British Prime Minister Tony Blair has gone on an appeasement spree and no one seems to mind. On Friday, Blair gave a marquis interview to Al-Jazeera's new psychological warfare platform - its English-language channel - to celebrate its launch.
It is unclear whether Blair meant to give the impression in that interview that he agreed with Al-Jazeera's Man-about-Town-in-Britain David Frost's assertion that the US-British war in Iraq is "pretty much a disaster." But Blair has made unmistakably clear that what he is suing for now is an ignominious American-British retreat from Iraq.
In his recent statements and actions, Blair has been unambiguous in communicating his belief that peace in Iraq begins with Israeli surrender to the Palestinians, Hizbullah and Syria. Blair sees in suicidal Israeli retreats from the Golan Heights, Judea and Samaria the key to unlocking the hearts of the mullahs in Teheran and the Ba'athists in Damascus. As Blair sees it, these enemies of Israel, the US, Britain and the entire Free World will suddenly become reliable friends of the non-Jewish West if Israel is left at their tender mercies. As friends, Iran and Syria will allow the US and Britain to surrender Iraq with their heads held high as they hand global jihadists their greatest victory since the Soviet retreat from Afghanistan.
#3
These recent comments from Blair do make one wonder what the hell has changed. Ne's now pivoted 180 degrees and the most amazing things are escaping his lips. He seems determined to outdo Prince Charlie for buffoonery.
#4
Apparently, from what I've read in a french swiss blog comments section, the "disaster" quote is a misquote (an answer to a provocative question by a journalo), spinned out of proportion, and Blair has retracted it.
#5
IMO Dubya taint gonna withdraw or retreat from IRAQ or anywhere, even iff it means mushroom clouds over Him + Washington DC/NPE. There's no need for him or America to, plus he already knows the WOT > for Amer's enemies > about isolating, weakening, destabilizing + defeating iff not destroying America anyways. 9-11/WOT > Amer MUST adopt anti-sovereign, anti-AMer OWG + SOcialism or be destroyed, which Dubya correctly interpreted as America rules the world or it will be destroyed, thus Amer chooses to rule the world. America = God/Allah > EXCUSE for the Radics to justify the CONTINUING, GROTESQUE FAILURE(S) OF ISLAM - ISLAMIC LDRS/OOVTS TO SATISFY THE MATERIALIST + SPIRITUAL ASPIRATIONS/
NEEDS OF ITS BELIEVERS. BLAMELESS LEFT > CUT-AND-RUN IN IRAQ-ME = SAME FOR MUSHROOM?WMD CLOUDS OVER US CITIES = what matters to the Blameless Left is they + Chicken Little stay blameless + alive no matter the costs to themselves or anyone else. STALIN = MAO EXECUTED TRAITORS + WEAKLINGS NO MATTER WHOM OR WHAT REASON OR WHOM BENEFITED, EVEN IFF FOR STALIN-MAO, AND THAT POLICY STAYED POLICY THROUGHOUT THE COLD WAR.
#2
Unfortunately, Phillips is completely correct. This incident in Minneapolis is a good example. We can't tolerate it. These scumbags just keep pressing. Give them an inch, they go for the mile. Brits just kept allowing more and more. I think she's right, they are done for.
Mod's not sure of the source but this is from an email I came across.
Yesterday John Kerry said, "You know education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework, and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well, and if you don't, you get stuck in Iraq...
So I wrote him a letter:
I am a Sergeant in the United States Marine Corps. I am currently on my second tour in Iraq, a tour in which I volunteered for. I speak Arabic and Spanish and I plan to tackle Persian Farsi soon. I have a Bachelors and an Associates Degree and between deployments I am pursuing an M.B.A. In college I was a member of several academic honor societies, including the Golden Key Honor Society. I am not unique among the enlisted troops. Many of my enlisted colleagues include lawyers, teachers, mechanics, engineers, musicians and artists just to name a few. You say that your comments were directed towards the President and not us. If we were stupid Senator Kerry, we might have believed you.
I am not a victim of President Bush. I proudly serve him because he is my Commander and Chief. If it was you who was President, I would serve you just as faithfully. I serve America, Senator Kerry, and I am also providing a service to the good people of Iraq. I have not terrorized them in the middle of the night, raped them or murdered them as you have accused me of before. I am doing my part to help them rebuild. My role is a simple one, but important. You see Senator Kerry, like it or not, we came here and removed a tyrant (who terrorized Iraqis in the middle of the night, and raped them and murdered them). And we have a responsibility to see to it that another one doesn't take his place. The people of Iraq are recovering from an abusive relationship with a terrible government and its going to take some time to help them recover from that. We can't treat this conflict like a microwave dinner and throw a temper tantrum because we feel like its taking too long.
Senator Kerry, you don't have to agree with this war. You don't have to say nice things about those of us who choose to make sacrifices for the rights of every American rather than sit back and simply feel entitled to it. But please Senator Kerry, if you're going to call me a stupid murdering rapist, stick by what you say. Don't tell me that I misunderstood or that you would never insult a veteran because you are one too. Having been there and done that does not give you a free pass to insult me.
My suggestion for you, Senator Kerry, is to remember that your speeches are recorded, and broadcast to us simpletons over here. You may want to write down what you want to say before you say it, maybe have somebody look at it before you say it and tell you what others might hear. Remember that we can't read your mind, if there are any misinterpretations in what you say, it's because you didn't communicate clearly.
Good luck to you Senator Kerry, if nothing else it's always entertaining to watch you try and climb out of the holes that you constantly dig for yourself.
Sincerely,
Somebody who is watching his daughter grow up in photographs so that you can have the right to say whatever you want about him.
#1
We should have been pounding the hell out of Syrian supply routes and depots used by the infiltrators who passed through their country, and we should have certainly bombed Iran oil pipelines so that it cost them tens of millions, if not hundreds of millions, of dollars in lost revenue and repair costs, to show them that we intend to stop their support of the Shiite militias of Moqatar Al-Sadr and the Mahdi Army from destabilizing Iraq, killing Americans, and helping to expand the Iranian empire.
Collateral damage be damned. Take this crippling concept out of military doctrine. If people are helping the enemy, then they should be prepared to die with them, otherwise, get out of the area.
#2
Collateral damage be damned. Take this crippling concept out of military doctrine. If people are helping the enemy, then they should be prepared to die with them, otherwise, get out of the area.
We both jumped on this quote, and rightfully so.
I don't know who this guy is, but it's people like him who should be running things around here.
#5
Well, somebody should send our leaders Powdermilk Biscuits then.
Posted by: Eric Jablow ||
11/21/2006 20:04 Comments ||
Top||
#6
"you were not supposed to be hit" - Well, and I guess post 9-11 we can rephrase that to "BUT-T-T, AMERICA WASN'T SUPPOSED TO BE DESTROYED". America = Amerika, the world-mighty USSA = weak anti-sovereign Amerikan Global SSR/USR, were only suppos to be attacked, and a small numer of people die, few dozen to few 000 to few 00,000 or Milyuuhn(s) tops = YOU KNOW, PATRIOTISM - NOT ANNIHILATED OR 200MILYUHN-PLUS AMERIKANS POLITELY EXTERMINATED, VOLUNTARILY = FORCIBLY. SNIFF, SNIFF, THE TREASON-CRATS, TERROR-CRATS, RETREAT-CRATS, + GLOBAL-CRATS, ETC, MEANT WELL. Just becuz we conspired for 9-11 doesn't mean we intended to hurt anyone, ergo you can't deny me my Social Sceurity + Pension, D ***ng it. BILL CLINTON > MONICA DEFENSE = "I/WE really Really REALLY R-E-A-L-L-Y, D *** YOU, BELIEVE SINCERELY TOLD YOU THE F ****** G *** D**** TRUTH WHEN WE KNOWINGLY + WILFULLY LIED, DECEIVED, AND MISLED YOU". Sniff, sniff, ITS ONLY A MERE, PALTRY, MEANINGLESS 3000 DEAD - no reason for a Traitor = Patriot to lose his job, Pension, or Social Security paid for by the same kind of people he DIDN'T KNOW HE WILFULLY KILLED OR HELPED TO KILL ON 9-11. And when RUSSIA-CHINA say war against America is not only possible but DESIRED, D *** ng IT THEY DON'T MEAN IT???
#2
We have stumbled. If you list what we have, what we've gained and what we've lost since 9/11/01, vs. what Islam has gained and lost since 9/11/01, we have not gained. In that time, many on our side have grown weary of the fight. In that time, some countries have fallen into turmoil and are slipping into chaos and eventually, into the enemy's camp. These include African, Asian, and European countries. There are more mosques in the US today. There are Islamic madrassas in the US today. There are newly converted muslims in the US today. There is NO debate on whether Islam is a death cult masked as a religion, which it is. Islam is also the enemy, so the enemy has not been defined by our illustrious leaders. We have failed to reverse this trend, and we cannot start the winning unless and until we reverse these trends.
I expect, in fact demand that the next president run on a platform of anti-Islam. I fully expect him or her to identify Islam as the murderer of millions of innocent people worldwide and promise that if elected he will work to ban the practice of Islam within our borders.
You don't expect China to allow Islam to undermine their control of the Chinese people, do you ? Japan ? Israel ? Australia ? Vietnam ? India is knee deep in the struggle now, but we can still win. We can still save Europe.
But, we must wake up.
#3
I think it is too little, too late for western Europe. As for the US, we are rapidly sliding into un-win able territory if we keep showing loss of nerve. Our allies will not stay with us and our enemies will be permanently emboldened.
#5
IMO I do NOT believe that Americans have grown "weary of the fight" - the 2006 Dem victory was A VOTE FOR = ABOUT VICTORY, NOT RETREAT/DEFEAT, although it should be of no surprise that the OWG-happy Dems/DemoLeft wants to argue the latter. Iff one believes as GLENN BECK that the true agenda/target was always RADICAL IRAN, then the GOP "LOST" BECUZ DUBYA-GOP FAILED = TOOK TOO LONG TO EMPOWER DEMOCRACY-CENTRIC "REGIME CHANGE" IN IRAN. The prob becomes NOT US-Allied milfors fighting-kiling Radical Islamist terrorists + Radical jihadists in the ME, BUT HOW LONG AMER WARRIORS WILL HAVE TO KEEP DOING IT UNTIL "REGIME CHANGE" DE FACTO TAKES PLACE. This is the true "CHANGE OF DIRECTION" that MAINSTREAM AMERICA, NOTSOMUCH PC POLITICIANS-ACTIVS, WANT. Dubya-GOP lost becuz America saw little to no evidence of regime change taking place inside IRAN, andor BY EXTENS NORTH KOREA. BETTER FOR US MILFORS TO COME HOME THAN FOR US WAFFLECRATS TO TAKE NO ACTION OF ANY SORT AGZ IRAN-NORTH KOREA. As like myself, as said long ago many US milfors have no probs killing Radical Islamist or any other Terrorist/Enemy around the world iff it means NO MORE 9-11's FOR A LONG LONG WHILE, OR EVEN FOREVER. That being said, iff the sponsor of 9-11 = anti-US Terror is RADICAL IRAN + ROGUE ALLIES, THEN US MILFORS SHOULD EXPECT THEIR GOVT=LDRS TO DO SOMETHING TO EITHER DE FACTO EMPOWER DE FACTO REGIME CHANGE OR TO DE FACTO DESTROY IRAN, ETC. PROPERLY + COMPLETELY WITH EXTREME PREJUDICE, i.e. to SOLVE THE PRIMARY PROBLEM(S). And iff any world nations want to interfere agz America, we'll destroy them along with Iran & Co. just for kicks, just becuz we can, and espec just becuz their nation-Govt is stupid enuff to be an ally(s) of the enemy(s) that would harm/ destroy me + mine. America "lost" in SOUTH VIETNAM, INPART, becuz America wasn't willing to take the extra, ALBEIT $$$ COSTLY steps, necessary to protect South Vietnam without invading = having to attack/
invade North Vietnam.
* HENRY FONDA in FORT APACHE > "Captain York, wHEN YOU COMMAND THIS REGIMENT, COMMAND IT!".
IFF WASHINGTON = AMERICA TRULY SINCERELY GENUINELY WANTS A SECURE IRAQ, THEN SECURE IT!
DON'Y SAY WANNA SECURE IRAQ, ETC, BUT THEN DON'T SECURE IT, AND WHEN SHIT HITS THE FAN ASK SOMEBODY ELSE, ANYONE ELSE, FOR ANSWERS-SOLUTIONS SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO ADMIT ANY MISTAKE WAS MADE. TRULY WANNA SECURE THEN SECURE,
2006 > ABOUT IRAN = WANNA DESTABILIZE IRAN FOR DEMOCRACY, THEN DESTABILIZE. WANNA REGIME CHANGE, THEN REGIME CHANGE. Americans = Amer voters, or many of them, already know that iff America doesn't rule the world + future OWG, America will be destroyed. WOT > WAR FOR THE WORLD = AMERICA WINS, OR ITS ENEMIES DO. WOT > ITS YOU vs THEM > YOU/WE DO, OR YOU/WE DIE.
by Dr. David Lazerson
It's getting more challenging by the day to list the positive accomplishments of the world's most pretentious, self-serving and corrupt organization - the so-called United Nations. It seems the only thing that the UN is united on is the anti-West and anti-American platform. Then, of course, there's their main focus for concern - Israel. Despite the fact that Israel is the only democracy in the entire Middle East, surrounded by openly hostile and repressive Muslim countries, the UN continues its ever-downward spiral into meaningless oblivion with the constant anti-Israel nonsense.
Let's take the UN's most recent "urgent" issue. Iran's nuclear ambitions? Not a chance. Hizbullah's blatant violations of the cease-fire in Lebanon? Dream on. The huge, horrific refugee problem and mass killings in Darfur? The UN couldn't be bothered. Al-Qaeda's efforts to obtain nuclear weapons? Some other time. No, they had much more crucial matters to tackle. The UN met to condemn Israel for the killings in Beit Hanoun.
"Recent conflicts remind us that our enemies are human beings whose most dangerous weapons are their abilities to creatively reason and rapidly adapt. Though our enemies can employ multiple forms of warfare in varied combinations, our conventional military preeminence virtually guarantees future adversaries will increasingly adopt the tactics of the insurgent."
-Lieutenant General James Mattis, in the Foreword to Small Unit Leader's Guide to Counterinsurgency
There has been much discussion of the military costs of our engagement in Iraq, but relatively little acknowledgement of the military benefits--not least of which is that by staying in Iraq, the U.S. military is being forced to adapt to irregular warfare.
#1
Adaption? Does that mean having to have three sworn statments every time a weapon is fired or an accidental discharge (AD) takes place? Or limiting 50 Cal engagement to non-personnel targets, ie, suspected IED? Thank you Cdr, 82nd Abn Div for your mods to the ROE. Please, someone correct me if I am wrong.
#2
No amount of 'adaptation' on the distant battlefield will deliver victory till the brass 'adapts' to the home front battlefield with the intent to win.
#5
Procopius 2k nails it on the head. We could win this thing outright if brass just got out and did some "selling" of this war. The lack of response from both the DoD and the White House on the constant MSM snipping and daily body counts wears down the "domestic will". This is as big, or possibly bigger, issue to win than the military aspects. We need to stop fighting to a ceasefire or surrender (pulling out) and fight to freakin' win! No holds barred, that's the only thing these goons understand. ALL else is seen as weakness, no matter how much "adaptation" occurs.
Posted by: BA ||
11/21/2006 11:46 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Muslims embrace a supremacist ideology. Communication can't shake their Koranic obligation to wage jihad terror. They are only humble, when we are arrogant. At war with Muslims, only harsh intelligence and disproportionate retaliation will work. During the Communist insurgency in Malaysia, post WW2, if British intelligence suspected a village held terrorist arms, villagers were forced to watch their homes being torched, so that they could see and hear the hidden arms explode. In saner times, the Israeli Defense Forces would conduct random investigative detentions of large numbers of Paleos. Few would talk, but enough held grudges against Paleo parasites to spill the goods. While the Paleos have no aversion to murdering informants, they were reluctant to kill all who had been detained.
We will only win in Iraq if the costs of jihad terror, are made higher than the benefits of trophy slaughters by the IED and ambush killers. After US troops pick up the dead, locals swarm the kill zones in celebration. The message is: the IED planters can kill at will, with near impunity.
#7
Concur w/your tactics. IMO, The first part of that phase militarily would be to have media blackouts in those Areas or Operations and do what must be done on the ground. Loosen up the ROE as well. Select certain religous and tribal leaders for sanction (even parts of whole tribes need to be liquidated). (i.e. Sadr & his ilk) Well past time to throw off the yoke and be the strong horse.
The problem I forsee now is dealing w/the new Iraqi gov't and all their rampant nepotism and ulterior motivations of putting tribe a head of country. That's a tough one. A lot of my previous paragraph would've been much better done before last December's election. I'm not saying it is too late, merely more tenuous. A good start would be to hit the Iranian border crossings and even bomb into Iranian space when applicable to maintain Iraqi border security.
In my corner of the world, we are used to fire disciplne, and minimizing eimpact except on the target. However, in the "special" community that I make my home, individuals and on-scene commanders are allowed considerable leeway and are expected to exercise proper agressive combat leadership and judgement when it comes to completing the mission. If that means using an M2 against personell, then so be it.
The ROE, modifications and restrictions of the ROE in the Regular forces are stupid and counter productive as they stand now, and some commands have made them even worse. We are not losing this war in terms of the individual combas and smal unit actions, we are losing it in terms of higher HQ hamstrining operaitonal elements of the regular forces from doing what they need to do to *decisively* engage and destory the enemy and bring about the end of his will to fight and resist.
This is what struck me - I considered such tales apocryphal at best, until I talked to an old friend and coupel of your line officers who I met that have recently come home.
The US military, with its political inclinations and incorrect judgement of the nature and psyche of "Haji" is doctrinally losing the war in Iraq. And it starts at the top with the President's refusla to see the nature of our opponent: the Radical Islamic Fundamentalist; and his refusal to demand that his military commanders account for the failures, and that people responsible for failures be sacked and replaced with new blood (ref: the CIA and state department).
In the case of our enemy, there is no such thing as the Religion of Peace and saying so feeds thier fanaticism and will to fight as it appears we are fulfilling thier prophecy that we will surrender to their Will of Allah.
There is no treating them gentle because they see that as weakness and it encourages to press further attacks.
There is no bargaining for quarter - they ask not and will not accept it honestly - only as Hudna, a lie told to buy time to build strength.
Tehy are no less fanatic than the Nazis and the Kamikazes. They have a racist ideaology, backed by thier religious certainties and reinforced by local tribal cultures. The only way to defeat them is to defeat their ideaology. The only way to defeat their ideaology is to inflict punishment so deep and severe as to cause them to have fundamental doubts about all of thier systems, and to kill all those who cannot be made to doubt.
It remains to be see whether we have the political will to do this.
I doubt that we do as of now, and that we ever will until we are hit again so hard as to remove all doubt. And that means mass casualties in the west, perhaps nuclear ones.
I grieve for the world and our lack of clear headed leadership needed to save it with lesser loss of innocent lives.
#11
---Sistani - the last I read about him, he had become discouraged with the deterioration of Iraq and has been less willing than ever to speak about public policy there. He actually seemed to believe in the separation of church & state.
---W has always been unwilling to take firm action against underlings who have performed poorly. He should have fired George Tenet on 9/12/2001, for example.
---Representative governments have always had problems with generating the will to resist a vague threat, which (to about 45% of Americans) is what the current jihad is. If the US is hit by a nuke or just a drastic drop in oil imports, the home front will suffer greatly and might wake up, but even that might not work.
--- I have no doubt about the lack of political will to resist the jihad. Many Americans no longer believe self-defense is a right, much less national defense. Domestically the home front is still very unserious about what's going on in the world, and this has to affect the policy of the Army overseas.
In part 1 of this commentary, I have discussed Muslims' deafening foul-cries of a whole load of injustices against them in countries where they form a minority population as well as issues like Israel-Palestine and the Kashmir conflicts. It has been clearly demonstrated that there is hardly any injustice against the Muslim minorities anywhere in the world. Instead, it is Muslims who commit all sorts of injustice against the non-Muslim minority populations even in highly regarded moderate Muslim countries like Malaysia, Bangladesh and Pakistan. Whilst in Kashmir and Palestine, the problem lies in the failure or unwillingness of the Muslims to live in peace and harmony with the non-Muslim people.
Muslims' allegation of 'injustices' against them do not just end with countries where they are a minority. Muslims are also oppressed, in their claims, in countries where they are even a majority, such as in Afghanistan and Iraq that were invaded by the UN-approved coalition and the US/UK-lead multilateral coalition, respectively. It does not stop there; the Muslims are also oppressed in countries like Saudi Arabia because of it's hosting foreign troops for security and stability reasons. The foul cry of injustice of the latter type has received an overwhelming support from the entire Muslim community and their gullible non-Muslim allies and has been heavily exploited by extremist groups like Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda. I will dissect these issues in this current part of the essay.
Continued on Page 49
When four young Muslims unleashed a suicidal terrorist attack on a bus and underground trains that crippled the London transportation system and killed 52 innocent commuters on July 7, 2005 (7/7 attack), Muslim leaders of UK came out in force to blame the UK government's foreign policy for the horrendous carnage. The leftists and liberal intellectuals and political leaders quickly joined the chorus of blaming the injustice in Afghanistan and Iraq for the attack. When PM Blair summoned a meeting with the Muslim leaders (in which he had obviously pressurized them about their violent tone over the years), overnight they changed their tune that there is no justification for terrorism. What was today a justified action in Islamic ideals, the next day became totally unjustified. They even found a verse in the Koran to discredit the horrendous terrorist attack which was a creditable act a day earlier.
Over one year on, when the chief of MI5 in the UK published an intelligence report on the 10th of November, 2006 about the massive terrorist plots being pursued by the homegrown Islamic extremists in the UK, the media again became flooded with commentaries and expert opinions on how the injustice of UK government's involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan is putting the country at the wrath of these homegrown Muslim terrorists. The message one gets from these commentaries is that the UK government is at fault and these terrorists have a justifiable cause to avenge the injustices unleashed by the US and UK lead coalition in Iraq and UN-lead forces in Afghanistan .
Continued on Page 49
The Atlas Shrugs babe blogger posts some atrocity pictures from Indonesia, for the interest of her fellow Ayn Rand followers. Don't look at them if you are squeemish, but they should be posted in context of the President's visit to that Religion of Peace country and beneficiary of US aid. What is in the pictures, depicts exactly what would happen to me if I attempted Christian mission work in the Islamic republic. Those who looked should ask why the West doesn't react to murders by Muslims, while our leaders cry over editorial cartoons that the Koran Klown Klan finds offensive.
As the Baker/Hamilton club considers America's options in the Middle East, its members would do well to browse two currently hot books on counterinsurgency, the better to understand the way our strategists are thinking.
The first is Counterinsurgency Warfare: Theory and Practice (1964) by the late David Galula, a French commander who fought in Algeria. It has been reissued with a dandy introduction by an US Army lieutenant-colonel, John Nagl, the author of Learning to Eat Soup with a Knife: Counterinsurgency Lessons from Malaya and Vietnam. Both are stimulating, thoughtful and serious.
Galula and Nagl agree that insurgencies are revolutionary wars and that the outcome will be determined by control of, and support from the population.
This does not mean, however, that counterinsurgents should concentrate on message and propaganda. Galula is in the Lyndon Johnson camp: if you've got them by the balls, the hearts and minds will generally follow. More on this in a minute.
#1
Very good, thanks a5089.
Rather than play their game, I prefer to act like a cornered rat. Kill all of the males and convert the females and remove all mosques and korans.
We can invent a 'religion' which does all of the slaughtering, then when victory is ours, banish this deadly 'religion' as we had banished Islam.
It's a simple matter of using their methods against them, but with our battlefield superiority.
Disclaimer, we are so so sorry that all of your men are gone, really really sorry. Please don't bother to call, our complaint lines are busy.
#2
2006 Elex > was about WHEN "Regime Change" will begin in Radical Iran + Rogue states. WAS NOT A VOTE FOR RETREAT NOR WITHDRAWAL NOR "RE-DEPLOYMENT" NOR AGZ DUBYA'S POLICY OF PRE-EMPTION, ETC. US milfors can keep killing the Spetzies anywhere as long as there is a parallel oper to begin regime change. THE VOTERS WANT TO SEE DESTABILIZATION + REGIME CHANGE ASAP.
#3
2006 Elex > was about WHEN "Regime Change" will begin in Radical Iran + Rogue states. WAS NOT A VOTE FOR RETREAT NOR WITHDRAWAL NOR "RE-DEPLOYMENT" NOR AGZ DUBYA'S POLICY OF PRE-EMPTION, ETC. US milfors can keep killing the Spetzies anywhere as long as there is a parallel oper to begin regime change. THE VOTERS WANT TO SEE DESTABILIZATION + REGIME CHANGE ASAP.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
