The War on Terror: A Victory of Sorts

We have lots of gloom in the Western world, and lots of valid reasons for that gloom. Almost every major Western country, from Australia to Japan to the USA to the benighted European continent, has mediocre to genuinely awful leadership. The few bright spots, e.g., Canada, Israel, Estonia, Chile, Wisconsin, have not yet managed to generate the energy to hold back, much less reverse, the tide of mediocrity that threatens to drown us all in debt, political correctness, bureaucracy, and lawyers.  We, however, have one possible glimmer of hope that is becoming brighter around the world: the defeat of Islamist terrorism. The last few years have not been good ones for the jihadis.  We can and, in fact, are defeating them.

 There has not been nor likely will be a surrender ceremony on a warship, in a rail car, or in a courthouse, but the great terrorist movements of the late 20th century and early 21st century are in disarray and crumbling. Dogged determination, lots of resources, guts, and intelligence (in both meanings of the word) have produced a remarkable result. On previous occasions, this humble blog has argued that we needed to inflict a series of defeats on the Islamists to drive home the message that they can bring only death, destruction, and hopelessness to their followers. All over the world, in fact, we now see the jihadis in retreat and staring at defeat. The nonsense about how they will replace every slain "martyr" with five, ten, twenty, thirty, etc., recruits has been shown to be, well, nonsense. As LTC Ralph Peters once wisely observed, "When you kill a terrorist, you do not make a martyr; you make a dead terrorist." Al Qaeda (AQ) and its once vaunted family of affiliates is a shell of its former self. No other organizations have sprung up with the global reach of the decaying AQ network.

The death knell for AQ rang in Iraq. Whatever the reasons were for the intervention, and despite the fashionable claim that Iraq was a distraction from the "real" war on terror, AQ died in Iraq. The leaders of AQ made the very unwise decision to go to war head-to-head with the United States military. Bad mistake. Iraq turned into Al Qaeda's Battle of Lepanto. They took on not only the most powerful military ever to exist, but also one that learns from its mistakes, adapts quickly, and seems to have an endless supply of ever-improving equipment and tactics, and of extremely competent and brave warriors. It was the US Army and the US Marines who chewed up AQ. They annihilated AQ's "foreign fighters" in the streets of Iraq, house by house, block by block.  AQ never recovered from its direct challenge to the US military, anymore than did the Viet Cong 40 years before. About a year ago, the SEALS even put down AQ's "spiritual" leader and Grand Poohbah, the Viagra-ingesting, scrofulous degenerate Osama bin-Ladin. A steady succession of AQ "number 2s," and affiliate leaders in Yemen, Indonesia, Pakistan, and elsewhere have joined the old buzzard. Even in once hopeless Somalia the jihadis are on the run.

We have not done this alone, by any means. I hope one day Americans will learn about the invaluable assistance from our friends around the world, friends such as the British and the Canadians, both of whom have taken huge losses in the war, the Australians (for whom I have a special place in my heart), the Israelis, and others we do not normally associate with the war on terror, e.g., Singapore, Indonesia, Thailand, Japan, Poland, Jordan, Germany, and, yes, France.

The victory is made all the more special by the fact that our current President never believed we could win, never supported the effort, and came into office pledging in essence to dismantle its machinery. He wanted civilian trials for the terrorists; promised to close Guantanamo, and demilitarize the effort. Even the term "war on terror" was banned in official publications.  We have, however, in this case, the good fortune that President Obama is as cynical as they come.  He realized that those pledges were electoral losers. He did not close Guantanamo, and, in fact, in his typically cynical "Chicago way" of politics decided to get around the legal issues and niceties of prisoners by not taking any. Incinerate do not incarcerate. As noted before, he decided to ramp up the drone war and to order death for terrorists, even those with US passports, at a rate that the left would never have tolerated with the evil Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld axis.

The war is not over. Terrorists remain out there, still plotting, and they most likely will have some isolated successes, probably against civilian targets. The big issue, however, has been decided. The West and its values cannot be defeated by the jihadis. Only we can do that to ourselves.

President Obama: From the Dark Side of the Moon

Remember when the media ridiculed Newt Gingrich for promising a colony on the moon by the end of his first term of president?  I can see why.  President Obama already lives there, on the far, dark side of the heavenly orb.  It is the only explanation for the press conference he gave this morning.

What was the purpose of this press conference?  What great message did he intend to deliver to us mere mortals? He gave a scripted but garbled, rambling, and fanciful "analysis" of the state of the economy, full of phony numbers, empty phrases and useless advice to the Europeans. Listening to our President, the "private sector is doing fine" and what problems there are come from too little spending by the government because of the Republicans. Insanity.

No mention of tax cuts except to state, "Congress refused to pass this jobs plan in full. They did act on a few parts of the bill -- most significantly the payroll tax cut that's putting more money in every working person's paycheck right now." Wait a minute! Continuing the current payroll tax rate PUTS money into people's paychecks? Another liberal madness based on the assumption that any of your money the government doesn't take from you is a gift from the government. 

He inserted himself to no useful end into the issue of whether Greece should exit the Euro. He showed that neither he nor his speechwriter has a clue when talking about the global economy, to wit, " the Greek people also need to recognize that their hardships will likely be worse if they chose to exit from the eurozone." Why? How does he know that? Why is he getting involved in that issue? His advice to the Europeans? Their governments should spend more, not less, because austerity means less money for everybody . . . as before, a typical leftist delusion about where money and wealth originate. 

Even worse than the President's statement was the reaction of the press in the room.  Either these journos are totally illiterate when it comes to economic issues, so far in the tank for Obama they're never going to emerge, or both.  They tossed up a couple of tepid pro forma questions which allowed the President to repeat his original statement and to demonstrate the President's stunning ignorance. One question at the very end asked about the recent leaks of classified information coming from the White House, which the President answered by saying he found the issue offensive. Nice. Offensive? Stop leaking! 

This man must be defeated next November.

Friday Rant: Obama's Foreign Policy Drones On

It is early Friday morning. Too much coffee. Read too many newspapers and watched too many news and talk shows. Ready to rant.

This posting likely will be misinterpreted, but let's charge on.  I start saying that I wish a hideous outcome for the jihadis and their "cause." I detest them; they are intolerant, stupid, murdering, and cowardly scum.  In my years overseas, along with other Foreign Service officers, I was directly involved in several actions against the Islamists. In one case I remember very well, working with the local services, we got a very bad guy scooped off the street, and sent to an "undisclosed location." In another assignment, working closely with the local services and those of a friendly third country, we managed to have a couple of prominent jihadis, who had killed a lot of people, end up very, very dead, their bodies riddled with bullets and torn apart with explosives. I slept fine. Unlike way too many people in the Obama Administration, my colleagues and I took seriously then and now issues of classification and protection of sources, means, and people. We certainly never said a word to the press, and not even to colleagues who did not have a need to know, or to our own families. It was serious stuff involving millions of dollars of taxpayer assets and putting at risk many lives, American and foreign. The Bush White House never said a word, either--no puff pieces on how the President had given the "go." I say all this not to brag but to underline that along with many other Foreign Service officers who served in the "hard places," I have some "street cred" which allows me to be critical of Obama's "war on terror."

Obama is not serious about the war on terror anymore than he is about almost anything else. For the Obamistas the anti-terror effort is just another program to be augmented, abandoned, or otherwise used to benefit the Dear Leader. It is akin to the auto bailout, "middle class tax cuts," student loan interest rates, or the "war on women." How's it polling? People want the terrorists dealt with?  Prisoners lead to legal and political issues? OK, then no prisoners; let's make the Dear Leader into the world's foremost terrorist killer.

Let me digress with a personal reflection. Many years ago I served in a very raucous and war-torn Central American country. One of my jobs was to be the bayonet dummy for visiting groups of secular leftists and radical religious personnel. Once a week, I would brief them on the political and combat situation in the country; then they would spit on, shout at and hurl insults at me. When they got home they would write newsletters for their backers about how they told off the Empire.  One point was always the issue of political prisoners. These visitors would get very angry with me when I would tell them there were no political prisoners despite decades of warfare. They assumed I was covering for the local regime. They were too stupid to ask, "Why are there no prisoners after thirty years of war?" I think the answer is obvious. 

The Obama war on terror involves taking no prisoners. Like the dopey academic leftists they are, the Obamistas get themselves all tangled up in endless legalisms, and Eric Holder stupidities, which makes killing a better, i..e, easier, option politically. They have turned the word "drone" into a verb which means killing.  Al Jihadi, the number two of al Qaeda in (fill in the blank) got droned today . . .  Drone strikes, however, do not make a foreign or a defense policy. Drone strikes are easy. They are useful on many occasions, but they are not substitutes for the hard work of real counter-terrorism warfare. Dead jihadis do not talk. Obamistas rather incinerate a building full of people rather than "waterboard" or sleep deprive one jihadi. Drones, however, make for better press releases than quiet work in the shadows.

Wisconsin Saves The World . . . Maybe . . .

No doubt about it.

Great result from the recall election in Wisconsin.

Republican reform Governor Scott Walker not only "survived" the expensive, and ultimately ill-advised recall vote staged by the big thuggish public sector unions, he triumphed in a way that provides at least a glimmer of hope in an otherwise dark panorama for the western world. There is a stark contrast between Walker's courageous stand against the destructive "business-as-usual-soak-the-taxpayer" policies to which we have all become accustomed, and the wimpy acquiescence of politicians in Greece, Spain, Portugal, California, Illinois, and New York. The Governor stared down the public sector unions, the lying mass media, the shouting academics and beat them soundly; Wisconsin has shown the way for the rest of the country, and, perhaps, the rest of the world. The Governor stood up for the taxpayers and the wealth-producers against the tax consumers and wealth absorbers.

Birthplace of Harley-Davidson, the Republican Party and Orson Welles, leader in the abolitionist movement, pioneer in labor law, and home of anti-Communist hero Joe McCarthy, Wisconsin has shown the way again.

The Chicago Way? Leaking Intel to Win an Election . . .

Unbelievable. Even CNN, the biggest of the overtly pro-Obama news networks, has questioned the ability and willingness of the Obama administration to keep vital national secrets.

I find the cavalier attitude of this administration towards genuine national security secrets very troubling. This is the most leak-prone administration in my memory. Remember the phony brouhaha over the "leaking" of the name of Valerie Plame by a Bush Administration official, the despicable loud-mouth Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage who allowed somebody else to take the blame? Remember all that angst? Remember the books, the movies, the money pouring in? I don't see any of that with this administration's far worse leaking, deliberate leaking, of highly sensitive details of ongoing operations against some of the world's deadliest terrorists.

It has to stop. Lives are being put at risk by the administration's cynical release of highly sensitive information as part of the re-elect Obama effort. Maybe that's the Chicago way, but it should not be the American way.

QE II: Through It All, A Class Act

July 4, 1776. That's the date on the official excuse note. It was signed by Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, Samuel Adams, and others, and delivered by George Washington. As of that date, it's official: We Americans don't have to worry or care about monarchs.  And I don't.

That said, I can't help but feel a bit of affection for Queen Elizabeth II, who is celebrating her Diamond Jubilee as monarch. Sixty years on the British throne--longer than I have been alive. She has been an old school class act throughout her time as monarch. She has a powerful sense of duty that comes through clearly in whatever she is doing, even when it is plainly ridiculous, e.g., the fawning, idiotic statement she was forced to read upon the death of the hideously stupid, self-destructive airhead Princess Diana.  The few times I have heard the Queen say anything off-the-cuff--she is usually very heavily scripted--she appears to have a refreshing and biting wit, with a touch of sarcasm.  Her husband, the Greek-born Prince Phillip, is an appealing irascible old coot, who has dedicated his life to playing second banana.

Her parents were a class act, too, and she inherited that. Her sister did not, nor did the Queen's children.  Prince Charles, the "heir apparent," is smart compared only to his two younger brothers. Charles would have been happy as a Hollywood celebrity jumping onto every fashionable cause and trend. He has shown deplorable taste in women, and, in essence, lived a wasted life. His brothers have done likewise. His children, Harry and William, seem somewhat better than their dad, but the jury is still out.  I can see why the Queen has never given up the throne to her son, Britain's longest "serving heir apparent."

Anyhow, I like Queen Elizabeth. I wish her the best. Here's to another sixty years for you . . .

Mad, Madder, and Madderer . . . the Europeans and the Euro

Sorry. Yet another post on the insanity in Europe. It just just gets weirder and more destructive by the day.

The Euro-fanatics, in a bid to save their sacred coin, are going to provoke a global economic catastrophe. I have written before several times about the fallacious thinking behind the EU and the Euro, and its dire consequences for Europe and the world. To sum up, this EU/Euro project was motivated by envy of and animus for the United States. The EU is formed largely by a bunch of bureaucrats from nations that are has-beens, never-weres, and never-will-bes. The EU reps I have encountered in my career were the most insufferable and boorish dolts imaginable--but very well paid. They could barely contain their hatred for the United States, and liked to brag endlessly about how "Europe" was going to be the next super-power. They attributed all sorts of magical properties and events to "Europe," e.g., winning the Cold War, keeping the peace, designing an economic system that was the envy of the world, etc.  The Euro currency would be the crowning achievement: a mighty amulet that would ward off the evil Americans and their almost as evil and deluded stooges, the British (Note: EU bureaucrats, as a rule, do not like the British, consider them only partially European, resent their rejection of the Euro, and, above all, detest the special military and intelligence relationship between the UK and the US.)

Well, we have seen how it turned out. The Euro, in the end, became nothing more than the German Mark, sustained by the impressive German economy and the sort of bookkeeping that got Al Capone thrown into prison. The Euro fed the delusions of the poorer economies of Europe that they could spend like Germans without having to work and save like Germans. It was funny money. Wasn't real. There was always more of the stuff around. Despite the "strict" rules on deficits, nobody bothered to enforce them, and, as we now see, there is no way to enforce them even if somebody wanted to do so.  Economic meltdown in Europe.

We are now moving into the next phase of insanity. Instead of actively beginning the admittedly difficult process of killing off the Euro, the Kool-Aid drinkers in the Old Continent are trying to find a way, any way, to "save" the Euro, almost regardless of the havoc that incurs. The latest manifestation comes from Spanish PM Rajoy who is proposing some sort of a centralized European authority that would control the budgets of the member states. This follows on the French proposal for one European bond issuing authority. That's desperation. This authority would, in essence, have a veto power over spending and tax policies.

One wonders then, what would national politicians do? Why elect them much less pay them a salary? On the one hand, if the Germans were placed in charge of this authority, it might not be a bad idea. But that is not how it would happen in Euroland. I can tell you right now, the Europeans would come up with some weird weighted voting scheme that would give power over the authority to the spendthrifts and demand that the Germans pay for it. In other words, the German treasury would become the common property of all of Europe. It is not not unlike loaning out your credit card, and having no real say over how it can be used but being responsible for the debts incurred.

Will the Germans buy off on that?  Will the German politicians, not an impressive bunch, finally work up the courage to say, "Enough!" The best thing Germany could do for Europe and itself is for Germany to get out of the Euro.