Unleashing the Dogs of War . . . Or At Least A Limited Strike

The worst kept secret on the planet right now is that the United States, and perhaps other allies as well, will launch some sort of attack on Syria in the near future.

Last summer, Obama declared that one of his "red lines" was the use of weapons of mass destruction.  Last week, someone in the Assad "administration" apparently used them to kill, among others, many hundreds of civilians.

US intelligence sources cite a strange intercepted phone call within the Syrian government camp as proof.  A Syrian defense official demanded an explanation for why chemical weapons were launched.  If one was forthcoming, the rationale has not yet been released.

This raises questions about the Syrian government.  Was the attack the work of a rogue officer?  Was it a direct order from the highest levels of government?  Is the Syrian government even a cohesive unit anymore?
In any event, Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron seem to agree that a response must occur.

Cameron plans to consult with Parliament.  At this time, however, Obama seems to have no plans to request authorization from Congress.  Although some congressional Republicans have offered muted support, Senator Rand Paul (Ky.) claimed that Syrian events had "no clear national security connection" to the United States.  Paul did not rule out action, but asked that Obama consult with Congress meaningfully before acting.

In this case, rushing to action within a few days does not seem absolutely necessary.  The repulsiveness of the attack is not likely to wear out.  Indeed the United Nations investigators will undoubtedly either uncover more evidence and details that maintain world disgust, or Syrian officials will block them entirely.  The UN has requested four days, which does not seem unreasonable.  President George W. Bush gave them much longer before launching war against Iraq.

Syria presents US policy makers considerable trouble.  The rebel targets of government chemical weapons have shown themselves no less murderous than Assad's thugs.  Islamicist rebels have slaughtered Roman Catholic clergy among many other innocents during their own reign of terror.

President Bush had some "good guys" to work with when he overturned Saddam Hussein's thugocracy.  Syria seems to have few or no credible leaders who could make a peaceful republic work.

This limits Obama's options.  Any Iraq style invasion would require a much more powerful force prepared to stay in place for much longer.  Nation building would by necessity look more like colonization.

Any boots on the ground would likely end badly for the United States.  In the mid 1980s, President Reagan deployed Marines to serve as part of a peacekeeping unit to try and bring stability to Lebanon.  Terrorists killed over 200.  After a few good-bye blasts from the USS New Jersey, American forces skedaddled.

The various Lebanese factions had no desire to play nice just because American and European soldiers showed up.  They continued killing each other and blowing up heaps of rubble until they exhausted their will to fight.  Lebanon has remained relatively peaceable ever since.

So ground based combat forces will not work.

That leaves air strikes and/or covert operations.  The CIA does need to infiltrate Syria.  To make reasonable decisions, American leaders need to have knowledge of what is going on and who makes it happen.  It needs to monitor individuals and groups as they refine terror techniques.  Covert teams can also find locations of important sites in case stronger military action is required.

Air strikes would have to be very precise and specific.  Former Representative and anti-war crusader Dennis Kucinich noted that air strikes by American planes would make them Al Qaeda's air force.  Indiscriminate targeting of Syrian government military forces would help clear the road for an even worse regime.  Conversely, firing a couple of Tomahawk missiles in the general direction of Assad makes American power look downright petty and even silly.

Take the time to identify chemical weapons facilities.  Only target them.  Use weapons capable of doing the job, like daisy cutters.  Cruise missiles may not deliver enough punch.  This will achieve a limited goal and curb WMD attacks in the future without overly involving the US or using military action as a public relations stunt.

Obama must also prepare to stand by Israel.  Attacks on Syria may provoke a response against Israel.  Specific tactical actions may be necessary against any force deployed to strike Israel.  On the other hand, it is difficult to see how effectively Syria could strike Israel while struggling in its own civil war.

Obama must make wise decisions here, stick by them, and articulate explanations.  He must have the specific goal of curbing WMD usage while rebuilding respect for American power.  If he covers his bases with Congress and the United Nations, this could help reconstruct respect for US foreign policy that has fallen greatly since Bush left office.

Many unmarked cliffs and chasms loom in the road ahead.  Obama will have to tread carefully as he acts.

How "Space Weather" Could Knock Out Services Here On Earth and What Can Be Done to Prevent It

"There is no dispute that electric grids worldwide are vulnerable to potentially catastrophic damage from solar-generated EMP."

So said former Maryland Republican congressman and Howard University professor Roscoe Bartlett in 2011.  According to Britain's Daily Mail, an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) expelled from the Sun nearly slammed into Earth.  Humanity missed calamity by a narrow two weeks.

EMPs are accelerated and highly charged streams of particles.  They can come naturally from the Sun, or artificially from nuclear weapons blasts.  Such an explosion in the atmosphere could create an electromagnetic field that could fry unprotected electronics and electrical systems. 

According to the Heritage Foundation, "effectively, the U.S. would be thrown back to the pre-industrial age following a widespread EMP attack."  Presumably a natural EMP blast could produce similar effects.  A one in eight chance exists that Earth may suffer such an event by 2020.

Heritage in 2010 laid out suggested preparations to protect against EMPs

Step No. 1: Require the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) to Produce a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) Describing Which Countries Are Capable of Launching an EMP Strike. The NIE should review not only the weapons systems themselves but the delivery systems and platforms capable of carrying the weapons. Additionally, Congress should obtain from the NIE the intelligence community’s assessment of how EMP-capable countries are incorporating those weapons into their broader military strategies.
The latter assessment would permit the President and his advisors to determine how the U.S. could respond to EMP threats as they arise. Such planning is an essential part of providing an effective defense against these threats.
Step No. 2: Press the Obama Administration to Prepare to Protect the Nation’s Cyber Infrastructure Against the Effects of EMP. Congress should direct the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security to manage this effort, which should incorporate the recommendations of the commissions. For instance, the commission has determined that preparedness measures must account for the fact that the cyber infrastructure is quite dependent on the power grid. Thus, contingency planning must explore ways to keep the cyber system functioning without primary power.
Further, it recommends identifying the most critical elements of the cyber system that must survive an EMP attack. Finally, the commission recommends that preparedness planning account for the interdependency between the nation’s cyber infrastructure and other elements of the broader infrastructure. Overall, the key to preparing to counter the effects of EMP is to put barriers in place to prevent cascading failures in the nation’s infrastructure.
Step No. 3: Require the Navy to Develop a Test Program for Sea-Based Interceptors with the Capability to Intercept and Destroy Ballistic Missiles Carrying EMP Weapons Prior to Detonation. It is clear that ballistic missiles offer an ideal delivery system for an EMP weapon. For instance, an enemy of America could launch a short-range missile carrying an EMP weapon from a cargo ship off the U.S. coast. Clearly, the terminal-phase ballistic missile defense systems currently in the field or entering the field, such as the Patriot system and the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system, will not reliably intercept such ballistic missiles prior to the detonation of an EMP warhead. The Standard Missile-3 Block IA (SM-3 Block IA), as a midcourse defense system, may be able to do so.
What the U.S. really needs to address this threat, however, is a version of the SM-3 that will intercept these kinds of missiles in the boost or ascent phase of flight. The Independent Working Group has recommended developing and fielding what it calls an “East Coast Missile Defense” to address this emerging threat.[3]
Accordingly, Congress should require the Navy to demonstrate the capability to produce new versions of the SM-3 interceptor that are capable of destroying a short-range missile in the boost or ascent phase of flight, prior to its reaching the preferred detonation points for an EMP warhead. This will require that Congress also provide the Navy with the funds necessary to undertake this test program.
If it chooses to do so, Congress could also direct the Air Force to undertake a companion program that would permit operational use of the Airborne Laser system to defend against an attack from a short-range missile.

EMPs have caused disruption before.  In 1989 they knocked out parts of Quebec's telephone infrastructure.  130 years prior, they interfered with telegraph operations not long after the invention of the device.

Don't Jump to Conclusions?

The newest revelations concerning the Fort Hood shooter are now nothing short of outrageous.

Recent information released to the media proves that the Army psychiatrist currently held for opening fire at an Army processing center, killing several, had active and open contacts with Al Quaeda related Islamofascist groups. You remember these guys; we are at war with them. At least we were until January.

Okay so the FBI and the Army blew it on this one. It happens when you have to follow a lot of suspicious individuals. Obama's misstep is even worse. A few days after the terror attack, he told Americans to not jump to conclusions.

I believed him. Honest to goodness I believed him. The president gets the intel and the info so I assume he knows more than I do. He said to not jump to conclusions so I thought it must be an individual nut, not a terrorist conspiracy. Wrong!

You can NOT tell me that Obama did not receive a full briefing on who Hasan was and what he was doing within hours of the attack. And he STILL comes out and tells the country to not jump to conclusions. Once again the community organizer in chief wants us all to settle down regardless of the fact that a terror attack happened at a military installation and American soldiers were killed.

I am mad. You should be mad. Most importantly Obama should be mad! He isn't. He wants us to be calm and not get our feathers ruffled so he misleads the country, apparently not knowing that Republican congressmen can find out the true details on their own. I am sick of the community organizer in chief trying to run American security like a Chicago outreach program. If Obama is not a liar and he himself was not jumping to conclusions, then he is incredibly naive or deluded.

The most incredible fact is that the same US Army who will not grant an officer's commission to a recruit with a misdemeanor on their arrest record will keep a guy around with obvious sympathies for the main adversary of the United States. Stop treating Muslim fanatics any differently than Communists in the 1950s or Nazis in the 1930s. Hint, they might be working for the enemy.

Somali Pirates, Q-Ships and Convoys

As early as 1783 Islamic Pirates were attacking US Merchantmen off the coast of Africa capturing them and demanding ransom. In 1786 Thomas Jefferson and John Adams tried to negotiate with a representative of the terrorist. They were told, “It was written in their Koran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every muslim who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise” by Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja.

On August 1^st, 1801 the frigate USS Enterprise engaged and defeated an Islamic Pirate ship in the Mediterranean that had been attacking US shipping. It was the first time that a nation had stood up to the Islamic terrorist. Europe then as now just paid ransom and practiced a process of appeasement with terrorist. For the next few years the US Navy patrolled the Mediterranean defeating the terrorist on the high seas and US Marines attacked on shore. The battle of Tripoli, Libya is remembered in the Marine Hymn and was the first time America took on the Islamic Terrorist and won over 200 years ago.

Today the Islamic Pirates are at it again off the coast of Africa. They captured another US Merchantmen, the “Maersk Alabama,” but unlike the other Merchantmen of the world, the US crew fought back. After 200 years the Islamic Pirates have forgotten how Americans react, but the US Navy must respond as it did 200 years ago.

The world has changed, but the one thing the terrorist understand hasn’t and that is a show of force. We learn from our history, or at least we should. Two things that have worked in the past will work here. The first is to form convoys as was done in World War I and II. This is where merchant ships form a fleet and are escorted through hostile waters by armed naval vessels. This has worked in the past and will work here. The Somali Pirates would be fools to take on actual warships.

Since the Islamic Pirates are not likely to attack an escorted convoy, they will look for easier prey, those lone ships that wander into their hunting ground. This is where the Q-Ships come in. Q-Ships were used to lure German U-boats to the surface in both World War I and II. The Q-Ships look like normal merchant vessels, but in reality caring no cargo. They are crewed by navy personal, carried hidden heavy weapons, and the cargo holds are filled with empty oil drums to keep them afloat should they be damaged in battle. When the U-boats would surface to attack the unarmed merchantmen, the Q-Ship reveals its armament and attacks. Today a modern Q-ship would be the perfect weapon to take on the Muslim Pirates and destroy them, leaving enough survivors to warn other pirates that all merchantmen are not what they appear. On second thought leave no survivors, let them all come out to engage the Q-Ships.

Evacuation Destination

For well over two years now, federal, state, and local authorities have crafted plans to deal with possible major terror attack on Washington D. C. Now millions of dollars may come available to invest in an infrastructure to handle the strain of hundreds of thousands of people pouring into the West Virginia mountains.

We saw how disaster preparedness worked in Louisiana a few years ago. A corrupt city of New Orleans and Louisiana state government misspent money and provided no leadership when hit by a massive hurricane. West Virginia's county, city, and state governments need to figure out not only how to solve problems, but what the biggest problems are likely to be.

Certainly first and foremost we need better infrastructure. Virginia must get on board to link Corridor H to the interstate system or risk creating a dangerous bottleneck that terrorists could strike in a second wave attack. US 50 needs serious upgrades. Even if it ultimately falls short of a four lane expressway, traffic not used to mountain travel needs a road easier to navigate. First responders in the Potomac Highlands need training on how to handle chemical, biological, and radiation related conditions. Predetermined quarantine areas need to be determined as well as where to place the rest of the people fleeing the event.

We need to address all these issues and more. What we do not need is to spend this money in the same old ways. The priorities and methods that have dominated Legislative decision making for over seventy years need to change overall, but especially in this situation. People's lives, evacuees and residents alike, will hang in the balance by the thousands; politicians and planners need to repsect and remember that. Hopefully those that represent the Potomac Highlands and Eastern Panhandle can make others in the state appreciate the potential here for effective deliverance or utter disaster.

The Solution to Health Care Coverage For the Poor

You've got to hand it to Michael Moore, the man knows how to get his oversized mug into the news. Breaking the law to film his new docufalsity "Sicko" has resulted in a federal investigation and tremendous amounts of exposure for a movie that few people will watch.

I refuse to watch any of his movies because I do not want to put any money in the man's pocket or contribute to any statistics that support him. However, I have seen the previews showing him grandstanding outside of Guantanamo Bay Naval Base taunting the guards to let him and some uninsured 9/11 rescue workers in for medical treatment. After all, he says, they deserve the same quality of health care as Al Qua'ida. He then states that this was the only place in the United States where health care was guaranteed.

Moore and the left do not understand that health care is not a right. Health care is a commodity; it is also an incentive to educate oneself and to work hard. As with anything else, those that work towards a goal in the United States will generally achieve it. America provides more opportunity to its people than any other country anywhere, anytime. All an individual has to do is make the choice to succeed, then bust their tails doing it.

This does not mean that a solution does not exist to solve this issue of health insurance for the poor. As a matter of fact, Moore could represent part of a market solution if he wanted. Rich liberals could band together to form their own health insurance company. The company could operate on a sliding scale of payment determined by income. Rich fat cat liberals like Moore or Hillary Clinton could choose to join this company and pay massive premiums so that the poor could sign on and pay little or nothing. That way they could assuage their guilt over succeeding in a capitalist world while the rest of us work hard and continue to invest in the market economy.

Those that would force the productive to work hard and pay so that others can receive a free ride of benefits are the real sickos.