What little is left of Venezuela's democracy has taken a literal beating from President Hugo Chavez's uniformed goon squads -- again.
Police used a variety of weapons, from water cannons to plastic bullets, last week to disperse hundreds of student protesters who refuse to knuckle under to an increasingly desperate and unpopular president determined to remain in power at all costs.
While the president and his followers were celebrating the anniversary of the failed 1992 coup that first brought him to national attention, the students were protesting the deterioration of their country. It wasn't the first time that Mr. Chavez has resorted to force to quell peaceful political opponents, but the frustration level inside the country is rising as Venezuela's political and economic situation goes from bad to worse.
Rolling blackouts, currency devaluation and price inflation (the worst in Latin America), water shortages and scarce commodities -- this is what 11 years of a Chavez presidency have produced.
As if to underline the utter befuddlement of Mr. Chavez's inept government, an advisory team from Cuba, of all places, was brought in to improve the dismal energy program. Cuba? That's like asking Scott Rothstein for advice on legal ethics.
The problem with PDVSA, the oil company, as Venezuelans well know, is that Mr. Chavez turned it into a sinecure for political cronies, destroying its once admirable efficiency and productive value. Only by putting the experts back in charge can it hope to recover, but President Chavez is not about to hand authority over to anyone who is not a known loyalist.
The problems at PDVSA are emblematic of what's wrong with Venezuela and why his Bolivarian revolution is in trouble. Mr. Chavez has run the economy, and the country, into the ground, but that hasn't stopped him from making trouble wherever he can.
As the streets of Caracas were in turmoil, the U.S. director of national intelligence, former Admiral Dennis Blair, was giving Congress an unvarnished assessment of Mr. Chavez's presidency that underlines the danger he represents to the entire region.
He has cultivated friendships in all the wrong places, beginning with Iran, spent $6 billion to buy weapons from Russia, and provided covert support to the terrorist Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC).
All of this spells disaster for the people of Venezuela -- and the hemisphere. It can be avoided only by the concerted effort of other countries in the region to pressure Mr. Chavez to moderate his behavior and adhere to the rules of democracy.
Isn't that what the Organization of American States is for? Mr. Chavez has undermined, if not destroyed Venezuela's once vibrant, if imperfect, democracy. He has bullied his neighbors, fueled a regional arms race and brought political tensions inside the country to a boiling point. The region's leaders shouldn't wait for domestic bloodshed or a cross-border conflict to move them to act.
#3
Hollywood needs to send them TARP (Terrorist Abetting Revolutionary President) money.
Posted by: Jack Salami ||
02/09/2010 11:16 Comments ||
Top||
#4
and Bill Ayers has been there a number of times cheerleading for Chavez
also Kevin Spacey and Spike Lee
Ed Asner and Harry Bellafonte and Naomi Campbell
and of course Jesse Jackson has made pro Chavez speeches, but only in the US
Posted by: lord garth ||
02/09/2010 11:19 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Dear Venezuela,
Socialism has been tried in many places. It has never worked in any of them. The places that still cling to it are in terrible condition with poverty and shortages of basic necessities common.
Nothing improves people's lives like unleashing individual choice. And really, capitalism IS a sort of socialism in that though millions of individual choices, the greater good is served.
#6
I know it may not have turned out as well as it could have, like every other socialist government, but maybe we should let Bambi give it a try here in the good ol' U. S. of A.. I'm sure we'll be the lone exception. Somehow.
#1
I didn't get halfway through the article before I was convinced it was a crock of bull$$$$. Gut the military, "end the war" without gaining victory, and protect every social program the US has ever enacted - just the thing to balance the budget. What nutcases.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
02/09/2010 16:54 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Any reference to 'empires' guarantees its leftwing horsesh!t.
World trade depends on the US military, aided by a few others like the UK and India, keeping the sea lanes open. China can't protect its trade routes to Europe. Europe can't protect its oil lifeline from the Gulf.
Imagine half the world's oceans plagued by Somali style piracy.
The writer is in fact right that reducing the military would be good for the US economy although for completely the wrong reasons. The real reason is that the US economy has a much smaller trade dependance than other developed economies.
#4
reducing the military would be good for the US economy
The US Navy is certainly doing its part. And the Air Force. Now if only the Army would get the message. But it's hard to reduce when you're actually involved in a war.
#6
What they don't realize is that even if Iraq and Afghanistan go away - we will still be 'at war' - a war which has been going on for some 1,400 years.
#7
WAFF > GERMANY'S CHOICE [ON GREECE|THE SITUATION IN EUROPE IS DIRE]. Let GREECE collapse; versus SAVING GREECE HENCE ALSO TO SAVE THE EU + GERMANY'S TROUBLED EU, GEOPOL CREDIBILITY???
* SAME > GERMANY IS ABOUT TO BUY [Econ annex?] GREECE???
* PAKISTANI DEFENCE FORUM > EUROPE RISKS ANOTHER GLOBAL DEPRESSION [depend on UN IMF vs. EU Central Bank].
#1
Brussels has forced the Greek government to present a plan to drastically reduce its budget deficit from 13% to 3% by the end of 2012. The plan will cost the Greeks blood, sweat and tears. It includes a freeze on civil service wages and the postponement of the retirement age. Brussels has invoked new EU powers under Article 121 of the Lisbon Treaty, which allow it to reshape the structure of GreeceÂ’s pensions, healthcare, labor market and private commerce.
The Commission fears a backlash from the Greek unions, who might organize strikes and bring down the Greek government.
What Greek government, your sovereignty was ceded to the EU, you are now vassels in a Neo-EU feudalism, a medieval Post Modern Europe, you have entered into mutual obligations with a monarchy "Perestroika Troika" comrades.
...Greek targets will be enforced strongly and that, if necessary, even more draconian measures will be taken.
And what are these more draconian measures pray tell? Crushing economic sanctions? Forced removal of the government? Force of Arms?
Behind every dictator is always the force of arms as the ultimate persuader. Of course the EU & force of arms is probably an oxymoron but I can easily see this shattering the myth of the EU one way or another. The question is what's next?
#5
Greece's government spending is a perfect example of the people voting themselves bread and circusses for decades without any care about finding the money to pay for it. At some point someone had to say no. The major foreign banks recently refused to buy up Greek government paper, as I recall, and now the EU is telling them what they need to do to remain in the euro. They can choose not to, but then they'll have to go back to the drachma, with all that entails.
It was exactly because they foresaw this kind of nonsense that the German voters did not want to be part of the euro in the first place. Ants do not appreciate grasshoppers, especially in the middle of winter.
#6
It's worse than I realized. Not merely innocent thoughtlessness, but deliberate fraud and gaming the system. From the article:
Otmar Issing, a German economist and a founding member of the European Central Bank (ECB), points out that successive Greek governments have falsified the Greek budget figures for years, in an attempt to deceive Brussels and the eurozone monetary authorities, such as the ECB. What is happening today is the result of “years of violating rules, cheating on figures, financing consumption, public and private by huge debts – this is a way which has to be stopped,” Issing told the BBC.
#11
"years of violating rules, cheating on figures, financing consumption, public and private by huge debts"
Sounds like D.C. >:-(
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
02/09/2010 21:41 Comments ||
Top||
#12
Sounds like any government and political establishment that has gone without significant challenge for years.
Markets - if allowed to work - bring what Schumpeter called 'creative destruction' to companies that become hidebound. Such companies often build alliances with regulators to avoid this discipline and maintain market share/profit anyway.
Elections - if truly free and the result of an engaged populce - bring accountability to officeholders. Officeholders in turn often build alliances with large dollar contributors, facilitated by a professional election management industry and enabled by a complicit press, to avoid election and policy accountability.
Every once in while we need the equivalent of 'creative destruction' to break up those alliances. We're way overdue, and therefore both the cost and the disruption involved are much greater than they could have been had we not as a nation grown lazy and complacent, or just busy at work and with the kids and unaware of the looming dangers.
A new poll is out that's absolute catnip for the members of the California political and media establishment who like to say the ignorant public demands services via ballot initiatives but then refuses to pay for them with higher taxes.
The Public Policy Institute of California survey found residents don't have a good sense of where state revenue comes from or what the state spends most of its money on. What does this unsurprising revelation translate into when interpreted by the Los Angeles Times? A snarky news story that said Californians who disdain our leaders and institutions “should save a little distaste for ourselves. ... Those who favored the comics pages in decades past may recall the words of the possum philosopher Pogo: ‘We have met the enemy, and he is us.'' Other coverage had a similar tone.
This is nonsense – easily refuted nonsense.
For starters, the vast majority of ballot initiatives dictating state spending didn't spontaneously emerge as a result of voter concerns. They came from special interests.
Then there's the fact that these initiatives aren't remotely the straitjackets they're made out to be. Nearly all their spending requirements can be bypassed with the same two-thirds vote it takes to approve the budget. As the Legislative Analyst's Office noted in September, “Despite these restrictions, the Legislature maintains considerable control over the state budget – particularly over the longer term.'
Then there's the fact that the establishment argument builds off the bogus premise that petulant voters have kept California's taxes artificially low via Proposition 13 and through their support of the constitutional mandate that taxes can only be raised by a two-thirds vote.
But the truth is California is among the most heavily taxed states in the union despite these obstacles. Its sales, income and gasoline taxes are among the very highest in the nation. Its corporate tax is the highest in the West. And even with Proposition 13, its property taxes are about the national average.
Why does the media's echoing of the political establishment's claptrap matter? Because it reinforces a narrative that holds that Sacramento is dysfunctional because the public is dysfunctional; therefore, there's no point in even trying to fix the status quo.
This is elitist garbage. Sacramento is dysfunctional first and foremost because legislators with gerrymandered districts face few if any repercussions for mismanaging the state. Their political futures, however, are at risk if they get in the way of the special interests who have such power in light-voting primary elections for open seats.
This results in such policy atrocities as the bipartisan vote by the Legislature last summer to promise a future $11.2 billion payoff to schools even though the state is in the middle of a long-running fiscal catastrophe. The California Teachers Association said, “Jump,' and lawmakers replied, “How high?'
So Pogo's philosophy doesn't apply to California's politics. But surveying the wreckage that is Sacramento, a Charlie Brown phrase comes to mind: Good grief!
#1
As one on the inside, I know this is hooey and agencies empire-build based upon the specious notion that it's to serve the public.
Posted by: Jack Salami ||
02/09/2010 11:08 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Its time California had a Constitutional Convention - scrapped the old Socialist order and re-established the "Republic of California" i.e. The Bear Flag Republic. Allow no presently seated Democrat or Republican office holder to attend the proceedings, in fact preclude their participation in any present or future order of government.
Consider feeding the existing politicians to the bears - polar, grizzly, or panda.
#3
Back in 1978 the California Teachers Association just about had a cow when Proposition 13 passed. One good thing about ballot initiatives is that it gives the people a direct control over their government. Old folks on fixed incomes were being taxed out of their homes but the legislature would have never passed Prop 13, or anything remotely like it, in a million years. It was great fun telling them to piss off.
Nothing good in this state would ever happen if it weren't for the ballot initiatives. That's why I believe the state legislature should be dissolved...permanently.
As for the CTA, they do more to hold our students back than anything else. It's not just the waste of tax dollars, I could forgive them for that, it's the incredible waste of the students' time. Years and years and years are spent on totally irrelevant subjects before they get around to teaching anything that might help the kids get a job, if ever. It is a monstrous criminal enterprise. You can say it's not against the law but that's just because they have so much influence with the legislators.
#4
Ebbang: Prop 13 was a great thing, but too often now, our CA electorate falls for crap like the mandatory funding level for schools, bullet trains, First Five, etc. All in the name of "the children" or "hey, it won't cost us anything because it's paid for by bonds!". The LA Times, Sac Bee, et al, should be shut down as propaganda outlets for the Donks, CTA...actually, on further review, they should be allowed to founder in their red ink.
Posted by: Frank G ||
02/09/2010 19:41 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Nothing good in this state would ever happen if it weren't for the ballot initiatives.
Yeah, keep tellin' yourself that. Prop 13 was as bad as all the other props the people pass to reward the party with the better scare ads. All the while politicians get rich doing nothing about the state's problems because they know when it really gets bad the sheeple will decide it for them in a prop. Caliphornia is broken. Between the teachers, prison guards and illegals, I'm very doubtful it can be fixed.
#6
Prop 13 was bad for several reasons. One, it took the ability to raise revenues out of the hands of the municipalities. They were now beholden to Sacramento, getting their budget deficits paid out of the state general fund. Sacramento could and did use this power to further its own agendas. Two, every municipality now had to tax property at the same rate. There was now nothing to differentiate a good town with good services from a lousy town with poor services. Whereas there were solidly middle class towns with great schools before Prop 13, afterward, only the wealthiest burgs could afford great schools. Three, services really did go in the toilet after Prop 13. I was a 13 year old in one of those solidly middle class bergs when it passed. Things went downhill rapidly. Four, the housing market was distorted. Due to the way Prop 13 was written, the only way a municipality could revalue property to its market value for purposes of taxation was after a sale. As folks who owned began to realize that they were paying way under the market for property, they held on to it for longer, freezing new buyers out of the market. All of you folks constantly kvetching and carping about all those Californians who came to your state and messed everything up? They were my friends and classmates who couldn't find anything even remotely affordable in state. (And when the oldsters were ready to move to Sun City, they held on to the property for the rental value and often rented to immigrants, illegal or not.)
In my opinion, California's tax rate is so high precisely because of Prop 13. As evidence, I offer all of the other states that never limited property taxes that have low overall tax rates and which are doing well.
My solution? Get rid of the initiative system. As the Founders understood, even the people need checks and balances and the initiative system rips away those checks and balances.
And speaking of special interests, Howard Jarvis, the hero of the Prop 13 crowd, was a lobbyist for the Los Angeles Apartment Owners Association.
#7
I was 18 when it passed, and working as a student engineer, making around 4 bucks (IIRC) over minimum wage, but gaining valuable experience, when Prop 13 passed. I was laid off. You'd think I'd be an anti-Prop-13 fan. Most long-term homeowners could not afford the escalation of property taxes based on equity they never saw til they sold. The state's revenue increased hugely, especially with the hold-n-sell attitude. A 60 year old homeowner, wishing to stay in their home til death, should NOT be taxed out by increased property taces based on a theoretical sale price. Chris Reed at the SD UT blogs on this frequently and links to others. Prop 13 DID NOT cause the State's funding problem The dramatic increase in spending in the 90's and 00's did
Posted by: Frank G ||
02/09/2010 21:10 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Frank, I agree with you that the current spending problems have nothing to do with Prop 13. Maybe it is misplaced nostalgia on my part, but Prop 13 made a great state a less great and played havoc on my generation. The problem with old people being taxed out of their homes could have been fixed with simpler legislation. Home prices almost doubled after the '73 oil shock (for no reason that I have ever been able to discern) and the resulting tax bills hurt many. My bottom line is that the initiative system has created far more problems than it has fixed. Prop 13 will always be for me the symbol of what is wrong with initiatives. It was created by landlords, for landlords, and created many more landlords -- often absentee and not particularly concerned with the kinds of tenants they brought in so long as they paid rent. A republic needs small freeholders... not landlords.
#9
I'd be more credible if I said TAXES, not taces. Jeebus. Landlords have their place. Until you can scrape together a decent downpayment, they are your "home" source. Even multifamily holdings get re-appraised and taxed at new levels on change of ownership, and most have changed since '00, ith consolidation happening. Reed's blog shows that they net revenue to the state due to Prop 13 has still been a plus - they just overspent it
Posted by: Frank G ||
02/09/2010 22:05 Comments ||
Top||
#10
More revenue is great. The problem is that the additional revenue was mostly from income tax and sales tax and mostly went to Sacramento and got put into the General Fund. So power migrated from the cities and counties to the state. Sacramento rebated some of the money back to the municipalities, but it always came with strings attached and was distributed according to whatever political theory was in vogue in Sacramento, not what according to the productivity and wealth of the community. Since the political theory most often in vogue was equality of outcomes, you end up with a lot of very mediocre schools... which then become bad schools as illegal immigrants began to flood in.
Additionally, no government in our country uses GAAP rules, so the General Fund can be raided for whatever. Municipalities with their own property tax revenue streams are the closest we have to legitimate "accounts" in the accounting sense. Therefore, the most transparent and efficient way to manage funds is to put the smaller unit of government in charge.
Landlordism, high state income taxes, out of control bidding by municipalities for malls and big box retailers (to increase sales tax revenue), were just a few of the bad results of Prop 13. Then there was all of the daily stuff that directly affected my generation: the end of summer school, the end of after school programs, libraries closed four days a week (yes I know, these all came back after a while... using state money), an artificially constricted housing market, It was bad law. Initiatives are a part of the old Progressive movement that need to go away.
Administration disrupts terrorists' plots, takes fight to them abroad. Pretty good coming from the Administration that is let by the Lecturer/Scolder/Pedantic in Chief.
Politics should never get in the way of national security. But too many in Washington are now misrepresenting the facts to score political points, instead of coming together to keep us safe. But too many in Washington are now misrepresenting the facts to score political points, instead of coming together to keep us safe. Yes they are!
Politics should never get in the way of national security. Agreed but then "You never let a serious crisis go to waste."
Immediately after the failed Christmas Day attack, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was thoroughly interrogated and provided important information. Senior counterterrorism officials from the White House, the intelligence community and the military were all actively discussing this case before he was Mirandized and supported the decision to charge him in criminal court. Mirandized: Oh, The Catch and Release Program (CARP or is it CRAP)?
The most important breakthrough occurred after Abdulmutallab was read his rights, which the FBI made standard policy under Michael Mukasey, President Bush's attorney general. The critics who want the FBI to ignore this long-established practice also ignore the lessons we have learned in waging this war: Terrorists such as Jose Padilla and Saleh al-Mari did not cooperate when transferred to military custody, which can harden one's determination to resist cooperation.
It's naive to think that transferring Abdulmutallab to military custody would have caused an outpouring of information. There is little difference between military and civilian custody, other than an interrogator with a uniform. The suspect gets access to a lawyer, and interrogation rules are nearly identical. No. First the CIA extracts information and then turns the terrorist over to the military. These terrorists are non-uniformed combatants without a country and not entitled to the Geneva Convention or our Constitution.
Would-be shoe bomber Richard Reid was read his Miranda rights five minutes after being taken off a plane he tried to blow up. The same people who criticize the president today were silent back then. The same people who criticize the president today were silent back then. I don't think so--at least not at the Burg.
Cries to try terrorists only in military courts lack foundation. There have been three convictions of terrorists in the military tribunal system since 9/11, and hundreds in the criminal justice system -- including high-profile terrorists such as Reid and 9/11 plotter Zacarius Moussaoui. Cries to try terrorists only in military courts lack foundation? When the United States entered World War II, Adolf Hitler ordered the remaining German saboteurs to wreak havoc on the country. The responsibility for carrying this out was given to German Intelligence (Abwehr). In June 1942, eight agents were recruited and divided into two teams: the first, commanded by George John Dasch, with Ernst Peter Burger, Heinrich Heinck and Richard Quirin; the second, under the command of Edward Kerling, with Hermann Neubauer, Werner Thiel and Herbert Haupt. All eight German agents were tried, convicted by the Military Commission, with six men sentenced to death. President Roosevelt approved the sentences. The constitutionality of the military commissions was upheld by the Supreme Court in Ex parte Quirin and the six men were executed by electrocution on August 8.
This administration's efforts have disrupted dozens of terrorist plots against the homeland and been responsible for killing and capturing hundreds of hard-core terrorists, including senior leaders in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and beyond -- far more than in 2008. We need no lectures about the fact that this nation is at war. Are you sure the Administration hasn't hired Baghdad Bob?
Politically motivated criticism and unfounded fear-mongering only serve the goals of al-Qaeda. Terrorists are not 100-feet tall. Nor do they deserve the abject fear they seek to instill. They will, however, be dismantled and destroyed, by our military, our intelligence services and our law enforcement community. And the notion that America's counterterrorism professionals and America's system of justice are unable to handle these murderous miscreants is absurd. Nor do they deserve the abject fear they seek to instill. Does anyone really believe this statement? Why not experience a little (or a lot) fear? Maybe they should know some fear. John Brennan is Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism.
#1
And the notion that America's counterterrorism professionals and America's system of justice are unable to handle these murderous miscreants is absurd.
Thanks for the Bureau and DOJ pitch. How are we coming with the MAJ Hasan investigation?
#3
I just Googled John Brennan, and discovered the "author" is Obumble's top counter-terrorism advisor. We are DEFINITELY in a world of hurt - or heading there at warp speed.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
02/09/2010 17:13 Comments ||
Top||
#1
Thanks Tipper for bring this Pajamas Media article to light.
PM illustrates atleast a decade and a half of inappropriate UN appointments, corrupt administrative practices, and fraudulent financial activities all in the name of a "Climate Change Theory".
#8
Silly Free Radical! Awwwwwwwww, indeed. No, our Oscar is a British soldier, possibly retired, but with an adventurous past. He started commenting not too long ago, and generally has something interesting or amusing to say.
While the war of words is escalating around the clock between Israel on the one side and Hezbollah and Syria on the other, analysts in the Middle East and Europe strongly believe that war is inevitable and will break out within a few months.
Certainly Israeli arms stockpiling seems to indicate their concerns, as does Hizb'allah and Syrian bombast. Not to mention reports of Shiite villagers leaving the area.
In this scary context, senior Lebanese sources told the Saudi daily Al-Okaz that Hezbollah has announced emergency readiness in all areas of the country where it operates.
Thus admitting the division of Lebanon into Lesser Lebanon and Hizb'allahstan. No doubt the IDF strategists and PM Netanyahu have some ideas what to do about that.
Don't count on Israel to honor that division. I certainly wouldn't in their shoes. Lebanon admitted the Hezbies into their government. They have cabinet seats. That means Lebanon is responsible for whatever the the Hezbies do, and the Lebanese government and other factions need to be made aware of that in no uncertain terms.
Senior figures of the organization were asked to exercise greater caution in their movements amid fears they would be targeted by Israel.
*Ring, ring* "Hello?"
"Israel calling. Do you have Prince Albert in a can?"
Hezbollah's leaders are bragging that they are capable of defeating, humiliating and destroying Israel's war machine.
Even more so than last time. No doubt Iran has promised to rebuild damaged homes like last time, too, and just look at how shiny the rubble is now!
Meanwhile, the verbal sparring between Jerusalem and Damascus continued over the weekend, even if in lower tones. The official Syrian newspaper Tishrin said in an editorial that "the threats from Israel make it clear that it intends to initiate a new war whose limits are unknown." The editorial added that "death and destruction may occur if Israel responds to the logic of some of its leaders, in whose veins flows crime. Damascus is ready for any path that Israel chooses, whether it is peace or war."
Damascus is ready for unlimited war? Seriously?
The editorial's author is the newspaper's editor-in-chief, who wrote that the "logic of war and threats is the dominant logic in Israel. Talk of peace is chatter void of substance that is mere media propaganda. There is no real political decision for peace in the Zionist entity, despite promises of this, on the basis of restoring rights to their rightful owners."
Since the Zionists are the rightful owners by international law, that statement has null value.
Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Moallem last week threatened that an Israeli attack against Syria would be total war. His Israeli counterpart, Avigdor Lieberman, warned that Syrian President Bashar Assad and his family would not remain in power as a result of the next war.
In a report written by Hamid Ghoriafi, Middle East analyst and journalist, that was published today by the Kuwaiti Daily Al-Seyassah, Ghoriafi drew a very dim picture for the whole situation and predicted a very devastating imminent war that will be according to the Israelis the last one with on their northern borders. Below are some excerpts from this report:
*Reliable European intelligence reports in London unveiled on Monday an extensive secretive Israeli ongoing operation to evacuate hundreds of families living in the Galilee settlements adjacent to the border with Lebanon to safer locations inside Israel, especially west Jerusalem, Tel Aviv and surrounding areas. These families are transported by trucks and buses and priority is given to families with many children, the elderly and the physically disabled. The evacuees' houses are put under the control of the Northern Military Command for reasons not yet known. "
*A German report that was recently distributed to those concerned in the European Union capitals revealed that there is a serious Israeli military intention to reoccupy the former border strip inside Lebanon with a distance of 5 to 6 kilometers. This strip was known as the "security zone" before the Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon in May 2000. Initially it was established in the aftermath of the Israeli invasion of Lebanon and occupation of her capital in 1982. The aim was to create a semi-demilitarized zone along the area of Lebanese Christian and some Shiite villages that are scattered near the Israeli border in a bid to safeguard the Jewish settlements from shelling and infiltration.
*The same intelligence report quoted Israeli Defense Ministry sources saying that their military engineers have finished putting designs for building two military airports inside the Lebanese "new security zone", which will stretch temporally up to the Litani River in the early stages of the war. This area has been under the control of the UNIFIL troops since 2006. Israel expects that the UNIFIL troops will withdraw in case the war breaks out. The first airport will be built on the middle and eastern region boundaries towards Shabaa Farms, Mount Hermon; and the second in the western sector region towards the coastal town of Naqoura.
All technical and logistic equipments required for the erection of these two airports are already in locations situated behind the front lines of the Israeli army that is extensively present on the northern border. Analysts say that this kind of preparations gives the impression that Israel is definitely planning for a long-term occupation to the south Litani area. The Israeli occupation accordingly will not endonce the coming military operations cease."
If true, the correct terminology would be conquest, not occupation, with the possibility of a Gaza-style border fence going up on the Litani side of the security zone. Perhaps the Egyptians can build it for them, once they finish building the fence on their section of the Gaza border.
*The report quoted the Israeli defense sources saying that the war will actually begin in the northern region of the Litani Rriver and all though the Bekaa Valley and eastern Lebanese mountainous areas that separate Syria and Lebanon because the presence of Hezbollah in the south of the Litani is no longer as heavy as it was in 2006. The UNIFIL troops took control of this region after the 2006 war. The report disclosed that the backbone of the coming Israeli war will be based on two plans:
The first plan is for extensive jet plane aerial bombardment of Hezbollah's scattered military weaponry caches and missile bases with phosphorus and cluster bombs,
Trying to implicate war crimes (phosphorus bombs, really?) here...
replicating the kind of devastation the southern suburbs of Beirut (Hezbollah's ministate) suffered during the 2006 war.
The second plan is to execute for the first time, air-landing operations behind Hezbollah's lines after weakening and destroying its bases in the south, Bekaa Valley and Beirut.
These two plans in contrast to the 2006 war aim to practically occupy many Lebanese areas and locations as was the situation in the 1982 invasion led by Ariel Sharon, who occupied Beirut and its surrounding mountainous and coastal areas.
*British sources claimed that another European intelligence report prepared by the UNIFIL French contingent in southern Lebanon revealed that the Israeli army command has made ready another SOS war scenario to deal with Syrian and the Palestinian troops who might cross from Syria and enter the Bekaa Valley equipped with advanced anti-aircraft missiles to hunt the Israeli jets. The scenario speaks about Israeli war inside Syria in a bid to completely destroy these troops. Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Moallem last week threatened that an Israeli attack against Syria would lead to total war.
And what, pray tell, does Mr. Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Moallem think total war is? I'd bet a great deal of money that in this context it does not mean that the entire Arab world sends armies to attack Israel,no matter what might be said at embassy cocktail parties.
The report said that 60% of the Israeli air force has already been put on full alert and is well prepared for action on the first day of the coming war in an extensive attack on the Lebanese. Israel is planning to fulfill all its objectives and finish the war within a few weeks. The remaining 40% of the Israeli air force will be ready to join in swiftly and effectively if the Syrian army gets involved.
The same French report added that Israel is determined to make this war the last one on her northern borders. The Jewish military command will not spare any advanced and destructive kind of weaponry that is stored in its caches. Hezbollah will not be the only target within the Shiite regions that are under its control, but also the Lebanese army, all Lebanese institutions and infrastructure. Israel is well convinced that Hezbollah is in full control of the Lebanese government and accordingly its army will not spare the country's infrastructure as was the situation in the 2006 war. Israel is planning to end Hezbollah the same way it ended the PLO in the 1982-1983 war.
That would certainly make for interesting conversations, including the White House.
#1
Dead terrorists do tell no tales and they are not particularly valuable for intelligence. Obama, if he can get off his self-righteous indignation pedestal, might re-visit Bushs' policies which were well thought out and legal. Such policies as: 1. Interrogation/debriefing approaches of high-value targets should be resurrected, 2. Non-law and order approach for terrorists, 3. Use of military tribunals for terrorists, and 4. Gitmo should continue to be used for detainees.
The kinder-and-gentler (speechify them to distraction) approach of the Obama administration isn't doing much to win the hearts and minds of our enemies and the respect of the Euro elite.
The MSM (and some Congressmen) aided and abetted the emasculation of the CIA. They, either through ideological blindness and stupidity or a malignant willingness, demonized and "Pallinized (a la K. Couric)" Bushs' policies at every turn even though it was harmful to the country. They willingly confused Abu Ghraib with CIA approaches despite it having nothing to do with the CIA. They condemned Gitmo before they visited it. When it was visited, the facility was found to be a well-run facility where terrorists are as well-treated as most of us--maybe better.
#2
The MSM (and some Congressmen) aided and abetted the emasculation of the CIA.
Given that the upper echelon of the Agency participated in destabilizing their own government as long as Bush was President, it's Karma baby. To me this is just red on red.
#4
The article complains that we are killing bad guys in Pakistan from a distance, thus losing the benefit of their interrogations. But how, pray tell, are we to get men in to pick up these people, living as they are in the wilds of the tribal territories, surrounded and protected not only by their own people but by natives hostile both to the Pakistani forces and all other foreigners? "We own the night" is all very well, but not for repeated ventures through hundreds of miles of hostile territory to pick up a dozen bad guys each trip... especially as there's no way the Pakistani army -- and especially the ISI -- would keep the secret for long, let alone refrain from sabotaging the effort.
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.
What little is left of Venezuela's democracy has taken a literal beating from President Hugo Chavez's uniformed goon squads -- again.
While the war of words is escalating around the clock between Israel on the one side and Hezbollah and Syria on the other, analysts in the Middle East and Europe strongly believe that war is inevitable and will break out within a few months.
