| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| Terror's New Homeland |
| 2006-06-01 |
| By RALPH PETERS May 31, 2006 -- THIRTEEN years ago, our troops won a lopsided battlefield victory in Mogadishu. President Clinton declared defeat and pulled out. We've been paying the price in terror ever since - and it might be about to soar. When it comes to strategy and military affairs, folk wisdom is worth a century of scribbling theorists. Your father could have told you how to handle the Mogadishu warlords: "If you start something, son, finish it." |
| Posted by:Steve White |
| #6 God sent Jimma Carter and Slick Willy Clinton to destroy the democrat party. They did well, but failed to complete their missions. It's up to us to finish the job. Happy hunting. |
| Posted by: wxjames 2006-06-01 14:35 |
| #5 The Rangers were reloading and planning to go out the next day and systematically destroy Aidid's forces (and we now know, Al Qaeda Arabs) and anyone else who got in their way. That is until Clinton called them off. If the Rangers were let loose, the World Trade Center towers, embassies, and thousands of Americans would probably still be alive. Clinton, Aspen, Murtha. May you all rot in Hell. |
| Posted by: ed 2006-06-01 13:28 |
| #4 wrt my above post, one could use muslim and arab interchangeably. |
| Posted by: Broadhead6 2006-06-01 12:48 |
| #3 In my experience from the time I was a young lad on, when dealing w/the arab mind: if an arab hits you on the cheek you turn and smash him on his cheek twice as hard. |
| Posted by: Broadhead6 2006-06-01 12:47 |
| #2 Wretchard said today that the enemy was "failed states." ("Personally I believe the underlying cause of the War lies in the breakdown of the Third World, as manifested in the multiplication of failing states: that is my definition of the enemy.") Failed states are a growth medium, not the pathogen. I think that there are three enemies: 1. Teeror funding states. Really there are only two of these -- Saudi Arabia and Iran -- because those are the only two that have the money and ideology to make a difference. 2. Salafists and Khomeinist terror networks. 3. Secular/Islamist nuclear proliferation network. All three are networked among themselves also. Networked enemies are hard as hell to defeat. It's also hard as hell for them to take decisive action. So wars with them tend to be wars of exhaustion. We could attack the networks indirectly, by directly and decisively attacking the funding states/nodes and drying up their operating cash. Until we summon the will to do that, we are stuck fighting two wars. The first war is the so-called long war. We will fight the Islamist terror networks in Somalia, Afghanistan, Gaza and Judea, Iraq, and anywhere else they pop up. This war will probably drag on until the money that funds the Islamists dries up. What worries me about the second war against the nuclear network, is that we are moving away from the force structure that we will need to win it. At some point, we are going to have to take nukes away from fairly crazed groups and individuals. Unless we are going to nuke them, we will need survivable forces that can mass and disperse rapidly and fight on a battlefield where nuclear weapons are being used tactically. Unfortunately we are dismantling much of the heavy iron and support structure that you need to win that sort of battle. |
| Posted by: 11A5S 2006-06-01 01:08 |
| #1 US defeat or withdrawal unto isolationism > will be interpreted by Amer-West's enemies as a de facto decline in US power and capability, to include ability to protect andor lead the West. IT MEANS ENEMY ARMIES BENT ON ARMED CONQUEST AND VIOLENT DESTRUCTION WILL SHOW UP INEVITABLY IN AMERICA'S BACKYARD, IN CONUS-NORAM, AND PAYING OR ECON REWARDING THEM TO NOT ATTACK AMERICA-WEST IS NOT GOING TO STOP THEM, NOT EVEN IFF AMERICA DID COME TO ACCEPT SOCIALISM. America must be LeftSocialist, Non-Independent and Non-Self Governing, Non-Sovereign, and under Socialist OWG where American is just one weak nation amongst all others, NOT SOCIALIST, INDEPENDENT, SELF-GOVERNING, SOVEREIGN, and OUTSIDE OF OWG OR NOT UNDER OWG!? VOLUNTARILY = FORCIBLY. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2006-06-01 00:20 |