Tag Archives: NATO

Filthy Bilge Rats Thursday Evening Edition 10-22-15

this man, who is not your President, is telling you the truth on Syria. Your President and his administration continue the parade of lies.

Thursday evening greetings. Tonight, we’re going to look at a couple of items that provide insight on what I consistently describe as America’s most significant national security risk – American Foreign policy, or as Henry Kissinger pronounces it – “furrin bollicy”.

The first item has to do with Vladimir Putin’s assessment of the Obama administration’s “strategy” in Syria – if it can even be termed as such. The second, underscores the absurdity of Hillary Clinton claiming that her ‘leadership’ as Madam Secretary, was competent and successful.

Russian President Vladimir Putin,

in a meeting with international geo-political strategists, collectively known as the Valdai Club, Putin made some striking observations about the preposterous and nakedly counter intuitive nature of the Obama White House’s activities with respect to the containment of America’s Frankenterrorist creation, the Islamic State or ISIS / ISIL.

The Valdai Discussion Club is named in honor of Lake Valdai, a water feature that was the setting of Veliky Novgorod, where the first meeting of the club took place. The gathering typically includes foreign policy academics ranging from the Ivy League, to Stanford, the University of London, the University of Tokyo, Tel Aviv University, Johns Hopkins University, the London School of Economics, King’s College London and the Sorbonne – just to name a handful.

Putin observed, “It’s always difficult to play a double game: declaring a fight against terrorists while simultaneously trying to use some of them to arrange the pieces on the Middle East chess board in one’s own interests.”

I was struck with his choice of terminology – the analog of the chessboard to describe the calculus of American strategy. That has been my go to nomenclature for how American maneuvering in such regions has been conducted since the post WWII era. The unfortunate picture that emerges the more closely you examine these American chessboard moves, is that it seems we either have grossly incompetent chess players – or, the intention is not to win in the sense that our citizens would understand it.

Putin continues, “It is impossible to prevail over terrorism if some of the terrorists are being used as a battering ram to overthrow undesirable regimes,” referring to Russian ally Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

To U.S. claims that Russia is targeting NATO sponsored ‘moderates’ in Syria, Putin responds,
“There is no need to play on words, to classify terrorists are moderate and non-moderate. What is the difference?” Putin said, scoffing that “in the opinion of some experts… so-called moderate bandits behead people moderately or gently.”

And this is something that I have written numerous reports dealing with. The Obama administration has not been dealing with any ‘moderates’ unless the definition of moderates is twisted beyond recognition to include ISIS aligned and affiliated Salafist jihadists that would torture, behead, rape and terrorize religious minorities (mostly Christians) and anyone they remotely suspect of holding allegiance to the Syrian government.

I hate to report to you that Russia’s President is telling the truth here and your President – a man chargeable with an extensive array of impeachable offenses and violations of his office, is once again lying to you. While the Pentagon, under the direction of the White House, has a case of the slows in even attempting to eradicate its devil dolls, ISIS – the Russians are getting busy on the double.

“As a result of Russian air strikes, the main forces of terrorist groups, made up of the best trained terrorists, have lost combat capability. Their command and resupply system has been disrupted,” senior military official Andrei Kartopolov told Russian news agencies.

Kartapolov said the strikes — which targeted the provinces of Hama, Idlib, Latakia, Damascus, Aleppo and Deir Ezzor — had destroyed a bridge over the Euphrates River used for moving supplies to fighters from neighbouring Iraq.

Since the start of the campaign, Russian planes have carried out 934 sorties that have destroyed 819 “terrorist targets”, including command centres, ammunition depots and training camps, Kartopolov said.

The next item –

is one that stands in mockery of Hillary Clinton and her media apologists’ assertions that her management of foreign policy as Secretary of State was laudable. It was instead, laughable if only incompetent  –  and treasonous if intentionally negligent or malicious.

Another handful of hacked emails, this time from the inbox of CIA Director John Brennan – show, among other interesting details, that the CIA and the State Department had no coherent or organized formal strategy to deal with terror threats in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Although they deal with a time period that involves the last year of the Bush Administration’s handling of affairs in the region – they serve the function of underlining the fact that once Hillary Clinton took charge of Foggy Bottom, she continued the same confused, unfocused and contradictory management of this part of the world, and if anything, compounded matters. And that’s if we give her the benefit of the doubt.

The new release contains Brennan’s address book and a full version of ‘Executive summary of key findings and recommendations on Afghanistan and Pakistan’, some pages of which were published on Wednesday by Anonymous. A brief note – the hacker claiming responsibility is a 13 year old. If anyone thinks Hillary Clinton’s exchanges of highly confidential government business on her “Homebrew” server was even as robustly secure as Brennan’s, I have some beachfront property in the Mohave Desert you might be interested in. Bottom line, any number of entities internationally have been monitoring Clinton’s communications at State.

The November 2008 report prepared by Senate analysts is accompanied by a memo from Louis Tucker, the minority staff director for Senate Intelligence Committee Vice Chairman Christopher “Kit” Bond (R-Missouri).

“Everyone we spoke with on the ground in Afghanistan and Pakistan confessed that they know of no overall USG strategy for the region,” Tucker wrote. “Rather, we observed quality individuals serving judiciously in their own lanes ungoverned by a coordinated, comprehensive strategy.” The US government would have to develop a “comprehensive regional strategy designed to meet a set of clearly defined goals,” Tucker’s memo concluded.

Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates has said of Hillary’s handling of the region – particularly North Africa and the Middle East – and he implicates the Pentagon and White House as well – that “we were playing it by ear”. Yet in today’s hearings, Democrats such as Elijah Cummings are continuing to attempt to present Hillary Clinton as a martyr and a victim of a political hit job.

Actually, the real victims are no longer with us, to be able to first hand confront Hillary Clinton. They would be Ambassador Stevens, Information Officer Sean Smith, and two CIA operatives, Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods . Somebody has to speak in their behalf. I’m glad that Trey Gowdy has taken on the largely thankless job.

Advertisements

Filthy Bilge Rats Mid Day Edition 10-22-15

 photo Mass execution_zpsopisnyzs.jpg

This is the genocide that Hillary Clinton says she acted to prevent in Libya by removing Colonel Gaddafi

Hillary Clinton…

is testifying before the Benghazi committee and is doing as she characteristically does – dodging and evading the truth. Clinton made this preposterous opening statement to the hearing:

“We need leadership at home to match our leadership abroad, leadership that puts national security ahead of politics and ideology.”

That was a campaign message during a Congressional hearing. So let’s address it as such. What does the outcome in Libya say about Hillary Clinton’s demonstrated “leadership” in her term as Madam Secretary?  She has called her management of Libya  “Smart power at its best” during the most recent Democratic debate.

How about Libya’s government?  Did we impose ‘Democracy’ (whatever that actually means to the puppetmasters that hand Obama his foreign policy assignments) in Libya?  No – not even close.  The Libyan government is now controlled by … you guessed it, the Muslim Brotherhood! And the parts of the country not under their control are under the terror of the Islamic State and various other affiliates of Salafist terror.  What a shock?  In all material respects, the same set of conditions exist and persist in Libya that exist now in Syria.

What about civil order in the country?  Everybody is happy and peaceful and getting back to building rather than destroying, right?  Wrong. The U.K. Independent reports:

As world attention focused on the coup in Egypt and the poison gas attack in Syria over the past two months, Libya has plunged unnoticed into its worst political and economic crisis since the defeat of Gaddafi two years ago.

Government authority is disintegrating in all parts of the country putting in doubt claims by American, British and French politicians that Nato’s military action in Libya in 2011 was an outstanding example of a successful foreign military intervention which should be repeated in Syria.

O.K. Well, certainly the economic situation is improving in Libya.  Don’t you believe it – in fact it’s just the opposite.   Before the NATO intervention, Libya was exporting 1.6 Million barrels of high-quality crude oil per day.  The oil trade was the lifeblood of its economy – 80 percent of its GNP and up to 97 percent of its exports.

Now, because of a large scale mutiny among the security forces that were previously protecting the drilling sites, refineries and pipelines – production has plummeted to less than 100,000 barrels per day – not even a tenth of normal production.

The mutineers are sabotaging production because of complaints of inadequate pay and are attempting to sell the oil under their control on the black market. More recently, some pipelines have been at least temporarily opened, increasing last month’s production to 350,000 barrels per day – still only 25% of the production before Ms.Clinton lobbied for the removal of Gaddafi.

Hillary Clinton claimed in this morning’s hearing that – the U.S. military campaign against Moammar Gadhafi in 2011 helped prevent “genocide.”

What about Social order in Libya?  That should have improved, we were told, consequent to the removal of a dictator. Not so much?  Not at all.  Again, the Independent details the disintegration since the NATO incursion and regime change:

Libyans are increasingly at the mercy of militias which act outside the law. Popular protests against militiamen have been met with gunfire; 31 demonstrators were shot dead and many others wounded as they protested outside the barracks of “the Libyan Shield Brigade” in the eastern capital Benghazi in June.

Though the NATO intervention against Gaddafi was justified as a humanitarian response to the threat that Gaddafi’s tanks would slaughter dissidents in Benghazi, the international community has ignored the escalating violence. The foreign media, which once filled the hotels of Benghazi and Tripoli, have likewise paid little attention to the near collapse of the central government.

There is widespread tribal warfare, clashes between opposing militia groups and the new government is suspending civil rights for those suspected of loyalty to the former leader, Muammar Gaddafi.

So besides the Benghazi betrayal, where Ambassador Stevens and 3 other Americans working in security roles were killed, while Obama, Clinton and Panetta sat on their hands and Valerie Jarrett issued orders to stand down on any readily available rescue efforts – nothing else has yielded the results we were promised by this administration.

Only fools would have believed the promises.

Editor’s Note:   for another excellent outline of the disaster in Libya that Madam Secretary left in her wake – here is a report by Nancy A. Youssef of the Daily Beast, in which we learn, among other things, that then-Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who opposed the U.S. intervention, frustratingly explained about Hillary’ War –  “We were playing it by ear.”  BTW – let’s say you were considering hiring someone for a job opening in your company. Would you hire them if you discovered that they had a reputation of playing things by ear, instead of intelligent planning and informed decisions?