The Hezbollah terrorist mastermind Imad Mughniyah has reportedly bit the dust by a car bomb. (I sense some irony) If he is actually dead, we all owe a debt of gratitude to the people who took him out, probably the Mossad. I first read about at Pajamas Media where I came across a link to a bombshell.
It was listed as an "Alternate view", but is strangely no longer present. The link is from Jane's, hardly a disreputable source. It is dated 9/19/2001, and it alleges that Imad and Dr. Zawahiri were behind the attacks, sponsored by - Iraq. If this still held as an opinion it changes the entire national security debate. I am attempting to investigate this. (Update after the jump)
I sent this to Andrew Cochran , founder of the Counter-Terrorism Blog an email asking if this was the current thought among CT professionals. Here is his response:No - and this article forgot that Al Qaeda was behind Ramzi Yousef's 1995 Bojinka Plot to bomb 11 US jetliners, and that KSM had already planned a second 9/11-type attack, which OBL iced. See http://counterterrorismblog.org/2006/08/london_the_latest_in_a_string.php. Certainly Mughniyeh was more experienced as of 2001, but OBL and Zawahiri were brilliant pupils.
I'd also imagine the Iraq connection also did not fair well with time. I have read elsewhere that Imad was an inspiration to Al Qaeda. That, and and the blood countless innocents on his hands, is more than enought reason to celebrate his death.
Thursday, February 14, 2008
A man I'm happy to see dead
Monday, July 30, 2007
Victory for Iraq!
My congratulations to all Iraqis on their magnificent victory in the Asian Cup. Omar at Iraq the Model lays out a blissful scene:
Our players, tonight our heroes, learned that only with team work they had a chance to win. May our politicians learn from the players and from the fans who are painting a glorious image of unity and national pride, and let the terrorists know that nothing can kill the spirit of the sons of the immortal Tigris and Euphrates.
The fear is gone, the curfew is ignored, tonight Iraq knows only joy...
Friday, July 13, 2007
How goes the battle?
This is probably the best summary of what the surge is trying to accomplish. Dr. Kilcullen is a State Department expert on counter-insurgency whose doctoral dissertation focused on the nature of insurgencies. He also is one of the architects of the current plan, and is thus supremely qualified to explain it.
For regular updates on progress in Iraq, I suggest Bill Roggio or Michael Yon
Al Qaeda Capitol Seized
Generally, when you take an enemy's capitol, you have seized the initiative and are winning the war. There are exceptions to this, of course: The USA had its capital burned and yet it achieved a stalemate in the War of 1812. Napoleon reached Moscow, and found it empty, the Russians having used scorched earth tactics. The key is to build on the success and expand on it.
In the Long War, I hardly thought we could take a capitol city of Al Qaeda. In fact, this has been used as an example of the difference between this war and others. Imagine my surprise when I read of a Hugh Hewitt interview of Michael Yon in which the self-proclaimed worldwide capitol of Al Qaeda was taken.HH: Now Michael Yon, a lot of people don’t know the significance of Baquba. And so can you explain what peace in Baquba means for the larger war effort?
MY: Well, it’s huge, because al Qaeda had claimed Baquba as their capitol, their worldwide capitol. And you might recall one of the things that kind of upsets people about my reporting is I said Iraq was in a civil war, and I said that way back in February of 2005, and I continue to do so. But when I first wrote that, I was in Baquba, in 2005, and I spent two or three months here. And it was just total…you could see it, and you could see al Qaeda was trying to foment that civil war, because that’s their underlying strategy, is to do that. And so getting, fracturing al Qaeda here, and al Qaeda alienating so many Iraqis, it’s helping us to put a damper on the civil war.
This is a significant victory for the Coalition forces. Apparently, the Democratic party was busy talking about surrender while the military was planning to take control of the enemy capitol. As for Michael Yon's view of this attitude:HH: Now yesterday, Harry Reid said on the floor of the Senate that the surge has failed. Do you think there’s any factual basis for making that assertion, Michael Yon, from what you’ve seen in Iraq over the last many months?
MY: He’s wrong, he’s wrong. It has absolutely not failed, and in fact, I’m finally willing to say it in public. I feel like it’s starting to succeed. And you know, I’m kind of stretching a little bit, because we haven’t gone too far into it, but I can see it from my travels around, for instance, in Anbar and out here in Diyala Province as well. Baghdad’s still very problematic. But there’s other areas where you can clearly see that there is a positive effect. And the first and foremost thing we have to do is knock down al Qaeda. And with them alienating so many Iraqis, I mean, they’re almost doing it for us. I mean, yeah, it takes military might to finally like wipe them out of Baquba, but it’s working. I mean, I sense that the surge is working. Reid is just wrong.
Read it all. Michael Yon notes that this is certainly not the end of combat. The leadership of Al Qaeda is trying to emulate (unconsciously, of course) the survival of the American leadership in 1812. However, the irhabists have lost a lot of popular support, and they may find they have few safe havens left. The reference to a massacre is from Yon's dispatch entitled Bless the Beasts and Children, whose title comes from a movie and its theme song. You read more about some of the controversial things that he has reported in this dispatch.
Friday, June 15, 2007
US Troops in Iraq, 40 years before OIF
Yes, back then we had US forces stationed in the Sandbox to repel any Middle Eastern adventures by Hitler. The guidance provided to them is surprisingly relevant to today.
Monday, June 11, 2007
Unconventional Insights on the Long War
Public perception of reality is far more important than reality itself. And who better to discuss public perception than a journalist? What color is your gator? Read it all, as is so often said. Counterinsurgency is a war of perceptions - is the government perceived as the lawful ruler and able to protect its citizens? If the government is perceived as a failure, it will fail in reality. By the way, Michael Yon is a excellent writer and probably the best war correspondent we have. His site is worth a prolonged visit.
The Mesopotamian, an Iraqi blogger, made an interesting point a few weeks back. Normally, we like to think of insurgencies as war on the cheap, but it isn't free. Even if the weaponry is less expensive, someone has to pay for it, and plastic explosive is hardly free. I don't know if I agree with his conclusions, (Iran has a lot of money, enough to build nuclear weaponry, after all) but we would be foolish to neglect the flow of money to the insurgents - often provided by the thirsty gas tanks of our cars.
For all those feminists out there who think the war on terror is not worth winning, I suggest this article. Dressing like a sack of potatoes is not exactly liberating.
Saturday, May 26, 2007
Why Skynet won't happen.
The Terminator: The Skynet Funding Bill is passed. The system goes on-line August 4th, 1997. Human decisions are removed from strategic defense. Skynet begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th. In a panic, they try to pull the plug.
Sarah Connor: Skynet fights back.
The Terminator: Yes. It launches its missiles against the targets in Russia.
John Connor: Why attack Russia? Aren't they our friends now?
The Terminator: Because Skynet knows the Russian counter-attack will eliminate its enemies over her
The idea of a supercomputer gaining sentience and turning on its creators is a classic of science fiction. It goes back to early Gothic sci-fi, like Frankenstein facing down his horrible monster - brought to life, forsaken, then returning with a vengeance. Looking backing even further, we see the idea of hubris in Greek tragedy. A audacious man dares to stand above his station and challenge the gods (the creators of life) and is destroyed by the horrific results of his actions.
However, a careful reading of these stories shows a common thread. It isn't just the AI/creation of life that causes the horrific results. The creator is horrified by his work, and tries to destroy his creation. I've often though that AIs would probably be treated better than that. The product of so much effort would probably endear itself to others.
It's already happening:
The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have become an unprecedented field study in human relationships with intelligent machines. These conflicts are the first in history to see widespread deployment of thousands of battle bots. Flying bots range in size from Learjets to eagles. Some ground bots are like small tanks. Others are the size of two-pound dumbbells, designed to be thrown through a window to scope out the inside of a room. Bots search caves for bad guys, clear roads of improvised explosive devices, scoot under cars to look for bombs, spy on the enemy and, sometimes, kill humans.
Even more startling than these machines' capabilities, however, are the effects they have on their friendly keepers who, for example, award their bots "battlefield promotions" and "purple hearts." "Ours was called Sgt. Talon," says Sgt. Michael Maxson of the 737th Ordnance Company (EOD). "We always wanted him as our main robot. Every time he was working, nothing bad ever happened. He always got the job done. He took a couple of detonations in front of his face and didn't stop working. One time, he actually did break down in a mission, and we sent another robot in and it got blown to pieces. It's like he shut down because he knew something bad would happen." The troops promoted the robot to staff sergeant -- a high honor, since that usually means a squad leader. They also awarded it three "purple hearts."
Humans have long displayed an uncanny ability to make emotional connections with their manufactured helpmates. Car owners for generations have named their vehicles. In "Cast Away," Tom Hanks risks his life to save a volleyball named Wilson, who has become his best friend and confidant. Now that our creations display elements of intelligence, however, the bonds humans forge with their machines are even more impressive. Especially when humans credit their bots with saving their lives.
Ted Bogosh recalls one day in Camp Victory, near Baghdad, when he was a Marine master sergeant running the robot repair shop.
That day, an explosive ordnance disposal technician walked through his door. The EODs, as they are known, are the people who -- with their robots -- are charged with disabling Iraq's most virulent scourge, the roadside improvised explosive device. In this fellow's hands was a small box. It contained the remains of his robot. He had named it Scooby-Doo.
"There wasn't a whole lot left of Scooby," Bogosh says. The biggest piece was its 3-by-3-by-4-inch head, containing its video camera. On the side had been painted "its battle list, its track record. This had been a really great robot."
The veteran explosives technician looming over Bogosh was visibly upset. He insisted he did not want a new robot. He wanted Scooby-Doo back.
"Sometimes they get a little emotional over it," Bogosh says. "Like having a pet dog. It attacks the IEDs, comes back, and attacks again. It becomes part of the team, gets a name. They get upset when anything happens to one of the team. They identify with the little robot quickly. They count on it a lot in a mission."
The bots even show elements of "personality," Bogosh says. "Every robot has its own little quirks. You sort of get used to them. Sometimes you get a robot that comes in and it does a little dance, or a karate chop, instead of doing what it's supposed to do." The operators "talk about them a lot, about the robot doing its mission and getting everything accomplished." He remembers the time "one of the robots happened to get its tracks destroyed while doing a mission." The operators "duct-taped them back on, finished the mission and then brought the robot back" to a hero's welcome.
Near the Tigris River, operators even have been known to take their bot fishing. They put a fishing rod in its claw and retire back to the shade, leaving the robot in the sun. Of the fish, Bogosh says, "Not sure if we ever caught one or not."
Who hasn't named their car or become used to their computers little quirks? When you work with a machine, you begin to apply human-like qualities to it. Now, imagine robots that actually simulate or possess personality and emotions. Rather than pulling the plug, you might see the robots in the barracks or with the unit on shore leave. Kind of hard to see Skynet deciding to eliminate humanity after playing poker with NORAD staffers...
Sunday, April 29, 2007
Victory or Death
It seems Harry Reid, with his vast experience in matters of strategy and the Middle East geopolitical climate, has declared the war in Iraq is lost. Strangely, General David Petraeus, the current military commander for Iraq, has a different view. I think I'll just trust the counterinsurgency expert on this one.
Not everyone is on the popular new bandwagon stating that the war in Iraq is lost. In fact, some people are dedicated to victory in the War on Terror.
The Victory Caucus
Victory PAC
No End But Victory
On a side note, victory in the Long War also requires that we defeat Islamism, (aka Islamic Fundamentalism, aka Jihadism, aka radical Islam) the brutal ideology that fuels Al Qaeda. This is not impossible, and those of an astute mind can turn themselves around. Like this guy.
Sunday, April 8, 2007
A question of training
As all of the readers for this site likely know, Iran has released the British sailors it took hostage. Many people seem to be quite critical of their conduct, which was rather embarrassing. Not being an expert in such things, I turned to someone more with the subject: Former Spook He is formerly of military intelligence, and ascribes the matter to a lack of training. This is understandable - sailors aren't expected to face capture, just as pilots aren't expected to deal with a hull breach. At least, until now.
As for tactics, it might be helpful to keep a helocopter overhead, especially one with a nice chaingun on it, in order to deter future Persian pirates. Given how close this is to the mainland, a land-based ground attack aircraft might also work.
