Showing posts with label World War. Show all posts
Showing posts with label World War. Show all posts

Monday, June 27, 2011

World War 3: Covert, high tech, and still very expensive

Topher Morrison
PurpleSerf.com

Special operations forces span the globe in the War on Terror.  
Photo credit: ABP World Group LTD.

"The Special Operations Command's (SOCOM) overall strength now stands at 60,000.  Of these, some 13,000 were deployed last week in 79 countries."  - Kenneth McGraw, Spokesman for SOCOM, according to The Daily Beast - June 25th, 2011


With Osama Bin Laden now officially dead, the World Wide War on Terror has entered its next phase.  What began with relatively conventional warfare in Afghanistan and Iraq characterized by large troop deployments, aerial "shock and awe" bombardments, and the expensive ancillary civil reconstruction efforts has morphed into a multidimensional high tech operation blending covert and overt tactics extending into "79 countries" around the world.


The US military in Afghanistan allegedly still pursues the "Doctor of Death", Ayman Al Zawahiri, who has purportedly been tapped (by whom or by what mechanism it is not known) to take over as Supreme Ultimate Commander of all disgruntled Islamic radicals around the world (a.k.a Al Qaeda).  Yemen, however, is the US military's growing priority as it plays host to the enigmatic American, Anwar al-Awlaki of Las Cruces, New Mexico, commander of the Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) franchise, and the US' new counterinsurgency warfare lab.


Although GQ noted that a May 5th attempt on al-Awlkai was the "first drone attack in Yemen in a decade" this "lab", according to the Daily Beast last week, is where a "covert war has raged for nearly three years" (keep in mind if this is true, it precedes both the Ft. Hood Shooting and the Christmas Day Bomber both of which al-Awlaki is charged with orchestrating.  Any argument using al-Awlaki and his purported connections with these events as a pretext for intervention in Yemen should be viewed as highly dubious).  


Working in tandem with US trained Yemeni forces is Delta Force, SEAL Team Six, CIA paramilitary groups, the amphibious mini-carrier USS Boxer, its cruise missile laden submarine chaperone, and "an armada of drones many of designs (and sizes) that are still classified."  We can, however, quantify the breadth of this drone army.  According to the New York Times, "from blimps to bugs...the Pentagon now has some 7,000 aerial drones compared with fewer than 50 a decade ago."  With names like Global Hawk, Predator, Reaper, Shadow, popularized names like the "Beast of Kandahar", and deploying nefarious sounding technologies like the "Gorgon Stare" one has to wonder whether the Armies of Freedom are in fact becoming viewed as something else.

Insect drones like this one will be designed
to hide in the shadows while recording in swarms. 
Posted at Wired.com

 A Predator drone armed for action.  
Posted at Wired.com.

As a part of a larger $45 million aid package to Somalia relatively new "Raven" drones are being outsourced in America's ever expanding shadow war to Burundi and Ugandan "peacekeepers" in order to cut costs and diversify the counter terrorism efforts there, according to Danger Room.  While it may seem odd that the US would give up operational control it looks as if the Pentagon is merely riding shotgun on this one as they are to purchase an unspecified $17.7 million aircraft for the US base in Djibouti, ostensibly a staging ground for the aforementioned drone war raging in Yemen.  


The larger portion of the foreign military aid package will be distributed to other corners of the empire, according to the Air Force Times, and will fund and equip foreign security forces with biometric instrumentation, weapons, night vision, armor, etc. in countries like Bangladesh, the Philipines, Maldives, Oman, Malaysia, Kenya, and Mali.  Evidently what we're seeing here is just another routine wealth and weapons transfer in the charitable business of military welfare. 


While some hawks may hem and haw over "cuts" to the defense budget because of a bad economy and the political appeal of austere budgets on Capitol Hill, most recently evidenced in the reduction of DARPA's budget (a paltry 5%), one must keep in mind the grand strategy of wartime finance.  Even though Secretary of Defense Robert Gates humbly claims "as budgets draw down, we have no option but to learn to fight smarter with less" these musings must be consumed while keeping in mind Gates recently ordered the Pentagon to come up with $100 billion in savings and redirected to combat forces (special forces included).  


Dubious statements like "budget draw down[s]" must be balanced with the facts.  Although DARPA may lose $150 million, Obama has on the other hand asked for a 5.7% increase in the Special Operations budget amounting to $6.5 billion on top of $3.5 billion already requested this year.  Therefore, not only is Sec. Gates to funnel massive savings back into various combat theaters around the world, Obama is doubling down on top of it - not exactly austere.  This can, however, be appended to Obama's stimulus package; it takes 19 analysts and one or two pilots to operate a drone's mission from take off to analysis.  If all 7,000 of the Pentagon's drones were called into action it would mean 133k jobs, imagine that!


World War is defined as "war that spans multiple countries on multiple continents, with battles fought in multiple theaters, and last for multiple years" according to Wikipedia.  With the United States officially involved in Pakistan, Yemen, Somolia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and unofficially in the rest of the "79 other [unknown] countries" do we doubt at all that this is in fact a world war?  This is merely the style of war in the 21st century, fought not by proxy, but by small elite forces under the aegis of incredible technology.  The body counts may be lower, but the same principles remain.  One major difference between WWIII and its predecessors, however, is this war is also being fought on American soil so don't be alarmed when a swarm of insect drones accompanies you to a town hall meeting, its for your protection - see "Planes, trains, and automobiles: TSA's ever expanding jurisdiction."


For an excellent documentary on the issue of covert remote controlled war visit "Remote Control War's" Facebook fan page and find out how to watch the mind bending documentary. 


UPDATE 8/8/11:  New article by Al Jazeera details the US military's secret armies.

Saturday, May 28, 2011

RON PAUL "ANOTHER NAIL IN THE COFFIN"

Topher Morrison
PurpleSerf.com
5/27/11


Ron Paul (R) stands virtually alone against our growing militarism and amongst other abominations against the US Constitution.  It seems as of late our Constitution means nothing to those in power and equally nothing to those without it - a default cabal of apathy, ignorance, and contempt suffocates any hope for reform or restoration.  It is exhausting to look at the news on a daily basis.  Our culture of liberty is on life support, it is no wonder why we find ourselves in such dire straights.  In an instant we could launch ourselves out this tyrannical trap, grow ourselves out of debt and break the chains of history; the same history all nations before us have fallen into, however, the path we find ourselves on looks so very similar and the finality so inevitable.  One must ask: is America better than history?


Ron Paul in his own words...



This post is uncharacteristically cynical, we apologize...

Sunday, May 22, 2011

PAKISTAN UNDER ATTACK, CHINA COULD STEP IN

Topher Morrison
PurpleSerf.com
5/22/11





"Militants" have just attacked a Pakistani naval air base in what the military and government call a "terrorist attack."  PNS Mehran is in the middle of Karachi, Pakistan's largest city and financial capital.  Apparently a group of 10 launched a surprise attack from 3 sides of the base with "small bombs" and "sophisticated weapons" successfully destroying a PC-3 maritime long range patrol craft recently delivered by the US government and killing two members of the Pakistani military.  


Story developing...


Pakistan has suffered 4,350 deaths over the past four years ostensibly due to Taliban attacks, however, threats have increased substantially since Operation Neptune's Spear (code name for the Osama Bin Laden raid) allegedly claimed the life of the Trillion Dollar Man, Osama Bin Laden.


Neptune's Spear has come under intense criticism on multiple fronts including the days of contradictory information following the raid, the violation of Pakistani sovereignty, the summary execution of the most important intelligence asset in the War on Terror, the quick disposal of OBL's body, the convenient treasure trove of incriminating and embarrassing information, but most importantly the timing and nature of the raid itself has raised questions of the US' real intentions. 


Today's attack would be of relatively little import given the history of attacks on Pakistan's government and military had the Sunday Express not reported Obama's defensive/antagonistic posture on May 15th:

“US troops will be deployed in Pakistan if the nation’s nuclear installations come under threat from terrorists out to avenge the killing of Osama Bin Laden… The plan, which would be activated without President Zardari’s consent, provoked an angry reaction from Pakistan officials… Barack Obama would order troops to parachute in to protect key nuclear missile sites. These include the air force’s central Sargodha HQ, home base for nuclear-capable F-16 combat aircraft and at least 80 ballistic missiles.”


While thousands of Pakistanis have protested the US-Pakistan War on Terror the US nonetheless maintains its "right" to defend itself against potential aggressors.  More specifically the protests emphasize the scores of attacks from unmanned drone aircraft and fluctuating support from the Pakistani military resulting in countless civilian deaths and exacerbation of the atrocious failed/police state that is Pakistan.  


Under what circumstances Obama is willing to deploy troops in order secure Pakistan's weapons of mass destruction remains to be seen, however, what we do know has been revealed in the recent Neptune's Spear operation.  The means is there, the will has been articulated, all that is left is the right opportunity - contrived or otherwise.


The stealth helicopter "ditched" in Abottobad during the raid has been vetted by expert aviation blogs all over the internet and its technologies have been corroborated to be at least more than possible given evidence from around the world.  The US has the now proven its stealthy ability to pierce far into Pakistani territory and execute major operations.  This operation outside of its official objective of killing OBL has effectively embarrassed the intelligence services of Pakistan as either complicit or negligent in allowing OBL to live right under their military's nose.  The mission resulted in top level resignations and if what I describe next is true Operation Neptune's Spear was alternatively about sending a signal to Pakistan that it was still under US supervision.  


The alternative narrative to what has been proffered by the Obama administration and the mainstream media begins with Prince Bandar's (remember "Bandar Bush") visit to Pakistan in March.  According to geopolitical experts and The Envoy the Saudi national security chief visited Pakistan in a possible effort to establish new alternative security arrangements given the lack of support the US offered Egypt in the ousting of Mubarak, in other words, bring Saudi Arabia under the Pakistani nuclear umbrella or acquire the nukes which the Saudi regime essentially underwrote.  This is very different than what was publicly speculated; that Saudi Arabia wanted Pakistani military support not only for Riyadh, but for other Sunni Gulf allies such as Bahrain.  


While both could be true the former is of prime interest here especially given the recent warnings by China 3 days ago that "warned in unequivocal terms that any attack on Pakistan would be construed as an attack on China." 


Will the Obama administration or NATO for that matter continue their bellicosity in the face of Chinese intervention?  This recent attack is exactly what the Obama administration purports to fear - militants successfully commandeering a Pakistani military establishment and either launching or stealing nuclear material.  Will Obama test China's new emboldened position?  Does the support of China now flow through to Saudi Arabia via Pakistan?  What does this mean geopolitically?  


More of the same - global realignment.


UPDATE: 5/26/11


China asked to build naval base at Gwadar, Pakistan thereby extending the "String of Pearls."


From the Alex Jones show 5/24/11 with Dr. Webster Griffen Tarpley.

Wednesday, May 18, 2011

The End of History

Editors Note:  Not to be confused with Purple Serf's "End of History for the Middle East?"


Free Radical
Zero Hedge
5/18/11


There is properly no history, only biography - Ralph Waldo Emerson










Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, it was famously proclaimed that what we were likely witnessing was

… not just the end of the Cold War, or the passing of a particular period of postwar history, but the end of history as such; that is, the end point of mankind’s ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government.

In reality, however, what we are witnessing is the ideological exhaustion of “Western liberal democracy” and therefore the last gasp of the fraud upon which it rests: the state, even its best form.  No longer able to hide behind the Jeffersonian dream of constitutional freedom and order or the Lincolnian myth that the dream could be preserved at the expense of the principle upon which it was founded, the American state’s demise proves that “the final form of human government” has not yet arrived – not because a final form shouldn’t have arrived but because, for those who have had so much fun during historical times, the aftermath won’t be any fun.  On the contrary, it will be “a very sad time”:

            The struggle for recognition, the willingness to risk one’s life for a purely abstract 

            goal, the worldwide ideological struggle that called forth daring, courage,     
            imagination, and idealism, will be replaced by economic calculation, the endless 
            solving of technical problems, environmental concerns, and the satisfaction of 
            sophisticated consumer demands.










How sad, in other words, that if people were in fact freed from “the worldwide ideological struggle” (though of course they have not been), they would at long last be able to live their lives on their own terms. How sad that without “the struggle for recognition,” people would not have to endure another Pharoah, Caesar, Alexander, Napoleon, Hitler, Stalin, Lincoln, Roosevelt, Clinton, Bush, or Obama, and would instead be left to while away the hours in the peaceful pursuit of their own happiness. How sad that without the “purely abstract goal” of one or another statist ideology, grandparents, parents, spouses, children, and grandchildren would not know the “daring, courage, imagination, and idealism” that continues to send their loved ones home in flag-draped cartons. How sad that “environmental concerns” could actually be solved, rather than perpetrated by governments and perpetuated by their bloated “regulatory” agencies. And how sad that “economic calculation and the endless solving of technical problems” – i.e., the day-by-day work of an increasingly complex and thus more richly rewarding world – would not be complicated by the relentless onslaught of the state.



















Yes, there is the hope that “centuries of boredom at the end of history might serve to get history started once again,” so that murder and mayhem can once again spice up the dreary “satisfaction of sophisticated consumer demands.” What is a cell phone, after all, compared to a land mine? What is communication compared to mutilation? With “no struggle over ‘large’ issues and consequently no need for generals or statesmen,” how much attraction can life hold?  What’s the use of living, in other words, if you can’t make a killing killing people?


And a twofold killing it is – over 15 billion people “since the beginning of authentic history,” at a cost of over a thousand trillion dollarsi  – according to the research published in a 1914 New York Times piece that also makes the following observation:

Brilliant deeds on the battlefield are done by the man who will take the greatest risks in support of an ideal; the man who will take the greatest risks is, ordinarily, the best of men. So these are least likely to escape. …

… And even though large numbers of the best of men are left, many are destroyed, and of those remaining many have been deteriorated physically by the effort, by the wounds, by the diseases, of wartime; while the economic course of every man participating in a war is interrupted by his service, and, in the majority of cases, such an interruption harms his industrial or professional or mercantile future, thus directly affecting the opportunities that he may offer to the rising generation, which, for a time, depends upon him.

And thus does the killing of the best in war also kill “a certain portion of the incalculable social and educational effort of the ages.”

But no matter. For as war is its very health, the state will have a war if it wants one, never mind how much the people, understandably, do not:

Why, of course, the people don’t want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece.  … But after all, it’s the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it’s always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it’s a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to greater danger. It works the same in any country.

But why? The answer is as old as Plato’s Dorians:

[I]t is immaterial for the citizens of any nation where the frontiers of their country are drawn. It is of no concern for anyone whether his country is big or small, and whether it conquers a province or not. The individual citizens do not derive any profit from the conquest of a territory.

It is different with the princes or ruling aristocracies. They can increase their power and their tax revenues by expanding the size of their realms. They can profit from conquest. They are bellicose, while the citizenry is peace loving.

The “princes and ruling aristocracies” will object, of course, that they are not bellicose at all and only want to increase their power in order to be of greater service to humanity. They are public servants, after all, seeking only to do good on their constituents’ behalf. What they do not understand, however – what they dare not even contemplate – is that because Men are cruel, but Man is kind, no men are more cruel than those who would do good with mankind’s money – with the proceeds, that is, of the legalized theft by which “Western liberal democracy” and every other manifestation of the state perpetuate themselves. For as easy as it is to make this theft legal, it is impossible to make it moral, the resulting assault on society being all the worse for the pretence upon which it is based: namely, that legalized theft is the price that must be paid for a civilized society.

And it is because of this vast charade – the biggest of all big lies – that its perpetrators fail to realize that they are but the latest incarnation of the iniquity that has prevailed from time immemorial, that however much the forces of history have been debated over the centuries – are they blind, cyclical, progressive, eschatological, dialectical, etc. – there are actually no forces of history; there is only the history of force. In fact, there is only history as force, the absence of which is not history but biography – the ability to graph, as it were, one’s own bio in cooperative association with one’s fellow human beings.

Its perpetrators do not understand, that is, that their role in history is history, for history is nothing more than the biographies of those who have used the political means to trump the economic means, the producers of which have had their biographies expropriated in the process. As such, history is merely a chronicle of conquest, subjugation, and confiscation, and therefore a glorification of perpetual war for perpetual war. And just as war and the state are one, so, then, are the state and history one.


Therefore, the end of the state will be the end of history.