Archive for the ‘Afghanistan’ Category


Sunday, September 20th, 2015


Petty Officer First Class Ian Regnier (above left) carries the remains of Petty Officer 1st Class Michael Joseph Strange, a cryptology technician, killed alongside members of SEAL Team 6 when their helicopter was shot down by a rocket-propelled grenade in Afghanistan in 2011 (bottom). The families of Strange and the other victims are demanding the White House release documents relevant to the incident. (Associated Press)

Obama stonewalls SEAL Team 6 helicopter crash probe, watchdog says

– The Washington Times – Wednesday, August 5, 2015

During the last several years it is evident that our government has spent a lot of time and resources covering up the truth on many things from both our allies and the American public,” Mr. Hamburger added. “Things like Benghazi and the NSA. I am afraid that with this FOIA case that the government is purposely delaying turning over documents because they need the time to redact and to delete things they do not want the American public to become aware of.”
Charlie Strange, whose Navy cryptologist son, Michael, was on Extortion 17, told The Times last year that it was too much of a coincidence for Taliban to be standing so near the landing zone.
“Somebody was leaking to the Taliban,” said Mr. Strange. “They knew. Somebody tipped them off. There were guys in a tower. Guys on the bush line. They were sitting there, waiting. And they sent our guys right into the middle.”
The Obama administration is violating a judge’s order to turn over documents in the Aug. 6, 2011, shootdown of a U.S. helicopter — call sign Extortion 17 — that killed members of SEAL Team 6 in Afghanistan, a watchdog group is charging.
On the fourth anniversary of the worst one-day loss of military life in the war on terror, families of the dead say they are aghast that the government will not honor basic requests under the Freedom of Information Act.
“It has now been four years since Extortion 17 was shot down,” said Doug Hamburger, whose Army air crew son, Patrick, was one of the 30 Americans killed. “I find it quite disturbing that the government is not willing to give us the answers we deserve. I find it very irritating that we will not question the Afghans about their knowledge of what took place that night.”
  • Share/Bookmark


Tuesday, June 2nd, 2015



De-Islamization is the Only Way to Fight ISIS

Posted by Daniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog 24 Comments
  EXCERPT FROM THIS ARTICLE:  ISIS is not a military force. It is a cultural one. Much of its success has come from its cultural appeal.

As long as the Middle East is defined in terms of Islam, some variation of the Islamic State or the Muslim Brotherhood bent on recreating the Caliphate will continue reemerging. We can accept that and give up, but the growing number of Muslim migrants and settlers mean that it will emerge in our country as well.

We have a choice between Islamization and de-Islamization.

Obama can’t defeat ISIS with soft power, though ISIS could beat him with soft power assuming its Caliph ever decided to agree to sit down at a table with John Kerry without beheading him. Iran has picked up billions in sanctions relief and the right to take over Yemen and raid ships in international waters in the Persian Gulf just for agreeing to listen to Kerry talk for an hour. that might be a fair exchange.

As bad as having your capital or ship seized by Iran is, listening to John Kerry talk is even worse.

If ISIS were to agree to a deal, it could pick up Baghdad and Damascus just in exchange for showing up. All it would have to do is find a Jihadi who hasn’t chopped off any heads on camera to present as a moderate. The administration and its media operatives would accuse anyone who disagreed of aiding the ISIS hardliners at the expense of the ISIS moderates who also represent the hardliners.

If Obama did that, he would at least lose in a way that he understands; instead of in a way he doesn’t.

So far ISIS has preferred the classical approach of killing everything in its path. The approach, deemed insufficiently nuanced by masters of subtlety like Obama and Kerry, has worked surprisingly well. Their response, which is big on the Bush arsenal of drone strikes, Special Forces raids and selective air strikes, hasn’t. But Bush was fighting terrorist groups, not unrecognized states capable of taking on armies.

It’s hard to destroy something if you don’t know what it is. And it’s hard to know what a thing is if you won’t even call it by its name or name its ideology.

The left loves root causes, but the root cause of ISIS isn’t poverty, unemployment or a lack of democracy.

It’s Islam. (more…)

  • Share/Bookmark


Friday, March 27th, 2015



Obama’s Mideast Realignment

His new doctrine: Downgrade ties to Israel and the Saudis while letting Iran fill the vacuum left by U.S. retreat


Max Boot   Mr. Boot is a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and author of “Invisible Armies: An Epic History of Guerrilla Warfare from Ancient Times to the Present” (W.W. Norton, 2013).

Data point No. 1: President Obama withdrew U.S. forces from Iraq in 2011 and is preparing to leave Afghanistan by the end of 2016, even while keeping a few more troops there this year and next than originally planned.

Point No. 2: The Obama administration keeps largely silent about Iran’s power grab in Iraq, Syria and Yemen, even going so far now as to assist Iranian forces in Tikrit, while attempting to negotiate a nuclear deal with Tehran that would allow it to maintain thousands of centrifuges.

Point No. 3: Mr. Obama berates Benjamin Netanyahu for allegedly “racist” campaign rhetoric, refuses to accept his apologies, and says the U.S. may now “re-assess options,” code words for allowing the United Nations to recognize a Palestinian state over Israeli objections.

Taken together, these facts suggest that Mr. Obama is attempting to pull off the most fundamental realignment of U.S. foreign policy in a generation. The president is pulling America back from the leading military role it has played in the Middle East since 1979, the year the Iranian hostage crisis began and the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. He is trying to transform Iran from an enemy to a friend. He is diminishing the alliance with Israel, to lows not seen since the 1960s.

Call it the Obama Doctrine: The U.S. puts down the burden, and Iran picks up the slack. (more…)

  • Share/Bookmark


Thursday, January 22nd, 2015



The Global War on Modernity

Islamists set the time machine to the Dark Ages. Putin dreams of czarist Russia. A common enemy: America.

A Russian-backed separatist near the Donetsk airport in eastern Ukraine, Dec. 16, 2014.
A Russian-backed separatist near the Donetsk airport in eastern Ukraine, Dec. 16, 2014. Photo: Agence France-Presse/Getty Images


Garry Kasparov  Mr. Kasparov is the chairman of the New York-based Human Rights Foundation. 

Globalization has effectively compressed the world in size, increasing the mobility of goods, capital and labor. Simultaneously this has led to globalization across time, as the 21st century collides with cultures and regimes intent on existing as in centuries past. It is less the famous clash of civilizations than an attempt by these “time travelers” to hold on to their waning authority by stopping the advance of the ideas essential to an open society.

Radical Islamists, from the Taliban and al Qaeda to Boko Haram and Islamic State, set the time machine to the Dark Ages and encourage the murder of all who oppose them, often supported by fatwas and funds from terror sponsors like Iran. The religious monarchies in the Middle East are guilty by association, creating favorable conditions for extremism by clamping down on any stirring of freedom.

Vladimir Putin wants Russia to exist in the Great Power era of czars and monarchs, dominating its neighbors by force and undisturbed by elections and rights complaints. The post-Communist autocracies, led by Mr. Putin’s closest dictator allies in Belarus and Kazakhstan, exploit ideology only as a means of hanging on to power at any cost. (more…)

  • Share/Bookmark


Thursday, June 26th, 2014

  • Share/Bookmark


Tuesday, June 17th, 2014

  • Share/Bookmark


Tuesday, March 18th, 2014


March 18, 2014

Why are there no good choices? From Crimea to North Korea, from Syria to Egypt, and from Iraq to Afghanistan, America apparently has no good options. If possession is nine-tenths of the law, Russia owns Crimea and all we can do is sanction and disinvite—and wring our hands.

Iran is following North Korea’s nuclear path, but it seems that we can only entreat Iran to sign the same kind of agreement North Korea once signed, undoubtedly with the same result.

Our tough talk about a red line in Syria prompted Vladimir Putin‘s sleight of hand, leaving the chemicals and killings much as they were. We say Bashar Assad must go, but aligning with his al Qaeda-backed opposition is an unacceptable option.

And how can it be that Iraq and Afghanistan each refused to sign the status-of-forces agreement with us—with the very nation that shed the blood of thousands of our bravest for them?

Why, across the world, are America’s hands so tied?

A large part of the answer is our leader’s terrible timing. In virtually every foreign-affairs crisis we have faced these past five years, there was a point when America had good choices and good options. There was a juncture when America had the potential to influence events. But we failed to act at the propitious point; that moment having passed, we were left without acceptable options. In foreign affairs as in life, there is, as Shakespeare had it, “a tide in the affairs of men which, taken at the flood leads on to fortune. Omitted, all the voyage of their life is bound in shallows and in miseries.” (more…)

  • Share/Bookmark


Wednesday, January 29th, 2014


Perhaps some of you saw Travis today ( January 29, 2014) being interviewed on Fox News.   He was severely injured in Afghanistan by an IED and lost all four limbs.   The following  two websites below tell the story of his journey which will be an inspiration to us all.   Nancy 


  • Share/Bookmark


Thursday, January 9th, 2014


Jan. 7, 2014 4:32 p.m. ET


Robert Gates Reuters

All too often during my 4½ years as secretary of defense, when I found myself sitting yet again at that witness table at yet another congressional hearing, I was tempted to stand up, slam the briefing book shut and quit on the spot. The exit lines were on the tip of my tongue: I may be the secretary of defense, but I am also an American citizen, and there is no son of a bitch in the world who can talk to me like that. I quit. Find somebody else. It was, I am confident, a fantasy widely shared throughout the executive branch.

Much of my frustration came from the exceptional offense I took at the consistently adversarial, even inquisition-like treatment of executive-branch officials by too many members of Congress across the political spectrum—creating a kangaroo-court environment in hearings, especially when television cameras were present. But my frustration also came from the excruciating difficulty of serving as a wartime defense secretary in today’s Washington. Throughout my tenure at the Pentagon, under both President George W. Bush and President Barack Obama, I was, in personal terms, treated better by the White House, Congress and the press for longer than almost anyone I could remember in a senior U.S. government job. So why did I feel I was constantly at war with everybody? Why was I so often so angry? Why did I so dislike being back in government and in Washington?

It was because, despite everyone being “nice” to me, getting anything consequential done was so damnably difficult—even in the midst of two wars. I did not just have to wage war in Afghanistan and Iraq and against al Qaeda; I also had to battle the bureaucratic inertia of the Pentagon, surmount internal conflicts within both administrations, avoid the partisan abyss in Congress, evade the single-minded parochial self-interest of so many members of Congress and resist the magnetic pull exercised by the White House, especially in the Obama administration, to bring everything under its control and micromanagement. Over time, the broad dysfunction of today’s Washington wore me down, especially as I tried to maintain a public posture of nonpartisan calm, reason and conciliation. (more…)

  • Share/Bookmark


Monday, September 30th, 2013


The Wall Street Journal

Two Marine Generals Ousted Over 2012 Attack in Afghanistan


WASHINGTON—The Marine Corps commandant on Monday ordered two high-ranking generals to leave the service as a result of their failure to put in place adequate defenses at a key base in Afghanistan, a rare instance of the military punishing senior officers for wartime lapses.

In an attack last year on Camp Bastion, a joint U.S-British and Afghan base in Helmand province in Afghanistan, 15 insurgents killed two Marines, wounded eight other Americans and eight British troops. The attackers also destroyed six Harrier fighter jets and damaged other aircraft.

The attack led Gen. James Amos, the Marine commandant, to request the retirement of the two major generals. It was considered an unusual step even for Gen. Amos, who has been particularly aggressive about pushing officers out of command if their performance has been found lacking.

“Commandership is a sacred responsibility, and standards for general officers are necessarily high,” Gen. Amos said in a meeting with reporters. “In their duty to protect our forces, these two generals did not meet that standard.”

Other senior officers who served during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars have retired in the aftermath of questions surrounding insurgent attacks. But those retirements generally came after senators blocked their confirmation for promotion, not as a result of a public reprimand by top military leaders.

One of the officers, Maj. Gen. Charles Gurganus, the former top commander in Helmand province, had been nominated for a third star and a top job on the Marine Corps staff. Gen. Gurganus’s nomination had been on hold, and will now be withdrawn. The second, Maj. Gen. Gregg Sturdevant, who commanded the Marine aviation arm, is currently serving on the staff of the Pacific Command.

The investigation by U.S. Central Command, which oversees American forces in Afghanistan, determined that the insurgents cut a hole in a fence near an unmanned guard tower on Sept. 14, 2012, then snuck into the base. The insurgents were able to roll grenades under fighter planes, badly heavily damaging the Harriers, according to the investigation report, which said destroying aircraft was the primary objective of the attackers. (more…)

  • Share/Bookmark
Search All Posts