Afghanistan
Special Report: The War Racket
“Al Qaeda has won
the War on Terror!”
“But we haven’t had a successful large terrorist attack on America since 9-11.”
As they say in the Ballard neighborhood of Seattle, “Ya sure, you betcha! At what cost, monetarily, in regard to the lives of our troops, and the limitations of our personal freedoms?”
Putting this in a realistic perspective, it is reported that there are 100 Al Qaeda operatives in Afghanistan, and maybe a few hundred more in Pakistan. Then there are bunches in Yemen and Somalia and scattered in other countries around the world. There are probably equal numbers in western democracies and in Islamic and developing countries. If we were to qualify only those who have both the desire and the where with all to directly attack the United States or European countries, adding in similar groups, the worldwide total of Islamic jihadis is probably less than 10,000.
So what does it cost to keep us safe from these hordes of wild extremists?
According to Wikipedia based on numbers from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, (SIPRI) the United States leads the world in military expenditures at $660 billion, followed by China at about $100 billion, France at $64 billion, the United Kingdom at $58 billion, and Russia at about $53 billion. You have to go to the SIPRI website to find out what their definition of what is a military expenditure.
One could assume from their definition that the $660 billion figure includes the wars in Iraq, and Afghanistan, but not Homeland Security and various transfer payments within and without the United States, not directly tied to the military expenditure definition. Since Wonder Springs has no way of quantifying that number we will take an educated guess of perhaps $440 billion, bringing the yearly total to a trillion bucks. That makes our War on Terror assessment equal to $10 million per really bad guy — per year.
Read More...
“But we haven’t had a successful large terrorist attack on America since 9-11.”
As they say in the Ballard neighborhood of Seattle, “Ya sure, you betcha! At what cost, monetarily, in regard to the lives of our troops, and the limitations of our personal freedoms?”
Putting this in a realistic perspective, it is reported that there are 100 Al Qaeda operatives in Afghanistan, and maybe a few hundred more in Pakistan. Then there are bunches in Yemen and Somalia and scattered in other countries around the world. There are probably equal numbers in western democracies and in Islamic and developing countries. If we were to qualify only those who have both the desire and the where with all to directly attack the United States or European countries, adding in similar groups, the worldwide total of Islamic jihadis is probably less than 10,000.
So what does it cost to keep us safe from these hordes of wild extremists?
According to Wikipedia based on numbers from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, (SIPRI) the United States leads the world in military expenditures at $660 billion, followed by China at about $100 billion, France at $64 billion, the United Kingdom at $58 billion, and Russia at about $53 billion. You have to go to the SIPRI website to find out what their definition of what is a military expenditure.
One could assume from their definition that the $660 billion figure includes the wars in Iraq, and Afghanistan, but not Homeland Security and various transfer payments within and without the United States, not directly tied to the military expenditure definition. Since Wonder Springs has no way of quantifying that number we will take an educated guess of perhaps $440 billion, bringing the yearly total to a trillion bucks. That makes our War on Terror assessment equal to $10 million per really bad guy — per year.
Read More...
Special Report: Times That Try Men’s Souls
These are the
times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and
the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink
from the service of his country; but he that stands
it now deserves the love and thanks of man and
woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered;
yet we have this consolation with us - that the
harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph.
What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: It
is dearness only that gives everything its value.
Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its
goods; and it would be strange indeed if so
celestial an article as freedom should not be
highly rated. Britain, with an army to enforce her
tyranny, has declared that she has a right not only
to tax but "to bind us in all cases whatsoever,"
and if being bound in that manner is not slavery,
then is there not such a thing as slavery upon
earth. Even the expression is impious, for so
unlimited a power can belong only to
God. Thomas Paine –
1776
Who would have thought two short years ago that the American people would be discussing revolutions in a somewhat serious context. The two revolutions most discussed are the American Revolution of which Founding Father, Thomas Paine gave us the above quotation from his pamphlets “The Crisis Papers.” The other revolution in this country relates to the Vietnam War, the last period of critical social distress. The important reference from that era that related directly to today is, “You Don’t Need a Weatherman To Know Which Way the Wind Blows.”
Adding to the national angst is the reality of actual wars. The Iraq War is in the process of hopefully winding down to a successful nation building operation. The War in Afghanistan is quite different. Iraq was a real nation in the twentieth century definition, at least since the end of WWII. The same cannot be said for Afghanistan, which is more akin to a historic tribal region, not successfully colonized by any western culture in its history.
Under the auspices of the War on Terror and after a traditional military invasion of Iraq the United States, became involved in a counterinsurgency to root out Al Qaeda, other foreign insurgents, and quench the historic conflict between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
In Iraq and Iran the Shia are the majority of the population. In Afghanistan the numbers are reversed and the Taliban are essentially the Sunni insurgents to which the United States and a number of NATO allies, through the escalation of the Obama Administration, are now attempting to develop a successful counterinsurgency nation-building exercise.
Read More...
Who would have thought two short years ago that the American people would be discussing revolutions in a somewhat serious context. The two revolutions most discussed are the American Revolution of which Founding Father, Thomas Paine gave us the above quotation from his pamphlets “The Crisis Papers.” The other revolution in this country relates to the Vietnam War, the last period of critical social distress. The important reference from that era that related directly to today is, “You Don’t Need a Weatherman To Know Which Way the Wind Blows.”
Adding to the national angst is the reality of actual wars. The Iraq War is in the process of hopefully winding down to a successful nation building operation. The War in Afghanistan is quite different. Iraq was a real nation in the twentieth century definition, at least since the end of WWII. The same cannot be said for Afghanistan, which is more akin to a historic tribal region, not successfully colonized by any western culture in its history.
Under the auspices of the War on Terror and after a traditional military invasion of Iraq the United States, became involved in a counterinsurgency to root out Al Qaeda, other foreign insurgents, and quench the historic conflict between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
In Iraq and Iran the Shia are the majority of the population. In Afghanistan the numbers are reversed and the Taliban are essentially the Sunni insurgents to which the United States and a number of NATO allies, through the escalation of the Obama Administration, are now attempting to develop a successful counterinsurgency nation-building exercise.
Read More...
Redux Rendezvous VII
07/July/2010 09:33 Filed in: Weekly
Column
This is the final installment of our specific Redux
Rendezvous series. That means it is the seventh in
the series, which this seventh month comes out on
the seventh day, our twenty-seventh issue of the
year. Which as far as I know means absolutely
nothing. It is not so much we have run out of ways
to enlarge these redux basics, but rather in a
forest of stupendously changing events we keep
finding amazing trees and other life that needs
deeper description.
Through this series timeline our separate Monday posts have become more important as descriptions of current events that got our attention in the previous week. These articles began in late January as a Week in Review posts, but over time they have become more focused commentary rather than spun reporting.
At the same time while doing the Redux Rendezvous series we have been able to focus on broader observations on what is developing in our world that no one seems to see or understand. Contrary to the uncertainty that you read and hear in the big bad world, everything that is now happening is following natural law, or more precisely is falling apart because we humans think we know better and hence create mess after mess as the result of our own foolishness.
This week we will sort of encapsulate our remarks in the context of a Ubermenschen failure. True, the world really has no superhuman people, except in their own eyes, but our human focus is still the belief that somehow the combined wisdom of humanity can make this whole adventure function better than it historically has been able to provide.
These uber-thoughts surfaced in the early morning hours as I was musing about the mess that Michael Steele has produced by remarks, at a Republican Party fundraiser over Afghanistan being president Obama’s war. Steele said it is doomed to failure because no power has been able to create a nation there in over a thousand years.
Steele’s observations are basically in line with our comments about the lack of somewhat related historic success when it comes to fighting counterinsurgency wars. Our thoughts that Afghanistan is really Obama’s Vietnam, and in the broader context just as the president kept the Laissez-Faire Scoundrels in charge of the financial system, it seems that he also kept the Bush era neocons in charge of foreign affairs.
Read More...
Through this series timeline our separate Monday posts have become more important as descriptions of current events that got our attention in the previous week. These articles began in late January as a Week in Review posts, but over time they have become more focused commentary rather than spun reporting.
At the same time while doing the Redux Rendezvous series we have been able to focus on broader observations on what is developing in our world that no one seems to see or understand. Contrary to the uncertainty that you read and hear in the big bad world, everything that is now happening is following natural law, or more precisely is falling apart because we humans think we know better and hence create mess after mess as the result of our own foolishness.
This week we will sort of encapsulate our remarks in the context of a Ubermenschen failure. True, the world really has no superhuman people, except in their own eyes, but our human focus is still the belief that somehow the combined wisdom of humanity can make this whole adventure function better than it historically has been able to provide.
These uber-thoughts surfaced in the early morning hours as I was musing about the mess that Michael Steele has produced by remarks, at a Republican Party fundraiser over Afghanistan being president Obama’s war. Steele said it is doomed to failure because no power has been able to create a nation there in over a thousand years.
Steele’s observations are basically in line with our comments about the lack of somewhat related historic success when it comes to fighting counterinsurgency wars. Our thoughts that Afghanistan is really Obama’s Vietnam, and in the broader context just as the president kept the Laissez-Faire Scoundrels in charge of the financial system, it seems that he also kept the Bush era neocons in charge of foreign affairs.
Read More...
Redux Rendezvous VI
30/June/2010 10:13 Filed in: Weekly
Column
When I completed Monday’s article
“In My Tent Leadership” on Gen. McChrystal
and the war in Afghanistan, I couldn’t help
thinking that to do this thing right we could have
the makings of a 30 year war, in a country that no
one thinks it truly is worth the bother. To my
surprise when I opened my emails Tuesday morning I
was hit with the headline
“The 30 Year War in Afghanistan.” As I read
the article from Stratfor, I began to understand
that their analysis believed that our war in
Afghanistan began in 1980, when we offered support
to the mujahideen to block Soviet advances. With
President Obama’s decision to escalate American
involvement when he took office, the war entered
Phase 4. It is now Obama’s war. This opens the
question will this be Obama’s Vietnam?
Over the weekend reports say that the Canadians spent a billion dollars to protect the G20 leaders from anarchists riots in Toronto, where 900 people were arrested. Maybe Afghanistan is not such a bad investment in that context.
In a developing story ten deep cover Russian spies were arrested in America just like in the good old days of the Cold War. We could go on, but rather than focus on war as and end, perhaps a better description of war is an attempt to control chaos. Chaos however begets chaos, and in the common sense definition of what is happening in the world, the change we were told we could believe in, is really chaos seemingly feeding upon itself.
Since the end of the Korean Conflict, for the United States our wars have been defined in terms of either insurgencies or counterinsurgencies. In Vietnam we were engaged in a counterinsurgency with the Vietcong and the North Vietnamese. In the Gulf War we fought a traditional war, and abandoned the war efforts before either term really applied. With the true Iraq War a similar result was quickly obtained, but pacifying the country quickly became counterinsurgency, against indigenous militias, foreign mercenaries, Al-Qaeda, Iran, and others.
It seems that the Iraq counterinsurgency is finally working, but many problems still remain. Afghanistan is still a very open and troubling question. Historically, the only truly decisive counterinsurgency victory was the British success in then Burma, where Black ops personnel basically hunted down the communist bad guys and killed them. Half a century later Burma is now Myanmar, one of the most oppressive communist régimes in history.
Our Redux Rendezvous emphasis today however, is not to promote or even describe warfare, but rather to focus upon major current worldviews that seem to be either insurgencies or counterinsurgencies in a world in which we all hope will return to order, rather than deepening chaos. In the broader picture this is currently not so much a guns and bullets war, but rather an economic war, or wars.
Read More...
Over the weekend reports say that the Canadians spent a billion dollars to protect the G20 leaders from anarchists riots in Toronto, where 900 people were arrested. Maybe Afghanistan is not such a bad investment in that context.
In a developing story ten deep cover Russian spies were arrested in America just like in the good old days of the Cold War. We could go on, but rather than focus on war as and end, perhaps a better description of war is an attempt to control chaos. Chaos however begets chaos, and in the common sense definition of what is happening in the world, the change we were told we could believe in, is really chaos seemingly feeding upon itself.
Since the end of the Korean Conflict, for the United States our wars have been defined in terms of either insurgencies or counterinsurgencies. In Vietnam we were engaged in a counterinsurgency with the Vietcong and the North Vietnamese. In the Gulf War we fought a traditional war, and abandoned the war efforts before either term really applied. With the true Iraq War a similar result was quickly obtained, but pacifying the country quickly became counterinsurgency, against indigenous militias, foreign mercenaries, Al-Qaeda, Iran, and others.
It seems that the Iraq counterinsurgency is finally working, but many problems still remain. Afghanistan is still a very open and troubling question. Historically, the only truly decisive counterinsurgency victory was the British success in then Burma, where Black ops personnel basically hunted down the communist bad guys and killed them. Half a century later Burma is now Myanmar, one of the most oppressive communist régimes in history.
Our Redux Rendezvous emphasis today however, is not to promote or even describe warfare, but rather to focus upon major current worldviews that seem to be either insurgencies or counterinsurgencies in a world in which we all hope will return to order, rather than deepening chaos. In the broader picture this is currently not so much a guns and bullets war, but rather an economic war, or wars.
Read More...
In My Tent Leadership?
This last week, where
unflattering remarks by the staff of Gen. Stanley
McChrystal found their way into Rolling Stone
magazine, and led to his subsequent resignation
from being the commander of forces in Afghanistan,
I have reflected upon my military service in Europe
during Vietnam. Even though I was a reluctant
volunteer, compared with the reluctant draftee, I
have always looked at that time as a tremendous
growing experience, that in many ways I see as a
Divinely controlled adventure, giving me priceless
insight into strategic world events that could have
not been gained in such a brief encounter anywhere
other than that time and place.
I read the Rolling Stone article, which is quite long and detailed for what passes for twenty-first century journalism. It sounded to me to be a relatively good assessment of a highly motivated general officer with a very tight staff. All good things, when you have a mission to bring a war action in Afghanistan to a reasonable conclusion as rapidly as possible.
My dad was not a military person, he was 4-F when asked to serve in WWII, he had a strong heart murmur, but he was a very successful school administrator. I can say he only had one absolute rule when it came to people management. That rule was, “Always support your staff, no matter whether they are right or wrong. Always support your staff and let the chips fall where they may.” It seems that Gen. Stanley McChrystal lives by the same absolute.
When I was in ROTC in college, we had the opportunity to be taught the science behind the art of military leadership. Many of the questions we were tested upon, outlined a role, mission, or objective to be obtained, and a number of different means to obtain the required results. Maybe to keep things light, somewhere in the options was the always wrong response generally following the line “give and order and say, if you need me I will be in my tent.” In the Rolling Stone article you find out quite rapidly that Gen. McChrystal was and is not a, “I will be in my tent kind of leader.”
Read More...
I read the Rolling Stone article, which is quite long and detailed for what passes for twenty-first century journalism. It sounded to me to be a relatively good assessment of a highly motivated general officer with a very tight staff. All good things, when you have a mission to bring a war action in Afghanistan to a reasonable conclusion as rapidly as possible.
My dad was not a military person, he was 4-F when asked to serve in WWII, he had a strong heart murmur, but he was a very successful school administrator. I can say he only had one absolute rule when it came to people management. That rule was, “Always support your staff, no matter whether they are right or wrong. Always support your staff and let the chips fall where they may.” It seems that Gen. Stanley McChrystal lives by the same absolute.
When I was in ROTC in college, we had the opportunity to be taught the science behind the art of military leadership. Many of the questions we were tested upon, outlined a role, mission, or objective to be obtained, and a number of different means to obtain the required results. Maybe to keep things light, somewhere in the options was the always wrong response generally following the line “give and order and say, if you need me I will be in my tent.” In the Rolling Stone article you find out quite rapidly that Gen. McChrystal was and is not a, “I will be in my tent kind of leader.”
Read More...