemented would probably catch many a non-citizen however there is always a downside to every mitigation; at some point a citizen may be asked to show proof of citizenship at random, a move that will whittle away slowly at our freedoms. It is difficult to discriminate between one group of people which poses no major threat and another group which blends in, is well funded, knows American culture and can survive better on their own. Like any incursion, almost reminiscent of the stay-behind teams in Vietnam; there must be someone on the inside to help facilitate not only entry into the country but free passage through the country and make them as invisible to law enforcement as possible. Sometimes this is a daunting task because concealment is tricky in many communities and the introduction of new and strange people into any town U.S.A. will raise some suspicions.

But then a strong tolerance must be built in some parts of the native population to help ignore an alien’s presence and make them no more than background noise. This perception change is one of the factors aliens can move about unimpeded for the most part because people simply ignore them. There must be a support network carefully implemented before someone can enter the country. It is a reality that this network is composed of Americans. Aliens know U.S. law. They know the law better than a citizen for two reasons:

1. Knowing the law enables them to plan how to counter act it by finding loopholes to help them stay
2. Knowing the law enable them to fight detention and/deportation through arbitration or socical campaigning

Some laws appear to be designed with the purpose of making illegal entry even easier. The Obama administration has accomplished what the Bush administration had refused to support. It will be easier for people entering the U.S. at any entry port to claim refugee or request asylum and can prove fear of persecution in their home countries will have the chance to be released in the U.S. Of course, immigration and human services swear that these individuals will be held in custody just the same while their petitions are undergoing review. Eventually it should be important to find out the limitations and the type of accountability of the asylum seeker because it’s only logical for a government to know where these people are. So far there is not information on how this initiative will work in real life and what issues that will bring to the table.

Even with a legal avenue for aliens to stay in country there are those who guide them through rough terrain, facing incalculable dangers from fauna, topography and weather to venture into the U.S. This is done with no regard to the safety of those crossing the borders. The Transborder Immigrant tool works with GPS technology and was designed by faculty members at the University of California at San Diego (SD, you just lost points with me). The technology is supposed to exonerate those using it to pass incursion into the country by sending out warnings and information. Even if there is no direct involvement that should perhaps qualify as a felony to assist them in entering the country illegally. First, the intention may appear to be very benign but it is also posing more dangers to these people in that it is possible the information is incorrect or not updated and the main purpose of the phones, which by the way are bought with grant money paid for with public funds – are taken to Mexico then sold for around $30. For those who cannot afford the cell phones there are always McCain water station manuals along their route.

When asked about the irony of using public funds to insert the GPS into these phones one of the leaders of this insurgent movement commented:

“There are many, many areas in which every American would say I don’t like the way my tax dollars are being spent. Our answer to that is an in-your-face, so what?” says UCSD lecturer Brett Stalbaum, 33, a self-described news junkie who likens his role to chief technology officer.

Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio knows all about fighting insurgency-type operations. In his quest to serve his community his aggressive and high-effective ICE raids and the numerous arrests of criminals legal or otherwise, has been fighting two issues actually. One was the limitations of his power in accordance with the 287g which basically allowed local and federal agencies to work together as local cops. DHS’s Napolitano saw he was too good at it and handed down a sanitized version that would slow down his progress. Aparently his raids are yielding excellent results and his ability to work and jurisdiction should be curtailed. Arpaio has been instrumental in the arrest of 30,000 illegal aliens jailed in his county One his detractors is Lydia Guzman who heads a group named RESPETO (Respect). Her organization conducts intelligence and surveillance work using texting technology to warn Latinos and other Hispanics of Sheriff Arpaio’s operations. She says it’s about protecting people from racial profiling, which is one of the main complaints that got DHS to cut his powers. This is a technique used by the British against the IRA. Teams composed of soldiers in civilian clothes were posted throughout Irish towns. Soldiers would take up surveillance inside abandoned buildings and such to observe people they were after and when they spotted them a call was placed to their command center, there the information would be distributed to the local cops and military working with them and dispatched to the scene. Many good arrests were made that way. The same principle is used in this borderline unlawful advance warning system to aliens. This goes beyond prevention of racist profiling; it is enabling the invasion of foreign peoples into the U.S. Arpaio faces even more obstacles as a federal grand jury is conducting an investigation of him and another peace officer. It’s hard to do a good job when there is so much opposition.

It doesn’t pay to serve and protect

An Arizona Border Patrol agent shot and killed a Mexican citizen believed to have crossed illegally into the U.S. One can only hope that there will be no nationally broadcast case against the officer for racism or some other charge. This is reminiscent of agents Ramos and Compean who were only performing their duties in one of the most thankless and dangerous jobs known to law enforcement. These two officers were vilified for engaging a drug peddler while on patrol, shot him as he fled then did not report the shooting. Strangely enough agents Ramos and Compean’s sentence commutation before the end of Mr. Bush’s term brought little solace to them as their reputations and civil status have been damaged. Clearly, officers convicted of felonies will have much trouble finding employment in the field of security and also posed a great financial burden on their families. The AG is still pretty sure that what he did was right but then if the crime was so heinous why grant the pardon? Frankly, after a thorough investigation it would have been advisable to suspend and eventually remove them from service. Rules are rules though the media circus pushed the story as though the case was concealed from the public. AG Johnny Sutton’s statement that the officers had received sufficient punishment but that he supported the president’s decision just rubs one the wrong way for some reason. Either way, the contention that Mexicans crossing our border illegally should be afforded them the same rights we enjoy through citizenship is disturbing and will lead to further their special status treatment…and the demise of law and order in the U.S.

Part Two: Destroying our Heroes

Sources:

Commutation letter from the AG

http://www.justice.gov/usao/txw/press_releases/Compean-Ramos/compean_ramos_commutation.pdf

http://agentramos.blogspot.com/

Ariz. border agent fatally shoots suspected illegal immigrant

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2010/01/04/20100104fatal-border-shooting-ON.html

Arizona Sheriff’s Powers Cut

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125487274278469239.html

Feds Revising Asylum Detention Policies

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2009/12/16/feds_to_stop_detaining_asylum_seekers/

Tax payers funding phone service for illegals

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Legal/Default.aspx?id=831722

Immigrant Advocate Uses Texting to Warn of U.S. Crime Sweeps

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,581831,00.html?loomia_ow=t0:s0:a16:g2:r2:c0.095340:b29624518:z10

The object of this essay is to illustrate how domestic policies projected at the global level can leave the United States vulnerable for more attacks. Our national security has been compromised since before the September 11 attacks however our ability to maintain a solid security foundation for generations to come is nearly gone. There are several factors involved in this equation, many which should be handled with great expediency as there is little time to waste wondering if there is a real emergency. This is an intellectual exercise however sometimes answers to real questions are born of theories formed just for entertainment or as part of a course of study. You be the judge. I’ve split up these points into five essays because the piece is too long as a whole and will probably make your eyes roll and your body shake out of control. I get a bit longwinded sometimes but let me pose to you a hypothesis then I promise to break down the evidence presented and let you roll with the rest. I cannot promise to leave out emotions out of this discussion however I am as objective as humanly possible. First and foremost, in order to dismantle a country we need a significant event to happen before we have a good working conspiracy theory. Let’s take a look at how a crisis can spurr on a national emergency.

Examples of a national security crisis

The catalysts

I.            Spend, spend, spend!

The New Axis of Evil

There is no logical argument against financial stability in that the more debt a country has the more dependent it is on the kindness of other states. Having a lot of debt can leave a country as vulnerable as a wounded animal in the woods. It’s just a matter of time before some predator smells its prey and moves in for the kill. With no cash or other resources – say, we could start drilling our own oil reserves and become energy independent – a spendthrift state must find ways to generate revenue or turning to the corner loan shark for help. Of course, we’re good for it, right? I’d hate to see what Chinese thugs can do if we don’t pay our bills….brass knuckles at the ready.

Vlad, you da man!

The problem is the lender or lenders may not have our best interest at hand…but it has every intention on benefiting from this negative turn of events. To prove this point, look at Russia and Venezuela. Their trade relationship may seem strange to outsiders but it makes perfect sense.  These two are apt partners, kindred spirits even. Back in those days if Russia/USSR wanted something, it simply called up some troops and plundered it.

Unfortunately wars cost money and so does national security. They spent too much, demoralized its armed forces and the whole world watched as their entire country and its economy collapsed. Going from a military superpower (in their estimation) to a pauper nation with sick and demoralized armed forces and populace, the Soviets found out the moral to this lesson:

The next time, they would amass great wealth, rebuild their empire and sit to wait out as the rest of the world went about its business and believing the Soviet threat was long gone. No longer was it feasible to fund pet projects like Cuba or spearheading the spread of communist rule throughout the world…wars run on money. Russia is going to be a wealthy country with an improved military capability. Its allies, Iran and  Venezuela  have access to oil reserves sufficient to generate a combined wealth that could support a trade and military might. Today the Soviets Putin’s Russia is getting out of its old Soviet-era debt, so in time this military rival will be able to afford to upgrade its defenses and finance small conflicts. The brutal incursion into Georgia was a practice run reminiscent of the Czech invasion.

No, you can't play with that Soviet-Red nose, Rudolph!

Once the Afghanistan debt is paid off Russia is coming back into the world scene with a brand new suit and looking like it is ready to behave, campaign for membership into the WTO and NATO and hopefully be allowed to participate in the reindeer games. Really, there is no trace of his GRU/KGB former ways but a nicer, cleaner, more western-friendly Ruskie. Don’t pass on the vodka just yet.

Putin’s friendly request that the Obama administration relinquish it missile technology is meant to taunt the US into submission through fear as it is often the case with these guys. Russia is feeling lonely without all of the former republics and fears those countries will side with the US and pose a national security threat. If the US were to use this technology in order to counteract any offensive measures developed by the Soviets Russians then the US will be less apt to engage them in a confrontation over Iran’s missile capability expending to Europe. The weakness projected by the US guarantees that invitations to lay down on our backs becomes a reality. Saber-rattling and posturing by Venezuela and Iran are a good distraction while the more capable Russians can work on an execution phase of their strategy.  Putin can take his time.

After all, having cancelled the implementation of the missile shield base in Poland dealt a blow to the hopes of safety and security in former Soviet republics and natural enemies alike. Many in Eastern Europe what am I saying, all of Europe! are terrified that history will yet again subject them to Soviet-style expansionism which is a profitable endeavor when there is plenty of money to spend. In the meantime the creditworthiness of the US drops quickly and dangerously. The cancellation of the F-22 fighter program surprised many in Washington, especially after the program was slated for the production of more aircraft only to be turned around completely. Secretary of Defense Gates stated that the augmentation of the F-22 was unnecessary; that the aircraft had no place in the war on terror. Domestic spending is at a high and increasing and comparing that to defense budgets we are spending very little. The nuclear arsenal does not have to be increased however, under recommendation from senior military leadership, it is not the amount of nukes we have but the technology employed in this type of ordnance. The Chinese are upgrading their technology as are other countries while the US lags behind. Upgrading our capability ensures the bad guys are caught off guard and are not able to come up with countermeasures.

An economically unstable country is just a powder keg waiting to go off. Add to that condition other variables and see what happens. In the US fiscal irresponsibility is a disastrous policy not only for the local economy and for the futures of of many Americans but it is a sign of great weakness and a signal for other states, friendly and hostile alike, to prepare for war. China has absorbed most of the US debt and is treading carefully right now, watching each and every development with great interest. Capitalism is an added bonus to the communist giant, one that has made its military growth possible. This is the first step in opening the door towards a compromise in security. But that alone will not create the conditions needed to dismantle a system. For that, we need the element of fear in the domestic arena, something that will propell the need for drastic change.

Considering Iran and Venezuela’s constant media bombardment against the US and its hostile overtures we should consider this a good possibility that cooperation between these hostile states is very real and has all the elements of a coalition ready to strike at our most vulnerable time. Even though sometimes events can take place in a linear form and set off expected outcomes, we must be mindful of the outcomes that we cannot measure within the doctrine of conventional wisdom. With that said, have some fun looking at these cases. This is a mental exercise after all…

How’s your health been lately?

Introduction: Beware of deception campaigns

Part I: Tu Casa es mi Casa

Part II: Destroying our Heroes

Part III: Keystone Cops and Harvard Robbers

Part: IV The Failures of Intelligence

Part V: Relinquishing our Sovereignty

Sources:

Vladimir Putin calls for more weapons to stop America doing ‘whatever it wants’

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article6970921.ece

CHINA/VENEZUELA alliance grows

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126152693744102097.html?mod=WSJEUROPE_newsreel_world

Russia sheds debt burden of Soviet Era

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704134104574624531539908924.html?mod=WSJ_hps_LEFTWhatsNews

Air Force Chiefs: Stop Making Those Stealth Jets

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/04/when-the-pentag/