The Secret Lives of Dade County Poll Watches

Druze Warlord Turns Neocon?,” by Mark Safranski, Zen Pundit, http://zenpundit.blogspot.com/2005/02/druze-warlord-turns-neocon-walid.html, 23 February 2005.

More flower children of Baghdad Spring

Walid Jumblatt, the canny survivor and leader of the ferocious Druze militia during Lebanon’s civil war, had some kind words for George Bush:

“It’s strange for me to say it, but this process of change has started because of the American invasion of Iraq,” explains Jumblatt. “I was cynical about Iraq. But when I saw the Iraqi people voting three weeks ago, 8 million of them, it was the start of a new Arab world.” Jumblatt says this spark of democratic revolt is spreading. “The Syrian people, the Egyptian people, all say that something is changing. The Berlin Wall has fallen. We can see it.”

Recalling Jumblatt’s activities twenty years ago, this is kind of like finding out that Daniel Ortega had emigrated to the States and was last seen as a Republican poll watcher in Dade county.

Pakistan’s Nuclear Secrets

No foreigners to question disgraced scientist Khan: Pak FM,” AFP, http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle.asp?xfile=data/subcontinent/2005/February/subcontinent_February794.xml&section=subcontinent&col=, 23 February 2005 (from Roth Report).

More from our ally Pakistan

Pakistan will not let any foreigners question Abdul Qadeer Khan, the father of the country’s nuclear bomb who has admitted leaking secrets to states including North Korea, Foreign Minister Khurshid Mahmud Kasuri said on Wednesday. “We have refused direct interrogations by anyone. The reason is national sensitivity,” Kasuri told a press conference at the end of a three-day visit to Tokyo.

Kasuri said Pakistan had acted against Khan even though the Pakistani opposition had accused the government of “succumbing to international pressure” against the local hero.

Hopefully, this is worthless isolationist BS, and we are secretly questioning him.

More likely, they’re serious.

Pakistan Authorizes Killing of American Soldiers

Pakistani soldiers can shoot US troops now: Orders from the top,” The Acorn, http://opinion.paifamily.com/index.php?p=1268, 23 February 2005.

Any doubt that Pakistan is a Gap enemy is rapidly evaporating

Philip Giraldi, publisher of ‘Intelligence Brief’ and a former CIA officer has revealed that stung by repeated intrusions by American troops across the border from Afghanistan (in hot pursuit of Taliban and al-Qaeda militants), General Musharraf has authorised Pakistani troops to fire back. (linkthanks Vijay Dandapani)

While shooting incidents across the border are not new, what is significant is that while past skirmishes were attributed to low-level troops and their field commanders, this time it is General Musharraf himself who has approved the orders.

Giraldi’s contention is that Musharraf was forced to this because the United States failed to bolster his position. That is conventional wisdom. But while he has supported the United States in capturing Arab and other non-local al-Qaeda operatives, Musharraf has always been reluctant to apprehend ethnic-Pashtun Taliban. Disappointment with the United States is a convenient pretext, he issued those orders because he could.

Le Grande Syria for Le Grande Bomb

Bush, Schroeder to Iran: Stop with nukes,” by Tom Raum, Associated Press, http://www.journalstar.com/articles/2005/02/23/top_story/doc421cd41737533948517170.txt, 23 February 2005.

Keep off Lebanon, Iran tells US,” Aljazeera, http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/172841F4-FA99-4643-A920-D88CF8F1AD28.htm, 23 February 2005.

America, Europe See Nuclear Iran As Not In Atlantic Interests

President Bush and German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder insisted Wednesday that Iran must not have nuclear weapons, but remained divided on how to coax Tehran into giving up its suspected ambitions for such an arsenal.

“It’s vital that the Iranians hear the world speak with one voice that they shouldn’t have a nuclear weapon,” Bush said at a news conference with the German leader.

Both sought to play down the differences between the United States and Europe.

“We absolutely agree that Iran must say, no, to any kind of nuclear weapon,” Schroeder said.

Iran see Atlantic Interference in Greater Syria As Not In Iranian Interests

US President George Bush on Wednesday said Syria should withdraw its military and its secret services from Lebanon.

Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi said Washington was trying to protect its chief ally in the region, Israel.

The Lebanese must beware of falling into the trap of foreigners who, using beautiful words, pursue their own political objectives,” he said.

“To secure the interests of Israel in the region, the Americans are putting pressure on Syria to withdraw its forces,” Kharrazi told the official IRNA news agency in Tehran on Wednesday

If only America and Europe had something they could trade in exchange for Iran getting the bomb (it is happening anyway). If only Iran had something it could trade in exchange for Atlantic interference in Greater Syria (it is happening anyway).

Hmm…

Hindu Kush Opium Poisoning

Chemical War Over Afghanistan: Poison Snow in the Hindu Kush?,” by Nick Meo, The Independent, http://www.indybay.org/news/2004/12/1707974.php, 1 December 2004.

You are the world’s last superpower. You are engaged in a struggle against a death cult that is trying to kill thousands of your citizens. The key to permantly destroying this cult is to increase economic connectivity. The enemy has sworn to kill you because they hate your freedom.

Poisoning thousands of poor farmers to protect your own citizens from themselves might not be your wisest option

British officials in Kabul have been questioned by President Hamid Karzai after fields were reportedly sprayed with chemicals from the air two weeks ago, leaving farmers sick. The Kabul government is keen to find out who could have carried out the alleged spraying, which it considers illegal, despite a stated desire by the US and United Nations to wipe out the opium crop.

The Afghans set up an inquiry into claims by villagers near the eastern city of Jalalabad that mystery aircraft had sprayed crops. The British ambassador was called in for questioning and a protest was lodged with the US after Afghan officials concluded that fields had been crop-dusted despite Mr Karzai being opposed to spraying.

Britain, which takes a lead role in drug eradication, is opposed to aerial spraying, which is credited with massive reductions in cocaine output in Colombia but at a heavy cost in damage to human health and the environment. Many in Washington have been pressing for aerial eradication to begin in Afghanistan, however.

Update: Praktike at Liberals Against Terrorism chimes in: “Worst Idea Ever.”

Definition of 4GW

Fourth Generation Warfare (4GW),” by Greg Wilcox and G.I. Wilson, Boyd Conference, http://d-n-i.net/fcs/pdf/4GW_wilson-wilcox_boyd_conf_2002.pdf, 20 May 2002.

4GW – Fourth Generation Warfare,” by John Robb, Global Guerillas, http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/globalguerrillas/2004/05/4gw_fourth_gene.html, 8 May 2004.

Two posts, two different perspectives, on Fourth Generation Warfare. The freakishly anti-American John Robb, and the definition-of-American Defense and the Natural Interest, both have posts describing 4GW. If it wasn’t for Mark I would not even recognize the name “Boyd,” so this is clarifying for me too.

Definition
4GW can be defined as a method of warfare that uses the following to achieve a moral victory:

* Undermines enemy strengths (this may seem obvious, but most of modern warfare has involved direct attacks on enemy strengths — find the enemy army and destroy it).
* Exploits enemy weaknesses.
* Uses asymmetric operations (weapons and techniques that differ substantially from opponents).

The strategic/operational/tactical breakdown

• Strategic
– Loss of nation state’s monopoly on war
– A return to a world of cultures and states in conflict
– Internal segmentation/division along ethnic, religious, and special
interest lines within our own society
• Operational
– Seeks major psychological impact (will to fight, public opinion)
– Disproportionate results to investment
• Tactical
– Shift in focus from enemy’s front to his rear
– Use the enemy’s strength against him

4GW is an evolution of what came before

Generations of Warfare
The generational development of warfare can be outlined as:

* First generation — wars of Napoleon, conscription and firearms (the decline of mercenaries).
* Second generation — the US civil war and WW1, firepower and nation-state alignment of resources to warfare.
* Third generation — WW2, maneuver and armored warfare.
* Fourth generation — ad hoc warriors and moral conflict.

The Boyd Conference report puts things more clearly

• 1GW = Age of Napoleon
• 2GW = Age of Firepower
• 3GW = Age of Maneuver and Ideas
• 4GW = Small Independent Action Cells

GG gives a summary of how to “win” fourth generation wars (at least for the other side)

Winning a 4GW conflict
Victory in 4GW warfare is won in the moral sphere. The aim of 4GW is to destroy the moral bonds that allows the organic whole to exist — cohesion. This is done by reinforcing the following (according to Boyd):

* Menace. Attacks that undermine or threaten basic human survival instincts.
* Mistrust. Increases divisions between groups (ie. conservatives and liberals in the US).
* Uncertainty. Undermine economic activity by decreasing confidence in the future.

DNI cites Boyd’s original paper

Idea
• Surface fear, anxiety, and alienation in order to generate many non-cooperative centers of gravity thereby magnify internal friction

AIM
Destroy moral bonds that permit an organic whole to exist.

What can we do?

To combat 4GW requires coordinated response
– Political
– Military
– Economic
– Social
– Religious?

What are the moral problems with this? (Open question)