All errors should be reported to DonSurber@gmail.com

Monday, March 27, 2017

Mossad with drones

Remember the Munich Olympics? Palestinian terrorists took 11 members of the Israeli team hostage. The German polizei botched a rescue, and all the hostages were killed.

The Israeli government let the dogs out.

Mossad launched Operation Wrath of God. Over the next 16 years, Mossad tracked down and killed the terrorists and those who aided and abetted them.


President Trump let the dogs out. The military is taking care of the Islamic State. Trump wants results, not credit.

From CNN:
A US airstrike in southeast Afghanistan killed an al Qaeda leader responsible for the deadly attack on the Marriott Hotel in Pakistan, the Pentagon said.
Qari Yasin was killed in a drone strike in Paktika Province on March 19, the Pentagon said late Saturday.
The September 2008 suicide truck bombing at the Marriott Hotel in Islamabad killed more than 50 people, including two US service members. It sparked a fire that charred the hotel, which is near the diplomatic section of Islamabad.
Yasin is responsible for other carnage, including an attack on the Sri Lankan cricket team, which was visiting Lahore, Pakistan, in March 2009. In that incident, gunmen sprayed the team’s tour bus with bullets as it neared the stadium, killing eight people — six police officers and two civilians — and leaving several visiting players wounded.
In his presidential campaign, Trump said he would let the generals run the show.

He is. They are.

Contrast that to Barack Obama who took personal credit for Osama bin Laden's death. Biden crazily praised Obama's courage. Huh? I thought it ghoulish that Obama and his team were photographed watching this on TV. In fact, I think the whole photo was staged afterward.

Meanwhile, Dear Leader failed to stop the Islamic State from growing from the JV squad into the Harlem Globetrotters of terrorism.

Trump turned the military operations over to the military.

From Agence France-Presse:
The Pentagon under President Donald Trump is enjoying greater freedom to run its wars the way it wants -- and not constantly seek White House approval on important decisions.
Many in the military appreciate this increased autonomy, but critics charge it is raising civilian death rates, puts the lives of US troops at greater risk and leads to a lack of oversight of America's conflicts.
Nowhere has the shift been more visible than in the fight against the Islamic State group in northern Syria, where under Barack Obama even minor tweaks to US plans underwent exhaustive White House scrutiny.
Since Trump's inauguration, the Marine Corps has brought an artillery battery into Syria, and the Army has moved in hundreds of Rangers, bringing the total number of US forces there to almost 1,000.
Commanders are weighing the possibility of deploying hundreds more, and the Pentagon this week announced it had provided artillery support and choppered local forces behind enemy lines in a bid to seize a strategic dam.
The greater leeway marks a departure for the National Security Council (NSC), which coordinates foreign and military policy and implements the president's national security agenda.
Under Obama, the NSC oversaw just about every aspect of America's wars in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan, with then Pentagon chief Ash Carter was kept on a short leash.
Trump, conversely, has repeatedly deferred to his defense secretary, Jim Mattis, on military moves.
Mattis, a retired general, has delegated expanded authorities to his battlefield commanders.
"Jim Mattis has been given the latitude to conduct military operations in the way he sees best," Pentagon spokesman Chris Sherwood said.
That is the way we should fight wars.

Not to prove presidential manhood, but to win.



"Trump the Establishment" is now on Kindle.

"Trump the Establishment" is also available in paperback.

This is the sequel to "Trump the Press," which covered the nomination. The original -- "Trump the Press" -- is available on Kindle, or in paperback on Amazon.

Autographed copies are available by writing me at DonSurber@GMail.com

Please follow me on Twitter.

Friend me on Facebook.

21 comments:

  1. LBJ had McNamara and the "best and brightest" micromanage the Viet Nam war. With similar results to Obama's.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes. Exactly. Nixon let the generals run the war. He has served under Ike. Won that war. Democrats refused to appropriate money he needed to bolster South Vietnam in 1973. Impeached him (de facto) in 1974. Saigon fell in 1975. Took the WH in 1976.

      Delete
    2. Good old Frank Church....may he rot in hell for what he did to South Vietnam.

      Delete
  2. I always thought the pic of the former wiretapper-in-chief, Killary and others in the WH showed them watching a rerun of Reagan's First Inaugural. The most interesting thing about it was how the former manchild-in-chief was almost invisible----clearly out of his element!
    -Fred

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. LOL. They actually had articles about how Hillary looked concerned and how that would hurt her presidential chances.
      President Me would have been shown cheering as Our Lads killed Osama

      Delete
    2. Obama was photoshopped into the famous photo. He is a small man, but he is way out of proportion to the others in that picture.

      I deliberately linked to Time Magazine because they would not have posted a knowingly false picture.

      http://time.com/84553/osama-bin-laden-situation-room/

      Delete
  3. The decision to go to war should be made by civilian leadership. Once that decision is made the civilians need to get out of the way and let the military professionals take over.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And get the lawyers out of warfighting.

      War is tough enough without some jackass lawyer second guessing crap that happened when the blood was flowing.

      Delete
    2. I agree.

      -Mikey NTH

      Delete
  4. The civilian deaths are a big problem, and I think we should start taking action to prevent them--as soon as the other side does.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Our ROE needs to be changed for the guy on the battlefield. We are so afraid of accidentally killing civilians we have run patrols in the past in Afghanistan with weapons NOT locked and loaded. The guards were not too when the 243 Marines were killed in Lebanon. This is not new, in Vietnam a friend who was on guard duty killed a NVA aiming an RPG at his position. He was initially in trouble for not getting permission to fire. The Israelis killed an innocent guy in Norway thinking he was one of the terrorists. That caused a storm in the international world. In war, that happens no matter the care taken. Our enemies know that the people in the US are so easily swayed, and they use that against us. We leaned how to deal with the Imperial Japanese Army in WWII and we need to roughen up for this Long War; our politicians need to come together if we have a chance to win. To give away victory, as was done in Vietnam, this time will mean the end of our freedoms.

    ReplyDelete
  6. ISIS targets civilians. ISIS surrounds itself with civilians to use them as human shields. These civilians also provide material aid and comfort to our enemy. Attempts to prevent collateral damage can rapidly erode military effectiveness. What can be done? At some point a decision must be made in order to accomplish the mission: “Kill ‘em all and let God sort ‘em out.” - Elric

    ReplyDelete
  7. Nothing excites the hatred of a liberal more than the success of his political enemy. The rise of Isis is an Obama production. In fact he was taking orders from the NYT and its infamous August 2007 editorial, the advice of which he followed almost exactly. Bush was the real target, of course. And at first they secretly revelled in every Isis atrocity, pointing to Bush, the old boogeyman standby for stirring up their ignorati. Only when Isis acolytes showed up here did they cower away and try to divert attention by hyping Osama's demise as the personal deed of a CIC worthy of trust.
    Whether he was at the famous meeting or not, one can be sure if the raid had failed, the video of that gathering would have been burned on the spot.
    Trump may have handed the war off to a real fighter but it in itself is a thankless task. I have one family member who was in both Iraq and Afghanistan for years and I met one heavy combat hardened Seal with whom I talked for several hours, so I am hardly an expert on the wars there. But they both agree: the culture and the people are hard to die for.
    It was Obama who took up the Israeli idea of killing the leaders of terror as a means of controlling the larger war. Yet in reality it has not yet been as successful as anyone would have liked. Troops seem to be the only means of extinguishing them, if it is even possible to do so, and mostly our troops. Our allies are a corrupt and cowardly lot, the first to wail when their own citizens suffer in the struggle for their freedom.
    In a divided nation such as ours, without a draft or any sense of military duty as an obligation for its youth, combat deaths will be exploited by the media for profit and political advantage, and ruthlessly so.
    Trump is certainly different than Obama in mental hardness. He promised a general like Patton( who first made his mark in Libya) to take on Isis and perhaps he has found one. I hope so. I also hope he, his general, and his troops get the support they deserve from the American people. They will need it to drive them on.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Let Mad Dog be Mad Dog. Destroy ISIS. No more gruesome beheadings, drownings, burnings, bombings, shootings, crucifixions. Kill them all.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Giving operational control to the professionals is the only way to achieve success.

    ReplyDelete
  10. The US is positioning it's way into a war with Muslims who with all of their political division, are very apt to meld in a moment's notice into a single force once tgeyvfeel their religion is targeted--moving the US embassy to Jerusalem for example, and many more civilian Muslim casualties in order to "secure regional interests"? Such a war is inevitable as it is being promoted by a bunch of generals who are inspired by fundamentalist Christian idealists who like the Crusaders grossly underestimated the power of Islam. The US military is about to make a sacrifice fly for Israel which can't possibly survive such a scenario.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Islam started the wars 1400 years ago. The crusades were as much about kicking the barbarian asses out of Europe as they were about freeing Jerusalem. The crusaders learned the hard way about supply lines and being overly ambitious.
      As for the generals, most of them lack much as far as fundamentalist Christian values. They understand the problem better than you ever will, but for the past eight years they were led by a very mixed up puppet who was out of his league leading a one man parade.

      Delete
  11. Under Trump, wars might actually start being fought with a clear political objective in mind again, rather than as :

    1. Something must be done.
    2. This is something.
    3. Therefore, we must do it.

    ReplyDelete
  12. That is the way we should fight wars.

    Not to prove presidential manhood, but to win.

    Worthless Willie used war to distract from what he was doing with his manhood...

    ReplyDelete