Lex has composed a fine piece, “Chatter,” putting some thoughts he has to the ‘net regarding the current state of our foreign affairs.

I began commenting and the stored thoughts I have had in the last few weeks began crawling to the forefront, so I’m bringing it over here. The beginning:

For my lowly opinion, I think it would do the bad guys well, looking at it from a purely strategic view point, to hunker down, at the minimum until after Jan 20 something in 2009. At best, put the chocks and chains in place for a few more years.

If “they” get it, the best tactics right now are to crawl into their spiderholes in the sand, and, if “caught in the open” be unarmed and politely disarming. Make all the violence go away.

Just what does that do? It gives a way out now, to both “sides” of the equation. One says “Mission Accomplished, we don’t need no mo’ money!” and the other says “Mission Accomplished, we’re cutting off all funds!”

Dang! I’m moving this to the blog…I haven’t written anything today!

If it gets all quiet on the Middle Eastern Front, President Bush, or any other supporter of the combat operations in Iraq, would be hard pressed to justify spending even a single penny more. Both side could claim they had the winning ideas. Both sides, as they ramp up for a Presidential election cycle, might even extend hands across the isle and smile for the cameras, for a brief moment displaying some sort of unity that the electorate might accept and thereby help the poll numbers on the popularity climb out of the basement.

The same thing happened when the Soviet Empire cried “Uncle!” President Bush was left to tell the Pentagon that a 600 ship Navy was no longer needed, along with the many air wings, and Army divisions. He actually began the downsizing of the military, and when President Clinton came into the Oval Office, he accelerated the plan dramatically.

So, if the Jihadis could just manage a degree of patience and fake smiles and handshakes all around, just take a guess at what measures we’d let go of…

• Intelligence gathering…why now the bad guys are good guys (they said they were), so Congress skims money to use for more pet projects
• Funds for stockpiling military related supplies could be cut back/off. No bad guys, what do you need all those millions of pairs of Desert Boots for?
• Overseas headquarters funds for all the leases in host countries could be dispensed with and CENTCOM personnel and equipment could retire to sunny SW Florida, helping boost the tourist economy
• Keep thinking on your own…there are all sorts of things that we could “do without” (translates that the voters are used to givning us that much money, so, since we’re collecting it, we’ll find some feel good program to spend it on)

You get the idea. The troops in Iraq come home. The troops in Afghanistan do, too. The “big decks” return to throngs of family members and well wishing females in small craft racing by, the “small boys,” in the shadow of the aircraft carriers get a warm welcome, too. Spouses get happy and quit writing to their Congresspersons. Vets by the returnees lots of beer and other beverages as “thank yous!” What is sweeter than reuniting the country?

Oh, and yes. Why pay more to have the TSA stand around to inspect your 3 oz bottle of liquid? What about the cost to maintain those fancy bomb detecting devices, lat alone the electricity bills? With the “terrorists” happy in their new land, busy constructing a working government, who would want to bomb us? You know, some contend the reason for the terrorism is the presence of America military forces in Iraq. Since they are home now, we no longer have to worry about such trivial issues. The Jihadis, keeping their composure and being able to control their “bomb lust” would be able to see us roll back the many security measures we have come to accept in public transportation venues and large gatherings, as the last of the US troops departs for a reunion with family. “Staying the course” for a few years would provide us, internally, greater demand for and rationalize impetus to get rid of all those things that got in the way of instant gratification.

Holding the violence to essentially nothing around the world would de-fang us. We could add another level of shame and guilt onto the heap, to go with slavery (never mind the Arabs enslaved more than we did and also were the ones capturing many of the Africans and selling them to us and Europe). If we left and the terrorists “quit,” then it had to be us who caused it all.

In the political realm, I would venture to guess that the Democrats would take just about every seat in the Congress, specifically if the holder of the seat had been in support of the war, and take the Presidency, too. The fallout would be an unstoppable legislative machine, with enough votes to soundly trump any minority remaining.
At this point, is there any doubt in your mind that an isolationist president would then take an even more appeasing standpoint for our foreign policy? What about then testing all our ideas for anything we do outside our borders (and even some things inside, such as immigration policy) in the Court of World Opinion ala jfk’s 2004 presidential campaign demanded?

Not only would we de-construct the tools of the trade to be alert for terror attacks, we’d ask other nations to give their views on how we should do it.

At some point, we will be lulled back to just being ourselves, happily pretending the world around us isn’t an issue and we can focus on going to Dixie Chick concerts and NFL games without “pat downs.” Then will be the time to strike, when we have successfully poked out our “I&W” eyes completely.

What that would look like would either be something “OUTCONUS” or, if within the 48 states, it better follow the old bar saying “If you’re gonna hit me, you better make sure I don’t get up, because if I do….”

So, the point I hope I have made is the best strategy would be for the Islamic leaders, who are looking for the Caliphate to reform, and expand to include the entire world, resign themselves to understand it is most likely not possible in the near term, but they may be able to make the appropriate moves to allow their children or grandchildren to be that “privileged.” We would do the work for them, we would turn inward and feed on ourselves, minimizing any “friction” they are currently trying to overcome.

If they do get this smart, I only hope the Democrats wake up in time to enter reality, or, as some now believe, we are outta here.

Of course, there are some who know the reality shouldn’t be like this, but I think they will admit I may not be far off the mark in today’s political climate.

One last thought I have on the topic for now: The chances of the Jihadis stopping the violence altogether are remote. Why? Simple. The very nature of the manner in which their waging an asymmetrical war, on many fronts, all around the world simultaneously is due to a dispersed, loosely connected network of terrorists. There is no structured chain of command, much less a trained force with a distinctly common vision of substance. So the very strength of their attacks on us also mitigates their ability to effectively manage such a grand, yet central strategy, to their cause right now, and for years to come.

Not good news, and a reminder why GTMO should stay open….

Two US Service Members Killed Outside Kabul Prison.

I picked this up on Caos’ Blog and pulled the above link from CENTCOM’s site.

It sounds as though a COL and SGT were killed by Afghan National Army troops, during a prisoner transfer, where Taliban detainees from GTMO were being brought to the prison at Pulacharke.

The shooters apparently ran off after the killings, so I suspect they were moles, as the report says there were other Afghan soldiers ran to the aid of the killed and wounded (2) US soldiers.

A Google search didn’t find this news. It is clearly listed by CENTCOM.

Tracked back @: Cao’s Blog

Update: See update at the end to get a better picture of the fallout of the new Army Policy on blogging from the Sandbox
———————–
I was in the car driving late into the evening, but I first heard the bad news and an audio clip of Matt of Black Five saying the leadership ordered soldiers to check their blog posts and personal emails with their chain of command. I know it’s not been presented in those terms yesterday and over night (Here’s Matt’s post: “The End of Military Blogging”), mostly it’s a wave of hysteria (and I agree this needs to be raised to the point of the top of the heap), but it requires soldiers to “consult” with their chain of command before posting/sending info.
From Black Five, quoting an email he received from a writer for Wired magazine:

Army Squeezes Soldier Blogs, Maybe to Death
Noah Shachtman Email 05.02.07 | 2:00 AM

The U.S. Army has ordered soldiers to stop posting to blogs or sending personal e-mail messages, without first clearing the content with a superior officer, Wired News has learned. The directive, issued April 19, is the sharpest restriction on troops’ online activities since the start of the Iraq war. And it could mean the end of military blogs, observers say.
[…]

One of the authors at MilBlogs, Army Lawyer, point ot the regulation published doens’t say you can’t blog:

By its terms, the new OPSEC regulation does not require approval of all communications beforehand, rather, the obligation is to consult. But as Noah’s article points out, the proponent doesn’t envision all communications to be monitored nor would it be practical to do so. When a regulation’s proponent gives you that kind of guidance, you hang your hat on it.

But even without that, the guidelines still place the authority (or burden) on the commander. Commanders are as varied as snowflakes. Will some lean too far forward and say “no blogs”? Yes. but they could have done that before. While a commander may technically say “No Myspace” “No Ebay” and “No AKO forum posting” they are not obligated to do so under the regulation and, truth be told, commanders that ARE so lacking in common sense probably have other concerns within their units.
[…]

Army Lawyer brings sanity to the table, and also points out my concern: How will each chain of command member implement this? Some will look at their troops and know they are trustworthy, sane, loyal, sold soldiers, aware that slips not only endanger their lives, but those of comrades in arms, in their units, in their service and in other arms of our combat forces, and will not let things slip. Other commanders will make the “default” decision and say “no more” so they 1) lift a possible time consuming administrative/security burden off their plate, but more likely 2) do it to CYA the situation: “No posts, no risk!”

All that being said and you’re wondering what the terrorist reference is in my title?

I pick up my free copy of USA Today and the headline that is (quite literally) above the fold (The bold print is, the article copy is below) Terrorists not countered on the Web” (titled “Report: Net is key extremist tool” on the “front page” of the online edition – I like that better for a one line synopsis) Key assaults my eyes. We know that, and thanks to General Casey, there is one more weapons we had to take them on, the real daily inputs of soldiers in the sandbox, taken out of the arsenal.

by Mimi Hall

WASHINGTON – Government and community leaders aren’t doing enough to counter media-savvy terrorists from using flashy websites, provocative video games, hip-hop music and gruesome images of bloodied Muslim children to recruit young people online, according to a new report that says the internet may be the extremist’s most powerful frontier.”
[…]

Now, contrast this to the report filed by Major Robbins “Muddy Boots IO (Information Operations): The Rise of the Soldier Blogs” stating thse blogs have a global reach.

[…]
Soldiers understand that the public has become increasingly distrustful of mainstream news, and milblogs are a way to circumvent the media’s power to select news content.
[…]

And that has been a good thing. It equally applies for the bad guys, where the media’b’Allah will choose to possibly not report the beyond the pale horrific activities the terrorists still want the world to see.

Now, possibly, no countering “good” reporting. The only good thing about this news is that I had begun a post a few weeks ago about sitting in a seminar and chafing at the statement of the Army general in charge of public affairs saying we (the room had members of all services in it) had to become experts at public affairs. I thought as a Surface Warfare Officer I had enough to be an expert at, and we were paying “staff corps” officers to be PAOs. At least the time invested in that work will not be lost, now this has come up…

I’m sure the Saturday discussions at the 2007 MilBlogging Conference will be full of this issue.

Update 4/3/2007 Evening:

As I drove today, I wondered if the MilBlog Community reaction (mine included) was a little too shrill and maybe we should take a breathe and use the 24 hour rule. like “we” like to advise others. It would have been good advice, but at least it elicited this response (H/T: Andi):

Fact Sheet
Army Operations Security: Soldier Blogging Unchanged

Summary:
o America’s Army respects every Soldier’s First Amendment rights while also adhering to Operations Security (OPSEC) considerations to ensure their safety on the battlefield.
o Soldiers and Army family members agree that safety of our Soldiers are of utmost importance.
o Soldiers, Civilians, contractors and Family Members all play an integral role in maintaining Operations Security, just as in previous wars.

Details:
• In no way will every blog post/update a Soldier makes on his or her blog need to be monitored or first approved by an immediate supervisor and Operations Security (OPSEC) officer. After receiving guidance and awareness training from the appointed OPSEC officer, that Soldier blogger is entrusted to practice OPSEC when posting in a public forum.

• Army Regulation 350-1, “Operations Security,” was updated April 17, 2007 – but the wording and policies on blogging remain the same from the July 2005 guidance first put out by the U.S. Army in Iraq for battlefield blogging. Since not every post/update in a public forum can be monitored, this regulation places trust in the Soldier, Civilian Employee, Family Member and contractor that they will use proper judgment to ensure OPSEC.
o Much of the information contained in the 2007 version of AR 530-1 already was included in the 2005 version of AR 530-1. For example, Soldiers have been required since 2005 to report to their immediate supervisor and OPSEC officer about their wishes to publish military-related content in public forums.
o Army Regulation 530-1 simply lays out measures to help ensure operations security issues are not published in public forums (i.e., blogs) by Army personnel.

• Soldiers do not have to seek permission from a supervisor to send personal E-mails. Personal E-mails are considered private communication. However, AR 530-1 does mention if someone later posts an E-mail in a public forum containing information sensitive to OPSEC considerations, an issue may then arise.

• Soldiers may also have a blog without needing to consult with their immediate supervisor and OPSEC officer if the following conditions are met:
1. The blog’s topic is not military-related (i.e., Sgt. Doe publishes a blog about his favorite basketball team).
2. The Soldier doesn’t represent or act on behalf of the Army in any way.
3. The Soldier doesn’t use government equipment when on his or her personal blog.

• Army Family Members are not mandated by commanders to practice OPSEC. Commanders cannot order military Family Members to adhere to OPSEC. AR 530-1 simply says Family Members need to be aware of OPSEC to help safeguard potentially critical and sensitive information. This helps to ensure Soldiers’ safety, technologies and present and future operations will not be compromised.

• Just as in 2005 and 2006, a Soldier should inform his or her OPSEC officer and immediate supervisor when establishing a blog for two primary reasons:
1. To provide the command situational awareness.
2. To allow the OPSEC officer an opportunity to explain to the Soldier matters to be aware of when posting military-related content in a public, global forum.

• A Soldier who already has a military-related blog that has not yet consulted with his or her immediate supervisor and OPSEC officer should do so.

• Commands have the authority to enact local regulations in addition to what AR 530-1 stipulates on this topic.

There you have it. Advice: When you feel the urge to “launch,” take a deep breath and see what happens in the morning…

The US Embassy in Saigon, RVN, 4/29/1975
Operation”Frequent Wind”: 32 years ago. What: The evacuation scores of friendly Vietnamese, rushing to get away from the onslaught of the North Vietnamese Army, rolling into Saigon. Why: Because we are Americans and we value loyalty and we are compassionate and we didn’t want our friend to die by the hands of the Communists.How did this come to be? The “defeatocrats” had won the battle and “defunded the war.” First they pulled money from our troops, then for all military aid to the South Vietnamese government.Sound familiar? Yes, it does. Toss this into the intellectual mixing bowl: In 1968, a new president, Richard Nixon, began pulling our troops out, based on the political pressures within our nation. He just didn’t load them up and bring them home, but put into place “Vietnamization” as a palatable strategy to fight the war, but not with US troops directly.

Soon after taking office. President Richard Nixon introduced his policy of “vietnamization”. The plan was to encourage the South Vietnamese to take more responsibility for fighting the war. It was hoped that this policy would eventually enable the United States to withdraw gradually all their soldiers from Vietnam.

In other wrods, it was a different strategy than had been in place under the Johnson Administration, which essentially was taking raw military might as the main “tool” in the diplomacy tool box.

The net result of Vietnamization was it was working, with the US supplying the air power to support the RVN ground units. Once funding for US military units was taken away, then the RVN forces began to loose the fight. Then when the funding for supplies for those troops was pulled, the war was lost.

Who had control of the Congress? The Democrats. Who had pushed for this? The Democrats. Sound like the same news could be on a newspaper headline near you soon? Yes. How about historians who can cut and paste from their works on Vietnam and then search and replace for a few names and dates and titles of bills in the Congress to record what happens next?

And when the Democrats are successful, either in this year or January 2009, know that we, the Americans people will demand that our faithful Iraqi friends and their families be spared from the quite real possibility of a horrible death, with a rapid immigration measure. And they will come…..It happened before, as we absorbed not only Vietnamese, but Montagnards and Laos, who had served us in holding the line against Communism. This will happen again.I foresee two scenarios with the massive immigration of Iraqis to this nation that put the Democrat’s policies at risk:

• The beleagured Iraqis, who risked their lives, and those of their families (and most likely did lose family already), believing we would, in the post-Saddam era, help them forge a free and safe country will be disillusioned. As they become US citizens, they will most likely not forget the petty political power struggles between Democrats that caused them to have to flee their native land for political asylum. Their votes will not fall in the Democrat’s column, nor will a few generations (at least the one following) either. Not good for the Dems.
• While the process is streamlined, much as we have done for the Cubans when they fled Castro, some who are able to get in the line to head to the US will be moles from al-Qaeda. They will, because of the rapidity with which each applicant will be handled, manage to avoid detection and then be set down in our midst, to begin to work from the inside. Whatever the next “9/11 Commission” we hold will have to struggle with a hard fact: It was some who we granted asylum to, who would not be here except for the fact that we pulled out before the job was done.

I don’t think one or the other are too far fetched. In the larger picture, I think it will be a combination of both scenarios, and the only question will be which plays out before the other?

The wave of immigration the Dems surely don’t want, but I’m sure they haven’t thought that through for gaming out the possible futures seems to be their extremely weak suit.

Tracked back @: EagleSpeak, Third World County

Presley Neville O’Bannon, USMC
Credit: Find A GraveChinpokomon points out one 1st Lt Presley O’Bannon of the USMC laid a thumpin’ on the “pirates” from Tripoli on this date, but way back in 1805. You know, as in “…to the shores of Tripoli, we will fight our country’s battles…”Note the time lag from authorizing a Navy in 1794 until the forces were on station for the mission they were established for. 11 years.Why can’t the Democrats take a breath?

---

Update 4/28/2007: In looking for a good link for the famous LT, I came found this: How do you feel about Ridley Scott directing a movie depicting some hacking and slashing way across parts of the North African coast line in the early 1800s?

‘O’Bannon’ May Make
Big-Screen Debut

Presley Neville O’Bannon is likely to make his big-screen debut within the next two years, alongside such notable talent as Russell Crowe and Ben Kingsley. There are two film projects underway focusing on the American-sponsored expedition against the Tripolitan tyrant in 1805. (Read WGT’s feature about Presley O’Bannon’s role in the expedition.)

The filming schedules and indeed, even the bulk of the casting have not yet been unannounced, according to a report in February in Variety, the trade paper for the American film industry.

The project that seems most solid is headed by Mark Gordon Productions (“The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen,” “The Day After Tomorrow”) and Scott Free Productions (“Man on Fire,” “Captain Kidd,” with 20th Century Fox on board as distributor and Ridley Scott (“Black Hawk Down,” “Gladiator,” “Hannibal”) as director.

The film, titled “Tripoli,” would bring together Russell Crowe, cast as U.S. Navy agent William Eaton, and Scott, both last together in the blockbuster “Gladiator.” According to Greg Dean Schmitz, a columnist for Yahoo! Movies, Ben Kingsley is also in this film, which reportedly has a $100 million-plus budget.

Though Eaton reportedly is the chief protagonist in screenwriter William Monahan’s treatment, O’Bannon, the leader of one of the two main attack forces in Eaton’s expedition, is likely to represent a plum role, as well.

According to Schmitz, Touchstone Pictures and Valhalla Motion Pictures are also developing a film focusing on the Tripolitan war. Jean-Jacques Annaud (“Enemy at the Gates,” “Two Brothers”) is the likely director, using a script by John Collee (cowriter of “Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World”).
— WGT

Now there are some possibilities! BRING IT ON! I know the story, I know the ending and I liked “300.”

I just hope it hits the screens before terminal PC sets in.

Also, for those wanting to understand the Marine Corps traditions in more detail, Lt O’Bannon is the one who began the traditional outfitting of Marine officers, which stands to this day: The Mameluke Sword.

[…]
On the 25th day of April, the forces under Eaton and O’Bannon reached Derne and terms of surrender were offered to the enemy. The flag of truce was immediately returned. “My head or yours,” came the reply from the Government’s stronghold.

O’Bannon then swung into action. With the support of naval gunfire from American ships in the harbor and accompanied by his seven Marines, he spearheaded a bayonet charge which resulted in the capture of the fort on 27 April, 1805. O’Bannon personally lowered the Tripolitian flag and hoisted the Stars and Stripes for the first time on foreign soil, securing the War with Tripoli.

Hamet Karamanli promptly took as ruler of Tripoli and presented the Marine lieutenant with his personal jeweled sword, the same type used by his Mameluke tribesmen. Today, Marine officers still carry this type of sword, commemorating the Corps’ service during the Tripolitian War, 1801 – 05.

Appropriately, the actions of O’Bannon and his small group of Marines are commemorated in the second line of the Marines’ Hymn with the words, “To the Shores of Tripoli”. These same words were also inscribed across the top of the Marine Corps’ first standard, adopted around 1800.
[…]

And, lest you believe there is something new under the sun, here’s a short recounting of the days after the victory at Derna and commentary on betrayal, the “what happened next” and the story of an embittered general who comes home to critisize the administration from About.Com: Military History – Barbary Glory, Barbary Shame:

[…]
Betrayal in Barbary

Eaton’s victory celebration was short-lived. The pasha’s reinforcements arrived the day after the battle and surrounded the town. For a month, Eaton held out against a force more than three times the size of his own. Constant skirmishes and raids kept his troops on edge. A plot to poison him was foiled only when a local Muslim mullah revealed the plan.

On June 11, the Pasha’s forces launched a last furious attack. Hamet’s cavalry bore the brunt during a confusing, four-hour slugfest of charge and counter-charge from which Hamet eventually emerged victorious. The road to Tripoli was open.

But the Marines never made it to the now-famous “shores of Tripoli.” The next day, the USS Constellation arrived with news that the United States had signed a peace treaty with the Pasha in Tripoli. Eaton was ordered to evacuate with his Christian forces, Hamet, and a handful of the former pasha’s retainers. The rest of Eaton’s army was to be abandoned.

The news was a crippling blow to Hamet, whose long-held mistrust of American intentions was confirmed. Eaton protested that his orders went against his sense of “duty or decency.” But in the end, Eaton obeyed his superiors. In a secret midnight maneuver, he pulled out of Derna. The story goes that when the townspeople awoke to find the Americans gone, their wails carried to the Constellation, where Eaton heard them in silent agony.

Most of those who remained in Derna either fled or were later massacred by a vengeful Pasha.
An Ignoble End

Eaton’s adventure is, at its heart, a story of missed opportunities — for Eaton to fulfill his military destiny, for Hamet to reclaim his throne, and for U.S.-Arab relations to find some common ground. While no one would claim that a successful end to Eaton’s mission would have led to friendly relations with the Muslim world, it is hard to look at the midnight retreat from Derna and not see in it the kernels of a profound Arab-American mistrust that echoes through to this day.

America greeted Eaton as a hero, his daring victory credited with freeing the hostages and ending the war. But he returned an embittered man, his rants against the administration soon driving away even his closest supporters.

General William Eaton spent the rest of his days a lonely drunk in the taverns of Boston. He died in 1811 at the age of 47, and was buried somewhere in Massachusetts in an unmarked grave.

Barr Seitz is a former journalist with ABCNews and is writing a book about Eaton’s march and the Battle of Derna, titled “The Sword and the Scimitar.”

History: Don’t leave home for a debate without it!

“Islamic State Of Iraq: The Cross Worshippers And Their Henchmen Plans Have Collapsed”.

H/T: JIhad Unspun Blog

In The Name Of Allah The Most Gracious The Most Merciful

All praise be to Allah, The Cherisher and Sustainer of the worlds. Peace and prayer be upon our prophet, Muhammad, his family, and his companions.

Allah Almighty says:

“ They will not fight you (even) together, except in fortified townships, or from behind walls. Strong is their fighting (spirit) amongst themselves: thou wouldst think they were united, but their hearts are divided: that is because they are a people devoid of wisdom.” Qur’an 59-14

It is apparent to every watchful eye that recent events over the past few days have exposed a huge crack in America’s administration. With weak declarations from their leaders about events on the ground in Iraq just two months after the so-called “Baghdad security plan” commenced and a growing dispute about funds spent on the Iraq and Afghan wars, the American command has now said “The current security plan is the last chance for the American army and the Maliki government”.

As usual, this was followed by a swift visit by the new (American) Defense Minister “Gates” who said, “The American support to the Maliki government is not unlimited”, insinuating that the American administration is impatient with the Maliki government that is incapable of handling the strikes of the Mujahideen. This comes on the heels of an important statement by House Majority Leader Harry Reid who previously said, “The Iraqi war is hopeless and the situation in Iraq is same as it was in Vietnam.”

Then came Bush’s stupid statement where he emphasized that his strategic goal in Iraq is more than a military victory but also to prevent the Mujahideen from benefiting from the fruits of the Jihad to ultimately achieve victory.

This is how the cross worshipping occupiers and their henchmen live. Their morale continues to collapse as the result of the increasing strikes of the Mujahideen, carried out by the grace of Allah. From downing their aircraft to penetrating their fortified Green Zone and targeting the heads of apostasy and agents, all this has pushed the American army to repeat what it did in Vietnam. In a similar fashion, they are instigating the policy of isolating cites and regions by building a concrete roadblocks and walls as we see in al-Ghazaliyah, al-Ameriyah and others places in order to create a huge prison for the Sunnis. But none of this disappoints the Mujahideen; they have activated their sniper weapons against Allah’s enemies to fill their hearts with terror and death, by the grace of Allah.

The use of these policies by the occupiers shows their inability and the failure of all their past efforts to defeat the Mujahedeen. Our battle against the enemy is first and foremost the will to fight and the length of the battle does not rest with the cross worshippers. Their past efforts to isolate and besiege cities such as Fallujah, Samarra, Hadithah and al-Qaim continue to be met with resistance, by the grace of Allah.

So be patient O our people in Baghdad for the tribulation equals the strength of our Aqeedah so be cheerful for you have had the honor and blessing of Jihad, which is a gift from Allah to the best of His creation. Who ever denies this blessing Allah has called him an apostate and he is weak in faith for Allah Almighty said:

“O you who believe, if you revert from your religion, (Islam) then Allah will substitute in your place people whom He loves and who love Him. They will be kind with the believers, stern with the disbelievers, and will strive in the cause of Allah without fear of any blame. Such is Allah’s blessing; He bestows it upon whomever He wills. And Allah is All-Sufficient, the All-Knower.” Qur’an 5: 54

And Allah’s love is precious and Allah’s provision is paradise. The signs of victory can be seen and the cross worshipper’s defeat is obvious and progressive, all praise be to Allah.

Allahu Akbar!

“Honor, power and glory belong to Allah, to his messenger, and to the believers, but the hypocrites know not.”

Information Ministry
The Islamic State of Iraq
7 Rabi Al-Akir, 1428
April 24, 2007

My skin crawls every time I see the term “Ministry of Information.” Sorry, maybe it’s my Cold War Warrior bias showing, but the pravda never was published in “Pravda.”

Tracked back @: Yankee Sailor

Victor David Hanson’s column today nails it….

[…]
What should we make of the Iranians’ behavior?

Namely that the country’s leadership is in deep political trouble. The Iranian government is desperate to provoke the West to win back friends in the Islamic world, and to quell growing unrest at home. Subsidizing food and gas, providing billions for terrorists and building nukes all cost money at a time when the state-run Iranian economy is in shambles.
[…]

It’s all about “showing off” and his contention is they want us to not just rattle the saber, but unsheathe it in their specific direction. More propaganda victories, even if it means many Iranian citizens take the bullet(s) for their President. If we do, then AMadDinnerJacket has propaganda out the wazoo and he’s still not with the 72 raisins. like some of his country men would be

Mark Steyn on Bill Bennett’s show this morning said “we need to quit handing them these little propaganda victories.” He was discussing the Birts backing down on the hostage situation, but he meant victories in plural. The pile of “little propaganda victories” is getting pretty tall in the last 5 years. At some point it will look like one big one to the Islamic world culture.

So…VDH says take your fingers off the pickle. Other things will do the job without giving them what they demand….go and find out what he says.

I was scrolling through the channels last night and settled on a documentary on the History Channel: “The First World War: Jihad”

It was about the British/ANZAC battles in the Mediterranean in WWI and it backtracked some of the ramp up situations.

It seems the Germans, with a “little” problem on their eastern border realized the Turks to the south, and Muslim in nature, also had a problem with the Russians. Solution to a really big nation? Gather overt allies, or….study the neighboring culture and fine a leverage point. They did. Guess what it was? “Jihad.” Heard of it?

To be brief, the show talked through the campaigns of the early days of WWI and also included some of the effect after the war, to include the problems the Brits had in the empire in the Middle East. It seems the jihad “reminder” placed by the Kaiser led to an emboldened Turkey and Muslim world, and it was on with the jihad even before WWII.

What a legacy. On the other hand, for some time, I thought this was a more recent phenomena, but it seems the Soviets got more than German rocket scientists at the end of WWII….

(it shows again 4/7-11-12-14. The link takes you to the schedule)

I went back and did some more work at the end of the posting on the topic of the captured British service members, based on the announcement from Iran today saying they were “pardoned.”

In the background, I’m doing an email discussion with someone who has questions on shipboard operations, and I suspect he has some detailed knowledge. I’m looking forward to reading some details, but it already sounds like letting your small boats operate in the open waters of the Gulf 4 NM away is a recipe for disaster, or this kind, and possibly a physical one from the elements in “normal” circumstances.

More when that comes through. I did spend a few months patrolling the “NPG” (Northern Persian Gulf) in an FFG, but spent more time in the “SOHEPA” (Strait of Homuz/Eastern Patrol Area) doing tanker escort on that cruise. All that while filling the Navigator billet, too.

Update: Here’s the post from Red State’s blog. He’s done some good homework and has some good graphics/charts and info to links on the ROE….

EU Referendum has more (found in the comments section at Red State).

It seems the USS CHINOOK (PC-9) and WHIRLWIND (PC-11) were in the flotilla. CYCLONE Class patrol boats that could have dashed in a put a hurting on any Iranians eyeing the Brits with evil intent….

Tracked back @; Yankee Sailor (who is back up and posting after a majority of a year layoff)

SFC Thomas Nichols, US Army, also known as “Jack Army” on his blog, has provided a written response to TJ regarding the current situation in Iraq, which is posted at this link.

Teaser quote:

[…]
TJ: What gives you the greatest satisfaction with your current mission? What gives you the least?

SFC Nichols: The best part is seeing the Iraqis take charge of situations in the area. From IED discoveries to crowd control to providing security for pilgrims moving through the area, the Iraqi Army and Police are performing more and more of those tasks with less involvement from Coalition Forces. We are able to mentor and guide more than having to take charge and lead them by the nose. The least satisfaction comes on days when we can’t do what we planned, for example, our medic planned and coordinated for a three-day combat lifesaver course for the Iraqi Army troops. The IA medics would train the IA Soldiers under his supervision. He coordinated this training several weeks prior and even confirmed the training the day prior. At the appointed time, nobody showed for the training, not even the medics. When the IA battalion staff was asked what was going on, they simply forgot. Frustrating. Not the end of the world, I know, but a distinct challenge in maintaining motivation and mission focus. Is it merely a cultural difference? I’m not sure, but I am disappointed by it.
[…]

Go. Read. Be educated as to what boots on the ground are seeing right now.

H/T: Black Five