Tag: war

This is an informative article on the unique structure of the IDF, which explains both the apparent indiscipline of the IDF with regards to the Gaza protests as well as the underperformance of the IDF in the 2006 war with Hezbollah.

There are no career ground force sergeants except as technicians. Unless the system has changed very recently, the IDF ground forces typically do not have career NCOs in the LINE of the combat arms. This is a structural tradition that derives originally from the Russian tsar’s army and which came to Palestine through Russian and Polish Zionist immigrants. This tradition of organization passed through the Hagenah into the IDF. The IDF “line” conscripts what amount to yearly classes of recruits and selects from them more promising soldiers who are given NCO level command responsibilities as; infantry leaders, tank commanders, artillery gun captains, etc. The IDF does have career NCOs but they are typically found in jobs of a more technical nature rather than junior combat command at the squad or platoon (section) level.

As a result, junior officers (company grade) are required to perform duties that in more traditionally organized armies would be performed by sergeants. Leading a small combat or reconnaissance patrol would be an example. As a result, a non-reserve infantry or tank company in the field consists of people who are all about the same age (19-22) and commanded by a captain in his mid-20s. What is missing in this scene is the voice of grown up counsel provided by sergeants in their 30s and 40s telling these young people what it is that would be wise to do based on real experience and mature judgment. In contrast a 22 year old American platoon leader would have a mature platoon sergeant as his assistant and counselor.

As a result of this system of manning, the IDF’s ground force is more unpredictable and volatile at the tactical (company) level than might be the case otherwise. The national government has a hard time knowing whether or not specific policies will be followed in the field.

To put this problem into perspective, if you’ve seen Band of Brothers, then you have some idea of the importance of the role that sergeants play in an infantry company. It was the sergeants’ revolt that led to Easy Company being led into battle by Dick Winters instead of Herbert Sobel, and it was Sgt. Carwood Lipton (played by Donnie Wahlberg) who was credited by Winters’s eventual replacement, Ronald Speirs, for holding Easy Company together.

If I were an IDF strategist, I would look very long and hard at figuring out how to get some seasoned veterans salting the smaller tactical units. The principle of having experienced veterans advising young officers has been a fundamental one of successful military organizations since Rome’s battle-hardened centurions were advising young patrician tribunes embarking upon the cursum honorum.

I expect Q will be addressing this soon.

DEVELOPING: Military C-130 plane crashes at @fly_SAV  in Savannah, GA

A lot of military aircraft going down recently. I wonder what the odds are of them all being random events.

Especially not to the God-Emperor’s Warmaster:

Secretary of Defense James Mattis explained Thursday why he directed a strike that reportedly killed hundreds of Russian mercenaries in Syria back in February.

Mattis told the Senate Armed Services Committee that the U.S. has a deconfliction line with Russia to ensure that the two countries can communicate in order to avoid direct conflict with one another in Syria. He said that a group of “irregular forces” were in conflict with U.S. forces, and once it was ascertained that those forces were not Russian regulars, Mattis directed a counterattack.

“The Russian high command in Syria assured us it was not their people, and my direction to the chairman was for the force, then, to be annihilated,” Mattis said. “And it was.”

It never pays to play tricksy word games with a warrior. Be direct. Be honest. And learn to understand when you are defeated and behave accordingly, lest you be destroyed.

Morrisey isn’t sad anymore. He’s hopping mad over the debased state of Londonistan and its Pakistani mayor:

The former Smiths frontman lashed out at the Mayor of London in an interview discussing his views on racism, violence and the capital. And Morrissey stated that London “is debased” and that “civilisation is over”.

Going on a rampage against Mr Khan, he added: “The Mayor of London tells us about ‘Neighborhood policin’ – what is ‘policin’? He tells us London is an ‘amazin’ city. What is ‘amazin’? This is the Mayor of London! And he cannot talk properly! I saw an interview where he was discussing mental health, and he repeatedly said ‘men’el’…he could not say the words ‘mental health’. The Mayor of London!”

Morrissey, 58, also went on claiming that “we now live in the Age of Atrocity” because of the way authorities have been dealing with acid attacks in London.

Speaking to interviewer John Riggers via his new website Morrissey Central, the singer said: “London is second only to Bangladesh for acid attacks. All of the attacks are non-white, and so they cannot be truthfully addressed by the British government or the Met Police or the BBC because of political correctness.

You know a nation is in trouble when its pop music stars are more intelligent, articulate and aware of historical actions and their consequences than its political class.

The USA is not the only country heading for another civil war. Meanwhile, the Prime Minister is apologizing to “the Windrush generation” when she should be apologizing to the British people for her predecessor’s failure to sink the ship and stop the invasion of their island at the start.

Sink the ships or fight a vicious war inside your borders. History clearly demonstrates that those are the two options. Western civilization isn’t over. But thanks to the historically epic foolishness of our parents and grandparents, we’re going to have to fight for it if we want to keep it.

A political breakup is inevitable. The only question is the level of violence that will be involved. So, working towards a peaceful one based on the Czechoslovakian model rather than a not-peaceful one based on the Yugoslavian model is highly desirable.

Divorce is hard, but it’s easier than cutting the brake lines on your wife’s car. It is long past time for an amicable divorce of the United States of America. There is simply no common ground with the Left anymore. We are now the couple screaming at each other all night, every night as the kids hide in their room.

We cannot come together, but we do not have to live like this. The history of the world is nations breaking up and redrawing their borders. If we want to avoid this political divide turning into a deadly one, we should do likewise.

Stop clinging to the past and acknowledge where we are as a country, not where you want us to be, not where things were when your grandpa was storming the beaches of Normandy. Where we truly are.

We are a nation hopelessly divided. We are more divided now than we have ever been in our history. And before you start screaming at me about the Civil War, keep in mind that bloody conflict was fought over one major issue. In those days, take ten families from New York and ten families from Alabama, put them all in a room, and you’d find they mostly had the same values (and bad accents).

Now, fast-forward to today and do that same thing. Those families have virtually nothing in common. We as a nation have polarized and separated from each other.

Anyone who thinks this is a radical idea has an extremely narrow view of history. If you don’t believe me, go try to book a plane ticket to Czechoslovakia, or look at a map of Europe from the year 1600, then look at one today. See any differences? Borders move. Countries split and change hands. They do this for a myriad of reasons. Ours would be a major cultural shift toward the left and half the country refusing to go along with tyranny.

The problem is that there is no “we as a nation”. The USA is a multinational empire. And like all such empires, the nations want to rule themselves, not be ruled over by other nations.

The US ambassador insists that the USA will not withdraw from Syria soon, contra the President’s previous statements. The objectives have officially evolved.

The US will not pull its troops out of Syria until its goals are accomplished there, ambassador to UN Nikki Haley said. This comes after Washington carried out airstrikes in Syria in response for an alleged chemical attack. US currently has over 2,000 troops in Syria and a number of contractors.

While it is America’s goals to see the troops come home, “we are not going to leave until we know we have accomplished those things,” she told Fox News Sunday.

Haley added the United States wants to ensure that chemical weapons are not used in a way that is of risk to US interests, the Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS) is defeated and Iran’s actions are monitored.

US officials were previously saying that their goal in Syria is just defeating ISIS. President Donald Trump said earlier that US would withdraw from Syria “soon”  and Washington would “let the other people take care of it now,” but no deadline for any such move has been announced.

That’s obviously not good. But then, if these rumors are true, the US will probably be withdrawing sooner rather than later, and there will be no more air strikes either.

It appears Russia was going to attack, and the U.S. was threatened into stopping the attack. This is probably the case. When this started, it was “going to be sustained, lasting days”. Then a large number of Russian planes took off, and suddenly America stopped attacking after only about an hour….

How do you go from “we are going to attack in waves, for days” to “an hour into the battle let’s call it quits”? And it is now confirmed that the Russian missile systems knocked out virtually ALL American cruise missiles, resulting in a totally failed missile attack. A few planes dropped bombs and then went home, with nothing returning. I think America quit because:

1. Russian defenses worked perfect, and America was watching its missiles go POOF on computer screens before they reached their targets, and
2. Russian war planes took off after the air defenses were very well proven, with confirmed destruction of practically all cruise missiles. That alone would not stop an American attack, but if any planes were carrying nukes it sure would, if it was proven Russian air defenses would escort those planes to their targets unscathed.

The big proof: the “days long attack” lasted about an hour. SOMETHING HAPPENED.

That’s not proof, let alone “big proof”. I haven’t seen any information that any Russian planes were launched anywhere, but we were told that Britain reports two hunter-killer subs were stalking one of its submarines carrying Tomahawk missiles, and that no missiles were launched from subs. In any event, the only way to determine who is telling the truth now is by watching to see what happens next. If there are more air strikes, that will be a strong indication that the Russians are seriously exaggerating. If there are not, that will be an indication, though less conclusive , that they are telling the truth now and the US has suffered a major blow to its military credibility.

It does seem a little strange that there should be so much sabre-rattling and posturing over a grand total of three targets in Syria, though. That offers minor support to the Russian account.

SF explains why more and more Trump supporters are showing a tendency to freak out when they are disappointed by his statements and actions:

I think the reason lots of people are panicking is because they have been burned and burned repeatedly by people they elected who were “their guy.” They are suffering from political “attachment disorder.” They want to be the ones to terminate their loyalty to the President on their own terms rather than feel like they got screwed again after trusting yet another political leader who tells them what they want them to hear only to turn on them.

For those who are suffering from this disorder and genuinely feel frightened that the God-Emperor will betray them sooner or later, allow me to suggest the following litany, which, like the Bene Gesseret Litany Against Fear, may prove soothing.

Trump is not the answer.
Trump is not the salvation.
Trump is not the last and final hope.
Mistakes will be made.
Decisions will prove suboptimal.
Failure is likely. Disaster is possible.
The world is fallen and ruled by evil.
Republics and empires always fall.
Gideon only needed 300.
Jesus only needed 12.
Don’t be afraid.
This is just the first level.
There is always hope.

If we get screwed again, we get screwed again. So what? What is the alternative, go back to the Jebs and Hillarys? Put our trust in the Romneys and Ryans? Trump was just the message. Trump is not the Second Coming of Charles Martel, the Defender of the West. He never promised to be. The time is not yet ripe. It cannot be, not when more than half the self-professed Right still firmly clings to the equality of race and religion, to multiculturalism, to civic nationalism, and to Judeo-Christianity, to the very deceits that are actively destroying everything they claim to cherish.

Before he comes, the statues of Stonewall Jackson and Thomas Jefferson and George Washington and Woodrow Wilson will fall. Perhaps even Abraham Lincoln. Before he comes, the South Africaust will take place. Before he comes, even the cucks and conservatives, even the identity-complicated and the civic nationalists, will be crying out to St. Breivik to save the harried remnants of their peoples from the barbarians they welcomed inside the gates as equals.

Only then, like Alfred the Great defending Anglo-Saxon England from the Great Heathen Army, will the people of the West be ready for the return of the Hammer. Only then will they be worthy of him.

Do not despair. Do not be afraid to hope. Remember, the Alt-Right is inevitable because the Alt-Right is the only political philosophy that is soundly based on a foundation of truth, history, logic, science, and Scripture. That is why not only the Left, but the cucks and cons and churchians as well, are observably terrified of debating us, listening to us, or even just accurately characterizing our views. They literally cannot handle the truth yet. And they will not be able to handle it, much less accept it, until the feelbads of their observed reality exceeds their feelbads caused by the truth.

I understand that there can be utility in holding someone accountable. But doesn’t the God-Emperor come in for enough criticism already that he doesn’t need to hear it all the time from both sides?

Prominent supporters of President Trump are expressing skepticism over his decision to launch airstrikes against Syria, slamming the move as overly aggressive and unnecessary.

Fox News hosts Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham both questioned Trump’s decision Friday to launch strikes in retaliation for a chemical weapons attack last weekend that the U.S. has attributed to the Syrian government.

Carlson noted the move was inconsistent with the president’s message during his 2016 campaign, and Ingraham said she found that intervention in other countries could be risky, as shown in the Iraq War, according to the Daily Beast.

Michael Savage, a prominent conservative radio host and author, tweeted that “sad warmongers hijacking our nation” following news of the strike.

Michael Savage@ASavageNation
 We lost. War machine  bombs syria. No evidence Assad did it. Sad warmongers hijacking our nation

Infowars’s Alex Jones broke down in tears while speaking out against the military action. “If he had been a piece of crap from the beginning, it wouldn’t be so bad,” Jones said of Trump. “We’ve made so many sacrifices and now he’s crapping all over us. It makes me sick.”

Conservative commentator Ann Coulter also shared her opposition to the strike, retweeting a series of other conservative or right-wing figures who condemned the move and resurfacing Trump’s own past tweets against military action in Syria.

And far-right figures Mike Cernovich and Laura Loomer also ripped Trump over the military strike in Syria.

Mike Cernovich@Cernovich
At least I won’t feel bad when he gets impeached.

The ironic thing is that I am probably more anti-war, and have been for much longer, than any of these right-wing figures. I’m not bothered by a few missile strikes. I don’t believe they will lead to boots on the ground, any more than all the previous missile strikes did.

Everything I have seen about the situation indicates that Trump is resisting the neocons and their war machine, not giving into it. I really don’t understand why none of these folks, of whom most I generally think well, aren’t able to do the same.

Be patient. Don’t react. And don’t assume you necessarily know what the President is doing.

It appears that my expectations were more or less correct. But now that the US has opted for the symbolic strike, what are the implications? The Saker discussed this very possibility three days ago, even as he worried about mutual escalation:

The truth is that Russia would never be a credible threat to the AngloZionist Hegemony if it was not for the innumerable self-inflicted disasters the Empire has been absorbing year after year after year. In reality, Russia is no threat to anybody at all. And even China would not be a threat to the Empire if the latter was not so arrogant, so over-stretched, so ignorant, reckless and incompetent in its actions.

Let me just give one simple, but stark, example: not only does the US not have anything remotely resembling a consistent foreign policy, it does not even have any ministry of foreign affairs. The Department of State does not deal with diplomacy simply because the US leaders don’t believe in diplomacy as a concept. All the DoS does is issue threats, sanctions, ultimatums, make demands, deliver score-cards (on human rights and the like, of all things!) and explain to the public why the US is almost constantly at war with somebody. That is not “diplomacy” and the likes of Nikki Haley are not diplomats. In fact, the US has no use for International Law either, hence the self-same Nikki Haley openly declaring at a UNSC meeting that the US is willing to ignore the decisions of the UNSC and act in complete violation of the UN Charter. Simply put: thugs have no need for any diplomacy. They don’t understand the concept.

Just like their Israeli masters and mentors, the Americans have convinced themselves that all they need to be successful on the international scene is to either threaten the use of force or actually use force. This works great (or so it seems) in Gaza or Grenada, but when dealing with China, Russia or Iran, this monomaniacal approach rapidly shows its limitations, especially when your force is really limited to shooting missiles from afar or murdering civilians (neither the US nor Israel nor, for that matter, the KSA has a credible “boots on the ground” capability, hence their reliance on proxies).

The Empire is failing, fast, and for all the talk about “Animal Assad” or “Rocket Man” being in need of AngloZionist punishment, the stakes are the survival of Hegemony imposed upon mankind at the end of WWII and, again, at the end of the Cold War, and the future of our planet. There cannot be one World Hegemon and a multipolar world order regulated by international law. It’s an either-or situation. And in that sense, this is all much bigger than Syria or even Russia.

There is still a chance that the AngloZionists will decide to strike Syria symbolically, as they did last year following the previous chemical false flag in Khan Sheikhoun (Trump has now probably tweeted himself into a corner which makes some kind of attack almost inevitable). Should that happen though, we should not celebrate too soon as this will just be a minor course change, the 21st-century anti-Russia Crusade will continue, most likely in the form of a Ukronazi attack on the Donbass.

While I think the Saker misses the point that Trump is not a creature of the Empire and is probably the primary target of its attempts to wield its influence, I suspect that he is correct that the neocons’ anti-Russian campaign will continue, although I expect its focus to shift to Iran next, rather than Ukraine.

And this commenter has it right: In its essence, U.S. foreign policy boils down to someone’s attempt to establish Satan’s kingdom on earth as per Isaiah 14:13,14.

But not just U.S. foreign policy. As another commenter observed, Russia appears to be placing the blame for both recent false flags squarely on Britain. And Britain was also involved in the attacks, which may indicate that any Russian retaliation is going to be directed at British interests.

Israeli military historian Martin van Creveld has a more regional and historical take on the situation:

With so many interests, native and foreign, involved, a way out does not seem in sight. Nor can the outcome be foreseen any more than that of the Thirty Years’ War could be four years after the beginning of the conflict, i.e. 1622. In fact there is good reason to believe that the hostilities have just begun. Additional players such as Lebanon and Jordan may well be drawn in. That in turn will almost certainly bring in Israel as well. Some right-wing Israelis, including several ministers, actually dream of such a scenario. They hope that the fall of the Hashemite Dynasty and the disintegration of Jordan will provide them with an opportunity to repeat the events of 1948 by throwing the Palestinians out of the West Bank and into Jordan.

That, however, is Zukunftmusik, future music as the Germans say. As of the present, the greatest losers are going to be Syria and Iraq. Neither really exists any longer as organized entities, and neither seems to have a future as such an entity. The greatest winner is going to be Iran. Playing the role once reserved for Richelieu, the great 17th century French statesman, the Mullahs are watching the entire vast area from the Persian Gulf to Latakia on the eastern shore of the Mediterranean turn into a maelstrom of conflicting interests they can play with. Nor are they at all sorry to see Turks and Kurds kill each other to their hearts’ contents.

What is most interesting, to me, is that despite their very different perspectives, both the Saker and van Creveld recognize that the “liberal factions” in Syria were false fronts for ISIS.

UPDATE: Russia Insider called it correctly ahead of time.

The latest news is that now the Russian and American militaries are frantically talking, helped by Israelis (Netanyahu himself!), and the Turks (NATO members after all, but de facto Russian allies), trying to figure a way out of this Mexican standoff. Some experts are saying that it will go down like last time: the Americans will notify the Russians in advance of the targets, the Russians (and most Syrians whom the Russians will inform) will leave them, the strikes will be all for show, and the Russians and Syrians will get on with pulverizing Al Qaeda. The Syrians have already moved their planes to Russian bases, so, no, Syria will not lose its air force. Everyone saves face, and the world moves on.

Interesting, though not surprising, that Mad Dog Mattis is credited as being the voice of reason responsible for the “de-conflicting” on the US side. And I note that he does have blue eyes.

President Trump has ordered “precision missile strikes” in order to let Assad know that the US will not tolerate the false flags of its proxies. Or something.

President Donald Trump said he had approved military strikes on Syria in retaliation for an apparent chemical attack by the regime of Bashar al-Assad on a rebel town.

“A short time ago I ordered the United States armed forces to launch precision strikes” on targets associated with Syria chemical weapons, Trump said in remarks Friday night.

Trump said the strikes would be carried out in coordination with France and the U.K.

Trump’s statement on U.S. policy toward Syria came after days of speculation that the U.S. would launch a strike against Syria in retaliation for an apparent chemical weapons attack last weekend that killed scores of civilians.

Idiocy, of course. But it strikes me as Trump trying to look like he’s doing something without provoking a serious response.

The problem is this: The Russian military said on 13 March it would respond to any US strike on Syria, targeting any missiles and launchers involved in such an attack.

UPDATE: Syria’s capital has been rocked by loud explosions that lit up the sky with heavy smoke as U.S. President Donald Trump announced airstrikes in retaliation for the country’s alleged use of chemical weapons. Associated Press reporters in Damascus saw smoke rising from east Damascus early Saturday morning local time. Syrian state TV says the attack has begun on the capital, though it wasn’t immediately clear what was targeted.

This all looks insanely stupid and totally pointless. I hope this is all some sort of kabuki allowing the God-Emperor to declare martial law and drain the swamp. Consider:

1. Dumbest, most unnecessary, and most poorly timed “chemical attack” ever.
2. Bizarre overreaction on the part of the President.
3. Uncharacteristically strong and public pre-reaction on the part of the ordinarily patient Russians.