Article

2013-08-19 Terror Networks

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve White 2013-08-19 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11128 views ] Top

#1 And we wish to cut aid to the Army for what reason again ?

Posted by Besoeker 2013-08-19 04:54|| 2013-08-19 04:54|| Front Page Top

#2 And we wish to cut aid to the Army for what reason again ?

Because they had the nerve to embarrass The One.

Mike

Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2013-08-19 05:29|| 2013-08-19 05:29|| Front Page Top

#3 Because the only thing that scares a certain Messiah is his country's military*?

*I'm not saying he's right.

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2013-08-19 05:33|| 2013-08-19 05:33|| Front Page Top

#4 ...maybe because after the factions trashed the old republic enough, the guys who ended up running the place, Marius, Sulla, Pompey, Caesar, etc all had military backgrounds? Not your local ward heelers.

Posted by Procopius2k 2013-08-19 08:15|| 2013-08-19 08:15|| Front Page Top

#5 You forgot Eisenhower.

Posted by Redneck Jim 2013-08-19 10:04|| 2013-08-19 10:04|| Front Page Top

#6 ...actually, Ike was the exception in that he had no faction to start with.
The Draft Eisenhower movement was the first successful political draft of the 20th century to take a private citizen to the Oval Office. It was a widespread American grassroots political movement that eventually persuaded Dwight D. Eisenhower to run for President. - wiki at linky
Unlike Sherman, "If nominated, I will not run; if elected, I will not serve." - he was drafted and served.

Posted by Procopius2k 2013-08-19 10:29|| 2013-08-19 10:29|| Front Page Top

...maybe because after the factions trashed the old republic enough, the guys who ended up running the place, Marius, Sulla, Pompey, Caesar, etc all had military backgrounds? Not your local ward heelers.

EVERYONE in the Roman government had a military background. You started with military service, then tried to get elected to a lucrative position. Even Cicero served in the military.

Posted by Rob Crawford 2013-08-19 10:52|| 2013-08-19 10:52|| Front Page Top

#8 ...it was a means of political advancement but not the only one. Various 'religious' positions/duties that came with caste position provided another means, but by the time of the late republic the main route was military, though some held positions (brought as usual) in name only with competent retainers doing the real work. See the decedent of Scipio at the final reduction of Carthage. He wasn't sent for his military acumen but for symbolism. By military backgrounds in the case of the individuals cited, it was practical successful field work/conquests. Simply doing a tour in someone's entourage (staff) in some obscure province didn't count for much. Thus the motivation in some case (ie Caesar in Gaul) to make a name.

Posted by Procopius2k 2013-08-19 11:13|| 2013-08-19 11:13|| Front Page Top

#9 but for the moment the struggle for power trumps the power of the faith.

Is it not always, thus, Mr. Ledeen? And when the power struggle is over, then the power of faith kicks in.

Posted by Bobby 2013-08-19 11:52|| 2013-08-19 11:52|| Front Page Top

#10 And we wish to cut aid to the Army for what reason again ?

Section 508 of the Foreign Assistance Act;
None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available pursuant to this Act shall be obligated or expended to finance directly any assistance to any country whose duly elected head of government is deposed by military coup or decree: Provided, That assistance may be resumed to such country if the President determines and reports to the Committees on Appropriations that subsequent to the termination of assistance a democratically elected government has taken office.

As a member of the 'Ta Hell with 'em crowd I say maybe we should first obey our laws and then see what happens.

Posted by DepotGuy 2013-08-19 14:54|| 2013-08-19 14:54|| Front Page Top

#11 Ledeen's premise is, "The war is easily described: there is a global alliance of radical leftists and radical Islamists, supported by a group of countries that includes Russia, at least some Chinese leaders, Iran, Syria, Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador and Nicaragua. The radicals include the Sunni and Shiâite terrorist organizations and leftist groups, and they all work seamlessly with the narcotics mafias. Their objective is the destruction of the West, above all, of the United States."

This is, I think, so simplistic as to be useless. Yes, on some issues the left allies with islamists, Shiites w Sunnis, Islamists w narco producers. But on other issues the bad guys fight it out among themselves. On Egypt for example, the Moslem brotherhood is supported vigorously by Iran, Turkey and Qatar, supported more causually by CNN and the EU and opposed by the saudis, Iraq, Jordan, the UAE and France. On Syria, Assad is supported by Russia, Iraq and Iran and opposed by almost every Sunni majority country and much of the rest of the world.

Posted by lord garth 2013-08-19 16:03|| 2013-08-19 16:03|| Front Page Top

#12 The "trick" to winning the great game is to make your enemies fight each other and you not have to fight.

Posted by Bright Pebbles 2013-08-19 20:12|| 2013-08-19 20:12|| Front Page Top

23:56 JosephMendiola
23:51 JosephMendiola
22:42 lord garth
21:44 mossomo
21:05 gorb
21:03 JosephMendiola
20:56 JosephMendiola
20:26 Glenmore
20:23 OldSpook
20:13 OldSpook
20:12 Bright Pebbles
19:48 Besoeker
19:43 Glenmore
19:38 Glenmore
19:36 Glenmore
19:33 Glenmore
19:03 Dale
18:40 Pappy
18:32 Pappy
18:32 Pappy
18:28 Pappy
18:21 Beavis
18:17 Frank G
17:41 SteveS