#2
Although the Taliban welcomed Osama bin Laden when it ruled Afghanistan, U.S. intelligence officials say they believe there are few, if any, links between Taliban commanders in Afghanistan today and senior al-Qaeda members.
Obama's choice of words was not lost on members of the review team. They, too, argued that the United States should focus on al-Qaeda. Their final document made the point bluntly: "The core goal of the U.S. must be to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al-Qaeda."
There's the problem right there. Talibunny season should be all year.
#3
U.S. intelligence officials say they believe there are few, if any, links between Taliban commanders in Afghanistan today and senior al-Qaeda members.
The same intelligence people who declared that Iran wasn't seeking nuclear weapons. When bourgeois facts are inconvenient, go with revolutionary facts (aka lies).
S.J.Res.23
One Hundred Seventh Congress
of the
United States of America
AT THE FIRST SESSION
Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
the third day of January, two thousand and one
Joint Resolution
To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States.
Whereas, on September 11, 2001, acts of treacherous violence were committed against the United States and its citizens; and
Whereas, such acts render it both necessary and appropriate that the United States exercise its rights to self-defense and to protect United States citizens both at home and abroad; and
Whereas, in light of the threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States posed by these grave acts of violence; and
Whereas, such acts continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States; and
Whereas, the President has authority under the Constitution to take action to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This joint resolution may be cited as the `Authorization for Use of Military Force'.
SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.
(a) IN GENERAL- That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.
(b) War Powers Resolution Requirements-
(1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION- Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution.
(2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS- Nothing in this resolution supercedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution.
#4
new strategy needed? How about one of our official civilian assholes read the Small Wars Manual and figure out if this place is worth it...also, what's the f*cking end state? I.E. commander's intent...instead of going on every other half-assed talk show and jetting off to copenhagen the fuckstick-in-chief can spend 10 min's and write one up...or, maybe Oprah can.
#5
Amen, BH6 - my son's in the sandbox, but if he was in Afghan, I'd be pissed at the two-month drift while doofus completes his "receipt" of Gen. McC's letter, all the while, preparing to go All-Biden. Make up your mind: defend at all costs, withdraw with subsequent encouragement of Islamists, or some nebulous wanna-e-world hybrid? Make up your f*ckin mind and take responsibility. No "present" here, no "Boooosh-blame", and don't leave our troops hanging without support, supplies, or a withdrawal plan.
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/08/2009 20:40 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Frank, Semper Fi to your boy. I go back to regular USMC Op forces next summer...I envision Douchebagistan is my next deployment...I did Iraq twice, at least we seemed to have an end state, whether anyone agreed how did it or not is another matter. Obambi wants plausible deniability and is looking for the classic clintonian triangulation methinx - totally unacceptable in a C-n-C wrt this type of conflict. COIN/SASO/Small Wars/Phillipine Insurrection are complex & difficult things to pull off - if the WH doesn't have the nads to accept the political hits from the far left loonies for the upcoming surge in U.S. casualties then we might as well pull out now. I may have not always agreed w/W on domestic policy but at least the dude had balls and stood like an oak tree against the winds of rasmussen polls.
[Quqnoos] A top Afghan official has lashed out at foreigners for election interference, causing an unexpected delay in the outcome announcement. Afghan Minister of Information and Culture, Abdul Karim Khoram, addressed a youth gathering on Tuesday in the capital, Kabul, saying the setback to the announcement of the official results is a major concern.
Minister Khoram's comment comes as sacked senior UN official, Peter Galbraith, stamped the 20 August elections with massive fraud and questioned the UN Special Envoy, Kai Eide's neutrality in the poll. Mr Galbraith, who was fired over a dispute with his superior on how to handle the fraud allegations, says as many as 30 per cent of President Karzai's votes were fraudulent.
How many of Abdullah's votes were fraudulent?
The final official outcome of the presidential election was expected to be announced last month, but international pressures to prove the election more credible forced the Afghan Independent Election Commission (IEC) to launch a partial re-count.
"People voted in the election and now they want the results to be announced," Khoram said. "The foreigners do not allow the announcement."
The postponement of the election results has caused many social, political and security problems, the Afghan minister further said.
Incumbent Karzai's closest rival, Abdullah Abdullah, also criticised the UN mission in Kabul, calling for an inquiry into the UN's role since the August poll.
Preliminary results show President Karzai has collected 54.6 per cent of the votes, above the 50 percent required to prevent a run-off with Dr Abdullah.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
[Dawn] The Afghan Taliban pose no threat to the west but will continue their fight against occupying foreign forces, they said on Wednesday, the eighth anniversary of the US-led invasion that removed them from power.
It was never the Taliban who caused problems beyond their borders, it was all their little friends that they gave houseroom. Which is why they were driven out of that house, and are being prevented from retaking possession now. Clearly the leadership was not properly fed as children.
US-led forces with the help of Afghan groups overthrew the Taliban government during a five week battle which started on October 7, 2001, after the militants refused to hand over al-Qaeda leaders wanted by Washington for the September 11 attacks on America.
'We had and have no plan of harming countries of the world, including those in Europe...our goal is the independence of the country and the building of an Islamic state,' the Taliban said in a statement on the group's website www.shahamat.org.
'Still, if you (Nato and US troops) want to colonise the country of proud and pious Afghans under the baseless pretext of a war on terror, then you should know that our patience will only increase and that we are ready for a long war.'
Yes, yes, but your international volunteer pool is shrinking, and with it no doubt financial donations. Y'all are old news -- the land of the Uighurs is the up-and-coming thing.
US President Barack Obama has said defeating the militants in Afghanistan and Pakistan is a top foreign policy priority and is evaluating whether to send thousands of extra troops to the country as requested by the commander of Nato and US forces.
In a review of the war in Afghanistan submitted to the Pentagon last month, US General Stanley McChrystal, in charge of all foreign forces, said defeating the insurgents would likely result in failure unless more troops were sent.
There are currently more than 100,000 foreign troops in the country, roughly two-thirds of who are Americans.
The Taliban statement comes at a time when western officials warn that deserting Afghanistan could mean a return to power for the Taliban and the country could once again become a safe haven for al-Qaeda militants, who could use it as a base to plan future attacks on western countries.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under: Taliban
#1
"We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them. "
George W. Bush, September 11th 2001
"These demands are not open to negotiation or discussion. The Taliban must act, and act immediately. They will hand over the terrorists, or they will share in their fate."
George W. Bush, Statement To Joint Session Of Congress September 20th 2001
When Bush made these statements he articulated a consensus not only in the US but in NATO.
To my knowledge neither the Bush or the Obama admin has ever repudiated these principles.
Hunting down and killing the Taliban is surgical retaliation for 9/11, necessary to send the one simple but indispensably important message to the Arab-Islamic World and others:
"Never, under no circumstances even attempt to attack NATO! Even if you succeed NATO's retaliation will inflict unacceptable damage!"
Conversely if the Taliban survive and in some form get to be rulers in Afghanistan again, it will be clear that an attack on the scale of 9/11 is not a suicidal mistake.
A month before conducting an underground nuclear test in May, North Korea attempted to import drugs from Japan used to monitor the effects of radiation on humans, but the attempt was foiled, the Yomiuri Shimbun says.
The revelation follows testimony from a Japanese businessman who was arrested in May for exporting a large tank lorry that could be converted into a missile launch pad to North Korea. The businessman received the North Korean request for the drugs via e-mail on Apr. 21. That alerted Japanese authorities, who had been monitoring North Korean transmissions.
The drug tests for the presence of radioactive elements in the blood stream.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/08/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
ION "DRAGON ISLES", CHINESE MIL FORUM > JAPANESE FASCISTS ATTACK CHINESE SHOP.
* SAME > YOUTUBE - RUSSIA:DEATH OF A NATION [in Parts], + WAFF > MALAYSIA PREPARES FOR "INVASION" BY INDONESIAN RADICAL GROUP.
North Korea launched a "150-day struggle," a press-ganged mobilization to increase production of collective farms from April 20 to Sept. 19 on the road to building a "powerful and prosperous nation" by 2012. No sooner had the one struggle ended than a "100-day struggle" ensued. But what exactly is the point?
More juche?
The 100-day struggle in the wake of the 150 struggle, despite propaganda that "great results were achieved," means that the North failed to achieve its goals. As the achievements, the regime cited increased electric power production and renovation of the Mt. Baekdu battlefield, a site idolizing former leader Kim Il-sung and present leader Kim Jong-il.
That alone, since it is quite unrelated to production, suggests that the first campaign failed. Hwang Jang-yop, a former secretary of the North Korean Workers' Party who defected to the South, said, "The activities taking place in the North in recent months are a kind of last gasp, using force to oppress the population and prolong the dictatorship."
The North has undergone major changes. With the ration system suspended in many regions since 2000, the market economy has made rapid inroads into North Korean society. North Korean defectors say the struggles are a means of keeping the market at bay by forcing people to work in the fields or on collective projects. They are also aimed, defectors say, at controlling a society shaken by UN sanctions and for the state to get its hands on individual wealth accumulated through the market.
A senior North Korean official who recently defected to the South said, "Though the 150-day struggle was supposed to raise economic strength to the level of the planned economy in the 1970s and '80s, its actual aim was eliminating the market economy." The North has never officially given up on the planned economy, but it effectively collapsed completely in the latter half of the 1990s. Some 80-90 percent of state-run enterprise staff are engaged in individual commerce, paying a certain amount of money to the businesses and keeping the rest for themselves.
Launching the 150-day struggle in April, the North tried to drive all able-bodied adults to collective farms. Beginning in spring, the security police rounded up anyone they found walking around in major cities and drove them to farms, reported the Daily NK.
The National Defense Committee proclaimed, "We must solve our food problem for ourselves and counter the unprecedented imperialist policy of isolating and smothering the nation" with UN sanctions. But the effort failed.
"Marauding and looting, sometimes even by hungry soldiers, are rampant in the North and giving rise to serious public unrest," one recent North Korean defector said. "It's all caused by the 150-day struggle. If North Koreans are driven further in the 100-day struggle until the end of the year, public unrest could get out of hand, and the results for the regime could be devastating."
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/08/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Couldn't the Norks combine all these little strugglettes into one big 5 Year Struggle? Worked for the Soviets and Chinese.
Posted by: ed ||
10/08/2009 0:28 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Compare wid WMF > SOUTH KOREAN POLL: 83% OF KOREANS WANT TO GO TO WAR AGZ CHINA; + BRITAIN: NEW SINO-JAPAN ALLIANCE ANOTHER SHOCK TO THE WORLD [JAPAN + "East Asian Community" concept].
[Al Arabiya Latest] Switzerland's Commission Against Racism said Wednesday that an anti-minaret poster campaign by a far-right party defamed the country's Muslim minority and could threaten public peace.
"The commission believes that this could threaten social cohesion and public peace," the government commission said in a statement.
The Swiss People's Party has unveiled a campaign poster depicting a woman wearing a burka against a background of a Swiss flag upon which several minarets resembling missiles were erected.
" They suggest that the Muslim minority living in Switzerland represents a danger and send the message that the Muslim population is seeking to dominate the Swiss people, oppress women and disregard fundamental rights "
Commission Against Racism
It is aimed at getting the population to vote for a ban on minarets in Switzerland in a referendum on the issue in November.
The commission said it found that the posters "feed prejudices, are over-simplistic and presents Islam overall in an unfavorable manner."
They "suggest that the Muslim minority living in Switzerland represents a danger" and send the message that the Muslim population is seeking to dominate the Swiss people, oppress women and disregard fundamental rights, it noted.
"This is equivalent to defamation of Switzerland's peaceful Muslim population," added the commission.
The commission statement came after several city authorities sought guidance on whether to allow the posters to be put up.
The cities of Basel and Lausanne have already decided to ban the posters ahead of the commission's guidance.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under: Global Jihad
#1
When you use the enemies definition of peace, of course everything you do threatens it.
Posted by: ed ||
10/08/2009 0:32 Comments ||
Top||
Kabul, Afghanistan - When Medea Benjamin stood up in a Kabul meeting hall this weekend to ask Masooda Jalal if she would prefer more international troops or more development funds, the cofounder of US antiwar group Code Pink was hoping her fellow activist would support her call for US troop withdrawal.
She was disappointed.
Ms. Jalhal, the former Afghan minister of women, bluntly told her both were needed. "It is good for Afghanistan to have more troops more troops committed with the aim of building peace and against war, terrorism, and security along with other resources," she answered. "Coming together they will help with better reconstruction." Without international troops armed groups could return with a vengeance and that would leave women most vulnerable.
Though Afghans have their grievances against the international troops' presence, chief among them civilian casualties, many fear an abrupt departure would create a dangerous security vacuum to be filled by predatory and rapacious militias. Many women, primary victims of such groups in the past, are adamant that international troops stay until a sufficient number of local forces are trained and the rule of law established.
During their weeklong visit here, in which they met with government officials, politicians, ministers, women activists, and civil society groups, the small team of Code Pink members had hoped to gather evidence to bolster their call for US troop withdrawal within two years, and capitalize on growing anxiety back home about the war. While the group hasn't dropped its call for a pullout, the visit convinced them that setting a deadline isn't in Afghanistan's interests, say Ms. Benjamin and fellow cofounder Jodie Evans.
I must regroup. I did not consider them capable of learning from those living in the real world.
#2
This seems to be at odds with what Ms. Benjamin was saying last night in her interview on the O'Reilly factor. She was adamantly against any troop increase over there although she didn't call for a total immediate withdrawal, either.
#3
OReilly told her her problem was dealing with reality!She wanted to spend the money for troops to pay off the Taliban so they wouldn't be bad guys anymore!
#4
Well, she can't exactly climb down from her position entirely, that would admit she was wrong in the first place.
Just set her in the corner and let her babble.
And she needs to realize that nobody on the planet wants these troops to be there. They need to be there, which is different. She probably has her desires confused with what the world needs, and figures if she gets rid of the troops then the problem will go away. I'd like her to have to live there after the troop pullout and see how she feels about the timing of the whole thing then.
#5
Just set her in the corner and let her babble.
Sorry for this outburst BUT, WHO IN THEIR RIGHT FREAKIN' MIND GIVES A SHEEEEEET ABOUT ANYTHING THIS WOMAN HAS TO SAY........She is an insignificant little piss ant...I can't believe O'Riely of all people is giving her air time.
A breakthrough that enables the early targeting of ballistic missiles by linking radars and other sensors from different parts of the world is key to the Obama administration's new missile defense plans, according to senior administration officials.
Oh how convenient ...
The administration announced last month that it would scrap a Bush-era plan to protect European countries and American troops stationed there from any potential Iranian missile attack. Instead of putting 10 interceptors in Poland and radar in the Czech Republic to counter intercontinental missiles, officials said, they would focus on containing Iran's ability to fire short- and medium-range ballistic missiles.
Instead of the longer-range missiles that could reach clear across Europe, which are the really destabilizing ones. Still it's nice to hear that Bambi now believes in some sort of missile defense ...
Lt. Gen. Patrick O'Reilly, director of the Pentagon's Missile Defense Agency, defended that decision Wednesday, saying that the linking of U.S. and allied radar systems with satellites and other sensors would allow officials to follow the path of launched missiles throughout their flight. "This capability did not exist five years ago," O'Reilly said at a symposium sponsored by the Atlantic Council, a nonpartisan think tank.
He said the first elements of the system would be operational aboard some warships by 2011. By 2015, he added, the goal is to base additional SM-3 interceptor missiles on land.
The undersecretary of state for arms control and international security, Ellen Tauscher, appearing at the same event, said discussions are already underway with Poland to base missiles there, and talks have begun with the Czech Republic about making it the headquarters for command and control elements associated with the system.
Tauscher said European allies, who were initially troubled by the hasty announcement canceling the George W. Bush-era system, have come to support the Obama administration's plan, which would permit earlier deployment and provide wider coverage than the earlier one.
"Remember, this is a NATO-wide European missile defense system as opposed to a bilateral missile defense system," she said. Tauscher also said there would be additional opportunities for allied countries to participate in missile defense. Another land-based radar system, which was also part of the Bush plan, for example, will need to be located in southeastern Europe.
O'Reilly said the new missile defense plan would be less costly and would allow for many more defensive missiles to be deployed. Under the tentative plan, 30 SM-3 interceptor missiles would be located in Poland at a cost of $10 million each; under the earlier plan, there would have been 10 interceptor missiles there at a cost of $70 million each.
But the interceptors were different than the SM-3 and had a different flight profile.
O'Reilly added that preparation of a Polish missile defense site, which was to have taken five years to complete, could now be finished in less than a year and be staffed with fewer than 100 U.S. personnel, instead of the 400 who would have been needed under the Bush-era plan.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/08/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
So European defense has gone from continental wide interception capability to one with maybe a radius of 200km. Too bad for Germany, France, Austria, Switzerland. Heh, heh.
Oh, and for any SM3's stationed on ships in the Med, any competent targeting officer will ensure the flight profiles of his IRBMs pass too high for interception.
Posted by: ed ||
10/08/2009 0:44 Comments ||
Top||
#2
no problem ed... this is about appearances... we all 'knew' all along that missile defense wouldn't work. that is what the one said all along.
you merely proved it for him.
Posted by: abu do you love ||
10/08/2009 3:24 Comments ||
Top||
#3
No reason the long range target countries can't mount their own missile defences. It only takes money and will, the technology can be purchased from Israel or India if President Obama won't sell it to them.
You want to use ship-based SM-3s Bambi? Great. Which ships?
We don't have that many. A few Aegis-equipped cruisers, a few more Burke-class destroyers. We're building more of the latter, slowly, but the DDX program is troubled and the CGX may never get built.
To keep one ship on station in the eastern Med or the Black Sea (assuming the Turks let it through which they don't have to do), you need to have three (better, four) ships available in the rotation.
And we have uses for the other SM-3 equipped ships -- off the coast of Korea, for example. So the number of ships available to cover Europe is decidedly limited.
To keep three SM-3 based ships on duty to cover Europe, assuming the SM-3s can do the job, means we need 10 to 12 new ships. We're building two new destroyers a year. We're not building any new cruisers that I've read about (someone correct me if I'm wrong).
That's one of the reasons why the Bush team wanted a land-based system (in addition to the flight profile issue and the types of missiles that Iran could really threaten Europe with). Oh sure, the navy system is 'cheaper' -- until you amortize the costs of the new ships needed.
But then economics doesn't seem to be Bambi's strong suit ...
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/08/2009 11:42 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Instead of the longer-range missiles that could reach clear across Europe,
so you think the mullahs are less interested in nuking Israel, than they are in nuking Berlin?
"Aegis BMD has worked closely with Japan since 1999 to design and develop advanced components for the SM-3 missile. Other prospective international participants include:
The Joint United States and Australia MOU was signed July 2004 and provides a 25 year framework for cooperation on missile defense.
The Joint United States/United Kingdom MOU was signed in 2003, and a U.S./UK Joint Study on potential Type 45 DDG BMD capability was initiated in 2006.
The U.S. has provided The Netherlands Pricing & Availability data to participate in a 2006 TRACEX event. In addition, initial discussions are underway to assess the capability of Dutch systems BMD capability and may lead to integration of SM-3 onto Dutch SMART-L/APARS equipped ships.
Germany has a BMD Liaison Officer working with the Aegis BMD staff to develop an understanding of BMD-related issues.
High level discussions have taken place to provide South Korea and Aegis BMD capability on their KDX-III Class Aegis Destroyers. "
apparently SM3 is to be used on non US ships, including on Skor amd JMaritimesselfdefenceforce ships, which you need to take account of that in your calculations, including also the prospect of land based SM3's (though not in the Visograd states, but in the Med)
Also, of course an AEGIS destroyer can be used for other things at need, so Im not sure it makes sense to attribute the cost entirely to euro/Med area missile defense.
#9
But then economics doesn't seem to be Bambi's strong suit
No, Reality is not his strong suit.
His fantasy world does NOT include Folks who'd be glad to Murder him and all other Americans, to him they simply don't exist, sorta like the Blind spot in your eye, it just ain't there.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
10/08/2009 15:15 Comments ||
Top||
#10
What, pray tell, has given you that impression?
No impression, liberal hawk, just a back-up plan. Just like the bit you quote about mounting the things on non-American ships, especially after Steve White wrote about the limited American ship inventory.
#11
Seeing as we the US govt under both parties has always strongly supported defense exports, especially to our closest allies, saying "if obama wont sell it to them" sounds out of left field to me. Its like asking what sources there are to buy a car with a US nameplate, if GM, Ford and Chrysler decide to go into the baby food business and use all their existing inventory to make artificial reefs. Saying heres a back up "if X does Y" implies theres a real chance X might do Y.
#12
First off, LH, Bambi has never actually said that he believes in missile defense, even in limited missile defense. A clear statement from him that he now believes missile defense to be useful, necessary and practical would be helpful.
In particular, I'd like to see Bambi recognize publicly that there are different types of BMD that require different systems. The land-based system Bush had proposed was more capable and would have defended both Europe and us.
Yes, you can use DDGs and CGs for other purposes, but to the extent that you do, they then aren't on station to provide missile defense. The whole point of putting an AEGIS-equipped ship on station is to provide missile defense, which means you have to park it where you want it and not task it with other duties.
Yes, you can sell SM-3 technology/systems to partners -- we're currently doing that. Such partners (UK, Germany) could then park ships in the eastern Med or Black Sea. They then have the same issues we have, though (perhaps) the rotation would be easier. But to make that work, you have to be absolutely sure that your partners see the threat as you do and, more importantly, have the same pressure on the trigger button as you do. It doesn't do any good (for us) to have a German FFG on duty if the German government / ship captain makes a decision NOT to fire SM-3s at incoming Iranian missiles because they aren't aimed at Germany.
Finally, the Mad Mullahs are indeed most interested in nuking Israel. But the ability to threaten to nuke Berlin if the Germans move to stop them is part of the strategic game. Having a European missile shield is the proper response -- it constrains the Mad Mullahs in their threat, because now they know that they can't blackmail the Euros with the threat of medium/long range nuclear-tipped missiles. That in turn protects Israel.
That's the point.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/08/2009 15:45 Comments ||
Top||
#13
multi uses - im assuming that our main potential great power competitor is the PRC, and that to a considerable extent the USN is sized to counter that potential threat. Im assuming that in the event of a conflict with the PRC, seaborne missile defense against Iran becomes a lower priority.
As for allied forces, I was thinking more in terms of the availability of the system to SKor and Japan, lowering demands for USN Aegis ships near North east asia.
Im not sure about a Presidential statement on missile defense. If DoD asks for funds for that in the PresBud and supporting documents, is it not clear thats the Presidents policy? Other than political gotcha, why do you need Obama to say that in public?
WRt to nuking berlin - isnt the realist response that Iran is rationally deterrable, with our nuclear response? In the case of Israel, where one can make the case that elements in the Iranian regime are proceeding on a non-rational basis, believing that nuking Tel Aviv would lead to the coming of the hidden imam and the end of days, well rational MAD theory may not apply. But does anyone in Teheran believe that applying nuclear blackmail to Berlin or Paris will usher in the 12th Imam? I dunno. Certainly the opinions of the govts of FRG and France would seem to be relevant. If they think the small odds of an iranian attack on them are not worth A. Pissing off the Russians with a system based in the Visograd states B. Going to the trouble of building their own sytem, or at least pushing hard in public for the US system, I dont know that I see the strategic logic for the US to choose a more expensive option, whose political support in the Visograd states has never been all taht firm, and which does piss off the Russians.
#14
Your assumption that the current USN is anywhere close to sized to counter a growing PRC capability betrays a profound unfamiliarity with the lifecycle timing of ship procurement, not to mention Congressional politics around same.
#15
WRt to nuking berlin - isnt the realist response that Iran is rationally deterrable, with our nuclear response?
Liberalhawk, within a decade of Pakistan getting The Bomb they were sponsoring terrorist attacks against Manhattan and our main response was to pretend it was Afghanistan and give them billions of dollars in transit fees _annually_ so we could support our troops in their little trap there, while people like you pretended we were actually fighting a war that mattered.
Let's see what Iran can do with the same class of deterrent.
#16
Seeing as we the US govt under both parties has always strongly supported defense exports, especially to our closest allies, saying "if obama wont sell it to them" sounds out of left field to me
Between his history of supporting our enemies and his track record of not supporting allies, I'd say the onyl thing that would be out of the blue is to assume he actually would sell it our allies.
Posted by: Mike N. ||
10/08/2009 22:03 Comments ||
Top||
President Obama told Congressional leaders on Tuesday that he would not substantially reduce American forces in Afghanistan or shift the mission to just hunting terrorists there, but he indicated that he remained undecided about the major troop buildup proposed by his commanding general. My guess is he'll go for the worst of both worlds...
"See? Y'all got what you wanted; I didn't significantly reduce troop levels. Stop fussing about the actual number, like ungrateful children!"
Meeting with leaders from both parties at the White House, Mr. Obama seemed to be searching for some sort of middle ground, saying he wanted to "dispense with the straw man argument that this is about either doubling down or leaving Afghanistan," as White House officials later described his remarks.
But as the war approached its eight-year anniversary on Wednesday, the session underscored the perilous crosscurrents awaiting Mr. Obama. While some Democrats said they would support whatever he decided, others challenged him about sending more troops. And Republicans pressed him to order the escalation without delay, leading to a pointed exchange between the president and Senator John McCain of Arizona, his Republican opponent from last year's election.
Mr. McCain told the president that "time is not on our side." He added, "This should not be a leisurely process," according to several people in the room.
A few minutes later, Mr. Obama replied, "John, I can assure you this won't be leisurely," according to several attendees. "No one feels more urgency to get this right than I do."
Still, compared with the harsh debate over health care, the tone was civil and restrained during the 75-minute meeting in the State Dining Room as Mr. Obama, Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and about 30 members of Congress gathered around a large table with only glasses of water and notebooks in front of them.
Mr. Obama summoned the lawmakers to assure them that he would keep their concerns in mind as he considered the request of his commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, for as many as 40,000 more troops. The president plans to meet with his national security team on Wednesday to talk about Pakistan and on Friday to talk about Afghanistan. Aides plan to schedule one more meeting before he decides on General McChrystal's proposal.
Several administration officials and lawmakers who attended the session on Tuesday said Mr. Obama was intent on using it to dismiss any impression that he would consider pulling out of Afghanistan. "There is no option that would entail a dramatic reduction in troops," said one administration official, who, like others quoted in this article, requested anonymity to discuss the closed-door meeting.
Mr. Obama and Mr. Biden made it clear that the option Mr. Biden had proposed was not a pure counterterrorism alternative, relying only on drones and Special Forces to track down leaders of Al Qaeda. Instead, Mr. Biden's approach would increase the use of such surgical strikes while leaving the overall size of the American force in Afghanistan roughly at the 68,000 troops currently authorized.
And in the final moments of the meeting, Mr. Obama sought to put to rest suspicions of friction with General McChrystal. "I'm the one who hired him," Mr. Obama said, according to participants. "I put him there to give me a frank assessment."
A joint appearance afterward on the White House driveway by the two top Democratic Congressional leaders demonstrated Mr. Obama's political challenge. "The one thing that I thought was interesting was that everyone, Democrats and Republicans, said whatever decision you make, we'll support it basically," said Senator Harry Reid, the majority leader.
But Representative Nancy Pelosi, the House speaker, smiled and raised her eyebrows in apparent disagreement. "Whether we agreed with it or voted for it remains to be seen when we see what the president puts forth," she said. "But I think there was a real display of universal respect for the manner in which he was approaching it."
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Sounded better than "Obama rules out taking action". So much for hope and change.
Posted by: ed ||
10/08/2009 0:47 Comments ||
Top||
#2
TOPIX/WMF > OBAMA VOWS TO HITS AL QAEDA WHEREEVER IT IS. US Mil-led Anti-Terror operations NOT limited solely to AFPAK andor Iraq-Mideast???
Lest we fergit, and unfortunately for POTUS BAMMER = the USA/USSA-USRoA, this scope is also contained in the GORBACHEV-YELTSIN-PUTIN-MEDVEDEV DOCTRINES, i.e POST-COLD WAR RUSSIA RESERVING ITS NATURAL RIGHT TO USE MILITARY + NUCLEAR FORCE TO UNILATER PROTECT RUSS INETRESTS + CITIZENS ANYWHERE, ANY TIME, ANY PLACE, + NOT NECESS WID ADVANCE WARNING [Preemption].
Read, even AGZ the USA INSIDE THE USA, ee GROWING CONUS-BASED JIHADIST, TERROR CELLS + ACTIVITIES.
RUSS DOCTRINES > RUSS VERSION OF REAGAN-BUSH ERA "FLEXIBLE RESPONSE" > it is "sufficient" only that a Terror strike(s) agz Russ Interests and espec Russ Citizens be made by Milits-Terrs TRACED BACK TO A US POINT(S)-OF-ORIGIN.
This is why US GOVT0-INTEL ANALYSTS of the period were worried about these new Russ Dcotrines.
#3
A joint appearance afterward on the White House driveway by the two top Democratic Congressional leaders demonstrated Mr. Obama's political challenge. "The one thing that I thought was interesting was that everyone, Democrats and Republicans, said whatever decision you make, we'll support it basically," said Senator Harry Reid, the majority leader.
Note to writer: That isn't a political challenge. Obamas political opposition pre-acquiescing to whatever he wants is the exact opposite of a political challenge. Whatever the word for that is.
Posted by: Mike N. ||
10/08/2009 4:54 Comments ||
Top||
#4
And in the final moments of the meeting, Mr. Obama sought to put to rest suspicions of friction with General McChrystal. "I'm the one who hired him," Mr. Obama said
Translation: I hired him, I can fire him or rondfok him and his army at my leisure.
#5
Mike N - i think the challenge line was a reference to the Pelosi eye roll, not the support from the GOP and from Reid.
Besoeker - I read that as BHO admitting what many of us have been saying, that it would be strange and embarrassing for BHO to not give high credence to the opinions of the guy he not only just hired, but whose predecessor he fired somewhat controversially. McCrystal really IS BHO's man.
#6
Even if Obama thinks an additional 40k in troops is needed, it will take some time to implement such a increase. I'm thinking it would take at least 9 months based on the logistics and the fact that our deployable forces are stretched pretty slim already.
This should give Obama some room to try a two or three phase surge (I'm sure it won't be called a surge) and McC could agree to report on the results of phase I before initiating phase II.
This would allow Obama to split the difference between the McC side and the Biden side in a way which causes minimal friction.
This
Posted by: lord garth ||
10/08/2009 13:04 Comments ||
Top||
#7
My guess is he'll go for the worst of both worlds...
[Al Arabiya Latest] President Barack Obama promised on Tuesday to target al-Qaeda wherever it takes root and to wipe out safe havens where Osama bin Laden's network can plan attacks on the United States. Obama told intelligence analysts at the National Counterterrorism Center in suburban Virginia that he could not rule out a future attack on U.S. soil, but would do everything in his power to thwart one.
"We know that al-Qaeda and its extremist allies threaten us from different corners of the globe, from Pakistan, but also from East Africa, Southeast Asia, from Europe and the Gulf," Obama said.
An interesting target list.
" We know that al-Qaeda and its extremist allies threaten us from different corners of the globe, from Pakistan, but also from East Africa, Southeast Asia, from Europe and the Gulf "
U.S. President Barack Obama
"That is why we are applying focus and relentless pressure on al-Qaeda," Obama said, without specifically mentioning Afghanistan, the focus of an exhaustive administration review of U.S. war and counter-terrorism policy.
"We will target al-Qaeda wherever they take root, we will not yield in our pursuit," Obama said.
The president said al-Qaeda was the "principal threat to the American people," but that his administration was making real progress in its mission to disrupt, dismantle and defeat the group.
The National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) was set up following the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, after it emerged that vital data on the pending strikes was not shared swiftly between various U.S. intelligence agencies. Its mission is to synchronize the fight against terrorist threats within the United States and abroad, and to coordinate and share data with U.S. government departments and agencies and U.S. foreign partners.
The president said the center was a vital cog in the arrest of Afghan immigrant Najibullah Zazi, 24, who was arrested last month and accused of preparing a bombing spree in New York.
Obama told an audience of NCTC employees that they were working well together and had helped to save American lives by thwarting terrorist strikes before they took place.
"You are one team ... you are more integrated, and more collaborative and more effective than ever before," Obama said.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under: al-Qaeda
#1
TOPIX > TALIBAN VOW PROLONGED WAR, + [Pew Forum]REPORT: WORLD MUSLIM POPULATION NOW AT 1.57BILYUHN, MAKE UP LESS THAN ONE PERCENT [0.008] OF US POPULATION. NEARLY ONE-IN-FOUR, wid 60% living in ASIA.
PEW study on WORLD CHRISTIANITY being planned for a lster time.
[Geo News] Secretary General of Jamat-e-Islami (JI) Liaquat Baloch has said that MMA has disbanded and there is no possibility of its regrouping. He expressed these views while talking to Geo News after his meeting with JUP President Dr. Muhammad Zubair Abul Khair here at Mansoora. He said Maulana Fazl-ur-Rehman is an ally of the incumbent government, therefore, there is no possibility of MMA's regrouping. Liaquat Baloch alleged that the country's autonomy has been traded against Kerry-Lugar Bill which should be tabled in the Parliament. This bill can be suspended if the opposition becomes serious, he added. He said the deferment of by-elections is the result of a rift in the government ranks.
This article starring:
DR. MUHAMAD ZUBAIR ABUL KHAIR
JUP
LIAQUAT BALOCH
Jamat-e-Islami
MAULANA FAZL UR REHMAN
JUI-F
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under: Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal
Former information minister Sherry Rehman and MNA Jameela Gilani called for repealing the blasphemy laws on Tuesday, as Sahibzada Fazl Karim said he would resist any move to do so. Speaking on a point of order, Sherry said the blasphemy laws should be reviewed as they were being misused. She said she wanted the laws to be repealed to reassure "our friends who have reservations". The Awami National Party's Jameela Gilani said her party also favoured repealing the blasphemy laws. "We are against all laws introduced by dictators," she said. Akram Masih Gill also complained of the Christian community being targeted under the blasphemy laws. Taking notice of these remarks, Sahibzada Fazl Karim said his party was against any change in the laws to appease the West. "We will not allow it," he added.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
Hakeemullah Mehsud is dead and it is possible that his look-alike might be his brother, Interior Minister Rehman Malik said on Tuesday. He was talking to reporters after visiting victims of Monday's suicide attack at PIMS. In the future, security personnel deployed at pickets would be ordered to frisk people in police or security guards' uniforms. The minister said the Pakistan Army had flushed out the Taliban from Swat and other conflict-hit areas. Malik said the government would not allow anybody to challenge its writ, adding that the government would launch a military operation in South Waziristan to bring peace there.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
#1
Let's not rule out the possibility this guy really is Hakeemullah, and his uncle and a nephew, all at the same time.
Posted by: ed ||
10/08/2009 0:50 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I have it on good authority that he's also his grandfather, Herb.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2009 8:08 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Insert obligatory "These are not the Hakeemullahs you are seeking" reference.
[Iran Press TV Latest] India's defense minister A.K. Antony has accused Pakistan of encouraging militants to cross border into Indian-administrated section of the disputed region of Kashmir. Antony told reporters on Wednesday that the Indian military was determined to stop the rise of infiltrations. "Pakistan is not willing to take strong action against these infiltrators," he said in New Delhi.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
#1
Terrorists injured during infiltration attempts at the LOC are now being evacuated by Pakistani Military helicopters.
The Pakistanis are not even bothering to pretend anymore.
Posted by: john frum ||
10/08/2009 7:52 Comments ||
Top||
[Al Arabiya Latest] The United Nations Security Council will hold closed-door consultations on Wednesday to consider whether to accept a Libyan request for a meeting mainly to discuss a U.N. report that accused Israel and Palestinian fighters of war crimes during Israel's assault of Gaza, diplomats said.
Libya's deputy ambassador Ibrahim Dabbashi told AFP that his country circulated a letter on behalf of the U.N. Arab group requesting "an emergency meeting" of the 15-member body to consider the U.N. report.
An investigation ordered by the Geneva-based U.N. Human Rights Council and led by South African jurist Richard Goldstone found that both the Israeli armed forces and Hamas fighters committed war crimes in the December-January war. But it was more critical of Israel.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
[Al Arabiya Latest] The United Nations agency for Palestinian refugees is mulling teaching the Holocaust to Palestinians in the Gaza Strip but is facing strong opposition from residents, the head of the agency said on Wednesday.
UNRWA officials are considering teaching the Nazi genocide of millions, including Jews, blacks and gypsies, during World War II to secondary school children as part of a human rights curriculum, said Karen AbuZayd.
But she stressed that the project, which has stirred stiff opposition in the Palestinian enclave, was still in its early stages.
"It's not even a draft; it's just some ideas that have been outlined. This human rights curriculum will be discussed with human rights experts in Gaza and with the community, the parents."
UNRWA earlier denied it had any immediate plans to teach the Holocaust in the schools it runs in Gaza following an outcry, notably from Hamas, which decried what it called plans to "teach a lie."
The strongest response came from Gaza residents rather than from Hamas, the enclave's Islamist leaders, AbuZayd said.
"It's not Hamas really, it's the community," she said.
"People don't understand why with what they've gone through ... they would have to learn about somebody else's problems," she said.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under: Hamas
#1
Maybe because despite all the whinging, their problems are 95% self-inflicted, and the remaining 5% are problems so minor that nobody gives a crap.
This is the most important lesson they need to learn.
Ma'an -- Secretary General of Islamic Jihad Ramadan Shalah accused President Mahmud Abbas of "blowing any chance of reconciliation."
Referring to the current controversy over the PA-initiated postponement of the Human Rights Council resolution on the Goldstone report under rumored American pressure, Shalah said the move would absolve Hamas and the other factions from any responsibility of failure of the conciliation talks in Cairo later this month.
During in an interview on Al-Jazeera Wednesday evening, Shalah said Abbas would bear the responsibility for the fallout from the Goldstone report, and all of the political consequences of its failure. He called the delay of the report a "disaster for every free man in the world," but noted there was an opportunity to pass the report in the General Assembly if the United Nations.
As for reconciliation between Abbas' Fatah and the other Palestinian factions, Shalah said it would likely depend on the spirit of what happened behind closed doors during the UN Human Rights Council meetings as sides were determining their positions on the Goldstone report. American pressure, as well as rumor of a secret video tape that shows Abbas urging on the war on Gaza to root out Hamas, are creating an angry atmosphere ahead of the planned Cairo talks.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under: Islamic Jihad
[Al Arabiya Latest] Hamas has asked Egypt to delay the signing of a Palestinian reconciliation deal Cairo had announced for later this month, a source within the Islamist group ruling Gaza said on Wednesday.
Hamas "asked Egypt to postpone the session for the signature of the agreement" with the rival secular Fatah faction headed by president Mahmud Abbas, the source told AFP, asking not to be named.
" Hamas, Palestinian factions and Egyptian officials are continuing consultations over what consequences the withdrawal of support for the Goldstone report by the Palestinian Authority would have on the Palestinian reconciliation dialogue "
Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhum
Egypt had announced on Monday that the bitter rivals would come to Cairo to sign a long-delayed reconciliation deal on October 25-26.
The postponement was requested because of the controversial decision by the Palestinian delegation at the U.N. Human Rights Council to drop its backing for an immediate vote on a damning report on the Gaza war, the Hamas source said.
For his part, Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhum would only say that "Hamas, Palestinian factions and Egyptian officials are continuing consultations over what consequences the withdrawal of support for the Goldstone report by the Palestinian Authority would have on the Palestinian reconciliation dialogue."
The U.N. report, authored by respected South African judge Richard Goldstone, accused Israel and Hamas of committing war crimes during the 22-day war that killed 1,400 Palestinians and 13 Israelis.
On Friday, the Geneva-based council decided to defer a vote on the report until March after the Palestinian delegation agreed to the move, reportedly under U.S. pressure.
Hamas has been at the forefront of criticism levelled at Abbas over the decision, saying the move "betrayed" the Palestinian victims of the offensive.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under: Hamas
The first death sentence for participation in Irans post election protests was handed down on Monday, an Iranian reformist website has reported.
Mowcamp, one of the many Farsi-language sites relied on by opposition supporters to spread news, reported that the accused, Mohammed Reza Ali-Zamani, had been informed of the verdict on Monday after the conclusion of his trial. The website gave no source for its report, which could not be independently verified.
The website reported that Mr Ali-Zamani was transferred on Monday from Evin prison ward 209 to Revolutionary Court number 15, presided over by Justice Salabati and the execution verdict was communicated to him. Evin is the name of Tehrans most infamous prison, where regime opponents have been imprisoned since the reign of the Shah.
If confirmed, it would be the first death sentence yet in the trials of more than 100 opposition supporters for allegedly fomenting street violence following President Ahmadinejads disputed election victory in June.
Opposition supporters and international and local human rights groups have denounced the proceedings as show trials designed to intimidate the general populace and uproot the moderate opposition supporting his rival, Mir Hossein Mousavi.
His supporters and others opposed to the clerical establishment itself took to the streets crying fraud after official election results abruptly handed President Ahmadinejad victory with more than 60 percent of the vote.
Evidence of official responsibility for the brutal suppression of streets protestors has mounted since June, much of it aired on the internet, including video footage, stills photographs and witness testimony. The opposition claims more than 70 civilians were killed or subsequently died in custody, more than twice the official death toll.
The regime has remained insistent that the protesters themselves were the instigators of the violence, dismissing official involvement in the deaths of such high-profile protestors as Neda Agha Soltan, the university student whose fatal shooting was captured on video and sent around the world.
In August, the semi-official Iranian news agency Mehr, named Mr Ali-Zamini as one of those set to stand trial, accusing of fighting to overthrow the Islamic Republic and belong to a terrorist monarchist organisation. Scores of other protesters remain in custody awaiting trial.
Next week Israel and America will undertake joint military exercises. Nothing unusual there. Operation Juniper Cobra (JC) is about missile defence. Nothing unusual there either, it's a regular event. It's an autumn deployment. Ah, that's different. In previous years Operation JC was scheduled for spring, and that was supposed to be the case this year. So what changed?
Timing is everything, and the timing of these war games comes just as the tension over the Iranian nuclear question has risen dramatically, as was always likely after the UN General Assembly. This may not be why the operation was shifted, but it makes sense.
War Games are required to iron out problems of strategy, technology, even personal relationships. But they are also used to send messages. When the Chinese mess around in boats near Tawian, they usually use landing craft boats. This sends the clear message that despite recently warmer relationships, the Chinese still have the option of one day landing back in what they say is part of the Motherland.
The message from Juniper Cobra is that the US will help defend Israel, and that together they are capable of deflecting a ballistic missile attack by Iran.
The Americans and Israeli's will link up their Arrow and Patriot systems and other equipment. Most of the action will take place on computer screens, but there will be some live firing. It will be interesting to see if the cameras are allowed to film this, if they are it will indicate a deliberate show of strength and it will be noticed from Moscow, to Pyongyang, to Tehran.
THE Pentagon claims a giant "bunker buster" bomb will be ready within months, adding a powerful weapon to the US arsenal amid tensions over Iran's nuclear program.
The 30,000lb (13,607kg) massive ordnance penetrator (MOP) is designed to knock out fortified sites buried deep underground, like those used by Iran and North Korea to protect its nuclear work.
"It is under development right now and should be deployable in the coming months,'' press secretary Geoff Morrell said.
The Defense Department had said in August it wanted to speed up production plans for the super bomb, asking Congress to shift funds to the project. Congress approved the request and the Pentagon today announced it awarded McDonnell Douglas Corporation a US$51.9 million ($57.5 million) contract to enable B-2 aircraft to carry the enormous MOP.
The bomb, which holds 5300lb (2404kg) of explosives, is designed "to defeat hardened facilities used by hostile states to protect weapons of mass destruction'', Mr Morrell said. But he declined to comment whether the weapon's development was in response to Iran's disputed nuclear program.
"I don't think anybody can divine potential targets or anything of that nature," he said. "This is just a capability that we think is necessary given the world we live in these days.
"The reality is that the world we live in is one in which there are people who seek to build weapons of mass destruction and they seek to do so in a clandestine fashion.''
The United States has refused to rule out military action against Iran if diplomacy fails though President Barack Obama's administration has played down the possibility. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said last month that a military strike against Iran would only "buy time'' and delay a nuclear weapons program by about one to three years.
The earth-penetrating MOP is often cited as a potential weapon to take out Iran's underground centrifuge facilities in Natanz.
Iran admitted last month it had been building a new uranium enrichment plant near the holy city of Qom, sparking international outrage.
In subsequent talks with world powers, Tehran has adopted a more conciliatory stance and agreed to UN inspections of the new plant.
Aerospace giant Boeing manufactures the MOP, which could become the biggest conventional bomb ever used by the US military.
[Al Arabiya Latest] Iran's police chief said on Wednesday that an investigation had found no evidence that election protesters detained in a now closed detention center had been raped as alleged by opposition groups.
"It has been proved that there was no rape in Kahrizak," the ISNA news agency quoted Esmail Ahmadi Moghaddam as saying, referring to the notorious detention center south of Tehran.
Moghadam acknowledged that "some offenses were committed" at the jail but he did not elaborate on the details.
Three of the center's warders and around a dozen judiciary and police personnel are awaiting trial in the case.
Iranian opposition groups have alleged that several male and female protesters detained in Kahrizak were raped there. Iranian officials have previously dismissed the allegations.
Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei ordered the closure of the detention center amid reformist media reports that three protesters died after being beaten in custody there.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Iran
#1
"We asked outloud and nobody spoke up! You can believe us."
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.
[Dawn] The Afghan Taliban pose no threat to the west but will continue their fight against occupying foreign forces, they said on Wednesday, the eighth anniversary of the US-led invasion that removed them from power.
North Korea launched a "150-day struggle," a press-ganged mobilization to increase production of collective farms from April 20 to Sept. 19 on the road to building a "powerful and prosperous nation" by 2012. No sooner had the one struggle ended than a "100-day struggle" ensued. But what exactly is the point? 
A breakthrough that enables the early targeting of ballistic missiles by linking radars and other sensors from different parts of the world is key to the Obama administration's new missile defense plans, according to senior administration officials.
[Iran Press TV Latest] India's defense minister A.K. Antony has accused Pakistan of encouraging militants to cross border into Indian-administrated section of the disputed region of Kashmir. Antony told reporters on Wednesday that the Indian military was determined to stop the rise of infiltrations. "Pakistan is not willing to take strong action against these infiltrators," he said in New Delhi.
The first death sentence for participation in Irans post election protests was handed down on Monday, an Iranian reformist website has reported. 
