Amateur Hour Continues

Posted: March 7, 2026 | Author: | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Persian Gulf. (Encyclopedia Britannica)

No one knows when the war in the Middle East will end. Government leaders continue to give multiple and often contradictory reasons for the attack and the strategic conditions that will end it. One thing is certain, we have a Commander-in-Chief that is unleashed, impulsive, and clueless. In his usual way of setting policy, and expecting it to be taken seriously, Trump set the terms of ending the war via Truth Social. In part he posted, “There will be no deal with Iran except UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!” As if they needed more incentive, the Iranians will now fight to the bitter end. There will be no unconditional surrender unless Trump plans to literally kill nearly everyone in the country. As I have stated often in these spaces, wars only end when the loser chooses to end them. No matter how bad things are, they will continue to fight until the attacker goes home or there is a negotiated settlement. There have been no wars settled by unconditional surrender since World War II. As if setting policy via social media was not enough, Trump shows us just how unserious he is by also including in his post “MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN (MIGA!).” Because, of course.

Ever the clever one, Karoline Leavitt, Trump’s spokesperson, when asked about what unconditional surrender means said, “When he as Commander-in-Chief determines that Iran no longer poses a threat to the U.S. and the goals of Operation Epic Fury have been fully realized, then Iran will essentially be in a place of unconditional surrender whether they say it or not.” Please see the above paragraph. There will be no unconditional surrender, Trump will just say it and go home claiming victory. Consequences be damned because the Iranians will not accept that as a permanent outcome. When asked by Time magazine reporters whether we should worry about retaliatory terror attacks on our homeland Trump replied, “I guess.” He went on to say “We think about it all the time. We plan for it. But yeah, you know, we expect some things. Like I said, some people will die. When you go to war, some people will die.” Well, that’s good to know.

Trump also claims that he will pick the next leader of Iran. Hubris or ignorance, you decide. Whichever you choose, he is of course fooling himself and trying to hoodwink us, the citizens of the United States in to believing that he somehow is the Master of the Universe. Let us remember that not only did Trump take out the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was also the spiritual leader for all Shi’ites. Saying that he will pick the next leader is akin to declaring that he will pick the next Pope. There are about 240 million Shia Muslims in the world (the largest sect with about 90% of all Muslims are the Sunni). The largest concentrations of Shi’ites are in Iran (about 68 million people), Iraq and Azerbaijan. There are also significant numbers of Shi’ites in Lebanon, Yemen and Afghanistan. To add to the equation, their leader was killed during Ramadan which takes place during the ninth month of the Islamic calendar, a holy month, and is believed to be the month where the Quran was revealed to the prophet Mohammed. None of them are going to let Trump pick the next leader.

The Washington Post reports that Russia is supplying targeting intelligence to Iran giving them the location of naval vessels, aircraft and other high value assets. The Secretary of the Treasury just announced that in order to keep the flow of oil going to Asia (the main buyers of oil coming through the Strait of Hormuz) the U.S. is issuing a temporary waiver for refiners, mainly in India, to buy Russian oil, which has been embargoed since Russia invaded Ukraine. So, let’s see, the longer the Strait remains closed, the more oil Putin can sell and thus save his nearly collapsed economy. And buy weapons to use against Ukraine. Are we sure Vlad doesn’t have something on his good friend Donnie? Nothing like acting in Putin’s interests to keep the war going while he makes money and helps to target Americans.

Meanwhile the disgraceful buffoon that calls himself the Secretary of Defense continues to strut and dance around while he brags about killing people. On a preview of an upcoming 60 Minutes interview he is asked about Russian involvement and said “we aren’t concerned about that.” He went on to say “the only ones that need to be worried right now are Iranians that think they’re gonna live.” Asked a similar question yesterday by a Fox News reporter Trump responded “What a stupid question that is to be asking at this time.” Such articulate and deep strategic thinkers. Recall that at a press conference this week the Secretary was asked about the American soldiers that were killed. He took the opportunity to berate the media for only reporting on the bad news in order to make Trump look bad. Because, of course, everything has to be about Trump.

One only has to know what the Secretary and the Trump administration think about the war right now is to look at what they are posting on social media. Most of their posts are memes splicing together scenes from video games, war movies and actual combat footage. Here is one example as reported in the Washington Post. “On Thursday, the White House also posted a video overlaying airstrike footage with the lyrics “Kaboom, kablow” from the viral rap song “Bazooka,” and another mixing clips of missile detonations with SpongeBob SquarePants. On Friday, the White House published another video referencing “Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas,” flashing the message “WASTED” — what the game’s players see when they die — atop missile footage showing trucks and people engulfed in flames.”

These are the people speaking for our nation. A school in Iran was bombed and killed dozens of elementary school girls and six Americans were killed in combat and our leaders think it is all a funny game.

Our military professionals are doing their job and doing it well. We pray that they are safe. Our government leaders are not only ignorant about the Middle East and amateurish in the formulation of strategy, but they also care little to nothing about our military men and women or the citizens of these United States.

What To Do About Iraq?

Posted: June 17, 2014 | Author: | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , | 1 Comment

As you know, events in Iraq have unfolded quickly as the fighters of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) moved into northern and western Iraq from Syria.  The cities of Mosul and Tikrit, significant in many ways to Iraq, fell without resistance from the Iraqi army, most of whom changed into civilian clothes and ran away.  The ISIS fighters seemed well on their way to Baghdad when the Iraqi army, backed by Shiite militia, stiffened and are now providing resistance to the advance. How this will end is anybody’s guess at the moment — truly, no one really knows.

There are several things that we do know, however, and these are worth a look.  Most importantly, the question before our national leadership is “should the United States get involved in what is fundamentally a religious civil war?”  “If so, in what way?”  Clouding the issue of course is the investment we already made of 4,487 dead and 32,223 wounded Americans.  A high price to pay any time, but especially given the unraveling of all that was accomplished. Unfortunately, in my view, we should not invest any more lives or treasure in Iraq.  Certainly, we should not do so under the current conditions.

Demands that the United States should supply immediate intelligence and material support to the Iraqi government are a bit overblown and not really reflective of the facts.  This is true in particular because of two things: the Iraqis have been known in the past to use “intelligence” to even scores with political rivals, and the ISIS forces are now equipped with modern U.S. weapons left behind when the Iraqi army abandoned their posts.  It will be a continued waste of time and money (and perhaps lives) to continue to equip and train the Iraqis (or any force) if they refuse to fight.

Most experts do not believe that ISIS has the will or ability to take Baghdad, especially now that the Iraqi army is beginning to mobilize.  It will, however, get very dicey in Baghdad in the coming days as the terrorists will use assassinations and car bombs and other attacks to disrupt life in the city and to create more friction between the factions that live there.  While Iraq as a whole is divided into roughly three sections (Sunni, Shiite, Kurdish), all three elements are present in the city which is also de facto divided.  This is where the United States needs to beef up its efforts. Protecting the world’s largest American embassy and those that work there should be our current focus of main effort.

It is tempting to get into a “who is responsible for this mess?” argument.  There is plenty of blame to go around.  Some of you may recall that from my observations in a key Pentagon office that I felt that President Bush and his administration began planning to invade Iraq beginning in January of 2001 following his inauguration.  The unfolding events after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks gave them a reason, however much of a stretch that might have been.  It was especially discomfiting because our real effort should have been in Afghanistan where the threat was real.  That is all now past history.  Similarly, accusations that President Obama did not do all that could have been done to reach a Status of Forces Agreement with the Iraqi government to leave U.S. troops there serve to place the blame at his feet.  I happen to think that the Iraqi people as a whole never really wanted the United States there at all, period, end of discussion and that it was unrealistic to think that they would allow our troops to stay.  But again, whatever one’s opinion of  that, it is past history.  We are where we are and the challenge is figuring out what to do about it now.

The real problem is the current Shiite government that totally shut out the previously dominant Sunni power brokers.  There is enough religious animosity, deep-seated anger and hatred between the two groups and that has only been exacerbated by the administration of Nouri al-Maliki refusing to deal with Sunni leaders and driving them not only from the government, but in some cases, from the country.

I suspect time will reveal that some percentage of the ISIS fighters are actually Iraqi Sunnis seizing an opportunity to topple the current government.  I am not sure how long this uneasy coalition of terrorist fighters can stay together and I am especially doubtful of their ability to administer a large territory or population.

There is no doubt, however, of their ability to create havoc, destruction, and threaten the lives of thousands of people.  They are also creating the conditions for another failed state that can easily become a training ground for terrorists that reach far beyond the current area of conflict.  That is a different problem, one that needs to be addressed but different from what to do to support the current Iraqi government.  In the end, wars end through political settlements.  Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is not able to, or does not desire to, build a functioning coalition government.  The ISIS leadership is not interested in a negotiated settlement.  This leaves the United States with few options.  In my opinion, putting more American lives at risk through direct military action will not help the situation and should not be one of the options on the table.

We should continue to protect our embassy and critical workers and to pressure Nouri al-Maliki to work out a political settlement.  Whether an “artificial” country drawn by western powers without regard to the indigenous population can survive is a difficult question that only time will resolve.