This is the final food for thought for 2015 on the subject of the new Lodge Act (or something similar). I know that yesterday's blog was unusually long-winded, it was by far the longest blog that I had posted thus far. However, the subject matter, I believe, called for as thorough an explanation and argument as was possible. I don't know whether I had done a sufficient job and convinced the readers, but there were still areas that I wanted to touch upon, so I will use this blog, the last one for 2015, for that purpose.
Until my retirement fifteen years ago, I had spent most of my childhood and working adult life abroad, on five different continents. In doing so, I was exposed to a lot of different cultures, different people who had varying thoughts and opinions about America. Perhaps when I was young and living in Japan and Okinawa I did not pay as much attention as I should have. But still, I managed to come away with some distinct impressions and had heard some opinions from Japanese and Okinawans that normally are not heard by an average person here in America. This is how I became aware of the fact that there are people who have a deep hatred for America that was born out of envy/jealousy. The most common refrain/criticism of Americans was that we had too much, we were all spoiled! This criticism appeared to be standard everywhere in the world, even among the more developed nations! Yet, there was also a definite desire by some to be like us, to not only have the same things that we have, but to live like us! I believe that this factor alone would draw volunteers for service in our military!
When I was in the service back in the 1960s, I did run into some of the military members of other countries, UK, Canada, Australia, Japan, Republic of Korea, Taiwan, Republic of Vietnam, Thailand, and several others. I remember many of the members of those services were very interested in our service and asked questions about the possibility of joining our military! It puffed-up my youthful pride that these foreign military members found our military to be attractive enough for them to be interested! Later, while I was with the Foreign Service, I have had locals approach me and ask me on how to join the U.S. military! This happened practically in every country where I served! I believe Egypt was the only country where I was not asked this question!
I remember how in the mid 1980s I was approached by a very impressive young Korean who was a university graduate and spoke excellent English. He said he was very interested in joining the U.S. Army, that he would gladly serve as a private until he could get his citizenship, then he would apply for Officer's Candidate School! This young man not only had a university degree, but had already served his 18 month obligatory service in the South Korean Army! But I could not offer him any advice, since we had no mechanism for such volunteers! In the 1990s, while I was in Canada, I was asked by a young Canadian why we didn't allow Canadians to enlist in our military. He was very interested in the U.S. military but had no way of joining! By far, Canadians have the easiest time of entering the U.S. (they only have to cross our northern border!), but, that is for temporary stay only, no work, no permanent living. I believe we would receive a large influx of Canadians in our military services if we allowed them to enlist!
I know that most Europeans give us the impression that: 1. They are anti military. 2. They are anti American. To be sure there are Europeans that are anti military and anti American (perhaps more than anti military!). But, there are still those that like America and would gladly serve in our military if they were given an opportunity. As with the young Korean and the Canadian that I mentioned, I have been asked by Europeans about the possibility of joining the U.S. military service.
Back in early 1990s, a young Japanese wanted to join the U.S. Army or Marines. He came to our Embassy in Tokyo and asked about how he could join our military. He was naturally turned away. He joined the French Foreign Legion and gained some fame when he rose to the rank of Sergeant Major and was captured by Al Qaeda and executed in Afghanistan! Incidentally, when he approached us, he not only spoke English but French and German as well! What a wonderful fit he would have been for our Special Forces! So you see, at least in my limited experience, I found that there is no shortage of qualified young men and women, for that matter, who would gladly serve in our military if they were allowed.
As I mentioned in yesterday's blog, short of dramatically increasing military pay and benefits, the only solution that I see is to open up enlistment to qualified foreigners. It will not turn our military into some sort of a "foreign legion," as some fear. It would be no different than making it a requirement for all new young immigrants do mandatory military service, which would never happen because it would be ruled unconstitutional! So, why not create some sort of a modified form of the old Lodge Act?
In this new century, with all the wars that will be taking place, we will need a steady flow of new recruits in our military. Congress would never approve a large pay increase, although they seem to have no problem increasing their own pay! Drones and smart bombs and other video game type weapons cannot replace boots on the ground, no matter what some "brains" in Washington may think! We need more bodies, more troops. The new type of Lodge Act would be a solution.
Thursday, December 31, 2015
Wednesday, December 30, 2015
The 21st Century Lodge Act, or something similar!
For the past two days I have been blogging about what we will be facing in this new century, i.e., constant small wars such as the ones we have now. The Islamic Terror groups and other such America haters will not be going away anytime soon. The war of "have nots" versus "haves" will occupy much of this new century. As long as we are allied with Israel, there is no way the Islamic world will accept us completely, and our relationship with Israel, despite being rocky at times, will hopefully never reach a breaking point. We have some Islamic nations that are our "friends," or so it seems. But even within their populations, there are those who hate us, envy us, and blame us for all their short comings! But even if it wasn't just the Islamic terrorists, there would have been and are others. Despite the demise of the Soviet Union and the rest of the Communist or Eastern Bloc, there are still those who believe that communism is the answer to everything, at least to their problems. I don't mean Cuba and North Korea, the two remaining true communist countries (China and Vietnam are sort of a hybrid communist/capitalists!), I mean various groups that are unhappy with their lot in Latin America and other parts who blame us for all their ills.
Venezuela has a large population of poor who think we are to blame for all their problems and their politicians capitalize on this when they want to be elected! Just about all of the Latin American countries have the poor, the disenfranchised, who believe that "Yankees" are responsible for all their troubles. Think about it! A friendly country to U.S. (compared to Venezuela!) such as Ecuador has a huge mural on the wall of their Congress which depicts U.S. as the Darth Vader! What kind of a signal do you think they are sending to their people! So, even if there were no Islamic Terror groups, there would be others in Latin America and other parts of the world where governments are corrupt and the population is poor! There is no shortage of America haters.
So, with the world divided as it is between the "haves" and "have nots," with the majority being the "have nots," these small "brushfire wars" as JFK called them, will be taking place around the globe. Right now it is in the Middle East, but it could just as easily be in Latin America, where we have had "brushfire wars" already (El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama) and some ongoing in Colombia, Ecuador, Bolivia, etc. Africa is ripe for such conflict, and there have been numerous wars, some horrible genocidal wars in Africa already! Asia is the only one that seems safe, except for Philippines and possibly Indonesia which have Islamic fundamentalists! Asia is relatively peaceful mainly thanks to the economic success of countries such as Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, and in the last couple of decades, China. But we must be prepared to engage in these "brushfire wars" in other parts of the world if we are to remain the super power. If we are going to engage in these conflicts, then we must maintain an army, a fighting force that is bigger than it is currently. But rather than increasing the size of our fighting force, it seems some of our leaders are bound and determined to decrease its size! It is very strange reasoning!
The Army is always the largest component of our fighting force. At the peak of our involvement in Aghanistan and Iraq, we had 546,057 active duty and 559,244 reserve and national guard troops for a total of 1,105,301 army personnel (active and reserve). We discovered that this number was not sufficient to handle both wars. The reserve and National Guard troops were being deployed as much, and in some cases more, than the regular Army troops. Some regular army troops like the Special Forces and units like the 82nd Airborne, 101st, 10th Mountain, etc., were deployed multiple times, spent more time in Afghanistan or Iraq than back at home! The Marine Corps, which deployed fighting units to those same countries are made up of 182,000 active and 40,000 reserve. The Marines too were stretched to the limit and reserve Marines were being deployed multiple times. The role of reserve or National Guard troops is not supposed to be quite like the way they have been used so far! That is neither the purpose or the reason for having the reserve Marines and reserve and National Guard Army troops. They are for emergency use, to be deployed when situation is desperate for the nation like it was during World War Two! They were not meant to be used like regular Marines and Army troops, that is not their role or purpose. Yet, that is what we have been doing because of poor planning and some hair-brained cost cutting moves.
During previous wars we had the Selective Service or draft system which brought in a fresh influx of men into the Army. During extreme shortages of manpower like during World War Two, some of the draftees were assigned to the Marine Corps. The Air Force at the time was part of the Army so it drafted enlisted personnel as well. But since the abolishment of the draft, the all volunteer military service is truly stressed trying to fill its new role! To make things worst, the government announced that Pentagon will be cutting the number of Army personnel almost in half, to below post World War Two numbers! Already the numbers are down from around 559,244 active duty just three years ago to around 400,000 active duty in 2014! The numbers for 2015 have not been released but they are lower than the previous year and by 2016 it is supposed to be down to about 250,000! It is absolutely mind-boggling why Pentagon would agree to that!
Part of the problem lies in that there are many in Pentagon, beginning with the Secretary of Defense, who believe that technology can replace manpower. All those drones and smart bombs are supposed to replace the boots on the ground. That is one of the reasons why there is such resistance to putting more boots on the ground in the Middle East. There are those in our government who truly believe that we can carry out a "push button" war and defeat enemies such as Al Qaeda and ISIS. The fact that they weren't able to do it thus far doesn't seem to faze them. Some, perhaps realize that we need bodies, but recruitment is down and it is very difficult to attract new recruits.
The draft will not be reinstituted, despite mumblings about having women register for draft! That was just a ploy to get some folks excited, perhaps try to find a way to increase recruitment for all volunteer army. The fact is very simple, it is no rocket science, we need more bodies in the Army and Marines, period. One easy solution would be to dramatically increase the pay and benefits of the uniformed service. I believe our military service personnel are grossly underpaid, considering what they are asked to do! It is criminal when someone working as a manager at a fast food restaurant makes more money than an infantry platoon Sergeant in the Army or Marines! The platoon Sergeant is responsible for the lives of around two dozen soldiers or Marines, depending on the size of the platoon. The fast food manager is responsible for....well, fast food! I don't mean to denigrate the importance or responsibilities of a fast food manager, but I think you know what I am getting at. But unfortunately, despite the fact that everyone realizes that the pay in the military is too low, it is doubtful if there will be any significant increase in the future.
To increase the number of enlistments in the Army, I think a modified form of the old Lodge Act can be instituted. The Lodge Act, as you may recall from my previous blogs, was enforced in 1951 for the purpose of recruiting Eastern European volunteers for service in the U.S. Army. Initially it met a lot of resistance from some. The most common opposition was, "we don't want a Foreign Legion!" Even Dwight Eisenhower made a comment that: "When Rome went out and hired mercenary soldiers, Rome fell." I have the deepest respect and admiration for old Ike, but in this case, he was wrong, Rome did not fall because it had mercenaries, Rome fell for other reasons. Roman Legions were always made up of different nationalities! The opponents of the Lodge Act misunderstood its purpose. Fortunately, the act passed and at least the Special Forces was able to take advantage of the act!
The old Lodge Act was initially meant to allow 2,500 volunteers and it was later expanded to 12,500. The volunteers were to serve a five year enlistment (same as the French Foreign Legion) at the end of which, if their service was honorable, they would be eligible for U.S. citizenship. It was primarily designed to fill some needed slots in the new Army Special Forces. But, the rest of the Army, especially the Intelligence Service, was supposed to take advantage of this act, that is why the numbers were increased to 12,500 from the initial 2,500. The Army Special Forces ended up with several hundred Eastern European volunteers who, as far as I know, all served honorably, some becoming legends in the Special Forces for their outstanding service, especially in Vietnam. Lodge Act expired in 1959, and its primary purpose was to recruit Eastern European country language speakers. To that end, Special Forces accomplished its goal. However, since we never did go to war in Europe against the Soviet Bloc, these warriors ended up serving far away from Eastern Europe ..... in Vietnam and Latin America! But still, although they were not used for the original purpose, they proved to be valuable assets to the United States, to the U.S. Army.
I think a new Lodge Act, not confined to Eastern European countries but open world wide like the French Foreign Legion, would draw a lot of volunteers who could become great assets to our country. They would be vetted, of course, and enlisted for a five year period. This will give more continuity rather than losing the soldier after a two or three year hitch! There would be no special unit created for this, the volunteers would simply be assigned to various units and integrated, become a part of the U.S. Army, not some special unit composed of "foreigners" like the French Foreign Legion. Even with the original Lodge Act, the volunteers may have been in a special unit, the Special Forces, but they served alongside American soldiers who were the majority! The fear that the U.S. Army will turn into a "foreign" army is unfounded. We would never be able to recruit that many foreign volunteers! We would have requirements such as at least a high school education and ability to speak and read and write English. That alone would eliminate a lot prospective volunteers and those simply seeking an easy way into the U.S. and U.S. citizenship. I think it will work.
There are currently several countries that will enlist foreigners in their armed forces and integrate them, no foreign legion. France has its Foreign Legion, has had it for a long time. Spain also has its foreign legion called Terciode Extranjeros or Legion Espanola. However, the Spanish legion is open not only to foreigners but to Spaniards as well and it is made up mostly of Spanish nationals! The reason for its existence is that the Spanish Legion is the one that Spain deploys overseas! Both Spain and France deployed their foreign legions to Afghanistan and Iraq, not their regular troops. Last year Vladimir Putin signed into law allowing foreigners to enlist in the Russian Army. Russia has had problems maintaining a large army although it still has the national draft! Since it became a non-communist nation, many young men have become draft dodgers and enlistment of volunteers has dropped dramatically. So, Putin did what he was advised to do, open enlistment to foreigners who want to serve in the Russian Army, thereby becoming Russian citizens. He is getting a lot of volunteers from the former Soviet Republics, the smaller ones that are not doing well economically.
I believe a new Lodge Act would solve our problem of shortages in the Army. The education requirement and language ability would eliminate a lot of less qualified individuals. We would get a lot of volunteers from not just Eastern European countries but from Western as well. We would also get volunteers from Latin America, of course, and Asia as well. Both the French and the Spanish legion have volunteers from China, Japan, and Mongolia! Adventurous young men are not restricted to certain countries, they come from all over!
Venezuela has a large population of poor who think we are to blame for all their problems and their politicians capitalize on this when they want to be elected! Just about all of the Latin American countries have the poor, the disenfranchised, who believe that "Yankees" are responsible for all their troubles. Think about it! A friendly country to U.S. (compared to Venezuela!) such as Ecuador has a huge mural on the wall of their Congress which depicts U.S. as the Darth Vader! What kind of a signal do you think they are sending to their people! So, even if there were no Islamic Terror groups, there would be others in Latin America and other parts of the world where governments are corrupt and the population is poor! There is no shortage of America haters.
So, with the world divided as it is between the "haves" and "have nots," with the majority being the "have nots," these small "brushfire wars" as JFK called them, will be taking place around the globe. Right now it is in the Middle East, but it could just as easily be in Latin America, where we have had "brushfire wars" already (El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama) and some ongoing in Colombia, Ecuador, Bolivia, etc. Africa is ripe for such conflict, and there have been numerous wars, some horrible genocidal wars in Africa already! Asia is the only one that seems safe, except for Philippines and possibly Indonesia which have Islamic fundamentalists! Asia is relatively peaceful mainly thanks to the economic success of countries such as Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, and in the last couple of decades, China. But we must be prepared to engage in these "brushfire wars" in other parts of the world if we are to remain the super power. If we are going to engage in these conflicts, then we must maintain an army, a fighting force that is bigger than it is currently. But rather than increasing the size of our fighting force, it seems some of our leaders are bound and determined to decrease its size! It is very strange reasoning!
The Army is always the largest component of our fighting force. At the peak of our involvement in Aghanistan and Iraq, we had 546,057 active duty and 559,244 reserve and national guard troops for a total of 1,105,301 army personnel (active and reserve). We discovered that this number was not sufficient to handle both wars. The reserve and National Guard troops were being deployed as much, and in some cases more, than the regular Army troops. Some regular army troops like the Special Forces and units like the 82nd Airborne, 101st, 10th Mountain, etc., were deployed multiple times, spent more time in Afghanistan or Iraq than back at home! The Marine Corps, which deployed fighting units to those same countries are made up of 182,000 active and 40,000 reserve. The Marines too were stretched to the limit and reserve Marines were being deployed multiple times. The role of reserve or National Guard troops is not supposed to be quite like the way they have been used so far! That is neither the purpose or the reason for having the reserve Marines and reserve and National Guard Army troops. They are for emergency use, to be deployed when situation is desperate for the nation like it was during World War Two! They were not meant to be used like regular Marines and Army troops, that is not their role or purpose. Yet, that is what we have been doing because of poor planning and some hair-brained cost cutting moves.
During previous wars we had the Selective Service or draft system which brought in a fresh influx of men into the Army. During extreme shortages of manpower like during World War Two, some of the draftees were assigned to the Marine Corps. The Air Force at the time was part of the Army so it drafted enlisted personnel as well. But since the abolishment of the draft, the all volunteer military service is truly stressed trying to fill its new role! To make things worst, the government announced that Pentagon will be cutting the number of Army personnel almost in half, to below post World War Two numbers! Already the numbers are down from around 559,244 active duty just three years ago to around 400,000 active duty in 2014! The numbers for 2015 have not been released but they are lower than the previous year and by 2016 it is supposed to be down to about 250,000! It is absolutely mind-boggling why Pentagon would agree to that!
Part of the problem lies in that there are many in Pentagon, beginning with the Secretary of Defense, who believe that technology can replace manpower. All those drones and smart bombs are supposed to replace the boots on the ground. That is one of the reasons why there is such resistance to putting more boots on the ground in the Middle East. There are those in our government who truly believe that we can carry out a "push button" war and defeat enemies such as Al Qaeda and ISIS. The fact that they weren't able to do it thus far doesn't seem to faze them. Some, perhaps realize that we need bodies, but recruitment is down and it is very difficult to attract new recruits.
The draft will not be reinstituted, despite mumblings about having women register for draft! That was just a ploy to get some folks excited, perhaps try to find a way to increase recruitment for all volunteer army. The fact is very simple, it is no rocket science, we need more bodies in the Army and Marines, period. One easy solution would be to dramatically increase the pay and benefits of the uniformed service. I believe our military service personnel are grossly underpaid, considering what they are asked to do! It is criminal when someone working as a manager at a fast food restaurant makes more money than an infantry platoon Sergeant in the Army or Marines! The platoon Sergeant is responsible for the lives of around two dozen soldiers or Marines, depending on the size of the platoon. The fast food manager is responsible for....well, fast food! I don't mean to denigrate the importance or responsibilities of a fast food manager, but I think you know what I am getting at. But unfortunately, despite the fact that everyone realizes that the pay in the military is too low, it is doubtful if there will be any significant increase in the future.
To increase the number of enlistments in the Army, I think a modified form of the old Lodge Act can be instituted. The Lodge Act, as you may recall from my previous blogs, was enforced in 1951 for the purpose of recruiting Eastern European volunteers for service in the U.S. Army. Initially it met a lot of resistance from some. The most common opposition was, "we don't want a Foreign Legion!" Even Dwight Eisenhower made a comment that: "When Rome went out and hired mercenary soldiers, Rome fell." I have the deepest respect and admiration for old Ike, but in this case, he was wrong, Rome did not fall because it had mercenaries, Rome fell for other reasons. Roman Legions were always made up of different nationalities! The opponents of the Lodge Act misunderstood its purpose. Fortunately, the act passed and at least the Special Forces was able to take advantage of the act!
The old Lodge Act was initially meant to allow 2,500 volunteers and it was later expanded to 12,500. The volunteers were to serve a five year enlistment (same as the French Foreign Legion) at the end of which, if their service was honorable, they would be eligible for U.S. citizenship. It was primarily designed to fill some needed slots in the new Army Special Forces. But, the rest of the Army, especially the Intelligence Service, was supposed to take advantage of this act, that is why the numbers were increased to 12,500 from the initial 2,500. The Army Special Forces ended up with several hundred Eastern European volunteers who, as far as I know, all served honorably, some becoming legends in the Special Forces for their outstanding service, especially in Vietnam. Lodge Act expired in 1959, and its primary purpose was to recruit Eastern European country language speakers. To that end, Special Forces accomplished its goal. However, since we never did go to war in Europe against the Soviet Bloc, these warriors ended up serving far away from Eastern Europe ..... in Vietnam and Latin America! But still, although they were not used for the original purpose, they proved to be valuable assets to the United States, to the U.S. Army.
I think a new Lodge Act, not confined to Eastern European countries but open world wide like the French Foreign Legion, would draw a lot of volunteers who could become great assets to our country. They would be vetted, of course, and enlisted for a five year period. This will give more continuity rather than losing the soldier after a two or three year hitch! There would be no special unit created for this, the volunteers would simply be assigned to various units and integrated, become a part of the U.S. Army, not some special unit composed of "foreigners" like the French Foreign Legion. Even with the original Lodge Act, the volunteers may have been in a special unit, the Special Forces, but they served alongside American soldiers who were the majority! The fear that the U.S. Army will turn into a "foreign" army is unfounded. We would never be able to recruit that many foreign volunteers! We would have requirements such as at least a high school education and ability to speak and read and write English. That alone would eliminate a lot prospective volunteers and those simply seeking an easy way into the U.S. and U.S. citizenship. I think it will work.
There are currently several countries that will enlist foreigners in their armed forces and integrate them, no foreign legion. France has its Foreign Legion, has had it for a long time. Spain also has its foreign legion called Terciode Extranjeros or Legion Espanola. However, the Spanish legion is open not only to foreigners but to Spaniards as well and it is made up mostly of Spanish nationals! The reason for its existence is that the Spanish Legion is the one that Spain deploys overseas! Both Spain and France deployed their foreign legions to Afghanistan and Iraq, not their regular troops. Last year Vladimir Putin signed into law allowing foreigners to enlist in the Russian Army. Russia has had problems maintaining a large army although it still has the national draft! Since it became a non-communist nation, many young men have become draft dodgers and enlistment of volunteers has dropped dramatically. So, Putin did what he was advised to do, open enlistment to foreigners who want to serve in the Russian Army, thereby becoming Russian citizens. He is getting a lot of volunteers from the former Soviet Republics, the smaller ones that are not doing well economically.
I believe a new Lodge Act would solve our problem of shortages in the Army. The education requirement and language ability would eliminate a lot of less qualified individuals. We would get a lot of volunteers from not just Eastern European countries but from Western as well. We would also get volunteers from Latin America, of course, and Asia as well. Both the French and the Spanish legion have volunteers from China, Japan, and Mongolia! Adventurous young men are not restricted to certain countries, they come from all over!
Tuesday, December 29, 2015
A Post Script to "The 21st Century: A Century of Wars"
Yesterday's blog was very long and I cut it short for fear of putting readers to sleep. There were still things that I wanted to point out, to discuss, so I left them for today's blog, a post script to yesterday's!
I realize that it is a very depressing thought and I don't mean to be so negative, but like I already said, the sad fact is that we will be facing many more conflicts, small wars. They will be small only in a sense that they will be regional, not global like World War Two, but they will nevertheless cause much loss of life and misery to those involved. If we participate in those conflicts, we will lose American lives. The numbers won't be like they were in World War Two or Korea, nor will they be like they were in Vietnam, but they will grow in time. As early as back in the 1960s, John F. Kennedy, along with several other prominent figures predicted that the future will be filled with small wars, what they called "brushfire wars." That was one of the reasons why JFK was so keen on Army Special Forces and launched the Navy SEALs program. He felt that Special Operations units were best suited for such "brushfire wars." But what we have now is something a bit larger than just "brushfire," therefore, to successfully carry out campaigns in these new wars, we need a bit more than just Special Operations, we need the participation of conventional forces as well. Also, JFK and others thought that these "brushfire wars" would be initiated by communist movements, not Islamic Extremists as it is happening today!
Whether we participate in these conflicts, fully engaged to win, not to just "show up" and then pull out as we have done recently, will determine whether we remain as the pre-eminent super power in the world or give up that responsibility and job to Russia! I am not saying that Russia is capable of carrying out that role, in fact I doubt if they could. We are the only ones that have the means, the technology and know-how, the equipment to take on that role. However, if we are not willing, then it will fall in someone else's lap, in this case, the most likely candidate will be Russia. China is the only other country in the world that could take on that role, but I don't believe they are interested or willing to do so. Despite China's dramatic military built-up in the last decade, China is more interested in dominating the world economically than militarily. At this point, unlike the former Soviet Union, China is not even interested in promoting their brand of communism! They built up and are still building up their military to protect their economic power, that is what they are doing, not for some sinister purpose of world domination through military might. China is doing quite well dominating the world economy without the need of warfare, they are truly following the principles of Sun Tzu's The Art of War - that is to avoid war if you can dominate in other ways!
Our politicians, for the most part, will not do anything to upset their constituency because, for one thing, they want to be re-elected. Another reason, of course, is that they are supposed to represent the interests of their voters. If the American voters are unwilling to have America engage in these wars, lose American lives, then our politicians will vote against any participation and we will not be engaged. That is one of the problems we have today, our politicians are trying to strike a middle ground, appear to be doing "something" yet not risk American lives and thereby risk their own political lives. So, there is a lot of talk, lot of saber-rattling by some politicians, but nothing is really getting done. No one really has any true plan on how to approach the problem of defeating ISIS or any other Islamic Terrorist group! So, blame is not entirely on the politicians, the American public has to bear some responsibility as well for it is the public that drives the actions of he politicians.
Are we, as Americans, willing to face the fact that there will be American lives lost if we engage in war to truly destroy our enemy? Are we prepared for a long protracted warring period? A century is not out of question! I know that with all the new technology, scientific advancements in everything from medicine to driverless cars and space travel, we should be able to figure out a way to live peacefully, like the old Coke commercial, "live in harmony." But the truth is, that despite all of the talk of Utopian society and the hippy movement of the 1960s which was partially responsible for our failure in Vietnam, human beings will continue to have wars. As long as there are those who are "haves" and others that are "have nots," there will be wars. Right now, despite enormous wealth found in some societies, the vast majority of the world population belongs in the "have not" column! Just think about it! In the Islamic world, where all of the current problems seem to be originating, we have countries such as Qatar whose population earns an average income of over $100,000 per year! Yet in the same Islamic world, in Palestine or in one of the many scattered refugee camps, there are families surviving on a couple of hundred dollars a year! The gulf is not just great, it is obscene!
America, after World War Two, became the richest country in the world. Everyone envied our wealth, good life. This envy quickly transformed into hatred in many cases. We became not only the most envied, but the most hated country, or I should say culture, in the world! Think about it, just about everything associated with good life, after World War Two, originated in America! We had the biggest and best cars (I know, some European cars were considered tops, like English Rolls-Royce, etc., but overall, it was always American cars), everyone tried to copy. The popular music of young people, Rock and Roll, was invented and originated in America! The denim jeans, the fast foods, movies, TV, just about everything you can think of in popular culture had its beginning in America. For most around the world, the good life meant living like an American. To this day, everywhere you find people wearing NBA or NFL T shirts, hats. Hip-Hop, Rap, everything came from America, even the awful grungy look that used to be so popular with young people not too long ago!
Envy, in many cases can quickly become hatred, and in our case, many of our initial admirers became some of our most dedicated haters! With many of the members of the Islamic nations, things got all jumbled and we became the focus of their hatred, the reason for their misery! Small wonder Iran calls us the "Great Satan," and ISIS/ISIL refers to us as "Rome," that ancient civilization that fell, mainly owning to its own corruption, lack of morals and hedonistic life style.
Many in America say to hell with everyone else, to hell with the Europeans who consider themselves superior to us because they say we lack "culture." To hell with Middle East and its oil, we don't need it! Why don't we just close our borders and live as isolationists. Well, that won't work and there are just too many reasons for me to go into that! So then, the other option would be to withdraw from being the world leader, let Russians make a mess of everything or whoever else takes over. Well, that won't work either! The world has become too interconnected, too interdependent for anyone to just create their own desert island, a Utopia in the middle of the ocean! Islamic Terrorists or their sympathizers (our own homegrown variety), will continue to crop up and commit mayhem on our shores even if we "withdraw!" We can "withdraw" but we won't escape terror attacks nor eliminate hatred for us, our way of life.
On this morning's CNN news, the Iraqi Ambassador to the U.S. was interviewed and he assured the reporter that the recent "victory" in Ramadi will soon be followed with "victories" elsewhere and ISIS will be ousted from Iraq. Well, I sure hope so. If Iraqis manage to do it on their own with only our air support, great! I will be very surprised, but let's face it, nothing is impossible! But that will not be the end. ISIS is just the latest incarnation of the "have nots" with a special hatred for America. Remember? Before ISIS there was Al Qaeda, and before.....the list goes on and on. ISIS is just a name....if they are gone, there will be others! This new century, I am afraid, will see many more incarnations of different terror groups, all seemingly set on destroying America and American way of life.
The hatred for us and our way of life was born out of envy, jealousy, possibly one of the strongest if not the strongest human emotions. Only love supposedly is stronger, but that is debatable, since love can turn to hatred as well!
I realize that it is a very depressing thought and I don't mean to be so negative, but like I already said, the sad fact is that we will be facing many more conflicts, small wars. They will be small only in a sense that they will be regional, not global like World War Two, but they will nevertheless cause much loss of life and misery to those involved. If we participate in those conflicts, we will lose American lives. The numbers won't be like they were in World War Two or Korea, nor will they be like they were in Vietnam, but they will grow in time. As early as back in the 1960s, John F. Kennedy, along with several other prominent figures predicted that the future will be filled with small wars, what they called "brushfire wars." That was one of the reasons why JFK was so keen on Army Special Forces and launched the Navy SEALs program. He felt that Special Operations units were best suited for such "brushfire wars." But what we have now is something a bit larger than just "brushfire," therefore, to successfully carry out campaigns in these new wars, we need a bit more than just Special Operations, we need the participation of conventional forces as well. Also, JFK and others thought that these "brushfire wars" would be initiated by communist movements, not Islamic Extremists as it is happening today!
Whether we participate in these conflicts, fully engaged to win, not to just "show up" and then pull out as we have done recently, will determine whether we remain as the pre-eminent super power in the world or give up that responsibility and job to Russia! I am not saying that Russia is capable of carrying out that role, in fact I doubt if they could. We are the only ones that have the means, the technology and know-how, the equipment to take on that role. However, if we are not willing, then it will fall in someone else's lap, in this case, the most likely candidate will be Russia. China is the only other country in the world that could take on that role, but I don't believe they are interested or willing to do so. Despite China's dramatic military built-up in the last decade, China is more interested in dominating the world economically than militarily. At this point, unlike the former Soviet Union, China is not even interested in promoting their brand of communism! They built up and are still building up their military to protect their economic power, that is what they are doing, not for some sinister purpose of world domination through military might. China is doing quite well dominating the world economy without the need of warfare, they are truly following the principles of Sun Tzu's The Art of War - that is to avoid war if you can dominate in other ways!
Our politicians, for the most part, will not do anything to upset their constituency because, for one thing, they want to be re-elected. Another reason, of course, is that they are supposed to represent the interests of their voters. If the American voters are unwilling to have America engage in these wars, lose American lives, then our politicians will vote against any participation and we will not be engaged. That is one of the problems we have today, our politicians are trying to strike a middle ground, appear to be doing "something" yet not risk American lives and thereby risk their own political lives. So, there is a lot of talk, lot of saber-rattling by some politicians, but nothing is really getting done. No one really has any true plan on how to approach the problem of defeating ISIS or any other Islamic Terrorist group! So, blame is not entirely on the politicians, the American public has to bear some responsibility as well for it is the public that drives the actions of he politicians.
Are we, as Americans, willing to face the fact that there will be American lives lost if we engage in war to truly destroy our enemy? Are we prepared for a long protracted warring period? A century is not out of question! I know that with all the new technology, scientific advancements in everything from medicine to driverless cars and space travel, we should be able to figure out a way to live peacefully, like the old Coke commercial, "live in harmony." But the truth is, that despite all of the talk of Utopian society and the hippy movement of the 1960s which was partially responsible for our failure in Vietnam, human beings will continue to have wars. As long as there are those who are "haves" and others that are "have nots," there will be wars. Right now, despite enormous wealth found in some societies, the vast majority of the world population belongs in the "have not" column! Just think about it! In the Islamic world, where all of the current problems seem to be originating, we have countries such as Qatar whose population earns an average income of over $100,000 per year! Yet in the same Islamic world, in Palestine or in one of the many scattered refugee camps, there are families surviving on a couple of hundred dollars a year! The gulf is not just great, it is obscene!
America, after World War Two, became the richest country in the world. Everyone envied our wealth, good life. This envy quickly transformed into hatred in many cases. We became not only the most envied, but the most hated country, or I should say culture, in the world! Think about it, just about everything associated with good life, after World War Two, originated in America! We had the biggest and best cars (I know, some European cars were considered tops, like English Rolls-Royce, etc., but overall, it was always American cars), everyone tried to copy. The popular music of young people, Rock and Roll, was invented and originated in America! The denim jeans, the fast foods, movies, TV, just about everything you can think of in popular culture had its beginning in America. For most around the world, the good life meant living like an American. To this day, everywhere you find people wearing NBA or NFL T shirts, hats. Hip-Hop, Rap, everything came from America, even the awful grungy look that used to be so popular with young people not too long ago!
Envy, in many cases can quickly become hatred, and in our case, many of our initial admirers became some of our most dedicated haters! With many of the members of the Islamic nations, things got all jumbled and we became the focus of their hatred, the reason for their misery! Small wonder Iran calls us the "Great Satan," and ISIS/ISIL refers to us as "Rome," that ancient civilization that fell, mainly owning to its own corruption, lack of morals and hedonistic life style.
Many in America say to hell with everyone else, to hell with the Europeans who consider themselves superior to us because they say we lack "culture." To hell with Middle East and its oil, we don't need it! Why don't we just close our borders and live as isolationists. Well, that won't work and there are just too many reasons for me to go into that! So then, the other option would be to withdraw from being the world leader, let Russians make a mess of everything or whoever else takes over. Well, that won't work either! The world has become too interconnected, too interdependent for anyone to just create their own desert island, a Utopia in the middle of the ocean! Islamic Terrorists or their sympathizers (our own homegrown variety), will continue to crop up and commit mayhem on our shores even if we "withdraw!" We can "withdraw" but we won't escape terror attacks nor eliminate hatred for us, our way of life.
On this morning's CNN news, the Iraqi Ambassador to the U.S. was interviewed and he assured the reporter that the recent "victory" in Ramadi will soon be followed with "victories" elsewhere and ISIS will be ousted from Iraq. Well, I sure hope so. If Iraqis manage to do it on their own with only our air support, great! I will be very surprised, but let's face it, nothing is impossible! But that will not be the end. ISIS is just the latest incarnation of the "have nots" with a special hatred for America. Remember? Before ISIS there was Al Qaeda, and before.....the list goes on and on. ISIS is just a name....if they are gone, there will be others! This new century, I am afraid, will see many more incarnations of different terror groups, all seemingly set on destroying America and American way of life.
The hatred for us and our way of life was born out of envy, jealousy, possibly one of the strongest if not the strongest human emotions. Only love supposedly is stronger, but that is debatable, since love can turn to hatred as well!
Monday, December 28, 2015
The 21st Century: The Century of Wars
Since the dawn of history, there have been wars. During some stretches in time, wars lasted a long time. In ancient China, during the "Warring States" period, there were constant wars for over 200 years, from 475 BC to 221 BC until China was finally united under one rule. But even then, there was always warfare against the constant invasions by northern barbarians, the nomadic tribesmen of Central Asia. It culminated with the conquest of China by the Mongols in 13th Century. But that wasn't the end, in the 18th Century the Manchus invaded China, and in the early 20th Century China was constantly at war, either amongst its own numerous warlords, against the invading Japanese, or Nationalists versus Communists!
The great Roman Empire which was supposedly established in 27 BC lasted as a whole until 285 AD when it split into two, Western and Eastern Holy Roman Empires. The Western Empire lasted until 476 AD while the Eastern lasted longer. But during its roughly 12 Centuries as a Roman Empire, it was constantly at war. At first it was constantly fighting wars of conquest and expansion, later it was wars of survival, as the Roman Empire was attacked, invaded, by outside forces as well as from within! During the first Century BC, Rome was engaged in over 20 wars! The Hundred Year War between England and France lasted from 1337 until 1453, more than a century!
For comparisons sake, let's look at the United States. We have fought five major wars in the 19th Century: The War of 1812, The Mexican War, The American Civil War, The Spanish-American War, and more or less the on going Indian Wars. In the 18th Century we were not a nation yet so the Revolutionary War and the French Indian War do not count. In the 20th Century we began with the Philippine Insurrection, the First World War, and the participation in Russian Revolution with deployment of troops to Siberia and Arctic Russia during the Russian Civil War. Then, of course, the world changing World War Two, quickly followed by the Korean War and a decade later the Vietnam War. We then became engaged in a couple of small wars, the Grenada Invasion and the Invasion of Panama, then the First Gulf War (Desert Storm). We closed out the century with involvements in Kosovo and Bosnia, Somalia and a bunch of other small, undeclared "brushfire wars" such as the one in El Salvador where only our Special Forces participated. But we did participate and American lives were lost, although most of the American public hardly paid any attention to those conflicts. Only when they were made into movies, like Blackhawk Down, did most of America learn of our involvement in Somalia . Not counting the undeclared "brushfire" type conflicts, we were involved in nine wars. In all, there were about dozen wars.
Now we begin the 21st Century with Invasion of Afghanistan, followed by the Second Gulf War with Iraqi Freedom. Those wars ended when we pulled out our troops prematurely, so now it is the Third Gulf War and the Second Afghani War. In addition, we have been involved in Philippines, the Marines and the 1st Special Forces Group out of Okinawa are very active in Philippines and the Special Forces has already lost several lives! We are now also involved in Syria. We may not have boots on the ground but we are using our air power and supplying arms to rebels. So, essentially, in this infant century, we are involved in four wars and have fought two earlier, from which we pulled out too soon and now are facing a mess! But that isn't all! Our 3rd Special Forces Group has been involved in several African countries surreptitiously, for over a decade now, and the 5th and 10th Special Forces Group have been sending teams to Yemen for a number years to fight Al Qaeda and other Islamic Extremist groups! The 7th Special Forces Group has been involved in Latin America in anti-narcotics operations since the 1970s! So, once again, we are involved in more conflicts than the American public is aware. Sadly, the situation is not going to improve, if anything, it will get worse. As long as we don't go into these conflicts with full force and eradicate the problem, and as long as we continue to fight these wars with half measures, our enemies will simply grow bolder and grow in numbers. It is in human nature that when you experience some success, you are emboldened and usually increase your effort.
In Afghanistan the Taliban has gained strength when we pulled out. Now we are facing not only Taliban with some residual Al Qaeda as well, but ISIS, the new evil force! We have beefed up our Special Forces numbers somewhat, but it is still far below what we need to do some serious work to stop the Islamic Terrorist groups. Iraq is even a more serious problem. Earlier, before Kerry struck that wonderful Nuclear Deal with Iran, as part of the deal, we allowed Iranian Special Operations forces to enter Iraq to help us fight ISIS. I was dumbfounded at the time when I learned what we had done. Well, now we are paying for it. The "new" Iraqi government that we helped establish, that we support financially and otherwise 100%, are allied with Iran! Yes, they are buddies with Iran! I am amazed that the news media is not covering it! The new Iraqi government will not allow us to bring in combat troops! They just want our air power and prefer to have Iranian help! We are caught in the middle. We can't put boots on the ground even if we wanted because the Iraqi government will not "allow" us. Yet, they can't handle the situation. Despite some glowing reports coming out of Iraq about Iraqi government successes, don't you believe the hype, the situation is desperate! Iranians are not all that great and they are not all that willing to risk Iranian troops in Iraq! Despite the billions that we spent and are spending, and American lives that were lost and maimed in that land, we are locked out, so to speak! Russia has partnered with Iraq and Iran and they have their own headquarters in Baghdad for fighting ISIS. We are just confined to our "green zone" and are essentially cut out!
The only ones worth their salt as fighters in Iraq are the Kurds, the Peshmergas, and they are our only true allies, despite the fact that we have betrayed them a few times! However, we cannot even supply arms, medicines, food, etc., to the Kurds directly. All supplies destined for the Kurds must first go to the Iraqi government supply distribution. The Iraqis are supposed to distribute these goods to Kurds. You can guess how that is working out. The Iraqi system is so corrupt that they won't even distribute supplies to their own troops, do you really think the Kurds are getting the needed supplies? Some Iraqi generals are getting very rich, probably selling the same supplies and munitions to Taliban and ISIS!
Despite what the so-called Iraqi government, the one that we helped establish and are financing 100%, are saying, denying us "permission" to bring in combat troops, we can deploy troops if we want, Nobody, except this same Iraqi government and Iran will object! Everyone can see clearly that the situation is hopeless and the Iraqis cannot handle it themselves, so despite their obstruction, we can, if we want to win this war against ISIS, deploy our combat troops. But we won't. Our leaders are too "politically correct" and will not risk criticism, even if it is only coming from the corrupt Iraqi government and Iran! Russia might oppose too, but they won't do anything, contrary to the fears of some in our government! Additionally, there will be too much opposition domestically from those opposed to war anywhere and for any reason! But even if we did deploy combat troops, without the resolve to finish the fight, to carry the fight until all ISIS is removed and destroyed, the deployment of ground troops will be a waste. It will be a waste of American lives and financial cost as well. You cannot fight wars with restrictions and half measures. We tried that in Vietnam and did not do so well. It is the fact of life that in war innocent civilian lives will be lost. Smart bombs are an improvement over the bombs we used in Vietnam, but they are still bombs that can kill and destroy innocent bystanders. Also, we cannot allow the enemy to have sanctuaries that they can slip into to avoid our bombing and carrying out the attack against them. We allowed the NVA to have sanctuaries in Cambodia and Laos, and look what it got us! We allowed Al Qaeda and Taliban sanctuaries in Pakistan, they are still around!
Until we decide to carry out a campaign to destroy ISIS and other Islamic Terrorist groups to the finish, not just make speeches about how we will destroy them, etc., but actually carry out a war that is meant to seek them out and destroy them, we will never be rid of this latest scourge on our society, our safety. We fought World War Two with the idea to destroy and defeat Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. To that end, we carried out our plan. Many innocent lives were lost in bombings, millions, in fact, but the end result was the complete defeat of our enemies. We were not at war with France, but because France was occupied by Nazi Germany, we bombed certain targets. Over 70,000 French civilians, innocent bystanders, lost their lives in our bombings, but the French welcomed us with open arms when we marched into their country. No Frenchman criticized us or pointed an accusing finger at us for innocent lives lost, it was just the sad fact of war, innocent lives will be lost, war is terrible. As long as we understand that, and our leaders understand that and are willing to accept the responsibility, we will be able to defeat ISIS or anyone else. If we don't? Then we end up with stalemates at best, like Vietnam, or in today's case, worst, an ISIS that is a true country, a state not only in name but in size and population. Do we want that? Do we want a country whose sole purpose for its existence will be to destroy us? I don't think even the most liberal minded individual in America would want their own destruction!
The great Roman Empire which was supposedly established in 27 BC lasted as a whole until 285 AD when it split into two, Western and Eastern Holy Roman Empires. The Western Empire lasted until 476 AD while the Eastern lasted longer. But during its roughly 12 Centuries as a Roman Empire, it was constantly at war. At first it was constantly fighting wars of conquest and expansion, later it was wars of survival, as the Roman Empire was attacked, invaded, by outside forces as well as from within! During the first Century BC, Rome was engaged in over 20 wars! The Hundred Year War between England and France lasted from 1337 until 1453, more than a century!
For comparisons sake, let's look at the United States. We have fought five major wars in the 19th Century: The War of 1812, The Mexican War, The American Civil War, The Spanish-American War, and more or less the on going Indian Wars. In the 18th Century we were not a nation yet so the Revolutionary War and the French Indian War do not count. In the 20th Century we began with the Philippine Insurrection, the First World War, and the participation in Russian Revolution with deployment of troops to Siberia and Arctic Russia during the Russian Civil War. Then, of course, the world changing World War Two, quickly followed by the Korean War and a decade later the Vietnam War. We then became engaged in a couple of small wars, the Grenada Invasion and the Invasion of Panama, then the First Gulf War (Desert Storm). We closed out the century with involvements in Kosovo and Bosnia, Somalia and a bunch of other small, undeclared "brushfire wars" such as the one in El Salvador where only our Special Forces participated. But we did participate and American lives were lost, although most of the American public hardly paid any attention to those conflicts. Only when they were made into movies, like Blackhawk Down, did most of America learn of our involvement in Somalia . Not counting the undeclared "brushfire" type conflicts, we were involved in nine wars. In all, there were about dozen wars.
Now we begin the 21st Century with Invasion of Afghanistan, followed by the Second Gulf War with Iraqi Freedom. Those wars ended when we pulled out our troops prematurely, so now it is the Third Gulf War and the Second Afghani War. In addition, we have been involved in Philippines, the Marines and the 1st Special Forces Group out of Okinawa are very active in Philippines and the Special Forces has already lost several lives! We are now also involved in Syria. We may not have boots on the ground but we are using our air power and supplying arms to rebels. So, essentially, in this infant century, we are involved in four wars and have fought two earlier, from which we pulled out too soon and now are facing a mess! But that isn't all! Our 3rd Special Forces Group has been involved in several African countries surreptitiously, for over a decade now, and the 5th and 10th Special Forces Group have been sending teams to Yemen for a number years to fight Al Qaeda and other Islamic Extremist groups! The 7th Special Forces Group has been involved in Latin America in anti-narcotics operations since the 1970s! So, once again, we are involved in more conflicts than the American public is aware. Sadly, the situation is not going to improve, if anything, it will get worse. As long as we don't go into these conflicts with full force and eradicate the problem, and as long as we continue to fight these wars with half measures, our enemies will simply grow bolder and grow in numbers. It is in human nature that when you experience some success, you are emboldened and usually increase your effort.
In Afghanistan the Taliban has gained strength when we pulled out. Now we are facing not only Taliban with some residual Al Qaeda as well, but ISIS, the new evil force! We have beefed up our Special Forces numbers somewhat, but it is still far below what we need to do some serious work to stop the Islamic Terrorist groups. Iraq is even a more serious problem. Earlier, before Kerry struck that wonderful Nuclear Deal with Iran, as part of the deal, we allowed Iranian Special Operations forces to enter Iraq to help us fight ISIS. I was dumbfounded at the time when I learned what we had done. Well, now we are paying for it. The "new" Iraqi government that we helped establish, that we support financially and otherwise 100%, are allied with Iran! Yes, they are buddies with Iran! I am amazed that the news media is not covering it! The new Iraqi government will not allow us to bring in combat troops! They just want our air power and prefer to have Iranian help! We are caught in the middle. We can't put boots on the ground even if we wanted because the Iraqi government will not "allow" us. Yet, they can't handle the situation. Despite some glowing reports coming out of Iraq about Iraqi government successes, don't you believe the hype, the situation is desperate! Iranians are not all that great and they are not all that willing to risk Iranian troops in Iraq! Despite the billions that we spent and are spending, and American lives that were lost and maimed in that land, we are locked out, so to speak! Russia has partnered with Iraq and Iran and they have their own headquarters in Baghdad for fighting ISIS. We are just confined to our "green zone" and are essentially cut out!
The only ones worth their salt as fighters in Iraq are the Kurds, the Peshmergas, and they are our only true allies, despite the fact that we have betrayed them a few times! However, we cannot even supply arms, medicines, food, etc., to the Kurds directly. All supplies destined for the Kurds must first go to the Iraqi government supply distribution. The Iraqis are supposed to distribute these goods to Kurds. You can guess how that is working out. The Iraqi system is so corrupt that they won't even distribute supplies to their own troops, do you really think the Kurds are getting the needed supplies? Some Iraqi generals are getting very rich, probably selling the same supplies and munitions to Taliban and ISIS!
Despite what the so-called Iraqi government, the one that we helped establish and are financing 100%, are saying, denying us "permission" to bring in combat troops, we can deploy troops if we want, Nobody, except this same Iraqi government and Iran will object! Everyone can see clearly that the situation is hopeless and the Iraqis cannot handle it themselves, so despite their obstruction, we can, if we want to win this war against ISIS, deploy our combat troops. But we won't. Our leaders are too "politically correct" and will not risk criticism, even if it is only coming from the corrupt Iraqi government and Iran! Russia might oppose too, but they won't do anything, contrary to the fears of some in our government! Additionally, there will be too much opposition domestically from those opposed to war anywhere and for any reason! But even if we did deploy combat troops, without the resolve to finish the fight, to carry the fight until all ISIS is removed and destroyed, the deployment of ground troops will be a waste. It will be a waste of American lives and financial cost as well. You cannot fight wars with restrictions and half measures. We tried that in Vietnam and did not do so well. It is the fact of life that in war innocent civilian lives will be lost. Smart bombs are an improvement over the bombs we used in Vietnam, but they are still bombs that can kill and destroy innocent bystanders. Also, we cannot allow the enemy to have sanctuaries that they can slip into to avoid our bombing and carrying out the attack against them. We allowed the NVA to have sanctuaries in Cambodia and Laos, and look what it got us! We allowed Al Qaeda and Taliban sanctuaries in Pakistan, they are still around!
Until we decide to carry out a campaign to destroy ISIS and other Islamic Terrorist groups to the finish, not just make speeches about how we will destroy them, etc., but actually carry out a war that is meant to seek them out and destroy them, we will never be rid of this latest scourge on our society, our safety. We fought World War Two with the idea to destroy and defeat Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. To that end, we carried out our plan. Many innocent lives were lost in bombings, millions, in fact, but the end result was the complete defeat of our enemies. We were not at war with France, but because France was occupied by Nazi Germany, we bombed certain targets. Over 70,000 French civilians, innocent bystanders, lost their lives in our bombings, but the French welcomed us with open arms when we marched into their country. No Frenchman criticized us or pointed an accusing finger at us for innocent lives lost, it was just the sad fact of war, innocent lives will be lost, war is terrible. As long as we understand that, and our leaders understand that and are willing to accept the responsibility, we will be able to defeat ISIS or anyone else. If we don't? Then we end up with stalemates at best, like Vietnam, or in today's case, worst, an ISIS that is a true country, a state not only in name but in size and population. Do we want that? Do we want a country whose sole purpose for its existence will be to destroy us? I don't think even the most liberal minded individual in America would want their own destruction!
Saturday, December 26, 2015
The New World Order
In 1989, the Berlin Wall came down and Germany started the rather difficult process of reunification, which owing to their organizational ability, they were able to accomplish with minimal problems, considering the vast differences that existed between the East and West. Today, the Chancellor of Germany, Angela Merkel, is a former East German, that's how well Germany managed the reunification and integration of the East and West.
In 1991 the Soviet Union fell apart, overnight it disappeared! With the fall of the Soviet Union, the rest of the Iron Curtain literally came crashing down. However, the integration of the former communist bloc countries into the free world was not as easy or peaceful as it was in Germany. The Balkan countries split up into pieces and conflicts began all over. The ethnic and religious conflicts lasted for years and still linger! In the former Soviet Union the economy was in shambles and people were really struggling. The new Russian Federation appeared to be incapable of a smooth transition into a non-communist system. Boris Yeltsin, the first Russian president tried, but old habits die hard. The former Soviet nomencultura, the oligarchy, simply changed its appearance, sort of. Who said that leopards can't change their spots! Only now, more than 20 years later, is Russia seemingly pulling out of the economic mess.
The world is not the same any more. Whereas in the past there were two super powers, United States and the Soviet Union, and two distinct ideological systems, the "free world" and the communist bloc, today it is more of a technological and economic separation, the "haves and the have nots." Within this separation, there are the Islamic Extremists and the West! It is, to some extent, a repetition of the Holy Wars of the past, the Christians against the Muslims, but not quite the same way. It is much more of a socio-economic/ideological struggle than a religious war. To put it another way, it is a class war.
The Islamic Extremists made their first appearance a long time ago. But in the modern era, it was more or less around 1959 when Al Fattah, the Palestinian organization was founded and in 1964, the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) came into being. The PLO founder, Yassar Arafat, even back in those days, was simply a gun toting terrorist, nothing more. How times change. In his first appearance before the UN in the 1970s, Arafat spoke before the UN with a .45 stuck in his belt! Today he would not have been allowed into the building armed like that! In 1970 the Black September Group was founded. This infamous terrorist organization was the one that carried out the massacre of Israeli Olympic athletes in the 1972 Munich Olympics. The world in general was first exposed to Islamic Terrorists at that time, although there were other terror acts that were carried out, especially in the Middle East. In 1979 the United States was first exposed to Islamic Terrorist act when the so-called Iranian "students" stormed the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and held hostage Americans for 444 days! The world was stunned! The Iranians under Ayatollah Khomeni had no regard for international law, international conventions! They made their own law! Shortly, other Islamic Terrorist organizations cropped up, Hezobollah (sponsored by Iran) in 1985 and Hamas in 1988 in the so-called East Bank where the Palestinian Authority was ruled by Yassar Arafat.
There were several Islamic terrorist attacks against America, but it was all abroad and seemed distant, and Americans in general forgot them quickly. Remember the bombing of the plane over Lockerbie? The bombing of the Marine barracks in Lebannon? The killing of the Marine Colonel in Lebanon? All this took place in the 1980s. There were also bombings of bars and cafes in Europe that catered to American clientele, but again, most Americans hardly paid attention. Then in the 1990s the bombing of the World Trade Center in New York which was the first terror attack on U.S. soil by Islamic terrorists. But it was thought of as sort of an anomaly. Then it was followed by two bombings of U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. American lives were lost in Nairobi, and the name Al Qaeda surfaced. There were other attacks that the American public hardly noticed. The gunning down of a van with U.S. Consulate employees by heavily armed gunmen in Peshawar, Pakistan. Four Americans were killed in that attack. The ambush of an Embassy shuttle van in Cairo where three Americans were killed. There were numerous attacks in the 1980s and 90s, mostly in Islamic countries. It was a clear sign of things to come. The 9/11 actually made Americans aware that we were not really safe just because we were far away from the Middle East! The recent San Bernardino killings only reinforced that!
With the demise of the Soviet Union and the "Eastern Bloc" of countries, America became the lone remaining super power. Unfortunately, with the new position, new responsibility befell on the United States. We became the "policemen" of the world. We became the only power that could quell troubles and other disturbances around the world. It is a role that perhaps we did not want or seek, but it is something that came with the job, so to speak. But in a way it was a role that we indeed asked for because we had been striving to be the top dog, the most powerful country in the world. Now we got our wish. The only problem is that our government is reluctant to take up the role, and the general voting public in America does not want that role!
The average American voter is interested primarily in his/her personal well being. It is only natural, that is what human beings have been doing since the beginning of time! The average person, be it an American or any other nationality, is interested in their well-being, their families fortunes. For many, what takes place outside of their immediate area is of no concern. Believe it or not, many really are not that concerned with what happens outside of their county or state, let alone some far away place across the ocean! You can understand then, the resistance that comes to surface when the government decides to spend money somewhere else on foreign aid, etc. It is a perfectly understandable feeling and emotion. The government should take care of its own rather than waste money outside! But unfortunately, things aren't that simple, especially if your country happens to be the "reigning" super power.
It is no longer possible to be an isolationist. There are folks who believe that we can just pull out of the world community and just take care of ourselves. We don't need anyone else, it is a very popular refrain. Small wonder the phenomenon of "survivalists" and "preppers" is thriving in America today. But the last time America could have possibly survived as an isolationist country was in the 19th Century, before the time of our Civil War! Things changed so rapidly that by the time of First World War, it was impossible for America to be an isolationist, as much as we wanted to be! World War Two and our dominance after the war changed everything completely. Now, whether we like it or not, we are very much a part of the rest of the world. The global economy is such that everyone is inter-dependent on each other. We may have all the oil reserves that we need under our soil, but we still need the rest of the world for us to continue as we are. I suppose we could become isolationists and cut ourselves off from the rest of the world. But I don't think anybody, not even those who are championing isolationism would like the new America with no outside contact!
So what does this mean? It means that we have to engage in solving problems around the world, even if it means going to war! Yes, going to war! There will be wars from now on for many years to come. Currently it is the Islamic Extremism, the Islamic Terrorists that are causing all the problem. Al Qaeda, ISIS/ISIL, and many other off-shoots are all fighting a class war. They use religion, in this case Islam, as an excuse. It is a way for them to recruit and convince people to follow them. Essentially it is an anti-"westernism" because it is the western world that has the money, the technology, and has for centuries, exploited some of the lesser developed countries. America being the biggest and the richest has become the main target! The Iranians call us the "Great Satan" and ISIS/ISIL has taken to calling us "Rome" referring to the great Roman Empire that eventually fell!
So far we have done a lousy job of being the world "leader." We made a mess of the "Arab Spring" when all those uprisings took place. We should have been more engaged, but instead we took the "wait and see" approach. Well, we now "see" what that led to! Putin is using our indecisiveness and lack of leadership to gain foothold and prestige. Russia is fully engaged in Syria. they may not come out a winner, but they have gained tremendous ground with Arabs and believe it or not, with some Europeans as well. They have shown that they will help their "friend," in this case Al-Assad. They just bombed and killed the main leader of the "moderate" rebel group, Zahran Alloush who was our main hope to take over if Al-Assad was removed! Well, that's not going to happen now!
In this new "world order," there will be other wars just like the one in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. Our leaders are reluctant to put American troops on the ground because lives will be lost and the voting public will be upset, meaning the politicians will lose votes! But if we want to remain the leader in this new world order, we have to participate in these wars with boots on the ground, not with just bombing! Using proxies is not the answer, and training locals does not always work, as you can see by what is going on in Iraq. It has to be American troops, that means American casualties. But that is just the fact of today's world order. If we refuse to participate in the world order and commit American troops, then we should just become isolationists and give up our position as the pre-eminent power in the world, we can't have both. We can't not risk American lives and participate in ground combat and remain the super power. If we don't want to pay the price, in that case, we should give up the role and hand it to Russia, who is the only power left that could fill the vacuum and will be only too happy to take our place.
In 1991 the Soviet Union fell apart, overnight it disappeared! With the fall of the Soviet Union, the rest of the Iron Curtain literally came crashing down. However, the integration of the former communist bloc countries into the free world was not as easy or peaceful as it was in Germany. The Balkan countries split up into pieces and conflicts began all over. The ethnic and religious conflicts lasted for years and still linger! In the former Soviet Union the economy was in shambles and people were really struggling. The new Russian Federation appeared to be incapable of a smooth transition into a non-communist system. Boris Yeltsin, the first Russian president tried, but old habits die hard. The former Soviet nomencultura, the oligarchy, simply changed its appearance, sort of. Who said that leopards can't change their spots! Only now, more than 20 years later, is Russia seemingly pulling out of the economic mess.
The world is not the same any more. Whereas in the past there were two super powers, United States and the Soviet Union, and two distinct ideological systems, the "free world" and the communist bloc, today it is more of a technological and economic separation, the "haves and the have nots." Within this separation, there are the Islamic Extremists and the West! It is, to some extent, a repetition of the Holy Wars of the past, the Christians against the Muslims, but not quite the same way. It is much more of a socio-economic/ideological struggle than a religious war. To put it another way, it is a class war.
The Islamic Extremists made their first appearance a long time ago. But in the modern era, it was more or less around 1959 when Al Fattah, the Palestinian organization was founded and in 1964, the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) came into being. The PLO founder, Yassar Arafat, even back in those days, was simply a gun toting terrorist, nothing more. How times change. In his first appearance before the UN in the 1970s, Arafat spoke before the UN with a .45 stuck in his belt! Today he would not have been allowed into the building armed like that! In 1970 the Black September Group was founded. This infamous terrorist organization was the one that carried out the massacre of Israeli Olympic athletes in the 1972 Munich Olympics. The world in general was first exposed to Islamic Terrorists at that time, although there were other terror acts that were carried out, especially in the Middle East. In 1979 the United States was first exposed to Islamic Terrorist act when the so-called Iranian "students" stormed the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and held hostage Americans for 444 days! The world was stunned! The Iranians under Ayatollah Khomeni had no regard for international law, international conventions! They made their own law! Shortly, other Islamic Terrorist organizations cropped up, Hezobollah (sponsored by Iran) in 1985 and Hamas in 1988 in the so-called East Bank where the Palestinian Authority was ruled by Yassar Arafat.
There were several Islamic terrorist attacks against America, but it was all abroad and seemed distant, and Americans in general forgot them quickly. Remember the bombing of the plane over Lockerbie? The bombing of the Marine barracks in Lebannon? The killing of the Marine Colonel in Lebanon? All this took place in the 1980s. There were also bombings of bars and cafes in Europe that catered to American clientele, but again, most Americans hardly paid attention. Then in the 1990s the bombing of the World Trade Center in New York which was the first terror attack on U.S. soil by Islamic terrorists. But it was thought of as sort of an anomaly. Then it was followed by two bombings of U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. American lives were lost in Nairobi, and the name Al Qaeda surfaced. There were other attacks that the American public hardly noticed. The gunning down of a van with U.S. Consulate employees by heavily armed gunmen in Peshawar, Pakistan. Four Americans were killed in that attack. The ambush of an Embassy shuttle van in Cairo where three Americans were killed. There were numerous attacks in the 1980s and 90s, mostly in Islamic countries. It was a clear sign of things to come. The 9/11 actually made Americans aware that we were not really safe just because we were far away from the Middle East! The recent San Bernardino killings only reinforced that!
With the demise of the Soviet Union and the "Eastern Bloc" of countries, America became the lone remaining super power. Unfortunately, with the new position, new responsibility befell on the United States. We became the "policemen" of the world. We became the only power that could quell troubles and other disturbances around the world. It is a role that perhaps we did not want or seek, but it is something that came with the job, so to speak. But in a way it was a role that we indeed asked for because we had been striving to be the top dog, the most powerful country in the world. Now we got our wish. The only problem is that our government is reluctant to take up the role, and the general voting public in America does not want that role!
The average American voter is interested primarily in his/her personal well being. It is only natural, that is what human beings have been doing since the beginning of time! The average person, be it an American or any other nationality, is interested in their well-being, their families fortunes. For many, what takes place outside of their immediate area is of no concern. Believe it or not, many really are not that concerned with what happens outside of their county or state, let alone some far away place across the ocean! You can understand then, the resistance that comes to surface when the government decides to spend money somewhere else on foreign aid, etc. It is a perfectly understandable feeling and emotion. The government should take care of its own rather than waste money outside! But unfortunately, things aren't that simple, especially if your country happens to be the "reigning" super power.
It is no longer possible to be an isolationist. There are folks who believe that we can just pull out of the world community and just take care of ourselves. We don't need anyone else, it is a very popular refrain. Small wonder the phenomenon of "survivalists" and "preppers" is thriving in America today. But the last time America could have possibly survived as an isolationist country was in the 19th Century, before the time of our Civil War! Things changed so rapidly that by the time of First World War, it was impossible for America to be an isolationist, as much as we wanted to be! World War Two and our dominance after the war changed everything completely. Now, whether we like it or not, we are very much a part of the rest of the world. The global economy is such that everyone is inter-dependent on each other. We may have all the oil reserves that we need under our soil, but we still need the rest of the world for us to continue as we are. I suppose we could become isolationists and cut ourselves off from the rest of the world. But I don't think anybody, not even those who are championing isolationism would like the new America with no outside contact!
So what does this mean? It means that we have to engage in solving problems around the world, even if it means going to war! Yes, going to war! There will be wars from now on for many years to come. Currently it is the Islamic Extremism, the Islamic Terrorists that are causing all the problem. Al Qaeda, ISIS/ISIL, and many other off-shoots are all fighting a class war. They use religion, in this case Islam, as an excuse. It is a way for them to recruit and convince people to follow them. Essentially it is an anti-"westernism" because it is the western world that has the money, the technology, and has for centuries, exploited some of the lesser developed countries. America being the biggest and the richest has become the main target! The Iranians call us the "Great Satan" and ISIS/ISIL has taken to calling us "Rome" referring to the great Roman Empire that eventually fell!
So far we have done a lousy job of being the world "leader." We made a mess of the "Arab Spring" when all those uprisings took place. We should have been more engaged, but instead we took the "wait and see" approach. Well, we now "see" what that led to! Putin is using our indecisiveness and lack of leadership to gain foothold and prestige. Russia is fully engaged in Syria. they may not come out a winner, but they have gained tremendous ground with Arabs and believe it or not, with some Europeans as well. They have shown that they will help their "friend," in this case Al-Assad. They just bombed and killed the main leader of the "moderate" rebel group, Zahran Alloush who was our main hope to take over if Al-Assad was removed! Well, that's not going to happen now!
In this new "world order," there will be other wars just like the one in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. Our leaders are reluctant to put American troops on the ground because lives will be lost and the voting public will be upset, meaning the politicians will lose votes! But if we want to remain the leader in this new world order, we have to participate in these wars with boots on the ground, not with just bombing! Using proxies is not the answer, and training locals does not always work, as you can see by what is going on in Iraq. It has to be American troops, that means American casualties. But that is just the fact of today's world order. If we refuse to participate in the world order and commit American troops, then we should just become isolationists and give up our position as the pre-eminent power in the world, we can't have both. We can't not risk American lives and participate in ground combat and remain the super power. If we don't want to pay the price, in that case, we should give up the role and hand it to Russia, who is the only power left that could fill the vacuum and will be only too happy to take our place.
Tuesday, December 22, 2015
Definition of Hero
It seems that in the last several decades, the definition of the word hero has changed considerably. According to common dictionary definition, a hero is someone "admired for their courage, exploits, especially in war, and also someone admired for their qualities and achievements, and regarded as an ideal or model." This is sort of a compilation of definitions from a dictionary. In awarding decorations for heroism, the military has its own definition, but basically it is the same, with the proviso that would include, "above and beyond the call of duty (requirements for the job, etc.), and "disregard for personal safety in carrying out the duty," so on and so forth.
Within the strict definition of the word hero, be it dictionary or military version, it is therefore, inappropriate to call every first responder and everyone in uniform a "hero," which appears to be the common practice today. Most surely these individuals, members of the military and the first responders in our cities and states, deserve to be respected and in some cases admired, when they perform their duties "above and beyond." But to apply a blanket label of "heroes" to all is not only inaccurate, but lessens the value of the word hero! I know that when I was in uniform during the Vietnam era, my fellow servicemen and I would have been somewhat embarrassed if we were referred to as "heroes," if we hadn't actually performed any heroic acts!
First and foremost, all of these individuals, be they military or first responders, are performing their assigned duties. In other words, it is just a job. Perhaps it exposes them to danger, but still it is just a job that in reality is no different from being a bank clerk, a shopkeeper, or a postman! If, in doing their job they do perform above and beyond the requirements of the job, risk their personal safety for the sake of others, then indeed they are performing a heroic act and can be called heroes. But otherwise, let's not over do it and call everyone a hero, as it seems to be the practice today! Over 55,000 men and women in uniform lost their lives in Vietnam, all deserving of due respect and honor, but not but all were heroes. Some were indeed heroes, but others were simply doing their jobs when they met their end.
The same applies to those who perished and are still dying in Afghanistan and Iraq. Although the numbers are much smaller than in Vietnam, nevertheless it is a significant number. But just like their predecessors, some were/are heroes, others simply performing their assigned duties. Pat Tillman, who turned down a financially lucrative NFL career to join the army after 9/11 is considered a hero by many. I believe he made an honorable and difficult decision to bypass NFL and join the army. For that he deserves recognition. But he did not die while trying to save others or to complete a mission. Despite army's attempt to cover up the whole thing, he died as a result of "friendly fire." Tillman was a hero in a sense that he could be regarded as an "ideal or model" but not from a military point of view. Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to "trash" Tillman or anyone else, as I said, he can be considered a hero from a different perspective. I am simply trying to point out that we seem to be using the term "hero" a bit too loosely, applying the label too easily.
Hollywood, and for that matter movie and TV show makers world wide, tend to use their "artistic licenses" a bit too freely when it comes to heroes. Individuals that are just ordinary, according to records, suddenly become heroes. At times, they even turn things around completely and someone who was perhaps even cowardly in fact becomes a heroic figure on screen! But more often, just a normal individual or someone just trying to survive suddenly becomes a hero on the big screen or the TV. Such was the case of possibly the unluckiest or luckiest (depends on how you look at it) individual in World War Two era!
I had previously mention him briefly in one of the earlier blogs. Kyoungjong Yang (Yang Kyoungjong) was a young Korean who was in the Japanese Imperial Army just before World War Two. His incredible journey took him from Japanese army to Soviet Red Army and finally to the Nazi German Army before he was captured by American soldiers. Yang ended up in Chicago and lived a very quiet life, never discussed his war experience with anyone, not even his family members. Upon his death a South Korean movie maker decided to chronicle his fantastic journey during the war. In the movie he is portrayed as a heroic young man who was forced into the Japanese army, later forced into the Soviet Army, and still later forced to serve the Nazi Germans. He is portrayed as a brave soldier who rose in rank in each of the armies where he served. Unfortunately there isn't anyone who can attest to his military record in those three services and there are no surviving official records.
He may have very well been a brave soldier, who knows? One thing is for certain, he was a survivor! I question whether he was the hero that he was portrayed in the movie, but I do not question the fact that he was a survivor! Disregarding the fictionalized version in the movie and how he was "forced" to join the Japanese, the Soviets, and finally the Nazis, let's look at some of the factual information.
He served in the Japanese Kwantung Army, the elite of the Japanese Imperial Army and he did not serve in a work battalion where typically conscripted Koreans were assigned. By his own admission, he volunteered to serve in the Japanese army because he needed a job! He was trained to be a mechanic with a tank battalion, an important job that is given to regular army soldiers! So, he was not drafted, as the movie made out, but volunteered to serve in Japan's finest army unit! He was captured by the Soviets during the Battle of Nomanhan before World War Two. He was sent to the POW camp but shortly emerged from the camp as a tank mechanic for the Soviet Red Army. Once again, he was not conscripted out of the POW camp, he volunteered because it was a way to survive! When he was captured by the Germans, the same thing happened. The German army was short of manpower and offered POWs, especially those of Russia's ethnic minority, to serve with German army. He, like some other POWs, chose to volunteer and serve with the Germans to survive!
Of course he was not a Nazi nor was he a communist! He was just a survivor, an incredible survivor. But, he was not a hero, like the movie made him out to be. His life in the three armies deserved to be chronicled in the movie to illustrate the struggles of a true survivor. But it should not have been made into some sort of a heroic action film, which made it into fiction! I am not being critical of the man nor the movie makers, just pointing out that truth sometimes can be very elusive and the definition of hero confusing!
Within the strict definition of the word hero, be it dictionary or military version, it is therefore, inappropriate to call every first responder and everyone in uniform a "hero," which appears to be the common practice today. Most surely these individuals, members of the military and the first responders in our cities and states, deserve to be respected and in some cases admired, when they perform their duties "above and beyond." But to apply a blanket label of "heroes" to all is not only inaccurate, but lessens the value of the word hero! I know that when I was in uniform during the Vietnam era, my fellow servicemen and I would have been somewhat embarrassed if we were referred to as "heroes," if we hadn't actually performed any heroic acts!
First and foremost, all of these individuals, be they military or first responders, are performing their assigned duties. In other words, it is just a job. Perhaps it exposes them to danger, but still it is just a job that in reality is no different from being a bank clerk, a shopkeeper, or a postman! If, in doing their job they do perform above and beyond the requirements of the job, risk their personal safety for the sake of others, then indeed they are performing a heroic act and can be called heroes. But otherwise, let's not over do it and call everyone a hero, as it seems to be the practice today! Over 55,000 men and women in uniform lost their lives in Vietnam, all deserving of due respect and honor, but not but all were heroes. Some were indeed heroes, but others were simply doing their jobs when they met their end.
The same applies to those who perished and are still dying in Afghanistan and Iraq. Although the numbers are much smaller than in Vietnam, nevertheless it is a significant number. But just like their predecessors, some were/are heroes, others simply performing their assigned duties. Pat Tillman, who turned down a financially lucrative NFL career to join the army after 9/11 is considered a hero by many. I believe he made an honorable and difficult decision to bypass NFL and join the army. For that he deserves recognition. But he did not die while trying to save others or to complete a mission. Despite army's attempt to cover up the whole thing, he died as a result of "friendly fire." Tillman was a hero in a sense that he could be regarded as an "ideal or model" but not from a military point of view. Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to "trash" Tillman or anyone else, as I said, he can be considered a hero from a different perspective. I am simply trying to point out that we seem to be using the term "hero" a bit too loosely, applying the label too easily.
Hollywood, and for that matter movie and TV show makers world wide, tend to use their "artistic licenses" a bit too freely when it comes to heroes. Individuals that are just ordinary, according to records, suddenly become heroes. At times, they even turn things around completely and someone who was perhaps even cowardly in fact becomes a heroic figure on screen! But more often, just a normal individual or someone just trying to survive suddenly becomes a hero on the big screen or the TV. Such was the case of possibly the unluckiest or luckiest (depends on how you look at it) individual in World War Two era!
I had previously mention him briefly in one of the earlier blogs. Kyoungjong Yang (Yang Kyoungjong) was a young Korean who was in the Japanese Imperial Army just before World War Two. His incredible journey took him from Japanese army to Soviet Red Army and finally to the Nazi German Army before he was captured by American soldiers. Yang ended up in Chicago and lived a very quiet life, never discussed his war experience with anyone, not even his family members. Upon his death a South Korean movie maker decided to chronicle his fantastic journey during the war. In the movie he is portrayed as a heroic young man who was forced into the Japanese army, later forced into the Soviet Army, and still later forced to serve the Nazi Germans. He is portrayed as a brave soldier who rose in rank in each of the armies where he served. Unfortunately there isn't anyone who can attest to his military record in those three services and there are no surviving official records.
He may have very well been a brave soldier, who knows? One thing is for certain, he was a survivor! I question whether he was the hero that he was portrayed in the movie, but I do not question the fact that he was a survivor! Disregarding the fictionalized version in the movie and how he was "forced" to join the Japanese, the Soviets, and finally the Nazis, let's look at some of the factual information.
He served in the Japanese Kwantung Army, the elite of the Japanese Imperial Army and he did not serve in a work battalion where typically conscripted Koreans were assigned. By his own admission, he volunteered to serve in the Japanese army because he needed a job! He was trained to be a mechanic with a tank battalion, an important job that is given to regular army soldiers! So, he was not drafted, as the movie made out, but volunteered to serve in Japan's finest army unit! He was captured by the Soviets during the Battle of Nomanhan before World War Two. He was sent to the POW camp but shortly emerged from the camp as a tank mechanic for the Soviet Red Army. Once again, he was not conscripted out of the POW camp, he volunteered because it was a way to survive! When he was captured by the Germans, the same thing happened. The German army was short of manpower and offered POWs, especially those of Russia's ethnic minority, to serve with German army. He, like some other POWs, chose to volunteer and serve with the Germans to survive!
Of course he was not a Nazi nor was he a communist! He was just a survivor, an incredible survivor. But, he was not a hero, like the movie made him out to be. His life in the three armies deserved to be chronicled in the movie to illustrate the struggles of a true survivor. But it should not have been made into some sort of a heroic action film, which made it into fiction! I am not being critical of the man nor the movie makers, just pointing out that truth sometimes can be very elusive and the definition of hero confusing!
Friday, December 18, 2015
Our Incompetent and Questionable Leaders
A couple of weeks ago I did a blog on our failing ISIS/ISIL policy. In that blog I brought up the fact that Rob Malley, a known Hamas sympathizer with a long history of association with Arab terrorist groups, has been appointed to a high advisory position in Obama's administration. It puzzles me that in this time of need for expertise on fighting ISIS/ISIL, our government appears to employ those who apparently "sympathize" with the Islamic fundamentalist movement! I know that, "keep your friends close and your enemies closer" is a wise saying, but this is ridiculous!
Rob Malley is not the only one holding a high and sensitive position in our government with questionable loyalties when it comes to Islamic terrorists! Did you know that until fairly recently (2014), one of Obama's chief advisors on terrorism, working for the Homeland Security Advisory Council on Terrorism, Mohamed Elibiary, is a an avowed member of Muslim Brotherhood? Elibiary, an Egyptian born radical Islamist, was appointed by Obama to that position! During his tenure as one of Obama's chief advisors on terrorism, he was constantly quoted in the press for his pro Islamic statements. Among some of the outlandish statements that he made prior to resigning from office in 2014, he declared that the United States was an Islamic nation! He constantly made disturbing, pro Islamic statements, culminating in a tweet that forced him to resign. He tweeted that, "As I've said before, it was inevitable that Caliphate returns," making reference to the rise of ISIS/ISIL! Fortunately, the uproar over that statement caused him to resign and he is no longer advising Obama, at least not officially!
I cannot comprehend how our government can appoint such people to sensitive, influential positions! Although Mohamed Elibiary is no longer associated with the government (I think!), Rob Malley is still very much around! These are people with known sympathies for radical Islam. How many more are there that we do not know about? How many more pro Islamists did Obama hire or appoint to sensitive offices? These are what I would call "questionable" leaders in Washington. It scares me to think how many "enemies" this government is keeping "closer!"
When it comes to incompetence, we don't have to dig very far, in fact, we don't have to dig at all! I know that most people simply lay the blame at Obama's feet and seem to ignore others that surround him. But there are people in Washington that absolutely astound me with their incompetence and stupidity! I have criticized and sniped at John Kerry, our Secretary of State before, especially during that disastrous "Iran Nuclear Deal." Kerry has been known to make stupid statements and commit some dumb acts going back decades. Do you remember when a young, long-haired, hippy-like Kerry threw his "medals" from Vietnam War over the fence in protest? Remember when he later admitted that those weren't "real" medals, that he just bought them at a surplus store for this particular event? Made me wonder then just what kind of a man he was! But now, he is holding one of the highest offices in our government!
Kerry can't seem to stay in step with his boss or even those who work for him! He made a horrible gaff in a statement about the Paris terrorists, saying something to the effect that it was poetic justice, or something. The liberal media was very quick to cover that up! He is constantly making statements that seem to be out of concert with his boss. About a week ago he stated emphatically that there would be no agreement for peace in Syria with al-Assad in place. Almost at the same time, his UN Ambassador (yes, the UN Ambassador reports to Secretary of State!) Samantha Powers stated that "something could be worked out" with Assad in place! Does Powers talk to Kerry? Does Kerry talk to Obama? Do they all speak the same language?
I have always maintained that Kerry was not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but recent events have shown that he is not the only dull knife in the drawer! Kerry is bad enough, but Kerry pales in comparison to Ashton Carter, our illustrious Secretary of Defense! In some of the earlier blogs I made several snide comments about Carter, about some of his statements like declaring that "we are at war," while his boss, the president made a statement to the effect that ISIS is contained and it is just a "regional" thing!
I've watched those boring Congressional hearings on the war against ISIS and was not impressed at all with Ashton Carter's responses or demeanor. He seemed hesitant, unsure, and at times tongue-tied. But this latest admission by him on the use of his private email account for official business is mind-numbing! Just how stupid can stupid be? With all of the uproar going on about Hillary Clinton's private email account, our illustrious Secretary of Defense blithely went on using his personal email for official business. Did he think he was bullet proof? His declaration that "it is all on me, I take full responsibility," is as dumb as the act itself! Who else is responsible? Give me a break!
With this kind of leadership, it is a small wonder that we are in such a mess today! I don't think that I have ever, not in my lifetime (and that's a long time!), seen such a collection of incompetent leaders in Washington. Our war against ISIS/ISIL is a joke, a tremendous waste of tax payers money, with no results! We are "delivering" via air drop or trucks, millions upon millions of dollars worth of arms and munitions. Is all this stuff going to the right places and being used by "moderate" rebels? Frankly, we don't know. If you are at all familiar with the small arms used in the Middle East, the bad guys are predominantly armed with AKMs or AK-47s which are distinctive in appearance, The good guys are armed with our M-16s, M-4s and captured AKs, in other words, a mixture. Lately, I've noted more and more ISIS appear in their videos armed with M-16s and M-4s! Now granted, some were no doubt captured from the "moderates," but I'll bet you that more and more are those that were "delivered" by air or trucks! Take a look next time, if you can tell the difference, it will surprise you to see now that about half of the terrorists are armed with M-16s and M-4s! Captured? May be.
Recently in a CNN interview, Martha McSally, the freshman Congresswoman from Arizona said that we are not fighting the war against ISIS to win. In her words, we are just "plinking" away at them, harassing them, nothing more. McSally was the first female combat pilot (First Gulf War) and the first female commander of a fighter squadron. She has seen war both as a direct participant and also as a staff officer, so she knows of what she speaks. She says we can win the war easily enough if we commit our forces to win, not to just "plink" away! We need to stop the reduction of the military, now at its lowest level since the end of World War Two. Technology is great, but it still cannot replace boots on the ground!
If I sound frustrated it is because I am frustrated with our government. We have the world's most powerful military and we are the richest country in the world. Yet, we are kow-towing to the Islamic Extremists group, not even a legitimate country. We are afraid to insult them, afraid to be politically incorrect! Our government appears to be rife with Islamic sympathizers and incompetent officials! I don't care if our government is run by a Republican or a Democrat, my personal political choice has nothing to do with it. I just want our government to be what it should be! We don't need to go to extremes and bar all Muslims from entering our country, we don't need to rattle our swords and confront Putin. What we do need to do is let everyone know that we mean what we say, and back those words with action, not some invisible "red lines" that are drawn for dramatic effect, and then promptly ignored! We don't need to be warmongers, but we do need to let the world know that we're not the "patsies" that we seem to be today!
Ever wonder why or how Putin is able to maintain his popularity among Russians? It is simple. Despite his heavy handedness and seeming bluster, he has gained the respect of his people as well as most of the world, except us, perhaps. We don't need a Putin, nor do we need some blustering individual who will alienate everyone. But we sure as hell need someone who can put us on the right course. Someone who can at least pick proper advisors and cabinet members!
Rob Malley is not the only one holding a high and sensitive position in our government with questionable loyalties when it comes to Islamic terrorists! Did you know that until fairly recently (2014), one of Obama's chief advisors on terrorism, working for the Homeland Security Advisory Council on Terrorism, Mohamed Elibiary, is a an avowed member of Muslim Brotherhood? Elibiary, an Egyptian born radical Islamist, was appointed by Obama to that position! During his tenure as one of Obama's chief advisors on terrorism, he was constantly quoted in the press for his pro Islamic statements. Among some of the outlandish statements that he made prior to resigning from office in 2014, he declared that the United States was an Islamic nation! He constantly made disturbing, pro Islamic statements, culminating in a tweet that forced him to resign. He tweeted that, "As I've said before, it was inevitable that Caliphate returns," making reference to the rise of ISIS/ISIL! Fortunately, the uproar over that statement caused him to resign and he is no longer advising Obama, at least not officially!
I cannot comprehend how our government can appoint such people to sensitive, influential positions! Although Mohamed Elibiary is no longer associated with the government (I think!), Rob Malley is still very much around! These are people with known sympathies for radical Islam. How many more are there that we do not know about? How many more pro Islamists did Obama hire or appoint to sensitive offices? These are what I would call "questionable" leaders in Washington. It scares me to think how many "enemies" this government is keeping "closer!"
When it comes to incompetence, we don't have to dig very far, in fact, we don't have to dig at all! I know that most people simply lay the blame at Obama's feet and seem to ignore others that surround him. But there are people in Washington that absolutely astound me with their incompetence and stupidity! I have criticized and sniped at John Kerry, our Secretary of State before, especially during that disastrous "Iran Nuclear Deal." Kerry has been known to make stupid statements and commit some dumb acts going back decades. Do you remember when a young, long-haired, hippy-like Kerry threw his "medals" from Vietnam War over the fence in protest? Remember when he later admitted that those weren't "real" medals, that he just bought them at a surplus store for this particular event? Made me wonder then just what kind of a man he was! But now, he is holding one of the highest offices in our government!
Kerry can't seem to stay in step with his boss or even those who work for him! He made a horrible gaff in a statement about the Paris terrorists, saying something to the effect that it was poetic justice, or something. The liberal media was very quick to cover that up! He is constantly making statements that seem to be out of concert with his boss. About a week ago he stated emphatically that there would be no agreement for peace in Syria with al-Assad in place. Almost at the same time, his UN Ambassador (yes, the UN Ambassador reports to Secretary of State!) Samantha Powers stated that "something could be worked out" with Assad in place! Does Powers talk to Kerry? Does Kerry talk to Obama? Do they all speak the same language?
I have always maintained that Kerry was not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but recent events have shown that he is not the only dull knife in the drawer! Kerry is bad enough, but Kerry pales in comparison to Ashton Carter, our illustrious Secretary of Defense! In some of the earlier blogs I made several snide comments about Carter, about some of his statements like declaring that "we are at war," while his boss, the president made a statement to the effect that ISIS is contained and it is just a "regional" thing!
I've watched those boring Congressional hearings on the war against ISIS and was not impressed at all with Ashton Carter's responses or demeanor. He seemed hesitant, unsure, and at times tongue-tied. But this latest admission by him on the use of his private email account for official business is mind-numbing! Just how stupid can stupid be? With all of the uproar going on about Hillary Clinton's private email account, our illustrious Secretary of Defense blithely went on using his personal email for official business. Did he think he was bullet proof? His declaration that "it is all on me, I take full responsibility," is as dumb as the act itself! Who else is responsible? Give me a break!
With this kind of leadership, it is a small wonder that we are in such a mess today! I don't think that I have ever, not in my lifetime (and that's a long time!), seen such a collection of incompetent leaders in Washington. Our war against ISIS/ISIL is a joke, a tremendous waste of tax payers money, with no results! We are "delivering" via air drop or trucks, millions upon millions of dollars worth of arms and munitions. Is all this stuff going to the right places and being used by "moderate" rebels? Frankly, we don't know. If you are at all familiar with the small arms used in the Middle East, the bad guys are predominantly armed with AKMs or AK-47s which are distinctive in appearance, The good guys are armed with our M-16s, M-4s and captured AKs, in other words, a mixture. Lately, I've noted more and more ISIS appear in their videos armed with M-16s and M-4s! Now granted, some were no doubt captured from the "moderates," but I'll bet you that more and more are those that were "delivered" by air or trucks! Take a look next time, if you can tell the difference, it will surprise you to see now that about half of the terrorists are armed with M-16s and M-4s! Captured? May be.
Recently in a CNN interview, Martha McSally, the freshman Congresswoman from Arizona said that we are not fighting the war against ISIS to win. In her words, we are just "plinking" away at them, harassing them, nothing more. McSally was the first female combat pilot (First Gulf War) and the first female commander of a fighter squadron. She has seen war both as a direct participant and also as a staff officer, so she knows of what she speaks. She says we can win the war easily enough if we commit our forces to win, not to just "plink" away! We need to stop the reduction of the military, now at its lowest level since the end of World War Two. Technology is great, but it still cannot replace boots on the ground!
If I sound frustrated it is because I am frustrated with our government. We have the world's most powerful military and we are the richest country in the world. Yet, we are kow-towing to the Islamic Extremists group, not even a legitimate country. We are afraid to insult them, afraid to be politically incorrect! Our government appears to be rife with Islamic sympathizers and incompetent officials! I don't care if our government is run by a Republican or a Democrat, my personal political choice has nothing to do with it. I just want our government to be what it should be! We don't need to go to extremes and bar all Muslims from entering our country, we don't need to rattle our swords and confront Putin. What we do need to do is let everyone know that we mean what we say, and back those words with action, not some invisible "red lines" that are drawn for dramatic effect, and then promptly ignored! We don't need to be warmongers, but we do need to let the world know that we're not the "patsies" that we seem to be today!
Ever wonder why or how Putin is able to maintain his popularity among Russians? It is simple. Despite his heavy handedness and seeming bluster, he has gained the respect of his people as well as most of the world, except us, perhaps. We don't need a Putin, nor do we need some blustering individual who will alienate everyone. But we sure as hell need someone who can put us on the right course. Someone who can at least pick proper advisors and cabinet members!
Tuesday, December 15, 2015
"Fiance Visa"
Ever since the terrible day in San Bernardino when Syed Farook and his wife Tashfeen Malik carried out a senseless, horrible attack, there have been questions and talk about the so-called "fiancé visa" which allowed Tashfeen Malik to enter the U.S. Questions have been asked and accusations made as to how did the U.S. government allow a terrorist to enter the U.S. so easily. Was not there a vetting process? Did not the visa issuing office do a thorough check on Malik's background? Did they not check her Facebook page where she had posted her allegiance to ISIS? These were all legitimate questions, especially if Malik had entered the U.S. with an immigrant visa (IV). However, given the fact the she used a non-immigrant visa (NIV), she managed to circumvent the rather vigorous vetting process that is required for an IV!
The non-immigrant visa (NIV) was designed to allow foreigners to enter the U.S. with a minimum amount of hassle. This was further simplified for those countries that have had a good record of non-abuse of the U.S. NIV by its citizens by instituting the Visa Waiver program, eliminating the need for an NIV for some countries. The K-1 ("fiancé visa) was established primarily for those countries that had a good record. The idea was to provide a mechanism for the prospective spouse to first come to the U.S. and see if they really wanted to marry the U.S. citizen partner. They are given 90 days to decide, at the end of which they either married the U.S. citizen and stayed in the U.S. or left, calling off the whole thing. I believe there is even a TV reality show called the "90 day fiancé" or something like that.
As an NIV, the K-1 visa prospect is treated basically just as any tourist applying for a visa. In countries that have a good record of non-abuse of the NIV, interviews are rarely made for NIVs. In other countries, those that have a bad record, usually countries with bad economic situation, each NIV applicant has to be interviewed by a visa officer, unless that applicant has had a U.S. visa before and did not abuse it, in which case the visa is simply renewed.
The whole process of visa issuance, NIV or IV, is extremely labor intensive. Visa officers don't last long at very busy posts, they burn out! It is also very difficult to recruit visa officers for they must speak the language of the country for interviewing visa applicants! It is a very time consuming and expensive process of training a visa officer, especially for difficult languages that require more than a year of training! At certain Foreign Service posts, the "visa lines" have infamous reputations, lines that form outside of the building the night before! Fraud is rampant with identity and false documentation heading the list. The visa officers not only have to be accomplished interviewers, but detectives as well!
Although for an NIV the vetting processes is minimal, for IV it is very intensive. I can assure you that had Tashfeen Malik applied for an IR-1 (Immediate Relative -1) Immigrant Visa, she would have been found out for her ISIS interest or connections. For IV, a thorough background check is run by the visa issuing post. However, the background check is only partially conducted by Americans, the actual visiting of locations and interviewing neighbors, etc., is done by a local investigator. So you can see that a local employee could conceivably be paid off! The entire process is full of pit falls, there is just no getting around it. In a best case scenario, the local investigator is loyal to the U.S. government and is not susceptible to bribery and will provide accurate and truthful information. But, unfortunately, that is not always the case.
To check every NIV applicant thoroughly with background investigations, etc., would be an impossible task. At a busy Foreign Service post, in a developing country where economy is poor and its citizens are anxious to get to the U.S., by whatever means, usually the NIV lines stretch for blocks. Daily, there are hundreds to thousands of NIV applicants at such posts. Mexico City averages about 2,000 NIV applicants daily. That's just in Mexico City, there are in addition posts at more than half a dozen other locations in Mexico. The Consulate General in Tijuana used to get anywhere between 500 to a 1000 NIV applicants daily. At one point in the 1990s the number of visa applicants had increased so much that an annex had to be opened in Mexicali to absorb the increased numbers! Can you imagine trying to run background investigations daily with such numbers just at one post? The cost would be astronomical, not to mention time spent doing investigations.
NIVs are issued the same day, usually within an hour at each post. If thorough investigations have to be conducted, that would not only delay issuance but create a backlog that would be impossible to get out from under! There aren't as many immigrant visa applicants as non immigrant, therefore, background investigations are not as big problem. But IVs are usually not issued the same day, in fact never in the same day as the application!
It would be silly to tighten the requirements for a K-1 visa, do a thorough background check etc. If we are to do that, then it becomes just like the IR-1 of the IV, why duplicate it? The whole idea for the K-1 was to make it easier for the prospective spouse to travel to the U.S. The visa was primarily designed for countries that today enjoy the Visa Waiver program!
If we are to change our visa issuing process from the current system, first and foremost we would need at least twice as many visa officers as we have now. To do so would cost a lot of money that no doubt Congress would never approve! Secondly, all our visa issuing facilities would have to be increased in size, and local employees doubled in numbers as well. All of this would require more funding, which Congress is not likely to approve. Congress is quick to hold hearings and criticize the lack of security etc., at foreign posts, yet, they won't approve the necessary funding for improving security! So, don't believe everything you hear and see on TV. Politicians love to grandstand and accuse others when there is security failures or other disasters. But, they would never admit to the fact that it is their refusal to provide funding that brought about the security failure, etc. Congress does not hesitate to vote itself a salary increase annually, but increasing funding? Whenever a government agency goes to Congress asking for funding, it is always, "what's in it for me?" kind of reaction!
The non-immigrant visa (NIV) was designed to allow foreigners to enter the U.S. with a minimum amount of hassle. This was further simplified for those countries that have had a good record of non-abuse of the U.S. NIV by its citizens by instituting the Visa Waiver program, eliminating the need for an NIV for some countries. The K-1 ("fiancé visa) was established primarily for those countries that had a good record. The idea was to provide a mechanism for the prospective spouse to first come to the U.S. and see if they really wanted to marry the U.S. citizen partner. They are given 90 days to decide, at the end of which they either married the U.S. citizen and stayed in the U.S. or left, calling off the whole thing. I believe there is even a TV reality show called the "90 day fiancé" or something like that.
As an NIV, the K-1 visa prospect is treated basically just as any tourist applying for a visa. In countries that have a good record of non-abuse of the NIV, interviews are rarely made for NIVs. In other countries, those that have a bad record, usually countries with bad economic situation, each NIV applicant has to be interviewed by a visa officer, unless that applicant has had a U.S. visa before and did not abuse it, in which case the visa is simply renewed.
The whole process of visa issuance, NIV or IV, is extremely labor intensive. Visa officers don't last long at very busy posts, they burn out! It is also very difficult to recruit visa officers for they must speak the language of the country for interviewing visa applicants! It is a very time consuming and expensive process of training a visa officer, especially for difficult languages that require more than a year of training! At certain Foreign Service posts, the "visa lines" have infamous reputations, lines that form outside of the building the night before! Fraud is rampant with identity and false documentation heading the list. The visa officers not only have to be accomplished interviewers, but detectives as well!
Although for an NIV the vetting processes is minimal, for IV it is very intensive. I can assure you that had Tashfeen Malik applied for an IR-1 (Immediate Relative -1) Immigrant Visa, she would have been found out for her ISIS interest or connections. For IV, a thorough background check is run by the visa issuing post. However, the background check is only partially conducted by Americans, the actual visiting of locations and interviewing neighbors, etc., is done by a local investigator. So you can see that a local employee could conceivably be paid off! The entire process is full of pit falls, there is just no getting around it. In a best case scenario, the local investigator is loyal to the U.S. government and is not susceptible to bribery and will provide accurate and truthful information. But, unfortunately, that is not always the case.
To check every NIV applicant thoroughly with background investigations, etc., would be an impossible task. At a busy Foreign Service post, in a developing country where economy is poor and its citizens are anxious to get to the U.S., by whatever means, usually the NIV lines stretch for blocks. Daily, there are hundreds to thousands of NIV applicants at such posts. Mexico City averages about 2,000 NIV applicants daily. That's just in Mexico City, there are in addition posts at more than half a dozen other locations in Mexico. The Consulate General in Tijuana used to get anywhere between 500 to a 1000 NIV applicants daily. At one point in the 1990s the number of visa applicants had increased so much that an annex had to be opened in Mexicali to absorb the increased numbers! Can you imagine trying to run background investigations daily with such numbers just at one post? The cost would be astronomical, not to mention time spent doing investigations.
NIVs are issued the same day, usually within an hour at each post. If thorough investigations have to be conducted, that would not only delay issuance but create a backlog that would be impossible to get out from under! There aren't as many immigrant visa applicants as non immigrant, therefore, background investigations are not as big problem. But IVs are usually not issued the same day, in fact never in the same day as the application!
It would be silly to tighten the requirements for a K-1 visa, do a thorough background check etc. If we are to do that, then it becomes just like the IR-1 of the IV, why duplicate it? The whole idea for the K-1 was to make it easier for the prospective spouse to travel to the U.S. The visa was primarily designed for countries that today enjoy the Visa Waiver program!
If we are to change our visa issuing process from the current system, first and foremost we would need at least twice as many visa officers as we have now. To do so would cost a lot of money that no doubt Congress would never approve! Secondly, all our visa issuing facilities would have to be increased in size, and local employees doubled in numbers as well. All of this would require more funding, which Congress is not likely to approve. Congress is quick to hold hearings and criticize the lack of security etc., at foreign posts, yet, they won't approve the necessary funding for improving security! So, don't believe everything you hear and see on TV. Politicians love to grandstand and accuse others when there is security failures or other disasters. But, they would never admit to the fact that it is their refusal to provide funding that brought about the security failure, etc. Congress does not hesitate to vote itself a salary increase annually, but increasing funding? Whenever a government agency goes to Congress asking for funding, it is always, "what's in it for me?" kind of reaction!
Friday, December 11, 2015
The One-legged Okinawan Gangster
Before I got a motorcycle and zipped around all over the island, I used to take an Okinawan bus from Camp Chinen to Naha main bus terminal. I would walk out of Camp Chinen and up to Oyakibaru, the little village in front of the fire station. I would have gladly taken one of those little "kamikaze" cabs if they were available. It cost less than a dollar for the fare to Naha! However, there were almost never any in that area. On very rare occasions one would be found dropping off a fare and I would grab that cab in a hurry! But for vast majority of the time, there were no cabs, just the bus.
For the sum of 15 cents the bus would take me all the way to Naha (the cab fare was 90 cents!). If I was going to one of the teen clubs, the bus ride was a bit of a pain, since after getting off the bus at Naha, I would have to either find another bus or catch a cab to take me to whichever teen club I was going to. The bus terminal was located in the part of Naha where it was strictly "Okinawan." During all the trips that I made on that bus route, I never once encountered an American either on the bus or just walking around that part of the town.
Finding myself in that part of Naha, I couldn't help but get acquainted with the area while leaving the bus terminal. It was a revelation, that part of Naha was not anything like the Naha that most Americans were acquainted with, Kokusai Dori with all the tourist shops and bars and restaurans. For instance, around Kokusai Dori you could get a nice Japanese meal for a couple of dollars. Around the "Okinawan" part of Naha, the same meal would cost you a dollar, sometimes less! A bowl of noodles would cost less than 50 cents. During that period, I used to hang around with my friend Tomo. Tomo attended Kubasaki only for one year, the year we hung around together. He went to Japan for a year after that, then returned to Hawaii. His sister Akiko, however, attended Kubasaki until she graduated.
Anyway, Tomo and I used to roam around the "Okinawan" part of Naha. We found that with our limited budgets, we could afford a lot more in that part of town. Meals were good and cheap, and we discovered the very inexpensive Okinawan gambling parlors, the "Lucky Ball" joints. Yes, I know, high school kids are not supposed to hang around gambling joints, but what can I say, nobody stopped us. It was cheap entertainment and we never lost a lot nor won a lot. It was just something that was fun to do. Lucky Ball was a sort of a "poor man's" roulette, simplified! A red colored ball was used on a spinning wheel with different numbered and colored slots. You placed your bets according to the colored slot and number. If the bouncing ball landed in one of the slots of the spinning wheel where you placed your bet, you won. Very simple.
Lucky Ball joints were run by Okinawan gangsters. They were not yakuza yet, they were simply thugs, street gangs. There was the Naha gang and the Koza gang. The two did not mix and their territory was sharply divided at Futenma! We encountered the Naha gangsters regularly. They were not mean or anything, I think they found it rather amusing to have us partaking in their Lucky Ball games. There was rarely if ever any violence, at least not during our presence.
One evening Tomo and I ran into a one-legged gangster in front of a Lucky Ball joint. We noticed that all the other gangsters were very deferential to him and some even called him oyabun, a common form of address for a boss among yakuza. His name was Shima and he actually appeared to be a very friendly sort. Although he used a crutch, he was very muscular and obviously quite strong. Later we learned that despite the fact that he had only one leg, he was nevertheless quite accomplished in karate. Don't know how he lost his leg. One of his underlings said that he thought he lost the leg as a child during the war. Shima appeared to be in his early 30s at the time.
After Tomo left that summer for Japan, I never went back to that part of Naha, but I never forgot those times nor Shima, the one-legged Okinawan gangster.
In 1976, two years after the reversion to Japan, a Japanese movie titled Okinawa Gokudo Senso became a big hit. The popular Japanese action movie actor Sonny Chiba starred with several other well known Japanese actors. The movie was shot on Okinawa and it more or less stayed true to the factual events of the "yakuza wars" on Okinawa that took place from about 1972 until 1980s, a bit over a decade! However, like all movies, it took some detours and exaggerated some events. But, generally speaking, it was more or less an accurate depiction of the yakuza wars between the naichi yakuza and the Okinawan gangs. Ultimately the Japanese yakuza lost and the Okinawan gangs united and became one, no more separate Koza and Naha gangs. Today they have become yakuza, following yakuza traditions down to cutting of the pinky!
What was amusing to me about the movie was that in depicting the Naha gang boss, the Japanese movie director chose to make the gangster a one-armed rather than one-legged man! He was not called Shima in the movie, instead, he was given the name of Yonabaru, a very Okinawan name. To the Japanese, Shima sounds just too Japanese, while Yonabaru sounds "foreign," Okinawan! There are many names that are typically Okinawan and not found among Japanese, Shima is not one of them! Kinjo, Higa, Shimabukuro, Yonabaru, are just some of the very typically Okinawan names.
So, the two bit Okinawan gangster that my friend Tomo and I met so many years ago in the "Okinawan" part of Naha had been immortalized, sort of, by the Japanese movie, albeit, with a missing arm rather than a leg!
For the sum of 15 cents the bus would take me all the way to Naha (the cab fare was 90 cents!). If I was going to one of the teen clubs, the bus ride was a bit of a pain, since after getting off the bus at Naha, I would have to either find another bus or catch a cab to take me to whichever teen club I was going to. The bus terminal was located in the part of Naha where it was strictly "Okinawan." During all the trips that I made on that bus route, I never once encountered an American either on the bus or just walking around that part of the town.
Finding myself in that part of Naha, I couldn't help but get acquainted with the area while leaving the bus terminal. It was a revelation, that part of Naha was not anything like the Naha that most Americans were acquainted with, Kokusai Dori with all the tourist shops and bars and restaurans. For instance, around Kokusai Dori you could get a nice Japanese meal for a couple of dollars. Around the "Okinawan" part of Naha, the same meal would cost you a dollar, sometimes less! A bowl of noodles would cost less than 50 cents. During that period, I used to hang around with my friend Tomo. Tomo attended Kubasaki only for one year, the year we hung around together. He went to Japan for a year after that, then returned to Hawaii. His sister Akiko, however, attended Kubasaki until she graduated.
Anyway, Tomo and I used to roam around the "Okinawan" part of Naha. We found that with our limited budgets, we could afford a lot more in that part of town. Meals were good and cheap, and we discovered the very inexpensive Okinawan gambling parlors, the "Lucky Ball" joints. Yes, I know, high school kids are not supposed to hang around gambling joints, but what can I say, nobody stopped us. It was cheap entertainment and we never lost a lot nor won a lot. It was just something that was fun to do. Lucky Ball was a sort of a "poor man's" roulette, simplified! A red colored ball was used on a spinning wheel with different numbered and colored slots. You placed your bets according to the colored slot and number. If the bouncing ball landed in one of the slots of the spinning wheel where you placed your bet, you won. Very simple.
Lucky Ball joints were run by Okinawan gangsters. They were not yakuza yet, they were simply thugs, street gangs. There was the Naha gang and the Koza gang. The two did not mix and their territory was sharply divided at Futenma! We encountered the Naha gangsters regularly. They were not mean or anything, I think they found it rather amusing to have us partaking in their Lucky Ball games. There was rarely if ever any violence, at least not during our presence.
One evening Tomo and I ran into a one-legged gangster in front of a Lucky Ball joint. We noticed that all the other gangsters were very deferential to him and some even called him oyabun, a common form of address for a boss among yakuza. His name was Shima and he actually appeared to be a very friendly sort. Although he used a crutch, he was very muscular and obviously quite strong. Later we learned that despite the fact that he had only one leg, he was nevertheless quite accomplished in karate. Don't know how he lost his leg. One of his underlings said that he thought he lost the leg as a child during the war. Shima appeared to be in his early 30s at the time.
After Tomo left that summer for Japan, I never went back to that part of Naha, but I never forgot those times nor Shima, the one-legged Okinawan gangster.
In 1976, two years after the reversion to Japan, a Japanese movie titled Okinawa Gokudo Senso became a big hit. The popular Japanese action movie actor Sonny Chiba starred with several other well known Japanese actors. The movie was shot on Okinawa and it more or less stayed true to the factual events of the "yakuza wars" on Okinawa that took place from about 1972 until 1980s, a bit over a decade! However, like all movies, it took some detours and exaggerated some events. But, generally speaking, it was more or less an accurate depiction of the yakuza wars between the naichi yakuza and the Okinawan gangs. Ultimately the Japanese yakuza lost and the Okinawan gangs united and became one, no more separate Koza and Naha gangs. Today they have become yakuza, following yakuza traditions down to cutting of the pinky!
What was amusing to me about the movie was that in depicting the Naha gang boss, the Japanese movie director chose to make the gangster a one-armed rather than one-legged man! He was not called Shima in the movie, instead, he was given the name of Yonabaru, a very Okinawan name. To the Japanese, Shima sounds just too Japanese, while Yonabaru sounds "foreign," Okinawan! There are many names that are typically Okinawan and not found among Japanese, Shima is not one of them! Kinjo, Higa, Shimabukuro, Yonabaru, are just some of the very typically Okinawan names.
So, the two bit Okinawan gangster that my friend Tomo and I met so many years ago in the "Okinawan" part of Naha had been immortalized, sort of, by the Japanese movie, albeit, with a missing arm rather than a leg!
Wednesday, December 9, 2015
The Real "Boy Soldier"
About a year and half ago, back in July of 2014, I wrote a blog titled "Boy Soldier 2." In it, I explained briefly how the Japanese during their desperate hours of World War Two formed the "Special Attack Units" called Tokkubetsu Kokkekitai, shortened to tokkotai. This unit or members of this unit were popularly referred to outside of Japan as the kamikaze, the Divine Wind.
The tokkotai or kamikaze pilots were portrayed in Japan during the war as heroic, honorable warriors, while in the West they were seen as wild-eyed, suicidal maniacs. As in all things, truth is sometimes somewhere in between, or as in this case, quite different from common perception. To be sure, there were zealots who were almost anxious to go to their death for the Emperor, but those were in the tiny minority. There are always the eager, "gung-ho" types in any military and Japan had its share. But the vast majority were not the zealots. They were high school and college aged young men who were coerced or duped to "volunteer" into tokkotai.
Those of you who know something of Japanese culture are aware that it is a culture that is driven by conformity, conformity to what the society dictates. The old Japanese proverb, "a nail that sticks out invites a hammer" perhaps best describes Japanese thoughts on conformity. Japanese children are allowed to more or less run wild (by Western standards) when they are very young. But once they start school, they are put in uniform and are taught to toe the line. Only one more time are they allowed to exercise their freedom of thought and behavior, and that is during their university years. That is why all of the radical movements like the zengakuren, all originated in universities. However, once they leave the university, magically they are transformed to law abiding, society conforming members. It is interesting to see the transformation of someone who was a wild-eyed, leftist, radical member of zengakuren while at school, transform into a conservative, dark suit wearing "sararimahn" (salary man) upon leaving school. Times have changed and the Japanese have changed. But back in the day, especially before World War Two, you would have been hard pressed to find a real Japanese hippy, a non-conformist! There were no doubt a few here and there, but not like in the West!
In Snap Shots there is a story, Chapter 3, entitled "The Boy Soldier." It is about a man that I befriended when I lived on Okinawa, in Camp Chinen. Although he lived on Okinawa and was married to an Okinawan woman, he was originally from naichi, the mainland Japan. He came to Okinawa shortly after the end of the war and decided to stay because, in his words, he had nothing left in Japan. His entire family had perished during the war. He got a job working in a small bowling alley in Camp Chinen, it only had four lanes! He became a manager of the bowling alley and I met him and befriended him. His name was Moriyama, although I changed it slightly for the story in Snap Shots to Murayama. I changed all the names of the characters in that story, so changing his name was just part of it.
One day while visiting with him in his tiny office, I learned that Moriyama (his real name!) had been in the Japanese Imperial Navy during the war. After talking to him more about his wartime experience, to my great surprise I learned that he had been a kamikaze pilot, a tokkotai! His story was that in the final year of the war, when Japan was desperate, he was drafted into service straight out of high school! He was all of 15 years old at the time, but he was already an accomplished glider pilot, having flown gliders since he was 13. His school had para military training and glider training was part of it. So he was drafted into the Imperial Navy and sent to flight school. After he completed flight training on a single engine aircraft, he and his classmates were offered the "opportunity" to join the Special Attack Unit, the tokkotai! They really had no idea what it was, although some suspected that it was for suicide duty! He told me in detail how they were "selected" to "volunteer!"
An assembly of all new pilots was held at a huge hall where patriotic martial music was blaring over the loudspeakers. Then beginning with the Commanding Officer, various patriotic speeches were made. Finally, everyone was told to stand at attention, then an announcement was made that Japan was seeking volunteers for the Special Attack Unit. Anyone who did not wish to volunteer was to step forward of the assembly and stand to the side. Can you imagine anyone from a society such as Japanese, teenagers in particular, who would break the mold and step forward in such a case? Surprisingly, Moriyama said that there were few, who knew what it was all about, chose to step forward. They were ostracized, brutalized by the cadre and their own former comrades. Some were killed, others just disappeared!
Moriyama said that after they "volunteered," they went through some brutal training process which was nothing but harassment by psychopathic cadre members. They were beaten regularly and told to do all sorts of cruel and unpleasant tasks. Finally that phase of training stopped and they were put back into planes to make sure they could still fly!
Moriyama was stationed at a secret naval base in southern Japan, Kyushu. In April, when the battle of Okinawa raged, squadron after squadron from that base was dispatched never to return. For some reason, Moriyama's squadron was never sent. He said that no one, not one man (or boy!) in his unit wanted to die. They were forbidden to write letters home, for they were at a secret base, so many simply wrote letters that were never sent! There were two groups, the high school aged tokkotai were called "boy soldiers" while the older, college age pilots were called "student soldiers." There were no career army or navy pilots! They were too valuable to be wasted like that!
He said he was relieved when the war ended and he never had to face death. They simply sent the young boys home on their own. Moriyama's family was in Hiroshima. When he got to the ruined city, he discovered that everyone in his family had perished, even members of the extended family. He was all of sixteen years old! But he was fortunate in that he had attended one of the better "higher" schools in Japan. One of the requirements at that school was for students to learn at least two foreign languages. Moriyama chose English and German. So, with his basic knowledge of English he was able to get a job with the US Occupation Forces. A year or so later he got a job on a ship that carried supplies to Okinawa. On one of those trips he decided to stay on the island and that is how he ended up on Okinawa.
As I mentioned in the story, Moriyama's best friend was an American who worked in Camp Chinen. I changed the American's name, but he really did exist and, I am afraid, just as I described him in the story, he was a drunk. But, he was an awfully kind soul and considered Moriyama to be his best friend. Harry, as I called him in the story, was a G.I. bulldozer operator who upon discharge from the Army got a job as a civilian contractor for the government. He was sent to Okinawa shortly after the war and he initially was involved in the building of Camp Chinen, so he knew everyone, all the Okinawan employees at the camp. He had a Okinawan common-law wife and lived just outside of Camp Chinen at the village called Oyakibaru by the fire station. They made a strange pair, Harry the somewhat loud hillbilly from West Virginia and the rather quiet, Moriyama. But, as I said, they were the best of friends and totally loyal to each other.
I always thought that it was a bit odd that Moriyama, who supposedly was ready and willing to give his life for the Emperor and Japan, possibly plunge his plane at Americans, was best friends with an American! But then, by his own admission, Moriyama was not eager or willing to die. However, the pressures of the Japanese society are such that if called upon, he would have flown his plane to his death.
I asked Moriyama if he would have gone to his death if ordered by his superiors and he said yes, he would have. I asked him why, and he looked at me like I was stupid or something and said, because at the time, it was his duty to do so! It really made an impression on me and I have never forgotten those words. Duty was something one did not take lightly, not in Moriyama's world, even if you didn't agree with the cause!
After I left Okinawa, I returned four years later. I called the bowling alley in Camp Chinen but someone else answered the phone and said that Moriyama did not work there anymore. He had apparently moved on to a bigger and better job. He was now the manager of a much larger bowling alley in what used to be called Machinato Troop Area. I went to visit him and we had a very nice get together. There was at the time quite a bit of talk about reversion to Japan and Moriyama was against it. I was surprised, because he was not an Okinawan, I assumed he would be all for the reversion. But having married an Okinawan and lived on the island all these years, he was completely pro Okinawa and said that reversion would simply make Okinawa what it was before the war, the poorest prefecture in Japan! He was right.
The tokkotai or kamikaze pilots were portrayed in Japan during the war as heroic, honorable warriors, while in the West they were seen as wild-eyed, suicidal maniacs. As in all things, truth is sometimes somewhere in between, or as in this case, quite different from common perception. To be sure, there were zealots who were almost anxious to go to their death for the Emperor, but those were in the tiny minority. There are always the eager, "gung-ho" types in any military and Japan had its share. But the vast majority were not the zealots. They were high school and college aged young men who were coerced or duped to "volunteer" into tokkotai.
Those of you who know something of Japanese culture are aware that it is a culture that is driven by conformity, conformity to what the society dictates. The old Japanese proverb, "a nail that sticks out invites a hammer" perhaps best describes Japanese thoughts on conformity. Japanese children are allowed to more or less run wild (by Western standards) when they are very young. But once they start school, they are put in uniform and are taught to toe the line. Only one more time are they allowed to exercise their freedom of thought and behavior, and that is during their university years. That is why all of the radical movements like the zengakuren, all originated in universities. However, once they leave the university, magically they are transformed to law abiding, society conforming members. It is interesting to see the transformation of someone who was a wild-eyed, leftist, radical member of zengakuren while at school, transform into a conservative, dark suit wearing "sararimahn" (salary man) upon leaving school. Times have changed and the Japanese have changed. But back in the day, especially before World War Two, you would have been hard pressed to find a real Japanese hippy, a non-conformist! There were no doubt a few here and there, but not like in the West!
In Snap Shots there is a story, Chapter 3, entitled "The Boy Soldier." It is about a man that I befriended when I lived on Okinawa, in Camp Chinen. Although he lived on Okinawa and was married to an Okinawan woman, he was originally from naichi, the mainland Japan. He came to Okinawa shortly after the end of the war and decided to stay because, in his words, he had nothing left in Japan. His entire family had perished during the war. He got a job working in a small bowling alley in Camp Chinen, it only had four lanes! He became a manager of the bowling alley and I met him and befriended him. His name was Moriyama, although I changed it slightly for the story in Snap Shots to Murayama. I changed all the names of the characters in that story, so changing his name was just part of it.
One day while visiting with him in his tiny office, I learned that Moriyama (his real name!) had been in the Japanese Imperial Navy during the war. After talking to him more about his wartime experience, to my great surprise I learned that he had been a kamikaze pilot, a tokkotai! His story was that in the final year of the war, when Japan was desperate, he was drafted into service straight out of high school! He was all of 15 years old at the time, but he was already an accomplished glider pilot, having flown gliders since he was 13. His school had para military training and glider training was part of it. So he was drafted into the Imperial Navy and sent to flight school. After he completed flight training on a single engine aircraft, he and his classmates were offered the "opportunity" to join the Special Attack Unit, the tokkotai! They really had no idea what it was, although some suspected that it was for suicide duty! He told me in detail how they were "selected" to "volunteer!"
An assembly of all new pilots was held at a huge hall where patriotic martial music was blaring over the loudspeakers. Then beginning with the Commanding Officer, various patriotic speeches were made. Finally, everyone was told to stand at attention, then an announcement was made that Japan was seeking volunteers for the Special Attack Unit. Anyone who did not wish to volunteer was to step forward of the assembly and stand to the side. Can you imagine anyone from a society such as Japanese, teenagers in particular, who would break the mold and step forward in such a case? Surprisingly, Moriyama said that there were few, who knew what it was all about, chose to step forward. They were ostracized, brutalized by the cadre and their own former comrades. Some were killed, others just disappeared!
Moriyama said that after they "volunteered," they went through some brutal training process which was nothing but harassment by psychopathic cadre members. They were beaten regularly and told to do all sorts of cruel and unpleasant tasks. Finally that phase of training stopped and they were put back into planes to make sure they could still fly!
Moriyama was stationed at a secret naval base in southern Japan, Kyushu. In April, when the battle of Okinawa raged, squadron after squadron from that base was dispatched never to return. For some reason, Moriyama's squadron was never sent. He said that no one, not one man (or boy!) in his unit wanted to die. They were forbidden to write letters home, for they were at a secret base, so many simply wrote letters that were never sent! There were two groups, the high school aged tokkotai were called "boy soldiers" while the older, college age pilots were called "student soldiers." There were no career army or navy pilots! They were too valuable to be wasted like that!
He said he was relieved when the war ended and he never had to face death. They simply sent the young boys home on their own. Moriyama's family was in Hiroshima. When he got to the ruined city, he discovered that everyone in his family had perished, even members of the extended family. He was all of sixteen years old! But he was fortunate in that he had attended one of the better "higher" schools in Japan. One of the requirements at that school was for students to learn at least two foreign languages. Moriyama chose English and German. So, with his basic knowledge of English he was able to get a job with the US Occupation Forces. A year or so later he got a job on a ship that carried supplies to Okinawa. On one of those trips he decided to stay on the island and that is how he ended up on Okinawa.
As I mentioned in the story, Moriyama's best friend was an American who worked in Camp Chinen. I changed the American's name, but he really did exist and, I am afraid, just as I described him in the story, he was a drunk. But, he was an awfully kind soul and considered Moriyama to be his best friend. Harry, as I called him in the story, was a G.I. bulldozer operator who upon discharge from the Army got a job as a civilian contractor for the government. He was sent to Okinawa shortly after the war and he initially was involved in the building of Camp Chinen, so he knew everyone, all the Okinawan employees at the camp. He had a Okinawan common-law wife and lived just outside of Camp Chinen at the village called Oyakibaru by the fire station. They made a strange pair, Harry the somewhat loud hillbilly from West Virginia and the rather quiet, Moriyama. But, as I said, they were the best of friends and totally loyal to each other.
I always thought that it was a bit odd that Moriyama, who supposedly was ready and willing to give his life for the Emperor and Japan, possibly plunge his plane at Americans, was best friends with an American! But then, by his own admission, Moriyama was not eager or willing to die. However, the pressures of the Japanese society are such that if called upon, he would have flown his plane to his death.
I asked Moriyama if he would have gone to his death if ordered by his superiors and he said yes, he would have. I asked him why, and he looked at me like I was stupid or something and said, because at the time, it was his duty to do so! It really made an impression on me and I have never forgotten those words. Duty was something one did not take lightly, not in Moriyama's world, even if you didn't agree with the cause!
After I left Okinawa, I returned four years later. I called the bowling alley in Camp Chinen but someone else answered the phone and said that Moriyama did not work there anymore. He had apparently moved on to a bigger and better job. He was now the manager of a much larger bowling alley in what used to be called Machinato Troop Area. I went to visit him and we had a very nice get together. There was at the time quite a bit of talk about reversion to Japan and Moriyama was against it. I was surprised, because he was not an Okinawan, I assumed he would be all for the reversion. But having married an Okinawan and lived on the island all these years, he was completely pro Okinawa and said that reversion would simply make Okinawa what it was before the war, the poorest prefecture in Japan! He was right.
Monday, December 7, 2015
Obama's Policy on Islamic Terrorists
It was not by chance that Obama spoke from the Oval Office to the American people on the eve of December 7, the anniversary of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. If he thought he could get away with it, he would have given his talk on December 7, however, that would have been a bit too much, too obvious even to pro-Obama camp, that the whole thing was politically motivated. It was another one of his attempts to "solidify" his legacy as a "great" American president.
In a flagrant attempt to piggy-back off FDR's famous address to America of long ago, Obama timed his speech trying to get as much out of the success of his Democratic Party predecessors as he can, even at the risk of being accused of trying to steal their glory. FDR and JFK appear to be his favorite models. Funny how he doesn't attempt to emulate some of his more recent predecessors like Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter! Not even LBJ, who embroiled us in Vietnam War! But, be that as it may, none of his predecessors had surrounded themselves with such incompetent people, and some very questionable "advisors."
Did you ever wonder why there is so much tension between Benjamin Netanyahu and Barak Obama? One of the reasons is tied to a person that Obama has used in the past, and has recently announced will be using again as his chief advisor in our fight against ISIS/ISIL. I used the word "again" because Obama had employed this "advisor" before and had fired him in 2008 when it was learned that he was trying to negotiate on his own with Hamas! Israel found out about it and informed our government and Obama was forced to fire him to preserve our cordial ties with Israel. But just last month, quietly and without fanfare, he hired him again and appointed him as the National Security Council (NSC) Coordinator for Middle East and North Africa, Senior Advisor for ISIL/ISIS in Iraq and Syria. Quite a handful/mouthful for a title! This man is Rob Malley, an open proponent of recognition of Hamas as a legitimate component of Palestinian government. Malley has been a sympathizer of Hamas, Hezbollah, al Fatah, and any number of Palestinian and other Islamic terrorist groups. It is curious why he is like that, because he is of Jewish background.
Rob's father was an Egyptian of Jewish background, his mother an American Jew. Both parents were leftist journalists. His mother worked for an Algerian National Liberation Front (FNL) before the French were thrown out of Algeria. FNL was a communist organization when she met and married his father, a politically like minded soul mate. His father founded a publication in France called Afrasia, which dealt mainly with the subject of how the West exploited the third world in Africa and Asia. He was an open supporter of the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 (that was his communist side) and at the same time applauded the Iranians for taking American hostages in Tehran that same year ( I guess that was his pro Islamic side). Later he strongly opposed the Camp David Accords and considered Egypt's Sadat to be a traitor to his country. Both parents were very close friends with Yasser Arafat, the Chairman of PLO! They often visited the Arafat family and ultimately, got kicked out of France for their activities in support of PLO! Rob was a young man, not a kid, when all of this was taking place, so his political beliefs were firmly established by the time he came to Washington!
So now do you wonder why Obama's response to ISIS is so anemic! In fact, it is quite obvious that Obama will do nothing to upset the sensitivities of Islamic nations, not as long as people like Malley are giving him advice. I wouldn't be surprised if Obama isn't planning on negotiating with ISIS (as he did with Iran) under Malley's advice! He's already negotiated with Taliban over that deserter, Bergdahl.
It is incomprehensible to me how a person like Rob Malley, with that background and known sympathies for Arab and Islamic extremists could hold such a position. Talk about a poor vetting process! Now do you wonder why Netanyahu is so upset with our government? Rob Malley is not only an open Palestinian sympathizer (Palestinians are the biggest thorn on Israel's side!), but he is also an Iranian sympathizer and openly anti Israel! I wouldn't be surprised if Obama was listening to Malley even before he hired him for the second time! I can't understand how you can hire someone to such a level of position when that person was let go earlier for being a security risk! There is something very, very wrong with Obama's government! Personally, I would have thought it would have been a security risk to hire someone like Malley to handle even unclassified material! But to hire him to be NSC Chief Advisor for ISIS/ISIL is just beyond comprehension! Is our government so incompetent that we can make such slips without blinking! If we have someone like Malley in such a sensitive and high position, I shudder to think what kind of vetting we do to fill less prominent jobs! It scares the hell out of me! The whole thing actually seems like an improbable scenario dreamed up by a Hollywood script writer. Remember all those movies about Soviet agents planted in high government positions?
Poor vetting of refugees might allow some terrorists to slip in to commit murder in our country. But hiring people in policy making positions who apparently were not properly vetted is downright criminal and might ultimately cost thousands of American lives! I don't believe our policy on ISIL is going to change as long as Obama is in office, not when he surrounds himself with people like Rob Malley. Either he is very stupid and naïve, or he knows exactly what he is doing! Remember one of my earlier blogs when I talked about how the president was only as good as his advisors, well.......
In a flagrant attempt to piggy-back off FDR's famous address to America of long ago, Obama timed his speech trying to get as much out of the success of his Democratic Party predecessors as he can, even at the risk of being accused of trying to steal their glory. FDR and JFK appear to be his favorite models. Funny how he doesn't attempt to emulate some of his more recent predecessors like Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter! Not even LBJ, who embroiled us in Vietnam War! But, be that as it may, none of his predecessors had surrounded themselves with such incompetent people, and some very questionable "advisors."
Did you ever wonder why there is so much tension between Benjamin Netanyahu and Barak Obama? One of the reasons is tied to a person that Obama has used in the past, and has recently announced will be using again as his chief advisor in our fight against ISIS/ISIL. I used the word "again" because Obama had employed this "advisor" before and had fired him in 2008 when it was learned that he was trying to negotiate on his own with Hamas! Israel found out about it and informed our government and Obama was forced to fire him to preserve our cordial ties with Israel. But just last month, quietly and without fanfare, he hired him again and appointed him as the National Security Council (NSC) Coordinator for Middle East and North Africa, Senior Advisor for ISIL/ISIS in Iraq and Syria. Quite a handful/mouthful for a title! This man is Rob Malley, an open proponent of recognition of Hamas as a legitimate component of Palestinian government. Malley has been a sympathizer of Hamas, Hezbollah, al Fatah, and any number of Palestinian and other Islamic terrorist groups. It is curious why he is like that, because he is of Jewish background.
Rob's father was an Egyptian of Jewish background, his mother an American Jew. Both parents were leftist journalists. His mother worked for an Algerian National Liberation Front (FNL) before the French were thrown out of Algeria. FNL was a communist organization when she met and married his father, a politically like minded soul mate. His father founded a publication in France called Afrasia, which dealt mainly with the subject of how the West exploited the third world in Africa and Asia. He was an open supporter of the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 (that was his communist side) and at the same time applauded the Iranians for taking American hostages in Tehran that same year ( I guess that was his pro Islamic side). Later he strongly opposed the Camp David Accords and considered Egypt's Sadat to be a traitor to his country. Both parents were very close friends with Yasser Arafat, the Chairman of PLO! They often visited the Arafat family and ultimately, got kicked out of France for their activities in support of PLO! Rob was a young man, not a kid, when all of this was taking place, so his political beliefs were firmly established by the time he came to Washington!
So now do you wonder why Obama's response to ISIS is so anemic! In fact, it is quite obvious that Obama will do nothing to upset the sensitivities of Islamic nations, not as long as people like Malley are giving him advice. I wouldn't be surprised if Obama isn't planning on negotiating with ISIS (as he did with Iran) under Malley's advice! He's already negotiated with Taliban over that deserter, Bergdahl.
It is incomprehensible to me how a person like Rob Malley, with that background and known sympathies for Arab and Islamic extremists could hold such a position. Talk about a poor vetting process! Now do you wonder why Netanyahu is so upset with our government? Rob Malley is not only an open Palestinian sympathizer (Palestinians are the biggest thorn on Israel's side!), but he is also an Iranian sympathizer and openly anti Israel! I wouldn't be surprised if Obama was listening to Malley even before he hired him for the second time! I can't understand how you can hire someone to such a level of position when that person was let go earlier for being a security risk! There is something very, very wrong with Obama's government! Personally, I would have thought it would have been a security risk to hire someone like Malley to handle even unclassified material! But to hire him to be NSC Chief Advisor for ISIS/ISIL is just beyond comprehension! Is our government so incompetent that we can make such slips without blinking! If we have someone like Malley in such a sensitive and high position, I shudder to think what kind of vetting we do to fill less prominent jobs! It scares the hell out of me! The whole thing actually seems like an improbable scenario dreamed up by a Hollywood script writer. Remember all those movies about Soviet agents planted in high government positions?
Poor vetting of refugees might allow some terrorists to slip in to commit murder in our country. But hiring people in policy making positions who apparently were not properly vetted is downright criminal and might ultimately cost thousands of American lives! I don't believe our policy on ISIL is going to change as long as Obama is in office, not when he surrounds himself with people like Rob Malley. Either he is very stupid and naïve, or he knows exactly what he is doing! Remember one of my earlier blogs when I talked about how the president was only as good as his advisors, well.......
Friday, December 4, 2015
The Aftermath - San Bernardino Massacre
Its been three days now since those horrific events took place in San Bernardino and 14 innocent people were murdered and 21 wounded by a husband and wife team of Sayed Farook and Tafsheen Malik. Understandably, initially the authorities were reluctant to classify this incident as a terrorist attack or call the murderers terrorists. More information was needed, conclusive evidence that would indicate that they were terrorists. The dictionary definition of a terrorist basically runs something like this: "an individual who uses force to demoralize, intimidate, and subjugate others." In other words, someone who uses violence, murder, mayhem, to achieve their goal or make a statement is a terrorist. It doesn't necessarily have to have a political agenda, although most do.
More than two and half years ago, in April of 2013, the Tsarnaev brothers, Tamerlan and Dzhokhor, planted home made bombs during a Boston Marathon thereby killing and injuring scores of innocent people. It didn't take long for the authorities to identify the bombers and also find information about their backgrounds. It was learned that the brothers were originally from Dagestan Republic, a part of Russian Federation. They were Muslims, like the majority of the population in that part of the world, and the older brother in particular was prone to be radical. They were, almost immediately, identified as Muslim radicals, homegrown terrorists, which indeed they were! There was no pussyfooting around the issue, they were who they were. They were home grown Islamic Terrorists!
Now we come to Syed Farook and Tafsheen Malik. They were Muslim, and by all accounts, radical Muslims, although they seem to have hidden their true beliefs from everyone, including their family. But they were nevertheless radical Muslims. Syed traveled to Pakistan and Saudi Arabia twice, where he met and married his wife Tafsheen who was from Pakistan and living in Saudi Arabia at the time. Both Saudi Arabia and Pakistan are hotbeds for Islamic Extremists, i.e., Islamic Terrorists! Think about it, Osama Bin Ladin was a Saudi who was ultimately killed in Pakistan! Pakistan is the sanctuary for Al Qaeda and Taliban! FBI says that Syed's computer and phone records show that he had numerous contacts with Muslims on FBI watch list, those that are known to be ISIS or Al Qaeda sympathizers and supporters. FBI cannot verify, but it is more than likely that both Syed and Tafsheen had face to face meetings with ISIS or Al Qaeda cadre in Saudi Arabia or Pakistan.
At this point, the FBI has pretty much thrown out the idea that it was a "spur of the moment" type of act, something that the local police chief kept saying the first day. As the FBI spokesman said, the amount of ammunition and explosives found on them as well as in their house indicates that they were planning this or something like this for a while. The vehicle that was all shot up, which was their get away car, was rented days ahead and was to be returned that day. So obviously, something was planned for that day! In yesterday's blog I alluded to the fact that Tafsheen was at home, and joined her husband when he returned from the luncheon. But it turns out that she did accompany him to the social gathering, only to return shortly, all dressed in black and shooting everyone in sight.
The day after the incident, both the police and the FBI kept saying that the husband, Syed was "radicalized." But they refused to say that he became a terrorist! Interestingly, they said nothing of Tafsheen's "radicalization!" In my book, if you are a Muslim and a radical and you commit such an act as they did, then you are Islamic Terrorists and it was an act of terrorism! Instead, even today, after three days, FBI and the police refuse to use the word terrorism or identify the culprits as terrorists! Perhaps this evening or tomorrow it will change, who knows?
Obama, apparently refuses to put the blame on Muslim terrorists. Instead, in his first TV appearance after the terrorist attack he talked at great length about changing our gun laws. He seemed more concerned with the fact that people on "no fly" list are still able to purchase firearms if they don't have a criminal record. Well, that is not surprising. Unless the government is willing to take away all rights from these "no fly" list people, how are they going to control that? No doubt FBI and other law enforcement agencies are under orders from the White House not to categorize this massacre as an Islamic Terrorist act.
In my view it doesn't matter if they are home grown or came from the outside. In this case, it was one of each, the husband was home grown and the wife came to America only two years ago! It doesn't matter if they committed this terrible act without receiving specific orders from ISIS, Al Qaeda, or any other terror group. They were Muslim, and they were terrorists by the very fact that the act they committed was an act of terrorism, so, it was an Islamic Terrorist attack, pretty simple.
Yet, our government is struggling with verbiage and refusing to use the word terrorist or Islamic. I wonder if it would help if they were not Muslim? There was no hesitation in calling the Oklahoma City bomber a terrorist, and he was not a Muslim! There was no hesitation in calling the Tsarnaev brothers terrorists, albeit they were called "home grown" although in a strict sense, they were not, since both were born and came from Dagestan. The various bombers and shooters involved in killings at abortion clinics, etc., are identified as "religious right" extremists, home grown terrorists. Why is it so difficult to label this latest terrorist couple?
Obama's administration's reluctance to call this latest incident a terrorist attack is in a way understandable. Considering the amount of criticism that was leveled at the White House for lack of positive reaction to Paris attacks, you can see how Obama is trying to avoid further fall out for lack of action. His strategy is turn this into strictly a domestic, gun related violence, something that is not tied to Islam in anyway! So, he is stumping hard for new gun laws, as if that will stop terror attacks!
The San Bernardino massacre may have indeed been carried out by domestic terrorists with no connection to terror organizations, although I doubt it. But regardless, the husband was a "radicalized" Muslim, and the wife was a Muslim who readily took up arms with her husband to commit mass murder. So, no matter how you cut it, domestic or foreign, they were Islamic Terrorists and it was another Islamic Terrorist attack in America.
More than two and half years ago, in April of 2013, the Tsarnaev brothers, Tamerlan and Dzhokhor, planted home made bombs during a Boston Marathon thereby killing and injuring scores of innocent people. It didn't take long for the authorities to identify the bombers and also find information about their backgrounds. It was learned that the brothers were originally from Dagestan Republic, a part of Russian Federation. They were Muslims, like the majority of the population in that part of the world, and the older brother in particular was prone to be radical. They were, almost immediately, identified as Muslim radicals, homegrown terrorists, which indeed they were! There was no pussyfooting around the issue, they were who they were. They were home grown Islamic Terrorists!
Now we come to Syed Farook and Tafsheen Malik. They were Muslim, and by all accounts, radical Muslims, although they seem to have hidden their true beliefs from everyone, including their family. But they were nevertheless radical Muslims. Syed traveled to Pakistan and Saudi Arabia twice, where he met and married his wife Tafsheen who was from Pakistan and living in Saudi Arabia at the time. Both Saudi Arabia and Pakistan are hotbeds for Islamic Extremists, i.e., Islamic Terrorists! Think about it, Osama Bin Ladin was a Saudi who was ultimately killed in Pakistan! Pakistan is the sanctuary for Al Qaeda and Taliban! FBI says that Syed's computer and phone records show that he had numerous contacts with Muslims on FBI watch list, those that are known to be ISIS or Al Qaeda sympathizers and supporters. FBI cannot verify, but it is more than likely that both Syed and Tafsheen had face to face meetings with ISIS or Al Qaeda cadre in Saudi Arabia or Pakistan.
At this point, the FBI has pretty much thrown out the idea that it was a "spur of the moment" type of act, something that the local police chief kept saying the first day. As the FBI spokesman said, the amount of ammunition and explosives found on them as well as in their house indicates that they were planning this or something like this for a while. The vehicle that was all shot up, which was their get away car, was rented days ahead and was to be returned that day. So obviously, something was planned for that day! In yesterday's blog I alluded to the fact that Tafsheen was at home, and joined her husband when he returned from the luncheon. But it turns out that she did accompany him to the social gathering, only to return shortly, all dressed in black and shooting everyone in sight.
The day after the incident, both the police and the FBI kept saying that the husband, Syed was "radicalized." But they refused to say that he became a terrorist! Interestingly, they said nothing of Tafsheen's "radicalization!" In my book, if you are a Muslim and a radical and you commit such an act as they did, then you are Islamic Terrorists and it was an act of terrorism! Instead, even today, after three days, FBI and the police refuse to use the word terrorism or identify the culprits as terrorists! Perhaps this evening or tomorrow it will change, who knows?
Obama, apparently refuses to put the blame on Muslim terrorists. Instead, in his first TV appearance after the terrorist attack he talked at great length about changing our gun laws. He seemed more concerned with the fact that people on "no fly" list are still able to purchase firearms if they don't have a criminal record. Well, that is not surprising. Unless the government is willing to take away all rights from these "no fly" list people, how are they going to control that? No doubt FBI and other law enforcement agencies are under orders from the White House not to categorize this massacre as an Islamic Terrorist act.
In my view it doesn't matter if they are home grown or came from the outside. In this case, it was one of each, the husband was home grown and the wife came to America only two years ago! It doesn't matter if they committed this terrible act without receiving specific orders from ISIS, Al Qaeda, or any other terror group. They were Muslim, and they were terrorists by the very fact that the act they committed was an act of terrorism, so, it was an Islamic Terrorist attack, pretty simple.
Yet, our government is struggling with verbiage and refusing to use the word terrorist or Islamic. I wonder if it would help if they were not Muslim? There was no hesitation in calling the Oklahoma City bomber a terrorist, and he was not a Muslim! There was no hesitation in calling the Tsarnaev brothers terrorists, albeit they were called "home grown" although in a strict sense, they were not, since both were born and came from Dagestan. The various bombers and shooters involved in killings at abortion clinics, etc., are identified as "religious right" extremists, home grown terrorists. Why is it so difficult to label this latest terrorist couple?
Obama's administration's reluctance to call this latest incident a terrorist attack is in a way understandable. Considering the amount of criticism that was leveled at the White House for lack of positive reaction to Paris attacks, you can see how Obama is trying to avoid further fall out for lack of action. His strategy is turn this into strictly a domestic, gun related violence, something that is not tied to Islam in anyway! So, he is stumping hard for new gun laws, as if that will stop terror attacks!
The San Bernardino massacre may have indeed been carried out by domestic terrorists with no connection to terror organizations, although I doubt it. But regardless, the husband was a "radicalized" Muslim, and the wife was a Muslim who readily took up arms with her husband to commit mass murder. So, no matter how you cut it, domestic or foreign, they were Islamic Terrorists and it was another Islamic Terrorist attack in America.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)