WAR 02-03-2018-to-02-09-2018___****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****

Shacknasty Shagrat

Has No Life - Lives on TB
Still nothing on Syrian Air Force response.
SS

Joyce Karam
‏Verified account @Joyce_Karam
2h2 hours ago

The Jemraya research center:
•3 miles out of Damascus #Syria
•Soviets helped Hafez Assad establish it in 1971 as technology research center
•Situated Near 105th battalion
•Western agencies believe it’s used for Chemical Weapons development
•Was hit by Israel in 2013,2017
https://twitter.com/Joyce_Karam
 

danielboon

TB Fanatic
Vice President Mike Pence‏Verified account@VP 2h2 hours agoCritical mtg w/PM @AbeShinzo where I announced new sanctions on the North Korean regime. The US stands shoulder-to-shoulder w/ Japan, South Korea & our allies to apply maximum pressure on N.Korea to achieve the global objective: denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. #VPinASIA

Hindustan Times‏Verified account@htTweets 13h13 hours ago
Amid increased tension, Pakistan troops resort to heavy shelling along #LoC http://read.ht/Bg6D

Yonhap News Agency‏@YonhapNews 13h13 hours ago
U.S. has no plans to meet with N.K. officials in S. Korea: State Department
http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/news...003100315.html
 

danielboon

TB Fanatic
Still nothing on Syrian Air Force response.
SS

Joyce Karam
‏Verified account @Joyce_Karam
2h2 hours ago

The Jemraya research center:
•3 miles out of Damascus #Syria
•Soviets helped Hafez Assad establish it in 1971 as technology research center
•Situated Near 105th battalion
•Western agencies believe it’s used for Chemical Weapons development
•Was hit by Israel in 2013,2017
https://twitter.com/Joyce_Karam

oh it will come then look out
 

danielboon

TB Fanatic
France: Turkey, Iran violating international, Syria using chlorine gas

PARIS - France's foreign minister said on Wednesday that Turkey and Iran were among those violating international law by their actions in Syria and warned that Ankara should not add "war to war".



"Ensuring the security of its borders does not mean killing civilians and that should be condemned. In a dangerous situation in Syria, (Turkey) should not add war to war," Jean-Yves Le Drian told BFM TV.


International law "is being violated by Turkey, by the Damascus regime, by Iran and those who are attacking eastern Ghouta and Idlib", he said.



Le Drian also said that "all indications show us that the Syrian regime is using chlorine gas at the moment."



The government and its ally Russia have been pounding a besieged rebel-held area outside Damascus for the last two days with airstrikes, killing dozens of people.



A UN-mandated investigator said Tuesday his team was probing reports that bombs allegedly containing weaponized chlorine have been used on two recent occasions in Syria.



"An investigation has been opened on that matter by the United Nations," Le Drian said. "The threat of using chemical weapons remains, this is a very serious situation."https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-5095865,00.html
 

Doomer Doug

TB Fanatic
The more "they" keep pushing the "Assad junior is using chemical weapons," scenario, the more nervous I get. When "they" think Assad junior is using chemical weapons, then "they" start bombing Syria.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2018/02/us-launches-airstrikes-on-taliban-training-camps.php

US launches airstrikes on Taliban training camps

BY BILL ROGGIO | February 6, 2018 | admin@longwarjournal.org | @billroggio

The US military launched a series of airstrikes on Taliban training camps located in Afghanistan’s remote northeastern province of Badakhshan, which borders Tajikistan. The camps were used by the East Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM) and other terrorist groups.

“Over the past 96 hours, US forces conducted air operations to strike Taliban training facilities in Badakhshan province, preventing the planning and rehearsal of terrorist acts near the border with China and Tajikistan by such organizations as the East Turkistan Islamic Movement and others,” Resolute Support announced in a press release.

According to Resolute Support, the airstrikes also “destroyed stolen Afghan National Army vehicles that were in the process of being converted to vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices.”

The strike took place in the district of Warduj, a US military officer told The Washington Post. FDD’s Long War Journal has assessed Warduj to be under Taliban control. The district has changed hands several times over the past 4 years. The presence of camps in the district is further evidence that the Taliban controls the district.

Badakhshan, once a peaceful province, has become a Taliban hotbed since the US withdrew the bulk of its forces after the troop surge ended in 2012. Of Badakhshan’s 28 districts, LWJ assesses three to be Taliban controlled and another nine to be contested.

The East Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM), which is also known as the East Turkistan Islamic Party, is an al Qaeda-affiliated jihadist group based in Afghanistan and Pakistan and operates throughout Central Asia.

ETIM’s emir has served on al Qaeda’s shura, and it has operated a training camp that was sponsored by Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda. After the Taliban lost control of Afghanistan in 2001, the ETIM established training camps in Pakistan. [See Turkistan Islamic Party leader criticizes the Islamic State’s ‘illegitimate’ caliphate.]

ETIM fighters have fought alongside the Taliban and other jihadist groups against Coalition and Afghan forces since the US first invaded Afghanistan in 2001.

The US has previously targeted ETIM leaders inside Pakistan in its drone campaign. In Aug. 2010, the US thought it killed Abdul Haq al Turkistani, the emir of the ETIM, in a drone strike in North Waziristan, Pakistan. Turkistani later re-emerged in a video in 2015, and said he was severely wounded in the 2010 drone strike. Abdul Haq issued another in 2016 that took al Qaeda’s side in its dispute with the Islamic State.

The US was also thought to have killed Emeti Yakuf (a.k.a. Abdul Shakoor Turkistani), in a drone strike in Pakistan in Aug. 2012. Yakuf took control of the ETIM as Turkistani was recovering from his injuries, and also took control of al Qaeda’s network in Pakistan’s tribal areas in 2010.

Bill Roggio is a Senior Fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and the Editor of FDD's Long War Journal.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://www.longwarjournal.org/arch...3-jihadist-facilitators-based-in-pakistan.php

Treasury Department sanctions 3 jihadist facilitators based in Pakistan

BY THOMAS JOSCELYN | February 7, 2018 | tjoscelyn@gmail.com | @thomasjoscelyn

The Treasury Department announced today that three jihadists based in Pakistan have been added to the US government’s list of specially designated global terrorists.

“We are targeting operatives who have provided logistical support, improvised explosive devices, and other technological assistance to [al Qaeda], Lashkar-e Tayyiba, the Taliban, and other terrorist groups,” Sigal Mandelker, Treasury’s Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, said in a statement.

Ms. Mandelker also gently prodded the Pakistani government to crack down on the illicit jihadi network, which has operated on Pakistani soil for years. “This is part of this Administration’s broader efforts to disrupt terrorist fundraising, and we call on the Pakistani government and others in the region to work with us to deny sanctuary to these dangerous individuals and organizations,” Mandelker said.

All three of the newly-designated men — Rahman Zeb Faqir Muhammad, Hizb Ullah Astam Khan and Dilawar Khan Nadir Khan — have worked for Fazeel-A-Tul Shaykh Abu Mohammed Ameen Al-Peshwari (also known as Sheikh Aminullah).

Sheikh Aminullah controls the Ganj Madrassa in Peshawar, Pakistan. The religious institution is a hub for several jihadist organizations, including al Qaeda, LeT, and the Taliban. Aminullah, who was designated as a terrorist in 2009, was previously identified as an “al Qaeda facilitator” by the US government. He has provided explosive vests to al Qaeda and Taliban suicide bombers, and also funded the families of the terror groups’ so-called martyrs. In 2011, Aminullah was also reportedly named the head of the Taliban’s Peshawar Regional Military Shura, which is responsible for operations in eastern and northern Afghanistan.

Today’s designations provide new details concerning Aminullah’s activities. Namely, Treasury says the newly-sanctioned trio facilitated Aminullah’s travels to the Gulf on several occasions between 2013 and 2015. It is likely that Aminullah was fundraising during his jaunts abroad.

Like Aminullah, Rahman Zeb Faqir Muhammad (a.k.a. Rahman Zeb) has worked for Lashkar-e Tayyiba (LeT), a designated terrorist group that was incubated by the Pakistani military and intelligence establishment. Treasury says Zeb “was an LeT operative” who ran the group’s Gulf-based fundraising network “for several years.” In that capacity, Zeb “coordinated” financial transfers “with a Pakistan-based LeT facilitator” in early 2016.

Although LeT is headquartered in Pakistan, and has been especially focused on India, its men have fought and plotted attacks inside Afghanistan as well. And Zeb has allegedly backed these efforts. “As of mid-2014,” Treasury says, Zeb was a long-standing contact of LeT members involved in Afghan operations, and he was involved in business activities with an LeT commander responsible for the group’s operations in Afghanistan.”

The US government ties Hizb Ullah Astam Khan to the jihad in Afghanistan as well. Hizb Ullah has “served as a financial official of a Peshawar-based madrassa that was co-founded by Shaykh Aminullah.” (This is likely a reference to the Ganj Madrassa.) But Hizb Ullah’s role hasn’t been limited to bean counting. He “previously worked for Shaykh Aminullah as an improvised explosive device (IED) expert in Kunar Province, Afghanistan, where he deployed IEDs targeting Afghan and Coalition forces.” Hizb Ullah also helped ship “IED precursor chemicals supplied from Pakistan to Afghanistan for U.S.-designated terrorist groups, including the Taliban and Jama’at ul Dawa al-Qu’ran (JDQ).”

The State Department designated JDQ as a terrorist organization in May 2016, noting it is “based in Peshawar, Pakistan, and eastern Afghanistan” and has “long-standing ties to al Qaeda and Lashkar e-Tayyiba.” In 2010, JDQ announced its fealty to the Taliban.

Dilawar Khan Nadir Khan (Dilawar) is the third and final jihadist designated as a terrorist today. He has served as “Aminullah’s assistant.” Dilawar’s responsibilities have included “handling Aminullah’s accommodations in Pakistan,” “relaying” the ideologue’s “messages,” and facilitating financial transfers. Treasury explains that Dilawar was “one of the leaders of the Ganj Madrassa” in 2013, and he presumably continued in that role in more recent years.

The Treasury Department is using the terror designation process to highlight Pakistan’s ongoing complicity in the jihadists’ operations. In January, Treasury sanctioned six senior Taliban figures. Five of the six are headquartered in Pakistan and the sixth runs a network that stretches into the country. At least two of those jihadists have worked for the Taliban’s Peshawar Shura, which Aminullah reportedly led as of 2011 and 2012.

Thomas Joscelyn is a Senior Fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and the Senior Editor for FDD's Long War Journal.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Hummm....

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://www.themaven.net/warriormav...ge-deterrence-equation-POwPqD8BP0aOjNLyh82WLA

Mattis: Nuclear-Armed F-35 Can Change "Deterrence" Equation

by
Warrior Maven
16 hrs-edited

The Pentagon sees “nuclear variant” of the F-35 attack envelope as key to the Nuclear Posture Review

By Kris Osborn - Managing Editor - Warrior Maven

The Pentagon's accelerated development of a “nuclear-armed" F-35 Joint Strike Fighter attack envelope is of critical importance to a new sweeping strategic nuclear weapons modernization and development strategy aimed at countering Russia, China and North Korea -- and addressing a much more serious global nuclear weapons threat environment.

Adding a nuclear-capable F-35 to the air portion of the nuclear triad – to supplement the existing B-2, B-52 and emerging B-21 – will bring a new dimension to US nuclear attack options and potentially place a new level of pressure upon potential adversaries.

Discussion of the F-35’s role in nuclear deterrence emerged recently during a House Armed Services Committee hearing on the Pentagon’s recently published Nuclear Posture Review.

In written testimony, Defense Secretary James Mattis cited the F-35 as an indispensable element of US and NATO nuclear deterrence.

“Modernizing our dual-capable fighter bombers with next-generation F-35 fighter aircraft will maintain the strength of NATO’s deterrence posture and maintain our ability to forward deploy nuclear weapons, should the security situation demand it,” his testimony states.

Mattis also cited the emergence of the F-35 as a “nuclear delivery system” in the context of expressing grave concern that US nuclear weapons modernization has not, in recent years, kept pace with a fast-changing global threat environment.

“Nuclear delivery system development over the last eight years shows numerous advances by Russia, China, and North Korea versus the near absence of such activity by the United States, with competitors and adversaries’ developing 34 new systems as compared to only one for the U.S.—the F-35 aircraft,” Mattis said in written statements.

Officials with the Office of the Secretary of Defense confirmed to Warrior Maven that Mattis here is indeed referring to an emerging “nuclear variant” of the F-35. Multiple news reports, such as Business Insider, cite senior officials saying a nuclear-armed F-35 is slated to emerge in the early 2020s, if not sooner. The F-35 is equipped to carry the B-61 nuclear bomb, according to a report in Air Force Magazine.

It makes sense that the F-35 would increasingly be called upon to function as a key element of US nuclear deterrence strategy; in recent months, F-35s deployed to the Pacific theater to participate in military exercises over the Korean Peninsula. The weapons, ISR technolgoy and multi-role functions of the F-35 potentially provide a wide range of attack options should that be necessary in the region.

Utilizing speed, maneuverability and lower-altitude flight when compared to how a bomber such as a B-2 would operate, a nuclear-capable F-35 presents new threats to a potential adversary. In a tactical sense, it seems that a high-speed F-35, fortified by long-range sensors and targeting technologies, might be well positioned to identify and destroy mobile weapons launchers or other vital, yet slightly smaller on-the-move targets. As part of this equation, an F-35 might also be able to respond much more quickly, with low-yield nuclear weapons in the event that new intelligence information locating a new target emerges.

The F-35 recently completed a series of weapons separation tests and is currently able to be armed with the AIM-9X, AIM-120, AIM-132, GBU-12, JDAM, JSOW, SDB-1 and the Paveway IV, Lockheed Martin data states. While it is not yet clear exactly how a nuclear weapon might integrate onto the platform, the F-35 is configured to carry more than 3500 pounds of ordnance in stealth mode and over 18-thousand pounds uncontested.

While senior Pentagon leaders are understandably hesitant to discuss particular contingencies or attack scenarios, the NPR is
quite clear that a more pro-active nuclear weapons posture is aimed at strengthening “deterrence.”

​After analyzing the global threat calculus, the NPR calls for rapid inclusion of two additional nuclear weapons options – to include a sea-launched nuclear armed cruise missile.

“A nuclear-armed sea-launched cruise missile and the modification of a small number of existing submarine launched ballistic missile warheads to provide a low-yield option – will enhance deterrence by ensuring no adversary under any circumstances can perceive an advantage through limited nuclear escalation or other strategic attack,” Gen. Paul Selva, Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters.

Senior Pentagon leaders stress that neither of these new nuclear weapons recommendations in the NPR require developing
new nuclear warheads or will result in increasing the size of the nuclear stockpile. NPR DoD advocates further stress that the addition of these weapons does align with US non-proliferation commitments.

​Mattis and other senior leaders seem aware that elements of the NPRs strategic approach may reflect a particular irony
or paradox; in response to questions from lawmakers about whether adding new low-yield nuclear weapons could “lower the threshold” to nuclear war and therefore introduce new elements of danger, Mattis told Congress that increasing offensive nuclear-weapons attack capability will have the opposite effect, meaning the added weapons would improve deterrence and therefore enhance prospects for peace.

Specifically, Mattis explained that a new, low-yield Submarine-Launched Ballistic Missile could likely provide pressure on Russia to a point where they might be more inclined to negotiate about adhering to the INF treaty they have violated.

“We have an ongoing Russian violation of the INF. We want our negotiators to have something to negotiate with because we want Russia back in compliance,” Mattis told lawmakers.

Alongside this strategic emphasis, Mattis also stressed that the NPR stipulates that nuclear weapons will only be used in the most extreme cases, adding that the “use of any nuclear weapon is a strategic game changer. Nuclear deterrence must be considered carefully.”

Citing the rapid technological progress of adversary air-defense systems, Mattis further elaborated that a sea-launched cruise missile option might be necessary to hold potential enemies at risk in the event that air-dropped low-yield weapons were challenged to operate above necessary targets.

“To drop a gravity bomb that is low-yield means a bomber would have to penetrate air defenses. Air defenses are very different than they were 20 years ago,” Mattis told Congress.

For instance, Russian-built S-400s and an emerging S-500 are potentially able to detect aircraft at much further ranges on a larger number of frequencies. Furthermore, faster computer processing and digital networking enable dispersed air defenses to hand off targets quickly across wide swaths of terrain.

This phenomenon also provides indispensable elements to the argument in favor of the Pentagon’s current development of a new nuclear-armed, air launched cruise missile – the Long Range Stand-Off weapon (LRSO). In similar fashion, a nuclear cruise missile could hold enemy targets at risk in a high-tech threat environment where bombers were less able to operate.

Some critics of the LRSO maintain that the introduction of the LRSO brings a “destabilizing” effect to the possible use of nuclear weapons. In a manner quite consistent with the current NPR, senior Air Force weapons developers told Warrior Maven over the course of several interviews that, by strengthening deterrence, the addition of a new LRSO is expected to have the reverse – or “stabilizing” – effect by making it more difficult for a potential adversary to contemplate a first strike.

NPR proponents say a strengthened and more wide-reaching nuclear weapons approach is necessary, given the current threat environment which does, without question, seem to be raising the possibility of nuclear confrontation to a level not seen in years.

“We're concerned about: some of the adjustments in potential adversaries' thinking about nuclear weapons. With a greater reliance on nuclear weapons, a featuring of them, in some cases -- for example, in the Russian nuclear doctrine, called "Escalating to De-escalate". John Rood, Under Secretary of Defense for Policy told reporters when discussing the NPR.

From the Nuclear Posture Review

-----Russia’s belief that limited nuclear first use, potentially including low-yield weapons, can provide such an advantage is based, in part, on Moscow’s perception that its greater number and variety of non-strategic nuclear systems provide a coercive advantage in crises and at lower levels of conflict. Recent Russian statements on this evolving nuclear weapons doctrine appear to lower the threshold for Moscow’s first-use of nuclear weapons ---

The text of the report specifically cites the importance of dual-capable aircraft (DCA) in Europe and states that the F-35 is fundamental to deterring Russia.

"We are committed to upgrading DCA with the nuclear-capable F-35 aircraft. We will work with NATO to best ensure—and improve where needed—the readiness, survivability, and operational effectiveness of DCA based in Europe," the Nuclear Posture Review states.

Nuclear Weapons Modernization

NEW ICBM

The NPR also seeks to accelerate ongoing efforts to modernize the air, sea and ground portions of the nuclear triad. DoD is immersed in current efforts to fast-track development and prototypes of a new Ground Based Strategic Deterrent ICBM, Air Force developers have told Warrior Maven.

Early prototyping, including expected prototype “shoot off” testing is slated for 2020, service developers have told Warrior Maven in recent interviews. Northrop Grumman and Boeing are both now under contract to build the new weapon. The Air Force plans to build at least 400 GBSDs, Air Force senior leaders have said.

Critical elements of the new ICBM, developed to replace the decades-old Minuteman IIIs, will feature a new engineering method along with advanced command control, circuitry and guidance systems, engineers have said.

CLICK HERE TO READ WARRIOR MAVEN'S EARLIER STORY ABOUT NEW AIR FORCE ICBMs

​NEW BOMBER

Regarding the Air component, the Air Force recently completed a critical design review of its new B-21 Raider nuclear-capable stealth bomber. As is often the case with nuclear weapons, many of the details regarding the development of this platform are not available, but there is widespread discussion among US Air Force leaders that the bomber is expected to usher in a new era of stealth technology; much of the discussion focuses upon the bomber’s ability to operate above advanced enemy air defenses and “hold any target at risk anywhere in the world,” the Air Force Military Deputy for Acquisition Lt. Gen. Arnold Bunch has told Warrior Maven in past interviews.

CLICK HERE FOR WARRIOR MAVEN'S EARLIER COVERAGE OF THE B-21

Early available renderings of the bomber show what appears to be an advanced B-2 like design, yet possibly one with a lower heat signature and improved stealth properties. However, service leaders are quick to point out that, given advancements in Russian air defenses, stealth will surge forward as “one arrow in a quiver” of nuclear attack possibilities.

Concurrently, the Air Force is surging forward with a massive B-2 modernization overhaul, involving new digital nuclear weapons capability and the integration of a developing system called the Defensive Management System. This enables the B-2, which Air Force developers acknowledge may indeed be more vulnerable to advanced air defenses than in earlier years when it was first
built, to more quickly recognize locations of enemy air defenses at safer ranges as a means to avoid detection.

NEW NUCLEAR-ARMED BALLISTIC MISSILE SUBMARINE

Finally, shifting to a program widely regarded as among the most significant across the DoD enterprise, the Navy is already underway with early development of the new nuclear-armed Columbia-Class ballistic missile submarines. Several key current efforts with this, including early “tube and hull” forging of missile tubes, work on a US-UK common missile compartment – and little discussed upgrades to the Trident II D5 nuclear missiles.

​CLICK HERE FOR WARRIOR MAVEN'S EARLIER STORY ON COLUMBIA-CLASS SUBMARINE

Undersea strategic deterrence, as described by Navy and Pentagon leaders, offers a critical means to ensure a second strike ability in the event of a catastrophic first-strike nuclear attack impacting or disabling other elements of the triad.

While it may seem obvious, nuclear deterrence hinges upon a recognizable, yet vital contradiction; weapons of seemingly limitless destructive power – are ultimately employed to “keep the peace” – and save lives. Along these lines, Senior Navy and Air Force nuclear weapons developers routinely make the point that – since the advent of nuclear weapons – the world has managed to avoid massive, large-scale major power force on force warfare.

While Pentagon leaders rarely, if ever, offer a window into current nuclear-strike capabilities, it is widely discussed that the current North Korean nuclear threat is leading US military planners to envision the full spectrum of nuclear weapons contingencies. Even further, the US did recently send B-2 bombers to the Asian theater – stationing them in Guam.

More Weapons and Technology - WARRIOR MAVEN (CLICK HERE) --

All Scout Warrior Content Has Now Moved towww.warriormaven.com

WARRIOR MAVEN's Premium Offer - Free for US Military - Offers Q&A with US Military Leaders - PREMIUM CLICK HERE

Kris Osborn can be reached at Krisosborn.ko@gmail.com
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art/america’s-unimportant-unserious-wars

America’s Unimportant, Unserious Wars

by John Bolton
Journal Article | February 7, 2018 - 3:59am

For America, brewing risk in its financial system, economy, and the wellsprings of national strength was far greater than anything that terrorists or other global rivals could muster.

-- David Rothkopf​

American soldiers spent another holiday season fighting what Foreign Affairs recently called “America’s Forgotten Wars.” Having spent my career serving in an Army at war, I would add unimportant and unserious. Though their last real peacetime holiday was 17 years ago, most Americans regard their seemingly perennial wars as an abstraction at best. The nation has ignored these wars beyond the most superficial attention and supercilious “Support the Troops” platitudes. America lacks both serious consideration about the ends America seeks in deploying its sons and daughters across the globe and the way it is achieving our stated ends.

America must make a choice between pursuing interests full or redefining national priorities. Failing do so since 9/11 has created perpetual wars that are exhausting national will, money, and prestige while eroding freedoms and domestic consensus. If America does not quickly right the ship of state, putting away a dangerous inward-looking nationalism, we will wake to find that our heritage, solvency, and capacity to shape the world gone, leaving behind a nation of debtors beholden to powers we beyond our influence.

America’s endless wars in the greater Middle East are emblematic of a failure to link policy and national interests. In Afghanistan, the decisive year still looms. Though President Ghani is a capable partner, systemic problems plague the Afghan government and much of the population remains beyond government control, while anti-Afghan forces retain safe havens in Pakistan, which remains a fickle partner at best, despite decades of American protestations (and billions in aid). The larger problem is that our stated goals in the Middle East—preventing terrorist strikes on the homeland and fostering a stable Afghanistan—overstate the capabilities of both our enemies and ourselves.

Reflecting a preference for action over effect, America seeks easy wins (kills) against terrorists while ignoring growing threats in more important regions. No matter the threat, our solution is nearly always military firepower; changing presidents has only changed means, not our way of pursuing ends. The solution remains the same: perpetual war waged from South Asia to West Africa, based on a pernicious, can-do belief that what persistently failed in the past can succeed if given sufficient (more) money and firepower. This stubbornness illustrates the dissonance inherent in how America sees itself compared to the rest of the world.

While expecting to dictate our will, culture, and prerogatives around the globe, Americans largely do not understand the wider world. As a result, the public magnifies threats, playing into the hands of our adversaries. We focus less on defining our goals and values than defeating enemy tactics. The result is unbalanced military policy and national strategy. If our wars are just limited engagements seeking limited ends, then their costs are grossly disproportionate to their gains. If, in fact, we are in a long-term, generational struggle, then our means are likewise inadequate to our ends. Either way, the nation’s policies are discordant with its wars—the result of 20 years of strategic drift. The biggest danger to America’s military is not a foreign opponent, but a fractured domestic consensus consumed by culture wars while waging a war on credit.

Gentlemen, we have run out of money. It is time to start thinking.

-- Ernest Rutherford​

Ignoring this choice—making our wars small and permanent rather than serious and short—has generated a stalemate machine. We fight not so much as to win, but to avoid losing. Our actions would make sense if the cost of inaction versus. action balanced out, but they are orders of magnitude apart. Sending $100,000 missiles against $2,500 pickup trucks is not a sustainable strategy, but we remain, somehow, afraid of what President Obama called “guys in pickup trucks.” After saying ISIS was “not an existential threat,” Obama received a media drubbing for his supposed dalliance, but events have shown him prescient. ISIS was not an existential threat; the group’s extremism was its undoing. The threat to the American homeland is best approached through policing, not military action. Meanwhile America’s debt grows unchecked, accrued in one-sided wars of attrition against an enemy that has more young men willing to die than we have dollars to spend.

Like an aging lion on the savannah—still powerful and deadly but outclassed by more nimble foes—America has thrown its might around the world haphazardly since the mid-1990s. Our national leadership, no matter the party, universally failed to adapt the nation to post-Cold War realities. The results are not pretty; even acknowledging post-Cold War disorder, American engagement has generally made situations worse. From Mogadishu and Kosovo to Iraq and Yemen, American bombs seldom reaped gains exceeding costs. Now-permanent crises overshadow our initial successes because of the humanitarian and political catastrophes left in our wake.

However, amid these challenges (and failures) America cannot afford to turn inward. Revisionist powers like Russia and China seek to counter American influence, specifically limiting our trade partnerships and power projection. Now we are turning against free trade, a self-inflicted wound that will limit our economic power and global reach.

The emerging global paradigm is less Cold War great power standoff than it is 19th Century Rush for Africa. As new markets open thanks to Globalization, we must take advantage. China’s One Belt/One Road initiative exemplifies this new paradigm. Likewise, while China embraces technology and rapid development, particularly mass transit, we look backward. Rather than grasping the future however, many Americans yearn for the past, espousing a specious nationalism which, ironically, serves our adversaries’ narratives. China and Russia utilize and encourage nationalism to justify violations of international law abroad. Domestically, they use nationalism to support a spurious deal to their people, forcing them to trade human rights for economic progress. America embracing outsider roles only helps this agenda. American ethno-nationalism is facile, ignoring American history and demographics. It inhibits our strongest virtues abroad and it underwrites poor choices at home.

Now lacking any enemy to frame ourselves against we are seeing the harsh edges of a morbid civil culture that has lost faith in mainstream institutions (except the military), norms, and practices. Older, multi-cultural, unifying American norms lie trampled under the feet of a fractured individualism that serves small, selfish needs and breeds distrust. Ironically, our adversaries trust their own despotic regimes more than we trust our own. As trust collapses at home, our strength abroad flounders.

Russian interference is the 2016 election is not surprising; what is shocking however is that a foreign power could have had such impact with such a shoddy, haphazard influence campaign. The Russian success shows the underlying mistrust and cracks in the previously strong American electorate.

In many cases men have been able to see the dangers ahead. But they have surrendered to an idea that seduced them into an irrevocable disaster…by their own folly rather than misfortune.

-- Thucydides​

Concurrent with a failure to develop sound policy is a Civil-Military chasm between the nation and the instruments of its militarized foreign policy. A nation that fails to take its military seriously cannot hope to take seriously the hard business of national security. An undeniable result of our Chicken Hawk military policies—whereby the public supports the military but lacks a connection to it—is the substitution of talking points and slogans for realistic policy. Americans love their military, but the public is AWOL on many critical issues. This partly reflects an increasingly political military that is, likewise, increasingly a family affair. A political and parochial military increases the likelihood of it becoming a political football.

Just two generations ago, Americans understood their military, beyond the platitudes and stereotypes seen today. In an earlier time, military service was something closer, tangible—respected surely, but not beyond a sly barb or joke. In other words, it was familiar. A familiar military is gone; most Americans today will spend their lives never knowing a service member, let alone have one in the family. Due to a combination of military parochialism, declining civic virtue, and the All-Volunteer Force, the American Military is more abstraction than reality.

Failing to address this situation generated a perpetual war with the attendant costs of a war state. Our budget exploded, our domestic strife increased, our military civil-divide is larger than ever, and we willing curtain civil rights in service of security. Wars so long should be intolerable to the national psyche, especially ones so detached from real threats.

So what should we do to alleviate this national malaise? According to National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster, winning “requires a rational determination to achieve sustainable outcomes…consistent with vital interests.” American can achieve its ends through domestic tranquility, financial solvency, and increasing economic power. That Americans are turning their back on free trade and the internal institutions that secured and sustained the peace for three generations—NATO, the UN, and the World Bank —should give us pause.

Consumed with internal faction and fighting culture wars, America needs to get serious—and quickly. Difficult choices lie ahead. We cannot continue doing what we have, excusing failure because we did not drop enough bombs or spend enough money. After a pause for reflection, we must strike a balance between the poles of isolating nationalism and neo-liberal nation building. We must disabuse ourselves of a nationalism that serves our adversaries’ agenda at the expense of our own. Americans have hyperbolic expectations of permanent primacy and world leadership as their birthright. Nothing is guaranteed, particularly world power. Our founders were wiser, reminding us “the price of freedom is eternal vigilance.”

About the Author

John Bolton
John Bolton is an Army Officer deployed to Afghanistan. He is a graduate of the Army Command and General Staff College’s Art of War Scholars Program and holds degrees from West Point and American Military University. His has multiple deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan. The views presented here are his alone and not representative of the U.S. Army, the Defense Department, or the U.S. government.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://www.yahoo.com/news/finnish-police-knife-attacker-identified-121623157.html

Finnish police: Knife attacker identified with IS

JARI TANNER, Associated Press • February 7, 2018

HELSINKI (AP) — Finnish police say the Moroccan asylum-seeker who killed two people and wounded eight others in last year's stabbing attack in southwestern Finland identified strongly with the Islamic State group and was motivated largely by hatred after heavy bombardments by the Western-led coalition in the Syrian city of Raqqa.

Olli Toyras of the National Bureau of Investigation said Wednesday that Abderrahman Bouanane became radicalized some three months before the Aug. 18 attack in the western city of Turku, and although he acted alone, he thought of himself as an IS fighter.

"We don't think any group is being involved in this," Toyras said, although adding that the suspect's phone and computer contained IS-related photos and material. "He has seen himself as a fighter, a soldier, a man of IS. He would have liked IS to have taken credit for the attack."

On the day of the attack, Bouanane had bicycled from Turku's outskirts to the city center, bringing along two kitchen knives he had taken from a friend's home.

He attended prayer at a local mosque before he started a stabbing rampage in Turku's main market square that lasted some three minutes and left two women dead and eight others — six women and two men — wounded.

Toyras said Bouanane, born in 1994, had picked his victims at random. His initial target had been a Finnish soldier waiting at a bus station but he abandoned the plan as too risky.

Toyras said Bouanane had keenly followed earlier terror incidents in Belgium and France and was willing to die for "a martyr cause" and was waiting to be shot dead by the Finnish police.

The suspect came to Finland in 2016 and saw later his asylum application rejected. but police said that was not considered the main motive.

Following the attack, police discovered a manifesto posted online by Bouanane that was strongly influenced by Muslim and IS world views and contained disparaging references to Western religions.

The case is being investigated as two counts of terror-related murder and eight counts of attempted murder with a terror-related motive.

State prosecutors are expected to file official charges by the end of February.

7 reactions
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2018/02/08/france-proposes-big-defense-budget-hike/

France proposes big defense budget hike

By: Pierre Tran  
1 day ago

PARIS — France unveiled Thursday a draft of its 2019-2025 military budget plan, setting €295 billion (U.S. $361 billion) on spending, which included better barracks, larger orders of Army armored vehicles, and studies on next-generation nuclear submarines and airborne nuclear missiles.

That spending plan compares to €190 billion in the present 2014-2018 budget law. The Armed Forces Ministry sees the budget law as a “renewal,” as the government seeks to “regenerate” the services. A first phase consists of €198 billion in the present five-year government term, with defense spending rising €1.7 billion each year to hit €44 billion in 2023. That compares to the 2018 budget of €34.2 billion.

That expenditure is covered by the government spending cap, which seeks to rein in the French deficit to 3 percent of gross domestic product, as requested by the European Commission. France has pledged to spend 2 percent of GDP on defense by 2025, a target set by NATO for member states.

-
France would reach NATO budget target under top military officer's plan
The funding proposed by Army Gen. Pierre de Villiers would help France reach NATO's budget target of 2 percent of GDP by 2022.
By: Pierre Tran
-

The second phase for 2024 and 2025 assumes an annual €3 billion increase, with much depending on the macro-economic performance. A government review will be held in 2021 to decide what to commit in the following budgets. A general election will be held in 2023, so the next administration will decide how closely it follows the budget law.

“There is much pragmatism,” said François Lureau of consultancy EuroFLconsult and former head of the French defense procurement office. The budget reflected the Army’s leading role in the Barkhane mission in Africa and the need for an overhaul of aircraft maintenance.

“Service is very expensive,” he added.

The budget law drew criticism from François Cornut-Gentille, a member of parliament on the finance committee of the lower house National Assembly.

“The main effort is pushed back after the five-year term, whether it is budgetary outlay, increase in personnel or delivery of equipment,” he said in a statement.

Two further setbacks were the Armed Forces Ministry carrying the full cost of overseas deployment and the lack of spending adjustment for inflation.

The Army and nuclear deterrent were seen as major beneficiaries of the budget.

Spending on buildings and infrastructure for the services will rise 14 percent, seeking to remedy the poor conditions of the bases and family housing. Some 6,000 personnel will be recruited, reversing a previous policy of cutting the size of services. Some 750 staff will be recruited to support arms exports.

The Direction Générale de l’Armement procurement office had already been authorized to recruit 80 staff for 2017-18 to support export deals, following a request that stemmed from the sharp rise in foreign arm sales.

On equipment orders, the Army’s Scorpion modernization program will see a faster delivery, with half the fleet of Jaguar troop carriers, Griffon combat vehicles and Light VBMR vehicles delivered by 2025.

“That is very good news,” a defense executive said. “There was a sanctuary for Scorpion.”

Other notable investments:

  • The Navy will receive the first four Barracuda nuclear-powered attack submarines, last three Fremm multimission frigates and first two FTI intermediate frigates.
  • There will be studies on arming the air defense version of the Fremm with the Aster Block 1 NT missile.
  • The Air Force will receive six armed Reaper drones, the first European medium-altitude, long-endurance UAV, 28 Rafale fighter jets and 55 upgraded Mirage 2000D fighters.
  • Acquisition of the A330 MRTT tanker transport aircraft will be increased to 15 from 12, with the first 12 delivered by 2023 and the remaining three shipped by 2025.
  • An annual €1.8 billion will be spent on concept studies on future weapons, including fighter jet, heavy tank and replacement to the nuclear-powered Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier.
  • The annual budget for feasibility studies will rise to €1 billion from €730 million.
A total €112.5 billion will be spent on equipment in 2019-23, of which €25 billion earmarked for studies on the next-generation nuclear submarine and airborne nuclear missile. Orders for the H160 for the joint light helicopter were pushed back to 2022, with delivery in 2028 in the next multi-year budget law.

For intelligence gathering, there will be orders for six light ISR aircraft, and Musis and Ceres satellites to gather visual and electronic intelligence. The government will seek a 36 percent increase in the number of programs run in cooperation with European allies.

It remains to be seen if the U.K. will be considered a European partner once Britain leaves the European Union, a second defense executive said.

The next step is that the parliament will debate the draft budget law.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/feb/08/venezuela-migrants-colombia-brazil-borders

Colombia and Brazil clamp down on borders as Venezuela crisis spurs exodus

Venezuela’s neighbors plan to dispatch more security personnel while Brazil prepares to relocate thousands of refugees to country’s interior

John Otis in Cúcuta Emma Graham-Harrison and Carmen Fishwick
Fri 9 Feb 2018 11.52 EST

Venezuela’s neighbours are tightening their borders, alarmed by the exodus of hundreds of thousands of desperate refugees fleeing hunger, hyperinflation and a spiralling political crisis.

Brazil and Colombia are sending extra troops to patrol frontier regions where Venezuelans have arrived in record numbers over recent months.

Colombia, which officially took in more than half a million Venezuelans over the last six months of 2017, also plans to make it harder to cross the frontier or stay illegally in Colombia. Brazil said it will shift refugees from regions near the border where social services are badly strained.

The economic crisis and food shortages which have driven so many from their homes show no signs of easing.

The International Monetary Fund forecasts hyperinflation in Venezuela will hit 13,000% this year, so most salaries are now worth the equivalent of just a few British pounds a month.

All but the very wealthiest, or those with access to support from abroad, are struggling to find or pay for food. Looting to eat is on the rise, with reports of people stoning a cow to death, butchering horses from a veterinary institute and raiding a fishing boat for sardines.

Filippo Martínez, a 45 year-old university researcher reckons he is among the top 5% of Venezuelans, even though he works 17-hour days on two jobs.

“Even people like me in stable and professional [jobs] can’t afford the basics,” he told the Guardian. His monthly salary for working 8am to 5pm at the university now covers just a week’s worth of food, so he works until 1am as a freelance consultant just to survive.

Friends have scattered across the region, and students leave as soon as they graduate. Martínez has stayed only because he spent years working for his current position, and can hardly bear to think about abandoning it.

“I don’t want to be an immigrant,” he says. “There’s a lot of people quitting the country with no plans, no money and no profession.”

Over the last half of 2017, the number of Venezuelans moving to Colombia jumped by 62% to about 550,000, according to immigration officials. But with illegal migration included, officials believe more than 1 million Venezuelans have moved to Colombia since the economic crisis took hold in 2015.

“Colombia has never before experienced a situation like this,” President Juan Manuel Santos said during a visit to Cúcuta, a border city of 670,000 that is the main receiving center for Venezuelan migrants.

Santos laid the blame squarely on the shoulders of Nicolás Maduro, Venezuela’s increasingly authoritarian president.

“I want to repeat to President Maduro: this is the result of your policies. It is not the fault of Colombians and it’s the result of your refusal to receive humanitarian aid, which has been offered, not just from Colombia but from the international community.”

It was a message echoed by Brazil’s defence minister, Raul Jungmann, who also visited a border town to unveil his government’s new plans.

“This is a humanitarian drama. The Venezuelans are being expelled from their country by hunger and the lack of jobs and medicine,” he told reporters in Boa Vista. “We are here to bring help and to strengthen the border.”

Life in exile is often precarious. In Cúcuta, tired and hungry Venezuelans often sell their possessions, including wedding rings and even their hair, to buy food. Some hole up in temporary shelters or on park benches and rely on soup kitchens set up by churches.

But the flood of departures is unlikely to slow while Venezuelans go hungry at home. “It feels like we are just dying slowly and there’s no hope of change,” said Cristian Sousa, a 24-year-old trainee doctor whose family have almost all left, including his mother, younger brother, an uncle and aunt, and half a dozen cousins.

He has stayed on to finish his degree but is counting the days to graduation. “We used to eat three full-sized meals and fruits, cookies or something between every meal. Now we can barely, really barely, eat twice a day.”

In Colombia, one of the newcomers, Jesús García, said he quit his job as an industrial mechanic with Venezuela’s state oil company in December when his salary no longer covered food for his wife and two kids.

He arrived in Cúcuta last month and while he looks for work, he is busking in a city park, playing a harp and singing folk songs alongside a a fellow Venezuelan, who strums guitar. Bystanders toss the equivalent of about £8 ($11) a day into an open guitar case – which is more than García earned as an oil worker back in Venezuela.
 
Top