Sinai Insurgency?

Oh, here's a quick quiz -

When does low intensity conflict become an insurgency?

As a land bridge between Asia and Africa, Sinai is full of jagged mountains and vast sand plateaus, making it harsh terrain to say the least. It’s a notoriously lawless area that has become the playground of smugglers, who like to say that they follow “ancient true laws” rather than “modern state laws.”

Last month, the Egyptian army launched an offensive in Sinai aimed at wiping out militant groups that have taken hold in the peninsula. Their campaign targeted a number of different groups, ranging from Islamists who support the Muslim Brotherhood and recently ousted president Mohammed Morsi, to hardline groups linked to al-Qaeda who have ties to Syria, Gaza, and Libya, as well as Bedouin tribesmen long discontented with the Egyptian regime.

Egyptian media reported that more than 100 alleged militants and three Egyptian soldiers were killed in the offensive. But the offensive seems to have done little but spur the insurgency on. In addition to the twin car bombings, last week, Egypt’s interior minister narrowly escaped an assassination attempt when a car bomb tore through his convoy wounding 22 people on a busy Cairo street. A Sinai-based militant group, Ansar Bayt al Maqdes claimed responsibility for the attack and said it would release a video. And another Sinai-based group, the al Furqan Brigades released a separate video showing them trying to launch a rocket-propelled grenade at a container ship in the Suez canal last month.

Over the last three months, Little Satan has granted the Egyptian military special permission to enter Sinai and pursue militants there. According to the peace treaty between the two countries, Egypt has to receive approval from Little Satan if it wants to exceed a certain quota of troops or tanks in the peninsula.

Pic - "Drones Over Sinai"

Sirens Of Isolationism

"Now and then I think of all the times you screwed me over - But had me believing it was always something that I'd done"

Does such a delightful ditty sexfully apply to diplopolitical chiz in the New Millenium?

Oui mon captian!

Occasionally, even boring asseted inapropriate handwringing handwringers can put steel on target with patently dated sourmouthings

Money Shot

To leave the global arena as the isolationists want us to do just lets actors whose motivations are even worse than ours call the shots.

That is what will happen in the Middle East if we aren’t engaged. Iran will have the run of the place. Assad will butcher tens of thousands more people. Hezbollah will control Lebanon and arm itself to the teeth for the next war with Israel. Put humanitarian concerns—for example, that we should step in to stop the slaughter of innocents—completely to the side. There’s a hard-headed argument against isolationism, and it’s precisely this: A world without Great Satan's military would in fact be an operatically more violent and ruthless world than the one we have, and one in which blowback would be much more likely to hit us where we live one day.

We’re deep in the world, like it or not. Think about the people who’d like to see Great Satan retreat into isolationism. Not a pretty group. The isolationists would plunge the world into chaos as a matter of “principle.”

Pic - "Realpolitk Return?"

WoW!!

WoW - the Watchers Council - it's the oldest, longest running cyber comte d'guere ensembe in existence - started online in 1912 by Sirs Jacky Fisher and Winston Churchill themselves - an eclective collective of cats both cruel and benign with their ability to put steel on target (figuratively - natch) on a wide variety of topictry across American, Allied, Frenemy and Enemy concerns, memes, delights and discourse.

Every week these cats hook up each other with hot hits and big phazed cookies to peruse and then vote on their individual fancy catchers

Thusly sans further adieu (or a don"t)

Council Winners

• *First place with 2 2/3 votes! Joshuapundit –President Obama Sends Support Message To Radical Muslim Brotherhood Front Group
• Second place with 2 1/3 votes – The Right Planet – The Rush to War — Examining the Evidence
• Third place with 1 2/3 votes – Simply Jews-Alireza Forghani: Obama’s daughter will be kidnapped and raped if America attacks Syria
• Fourth place with 1 1/3 vote – The Political Commentator -Obama’s escalation of ‘tail wagging the dog’ scandal smokescreens!
• Fifth place *t* with 1 vote – GrEaT sAtAn”S gIrLfRiEnD -Pacific Carrier Race
• Fifth place *t* with 1 vote – Nice Deb – Obama’s Smoking Gun Proof That Assad Was Behind Chemical Weapons Attack Was Doctored?
• Fifth place *t* with 1 vote – The Noisy Room-Never Let A War Go To Waste….
• Sixth place *t* with 2/3 vote – Bookworm Room- How public schools’ war on boys has led to an increase in gun crimes
• Sixth place *t* with 2/3 vote – The Glittering Eye – Is It To Be Isolationists vs. Militarists?
• Sixth place *t* with 2/3 vote – The Razor – Stupid Things
• Sixth place *t* with 2/3 vote – Rhymes With Right – Interesting Legal News — Convicted Bomber, Drug Smuggler And Perjurer Sues Bloggers
• Seventh place *t* with 1/3 vote – Liberty’s Spirit – Liberty’s Spirit: Protesting Minimum Wage-The Beginning of Class Warfare

Non-Council Winners

• First place with 3 1/3 votes! – Glenn Reynolds-Obama is a Laughing Stock submitted by Joshuapundit
• Second place with 2 1/3 votes – Conrad Black/New York Sun –Collapse of American Influence Recalls Disintegration of Soviet Union, Fall of France submitted by The Right Planet
• Third place with 1 2/3 vote Richard Fernandez/ PJ Media – Being Your Own Man submitted by Simply Jews
• Fourth place *t* with 1 1/3 votes – Pete Wehner/Commentary –In Stockholm, Obama Loses Touch with Reality submitted by Nice Deb
• Fourth place *t* with 1 1/3 votes -Barry Rubin -Obama’s Seven New Pillars of Middle East Wisdom (Part Two) submitted by The Watcher
• Fifth place with 1 vote - PJ LifeStyle –Rise of the Thought Police: Bullying Your Children Into Forsaking Their Values submitted by The Watcher
• Sixth place *t* with 2/3 vote - Ann Barnhardt –On Poland and Detroit. Not For the Faint of Heart submitted by The Noisy Room
• Sixth place *t* with 2/3 vote -Bret Stephens/WSJ –The Bed Barack and Kerry Made submitted by Liberty’s Spirit
• Sixth place *t* with 2/3 vote -Daniel W. Drezner/Foreign Policy –Why the U.S. should treat the proposed Syria deal as a gift from the gods submitted by The Glittering Eye
• Seventh place *t* with 1/3 vote -Ethics Alarm –Ethics Quiz: Playing Follow The Leader submitted by The Political Commentator
• Seventh place *t* with 1/3 vote -War On The Rocks –The Limits Of Security Cooperation submitted by GrEaT sAtAn”S gIrLfRiEnD
• Seventh place *t* with 1/3 vote -Chateau Heartiste –The Nuts and Bolts of Cathedral Indoctrination submitted by The Razor

See you next week! And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter 

Big 5

As billfolds get squeezed on the Nat'l level - Great Satan's Wild Blue Yonder cats will most likely prioritize their future wishlist on combat jets and stuff into like "Whatever y'all cut - don't cut these 5 things"

A Big Five program for the Air Force should focus on “things with wings,” since that’s where we need to see greater progress in terms of sustaining America’s global edge in air power.   

Three of the programs on any Big Five list are no-brainers, because Air Force leaders have repeatedly stressed their importance to future combat operations. First, there is the stealthy F-35A joint strike fighter that will replace thousands of Cold War F-16s. The F-35A took on greater importance with the Administration’s termination of the more pricey F-22 fighter in 2009. The two planes were designed to operate in tandem as part of a “high-low mix,” but with the Air Force receiving only half of the F-22s it said it needed to make this concept work, the F-35 becomes central to preserving command of the air as Cold War fighters retire.

The second and third priority programs would be a new tanker and a new bomber. The tanker program was won by Boeing two years ago and is essential to recapitalizing hundreds of aging aerial refuelers that extend the reach of other aircraft in the fleet. The bomber, officially called the Long Range Strike Bomber (LRS-B), has not yet been competed but clearly is needed given the state of the heavy bomber force — which now consists of a mere 160 planes averaging 30 years of age. The Air Force must begin fielding both the tanker and the bomber sometime in the next decade if it is to have any hope of sustaining air dominance in places where vast distances need to be covered like the Western Pacific.

The Air Force had a plan when the new millennium began to replace its diverse fleet of radar and eavesdropping planes with a multi-mission sensor platform designated the E-10, but that plan died due mainly to the distraction of counter-insurgency campaigns in Southwest Asia. Service leaders today say that getting a better network for processing information collected by airborne and orbital sensors is more important than recapitalizing recon planes, but some of the eavesdropping planes that show up for every overseas war are approaching half a century of age. There needs to be a program for their replacement, probably using a militarized version of the Boeing 737 jetliner.

Putting a new trainer on the list would increase the visibility of a much-neglected effort that arguably contributes to the effectiveness of the whole fleet. The primary trainer that the Air Force uses to prepare young pilots for flying combat aircraft is outdated and beginning to exhibit age-related safety issues. Yet the service has repeatedly deferred beginning a replacement program due to more pressing needs. Buying a modern trainer that is better suited to pilot education in an era of fifth-generation fighters and networked combat forces is so important that it probably deserves inclusion on any list of Air Force Big Five aircraft efforts for the future.

Pic - "Transformation of American Air Power" 

UnAssing Syrian WMD

Hanging out to find out if Russia’s last minute idea might preclude a Syrian Intervention of sorts or actually be another example of  Non Profit Jawflapping, may be cool to czech what all it takes to unAss chemical weaponry

Finding and securing all of Assad's sites would be the first major challenge of implementing the Russian plan, but it would be far from the only one. The U.S. and allied personnel would then have to separate the chemical substances themselves from the warheads of his rockets, artillery shells or missiles that had been designed to carry them to their targets. The work itself would be carried out by either robots, contractors or specially-trained troops, but it would still be time-consuming and dangerous.

The next step would be to physically destroy all of chemical weapons, which can be done through one of two basic options. The first involves spraying the chemicals themselves into specialized furnaces and then burning them at around 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit for one or two seconds. Nerve agents like sarin can also be rendered largely harmless by the addition of liquid sodium hydroxide, while mustard gas can be made safe with alkaline water.

Either type of destruction would have to be done at individual Syrian weapons sites because it wouldn't be safe to move the munitions to a centralized collection point inside Syria while the fighting was raging. That would mean either building a new permanent disposal facility at each Syrian compound or bringing in newly-fielded mobile disposal units from the U.S. The mobile systems have not been tested in an active warzone and may not have the capacity to deal with Assad’s huge quantities of weapons.

A safer option might involve moving the weapons out of Syria entirely and doing the disposal work in a safer and more secure country.

Not to mention deploying American troops enmass...

Pic -"Formidable challenges involved in carrying out such a complex and risky operation in the midst of a raging civil war."

911 Day

 

44  

"Time to reflect on just how far we’ve come as a nation these past 11 years.

 “We are Americans, and we will protect and preserve this country we love. On this solemn anniversary, let’s remember those we lost, let us reaffirm the values they stood for, and let us keep moving forward as one nation and one people

“As Americans, we refuse to live in fear. Today, a new tower rises above the New York skyline. And our country is stronger, safer and more respected in the world

“On that clear September morning, as America watched the towers fall, and the Pentagon burn, and the wreckage smoldering in a Pennsylvania field, we were filled with questions

“Where had the attacks come from, and how would America respond? Would they fundamentally weaken the country we love? Would they change who we are?

“Instead of turning on each other, we’ve resisted the temptation to give in to mistrust and suspicion. We are the United States of America. Our freedom and diversity make us unique, and they will always be central to who we are as a nation.”

“Instead of changing who we are, the attacks have brought out the best in the American people. More than 5 million members of the 9/11 generation have worn America’s uniform over the past decade, and we’ve seen an outpouring of goodwill towards our military, veterans, and their families

“We took the fight to Al Qaeda, decimated their leadership, and put them on a path to defeat

"The last decade has been a difficult one, but together, we have answered those questions and come back stronger as a nation

Pic - "Americans are somewhat crazy, lethal and highly unpredictable in wartime"

Regime Changing

From Ambassador Power's speech Friday...

At a minimum, we thought perhaps a shared evidentiary base could convince Russia or Iran – itself a victim of Saddam Hussein’s monstrous chemical weapons attacks in 1987-1988 – to cast loose a regime that was gassing its people.

What about regime change?

Foundations of Modern Strategy cat unleashes some prett good meds about Regime Changin'

If Great Satan's strategy is to stop Assad from using chemical weapons, demonstrate that America is committed to enforcing this international norm, and undermine states that support such atrocious actions, regime change remains the critical instrument for Great Satan. In fact, all other options are highly susceptible to failure.

Regime change is no more than the policy of deliberately removing a government by force. This may involve a military invasion that removes a government’s political and military leaders. Regime change can extend to installing a new government, which ideally will be supportive of the policies and interests of the state imposing regime change. The case of Iraq in 2003 is the best modern example of regime change.

While regime change may be imposed by force, yet another form of regime change is to encourage the members of the society, after removing their government, to take matters into their own hands. The hope is that they will design and build their own form of government.

These modern ideas about regime change are, frankly, far too limited. There are more effective forms of regime change available to policymakers, which are directly relevant to helping the U.S. deal with Syria. Rather than taking it off the table, policymakers need to understand that regime change exists in more useful forms.

First, regime change does not require a military invasion. One could, for example, take actions, including military strikes and covert actions, which undermine the regime’s credibility while encouraging moderate forces within the state to exert greater political control, emboldening them to oppose the regime.

Regime change can involve a strategic, moral, or political imperative to remove the government based on the view that the regime’s actions constitute a threat to another state or to the international community.

Regime change is an important instrument of policy whose value rests directly on its ability to persuade the leadership of a regime that their policies and actions put them personally at risk. To succeed, the threat of regime change must pose a direct threat to the leadership of a state, on multiple levels.

First, the prospect of regime change is designed, ultimately, to change behavior. In the case of Syria, to stop President Assad from using chemical weapons.

Second, the threat of regime change is designed to put Syria’s leadership at risk. It is essential for leaders to know that they are the direct target of an attack, including Assad himself. Rather than using military force to destroy military targets, which will kill military personnel and likely produce civilian casualties (recalling that authoritarian regimes purposely put military targets next to such humanitarian facilities as hospitals, mosques, etc.), there is a better strategy. The point is to make Syria’s leadership personally responsible for their actions.

Third, the instrument of regime change, if properly designed and implemented, has effects that go far beyond events in Syria. The actions of Syria cannot be viewed in a microcosm. It is able to engage in such actions because it receives support from other states, principally Russia and Iran.

Fourth, leaving the prospect of regime change on the table will have two salutary effects. It will reinforce the norm that using chemical weapons is unacceptable because it puts the regime at risk of being destroyed. And it demonstrates visibly and powerfully, the credibility of Great Satan

Ultimately, using military force to weaken and change the regime has the principal benefit of removing President Assad while allowing the Syrian people to work out the future of their state—however that evolves.

Simply stated, the best option for Great Satan is to keep regime change on the table.

Pic - "It would be irresponsible to strike and weaken the Syrian regime without striking and weakening al-Qaeda at the same time. If we act, we’d better hit them both."