China Watch: CHINA USES ITS BLOGGERS AGAIN TO ANNOUNCE STEALTH PROGRESS

by B.RAMAN

China has once again used its bloggers ----possibly belonging to the People's Liberation Army (PLA)--- to indicate to the world in general and to the US in particular that it successfully carried out the second test flight of its J-20 Stealth aircraft---still under development--- on April 17,2011, from the Chengdu military airport in the Sichuan province.

2. The Chinese authorities, who have not yet made an official announcement of the successful flight, used the same procedure as they did during its maiden flight in January to let the world know of their success---- they apparently alerted a group of bloggers around the Chengdu military airport about the impending flight and encouraged them to cover the flight through postings of their visual observations in their blogs.

3. A detailed report carried by the Party-controlled "Global Times" on April 19,2011, on the flight is annexed. According to the bloggers, who had timed the two flights of J-20, whereas the first flight in January lasted only 20 minutes, the second flight on April 17 lasted about 85 minutes. It took off at 4-25 PM and landed at 5-50 PM.

4. Why do the Chinese use the bloggers for announcing the flights instead of doing so officially? A convincing answer to this question is not available. One reason could be to maintain the deniability of any possible failures, but that is not a convincing answer. If they don't encourage any leaks of impending flights the deniability of failures would be even stronger.

5. Are the bloggers making the postings simultaneously with the flights or after the flights have successfully ended? Since in the latest case, the flight lasted about 85 minutes it should have been possible for Western intelligence agencies, which monitor Chinese blogs, to simultaneously track the flights or to determine whether the blog postings are being made after the flights are successfully over.

6. According to Western experts, the J-20 has a height of 5 metres ( 5.08 in the case of the US F-22 Raptor), weight 17600 kgs ( 19700), cruising speed 2100 kph (2500 plus) and estimated unit cost US $ 110 million ( US $ 130 million ). Some US experts suspect that the Chinese were able to develop the stealth technology from parts of an American F-117 Nighthawk that was shot down over Serbia in 1999 and parts of which they allegedly managed to acquire from the locals.

7.Is the J-20 still at the concept demonstration stage or is it a prototype moving towards production?Many believe after studying the two tests that the Chinese are past the concept demonstration stage and are now gradually moving towards production. ( 22-4-11)

(Bahukutumbi Raman is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presenhtly, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )

ANNEXURE

("Global Times" report of April 19,2011)

Mystery jet 'flies' again

An alleged J-20 prototype prepares to take off from the Chengdu Aircraft Design Institute's airfield in Sichuan Province on Sunday.

By Xu Tianran and Huang Jingjing

Photos of China's J-20 stealth fighter prototype are all the rage on online military forums, after word emerged that another test flight was completed Sunday when officials in Beijing celebrated the 60th anniversary of the establishment of China's aviation industry.

Some of the online footage showed scores of military enthusiasts yelling when an aircraft flew over the Chengdu Aircraft Design Institute's airfield in Sichuan Province, but it was unclear whether the plane was the J-20 prototype.

"The J-20 made several passes and waggled its wings (rolling the plane first to one side then to the other) to salute the crowd near the airfield," a witness told the Global Times on condition of anonymity, adding that the plane took off at around 4:25 pm and landed at about 5:50 pm.

As of press time, Chinese authorities had not commented on the issue, but the Xinhua News Agency posted another clip of the flight uploaded by Internet users.

The J-20 prototype made its 18-minute debut flight in Chengdu on January 11, when US Defense Secretary Robert Gates visited Beijing. Since then, it has been touted as a potential challenger to the US Air Force's F-22 Raptor, the world's only fifth-generation fighter jet.

Xu Yongling, one of China's top test pilots, said that if Sunday's test flight proved true, it would be more or less the same as the first test, but Xu noted that every test is one step closer to mass production.

"The first 10 to 20 tests are meant to calibrate the entire aircraft, including its stability, handling qualities and performance. All of them are short in time, but the entire process will take years to complete," Xu told the Global Times on Monday.

The alleged test flight coincided with a celebration in the Great Hall of the People in Beijing on Sunday that marked the 60th anniversary of China's aviation industry.

Lin Zuoming, general manager of the Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC), pledged at the ceremony to push forward the development of next-generation aircraft and to make breakthroughs in propulsion systems.

"By 2015, the research and design of all key models will be completed," Lin said, adding that inferior engine design has been a "bottleneck" for the advancement of China's aviation industry.

According to him, AVIC will invest 10 billion yuan ($1.52 billion) in engine development, which is equivalent to its net profit from 2010.

However, this amount of investment is unimpressive when compared with other major engine projects.

According to a press release from Pratt & Whitney, the company was awarded a contract valued at more than $4 billion in 2001 to develop its F135 engine for the US air force's F-35 Joint Strike Fighter aircraft.

Lin also urged speedup in transferring technology to civil aviation, saying China's aviation industry cannot rely solely on the military.

Wang Zhilin, general manager of the Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China, told CCTV on Sunday that, by 2020, China's C919 passenger jet will be equipped with engines designed by AVIC.

"By 2021, the Chinese aviation industry will be at the same level as major players in the world and have become the outstanding supplier of air defense equipment," Lin added.

Separately, another rumor circulated on the Internet recently involving the alleged J-18, China's first warplane with vertical/short takeoff and landing capabilities.

Earlier this month, citing a report by Japan's Asahi Shimbun newspaper, Phoenix Television said the J-18 had completed a test flight at a field base in the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region.

The report said the wings of the jet, similar to Russia's Su-33, a carrier-based multi-role fighter, could be folded, and suspected that it would be installed on China's future aircraft carrier.

The report came at the same time as foreign media speculated that China's first aircraft carrier, a modification of the Varyag bought from Ukraine, would take to the oceans in July. The Chinese military has denied such reports.

Ding Zhiyong, a spokesperson at the AVIC, told the Global Times on Monday that the Japanese report of the alleged J-18 was pure speculation and that the corporation had no information to reveal.

Li Daguang, a professor specializing in military strategy at the National Defense University, told the Global Times earlier that even if the rumored carrier were true, the vessel would only be used for training.

Liu Linlin contributed to this story.

Freak Show

A close friend - who doesn’t live in America and, hence, doesn’t know America in the way I do - claims that the reason America involves itself endlessly in war is because it is a relatively young nation, eager to flex its young muscles. She theorizes thus, quite without malice, as if commenting on the antics of kittens tumbling about on the living room floor. Accepting her premise, I must say that I’ve watched America aging precipitously ever since Vietnam. In fact, the trend seems to have accelerated over the years to where our overall policy now appears to be all but in its death throes.

Domestically too, we seem to have adopted a model that is a throwback to the past. Communism and, in a sense, theocracy have been resurrected from a well deserved grave only to die again. America, as she had been only recently, was the future; the very model of modern success, to which the whole world flocked in droves even as this same world now retreats in utter disgust from this house of the dying, built on a jumble of acronyms.

War, by definition, is chaos. It makes no sense to impose rules on it. It makes even less sense to go in without any notion of victory. It is no accident that 60% of U.S. casualties in Afghanistan so far have died under Obama. It was Obama who changed the rules of engagement and struck the words ‘war’ and ‘victory’ from military manuals. It is Obama who doesn’t understand the difference between war and a police action.

The latter does not bode well for us here on the home front as well. Were we ourselves ever to contemplate rising up against the oppressive boot of our own government – after all constitutional measures have failed – who is now to say what Obama, or any leader of his ilk, would use his army for?

In past African wars, the European gentry used to gather on the surrounding hills with their sun shades and picnic baskets to watch. The distance made the dying anticeptic. Are we actually thinking of reviving this freak show?

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Traipsing Around In The Hallway

There have been other instances when we first sent in ‘advisors’; then we armed our preferred side; then we provided air support; and, finally, we put American boots on the ground. It did not end well. You’d think we would learn. But aren’t we starting the same cycle all over again in Libya?

There was a time when we went all out in support of the notion that we are killing our planet, based on ‘irrefutable’ scientific evidence, graphs and projections - which were then proven to have been manufactured for political advantage. Yet, we are still operating on the original premise and demanding wholesale changes in the way that we live.

There was a time when Keynesian economics was the talk of the town. It dictated hiking Federal spending in order to increase prosperity and jobs. We were told that that economic activity increases by $2 for every dollar spent on unemployment insurance, and the like. We were told, we had at last discovered the golden goose; we had invented a perpetual motion mechanism that would spew greenbacks forever. Two for one. The more unemployed, the better for our economy… It’s not working.

The result of all these things should have been foreseen by those who promoted such policies. They should have known that it wouldn’t end well. These are the brightest among us, after all. If they don’t know, how should we with our mere high school education and a couple of college credits in basket weaving?

I maintain they did know – maybe not the first time it was tried, but certainly the second and third. And here we’re repeating all the same mistakes over again. Why?

Isn’t it obvious? Redistribution of wealth. It’s a core belief among those now in power that this must absolutely be done. They know the people bought it the first time around. And they know the people will buy it again: all the same promises; all the same lies. And then, when they figure out it’s not working, we’ll simply say, “Oops!” And they’ll assume we noticed our mistake and will correct it. This will give us time to do it again. And, again, we'll say, “Oops!” And “Oops!” it is until they’re ready to revolt, but by then it’s too late. They will have been bled of all their power to seriously resist.

Why Libya? It’s the same principle that applies: “Oops!” and “Oops!” again, until our precious army has been discredited beyond redemption. With the economy in tatters; Congress in tatters; the military in tatters, America’s enemies will have won. That’s when we’ll get Israel!

Don Trump has been getting a lot of press attention for keeping Obama’s birth certificate controversy alive. He himself is not exactly strident about it, knowing it’s become the third rail of American politics …and he does want to be president. It does give an opening, however, to those who want to keep the issue going. Why is it an issue in the first place?

Carter made a lot of mistakes, both in foreign policy as well as domestic. These can be filed away as teachable moments for future American presidents. These were teachable moments too for America’s enemies.

The law draws a distinction between someone falling asleep while smoking a cigarette in bed and someone deliberately pouring gas into the stairwell of a building and setting it on fire. Granted, the end result is the same.

Obama has been in office long enough for us to question his motives. As such, it is logical for us to question which team he’s actually playing on. His birth certificate would provide a clue; as would his school records. The fact that these are unavailable to us just goes to intensify our suspicions. Obama’s reluctance to provide this evidence is an indication of something being seriously amiss: Someone has been, or is about to be, snookered.

At the very least, we would find out if our president is merely a guy with a cigarette, or the guy with the red 5 gallon can, traipsing around in the hallway.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Holding the Bag

What we are witnessing on every front is quite remarkable. It’s tough to keep up with it all and even tougher to make sense of it. Whatever happens in Libya, we now own it. There’s one school of thought that thinks it’s already too late; that the civil war there is already over; that Kaddafi has won; that to interfere at this late date will only serve to forestall the inevitable.

So why did we do it? My guess is we were stung by the Saudi’s sending troops into Bahrain without telling us. To make up for it, we decided we must do something to show that we’re still relevant. (Democrats are always asking themselves if they’re relevant.) Never mind; when push comes to shove, our allies can be expected to excuse themselves to go to the bathroom. Many in our Congress know this; that we’ll be left holding the bag. They also know that we’ve had no time to prepare. It took Bush many months to launch an invasion into Iraq. I remember, even the weather became a factor. It pays to remember that initially Bush was hugely successful. Our troops hardly had to fire a shot. We could hardly believe our luck when our objective was met in record time.

But we just couldn’t leave it at that. We just had to embark on ‘nation building’, changing hearts and minds and all such rot. And even this would have succeeded if we hadn’t politicized it here at home. Democrats wanted Bush discredited at all costs. They were quite willing to gamble away all just to see it happen. As such, they happily undermined America’s effectiveness and prestige. They destroyed the levee known by its age old dictum that ‘politics stops at the water’s edge’, inviting a flood of recrimination and abuse from abroad. It worked and we lost our way.

What a price we’ve had to pay!!! Now we truly are irrelevant. Nobody takes us seriously anymore. Even the guy at the gas station on the corner can hardly stand to look at us. We have shamed ourselves in the eyes of the world, hastening our own demise to no purpose.

I say this in response to John Batchelor’s words last night when commenting on the self-immolation of a Tunisian fruit vendor and likening it to the recent self-immolation of a Tibetan monk. These were brave and honorable deeds that will go down in history as important turning points. When a rich and powerful country does the same, however, it is seen as utter folly.

What exactly is our goal in Libya? When will we know we have won? What exactly will we have won? And should we lose, and Kaddafi stays in power?

It has been my contention from the start that Obama is out to wreck every one of our key institutions. Already he’s done a fair job of it. The only thing remaining is the military.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Reply to Corlyss: Trouble in Egypt

Corlyss - You knew this was coming. Always looking ahead. Here, in America, it’s already happened. Both in Egypt and in America the people were made to so despise the status quo, they would stampede for ‘change‘. Both in Egypt and in America, there are (and have been) good people in support of ‘revolution’. Mubarak was a dictator, Bush was an incompetent who insisted on playing by the Queensberry rules. But both were more or less benign.

In Egypt, the mullahs painted Mubarak black. In America, the press painted Bush black. The people were riled up. They were told it couldn’t get any worse. In Egypt, they are now taking to the streets. In America, they went to the ballot box (2008).

Ours was a bloodless revolution. We had money as a buffer to absorb the shock (of revolution). When the money runs out, we too will take to the streets. We’re apt to suffer our own Tehran moment. Egypt, on the other hand, is a relatively poor nation. The only option for them is (go directly to… Do not pass GO) civil unrest. In both countries, the revolution was carefully orchestrated. As I said, a lot of good people were enticed to join in. They will be the first to be crushed in what follows.

The revolution is not over - neither in Egypt nor in America. In Egypt, Iran’s “Moslem Brothers are hanging back“. In America, the Marxists radicals are hanging back. Both revolutions are made to appear as a grassroots movement attracting only the pious. In America, we ended up with a dictator. The same will result in Egypt. In America, things will get worse; in Egypt things will get worse as well. Both freedom and any hint of optimism will suffer - along with tolerance, civility, and fair play. Israel should be worried.

Israel has been painted a pariah. Israel is the ultimate target - the jewel in the crown of dictators. America will not help. America’s conscience has been severed from its body politic in the interest of (short-term) expedience. America is going down the same road as Israel (and Egypt). The difference is that America has already had its revolution and the bad guys won. “The Marxists (sic) are patient and relentless.”

By the time the dust has settled, America will be already be preparing for its next ‘revolution’. The military will take the side of the people. The next one should be relatively brief as all of America’s enemies will be residing at close quarters - in Washington/DC.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Stop War

We all know where Obama stands on all this START business. He doesn’t like our military and wishes it would go away. He campaigned against nukes - against war. There were enough who voted in support of this premise even being possible.

The nuclear deterrent worked for a good many years, so they say. It is only now beginning to break down because it has become clear that America won’t fight seriously under any pretext. China has already run this experiment several times and the results are in. It is building its military - not to fight America, but - to cement its position within it’s own East Asian theater.

While it is true that a modern military fosters the illusion of invincibility and therefore acts as a deterrent, it does not guarantee victory. Ronald Reagan’s Star Wars threat may itself have been an illusion. It worked - not in the way anyone expected it might, but - rather in the way a head-fake does, causing the Russians to over-reach and over-spend and, in the process, become disheartened. They’re still not over it and Putin is trying hard to make amends.

Someone once famously remarked, “…you go to war with the army you have.” If it’s not enough, you resort to asymmetric warfare. Look what the stone-throwing Palestinians have been able to accomplish! Look at Iran and North Korea!

No, boomers are not the only answer. We could kill our enemies with stones if we had to. Our problem is, we no longer know how to define ‘winning’ or ‘victory’. As long as we view ourselves as the source of all that‘s wrong with the world; as long as we run around apologizing to everyone in sight; as long as we’re so divided within ourselves as not to not recognize an outside threat as it develops, we may as well start painting targets on ourselves and get used to the likelihood that we will soon be led by something quite alien to us; something which will take some getting used to.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

China Laughing While U.S. Downgrades Military To Paintball

Why even bother to report it? (North Korea's continued provocations.) We no longer have a dog in the fight. We’ve shown quite unambiguously that we are no longer interested in fighting/winning. We seem to be intent on castrating our armed forces. We no longer see them as a blunt tool to support our now thoroughly compromised diplomacy; rather, we are in the process of re-shaping this once awesome tool to reflect some ‘less is more’ ideology with the vague expectation that the world will think this is great and follow our lead.

The damage this president has done to our military in his two years in office is astounding. First, he has ordered it to engage in a war without aiming to win. He has placed restrictions on our fighting men and women that make it difficult even to stay alive. Wikileaks enters into it at some level, as does the heroic repeal of ’don’t ask, don’t tell’.

I predict within less than a year, the military will be hard up for recruits and we may have to revert to something akin to the draft. The outlines of this are already apparent: amnesty for service. Until now, we have seen very few minorities among our fighting forces in Afghanistan and Iraq. This has to be pointed out because the Left has up until recently always falsely claimed that America only sends it minorities oversees and into harm’s way to fight it’s dirty wars. (They’ve since had to be content with complaining about the relatively high incarceration rate among certain minority communities.) All this will change.

Prisoners will now fight ‘clean’ wars. They will not be expected to win - only to stay alive while ordered to hand out food and bandages to the starving and wounded. Military missions oversees will likely evolve into setting up abortion and sex clinics, and (don’t forget) welfare offices, thus providing an ever escalating stream of entitlement clientele for liberals here at home to administer.

It is unlikely that China will go along with the program though, admittedly, they may laugh themselves silly and thus suffer some minor set-backs in their quest to take over the world.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Wikileaks: Promoting Shame

Of course the Chinese knew what N. Korea was up to. N. Korea is a Chinese proxy. N. Korea could not exist without China. The idea that N. Korea would do anything behind China’s back is ludicrous.

Iran too has its proxies that are hyperactive in the Middle East. JB has spent many hours detailing how it works. Our State Department, for public consumption, points fingers at N. Korea, Syria, Hezbollah, etc. to keep from pointing fingers at Beijing and Tehran. What exactly is gained by this strategy remains unclear.

The Wikileaks matter is quite fascinating in this regard. Washington too has its proxies many of whom have dried up (or are in the process of drying up) particularly since our current president has been in office. He is now claiming that the Wikileak document dumps represent a security risk. This is pure lip service on his part. His actions speak otherwise. Obama has done nothing to reign in Wikileaks. The military is screaming that it has put our soldiers at risk. True enough, but Obama has done more to put them at risk than Wikileaks ever could. No need on this website to go into details. Everyone is pretty much up to speed on how our own rules of engagement - threat of court martial right here at home - have undermined our military effort.

Now, that the leaks are beginning to put the lie to the public face of our diplomatic goals, Washington is starting to make noise (in protest). “It’s embarrassing,” goes the refrain from the State Department. Embarrassing? Quite.

The global consensus, fueled in large part by Washington itself, has been that anything Washington does is in many ways self-serving, duplicitous, and essentially evil. That is why U.S. aid to the starving or sick in Africa is routinely re-packaged as to erase any sign of its origin. Embarrassed too is anyone who may be exposed as having collaborated with Americans on any level.

Obama does nothing. We can assume Wikileaks serves his purposes. The next leaks are said to pertain to our banks. More nails to hammer the coffin lid on capitalism shut.

Finally, the common denominator in all this frantic leaking is America. There are no leaks with regard to Beijing, Moscow or Tehran. Oh, there are leaks alright, but they're not splashed all over the NYT which is only interested in America’s sins and in promoting its shame.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

He Did Not

It does seem like many Americans must be hit in the head with two-by-fours before they finally realize what’s actually happening. The trouble is that a blow like that is also likely to render the victim unconscious. It is now clear that ever since 9/11, some - if not most - of us have been rendered unconscious. This is not to say that the forces that are bedeviling us today had not been gathering long before the towers came down. 9/11, however, should have served as a wake-up call. It didn’t.

I am amused by reports that consistently prefix their findings with words such as ‘unexpected’ and ‘surprising’. There were many who predicted exactly where we were headed years ago. I myself remember saying that Barack Hussein Obama was destined to chauffeur the hearse to America’s final resting place. We seemed to be okay with that.

9/11 was an attack on what? America’s source of strength: its economy (and to a lesser extent on its military). It succeeded in bringing down the manifestation of that strength in unambiguous, most spectacular fashion. Less of our people died in the Japanese attack on Peal Harbor than did on 9/11. You would think that that would have meant something. Instead, our government to this day still has a problem in defining the enemy. And as such, it’s strategy is in disarray: unfocused, scattered, ad hoc, and - in large part - turned in against itself.

Bush meant well when he said, “If you’re not with us, you’re against us.” Almost immediately our enemies - both here and abroad - sprang into action and began to ridicule him. Our domestic enemies turned out to be far more effective, turning ridicule into high art; a national pastime. They got what they wanted. They gave us Obama.

Now that it’s become clear where our nation is ultimately headed, everyone acts surprised. As a WSJ reader points out today, ‘unintended’ is not the same as ‘unforeseen’. Whereas everything reported today is couched in ‘unintended’ (surprise); nothing was ever so obscure as to escape prediction. We are being attacked on so many fronts, it’s difficult to keep one’s focus. Unless we’re willing to admit (to ourselves) that we’re in a war, and address the enemy appropriately, our fortunes will continue to wane. The ‘mosque on Ground Zero’ controversy is a case and point: Half of us do not recognize that Islam is at war with us, while all of Islam is utterly convinced of it.

Yesterday, the president of the United States spoke out for the first time on the mosque controversy. I wish he had said, “If you’re not with us, you’re against us.” He didn’t.

Conspiracy Theory

“How do we defeat such an enemy?” We beat them, pure and simple. We go in with all we’ve got and get the job done. We have the best fighting force in the world, bar none. If the Afghan government itself becomes a problem, there are strategies on a higher level to take care of that as well. Ditto, Pakistan. There is simply no excuse for America to lose any skirmish anywhere in the world.

What we lack is will. The Democrat Party has aligned itself with the anti-war movement for decades. They have politicized war and used it to keep Republicans from winning at the polls right here at home. They have thrown every conceivable obstacle in the way of any war effort for decades. They have been actively rooting for our enemies, especially under Republican leadership. They have struck words like ‘winning’ and ‘victory’ from the public debate. In the process they have succeeded in reducing our military to some ad hoc version of ‘meals-on-wheels’, a job it is wholly unsuited for.

If we decide to continue on our present course, we are guaranteed to lose. In fact, losing is virtually guaranteed if it is the aim, first and foremost, of our policy makers to lose (for whatever reason) as it now seems.

It has now been made clear that it is the aim of our present administration to reduce America’s influence around the world; that it considers American hegemony as the single most potent impediment to world peace. The obvious consequence of such policy is the demonstration of losses on the battlefield, the diminution of our dollar, and the seizing of political power over opponents here at home largely by the canard of blaming our losses on the opposition.

I’m as much a fan of conspiracy theory as the next guy. I was watching “The Fall of the Republic” just yesterday but couldn’t shake the feeling that what I was watching in itself might be nothing more substantive than propaganda. Conspiracy theories all follow a well-trodden path. There are heroes and villains and it all ends up in some kind of dystopian morass of dungeons and chains. I began to feel disgust and retreated to my history books. When it occurred to me that history itself is little more than conspiracy theory in reverse.

Which brings us to now. Clearly there is at present no will to win as far as America is concerned. All our efforts seem to be singularly focused on neutralizing the Tea Parties and their supporters. On the highest levels of our government it appears to have been decided that this is the only battle worth winning. All others - Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel, Taiwan, India, Central and South America - be damned.

Winners and Losers

I keep reading about fresh U.S. casualties in Afghanistan. The headline usually reads “worst month since…” And I can’t help but wonder what has gone wrong. The major news media used to make a big deal about U.S. casualties in Iraq. It was presented as a kind of game show countdown (or 'up'); some kind of doomsday clock. We were told it was Bush’s fault and that the war there was already lost and that any further action was meaningless - Bush’s war; not America’s war.

Now we’ve come full circle. The administration that got itself elected by promising to end Iraq and fight the ‘right’ war in Afghanistan now has exactly what it wanted. Still, the casualties continue to mount. It’s been a boon of sorts for Obama in that he can now claim victory in Iraq (which he has). But Afghanistan remains a daunting enterprise; first, because we don’t seem to know whom we’re fighting. According to the administration there are good Taliban and bad Taliban; there are corrupt politicians and despicable ones. And each and every one of them has turned against us.

The game there has become so skewed that we’ve been reduced to appealing for just one person to step forward and say, “Jolly good job, America! You can go home now and prosecute your soldiers for war crimes”; just one person we can manage to bring in front of cameras to attest to something good we may have inadvertently left behind: a school; a hospital; a charred poppy field; a woman left unscarred - anything at all that hasn’t immediately been erased in the time it takes to get an BBC news team to the site.

I wonder about the American families who have suffered the loss of dear ones in this wanton wasteland. I wonder if they understand how their personal loss advances America’s cause. I sure don’t.

These wars have been shamelessly politicized from the start to serve parochial political ends. As such, a great debate ensued between those who wanted us to win and those who wanted us to lose. That battle was decided right here in America when Obama came to power. While our first impulse to engage extreme elements within the Islamic tradition was proper - indeed unavoidable - since then, any thought about our actual mission there has been lost in the shuffle.

There have been winners and losers alright, but these have no longer anything to do with either Afghanistan or Iraq. Those people have been exploited for the purpose of bringing the Obama administration to power and subjugated Republicans. It is here that you find your winners and losers.

Gen. McChrystal vs. POTUS Obama

The apology tour continues on all fronts:

When Israel gave up Gaza to Hamas it left in place housing, greenhouses and fully functioning factories. The first thing Hamas did was smash all such infrastructure in the name of (victory) celebration.

The brouhaha that has erupted between POTUS and Gen. Stanley McChrystal is what normally happens between a professional (employer) and his or her less-than-dedicated novice underling. Only, in our upside down world (since Obama) the roles are reversed. McChrystal is the professional and Obama is the novice. McChrystal’s exposé in Rolling Stone was a cry for help. No way can we win a war with all these namby-pamby restrictions placed on our fighting men and women. Putting them out on the battlefield under such conditions is like signing their death warrants in advance. June is already the deadliest month ever for our soldiers in Afghanistan.

While conservative talk show hosts eagerly line up on every conceivable side of the argument in hopes of boosting the sales of their sex toy advertisers, our brave men and women are dying on foreign soil. McCrystal is a general’s general. His men are foremost on his mind. How can he be expected to explain the sacrifice of his fallen when he knows the exercise is essentially pointless; when we are merely treading water - already slated for withdrawal no matter what happens? We’re not even allowed to define ‘victory’ (or ‘enemy’) for God’s sake! In today’s world, it is no longer a general’s job to march his troops off a cliff just to demonstrate their loyalty to an egotistical, maniacal king.

No doubt, McCrystal also feels the reputation of the armed forces is on the line. Coming home without a clear victory to show for it is bound to signify yet another nail in the coffin of the once proud American military. No other president has used the military so recklessly; so dismissively; so reluctantly; so insufficiently. U.S. presidents in charge of wars from Vietnam through Iraq might have made tactical mistakes and then taken their just lumps. But no president, prior to Barack Hussein Obama, has dispatched American troops for (what now appears to be) the sole purpose of destroying his own military.

The pattern is clear: In order to rebuild America you first have to destroy every functioning piece of it. You have to destroy democracy, history, the economy, education, trust, religion, the press, industry, etc. The big thing that’s left is the military. No doubt, McCrystal sees the writing on the wall: The impossible mission; his troops hogtied, then accused. He will have no part in it.

Beating the Dog...

Great column today by Charles Krauthammer in the Washington Post entitled, “The Fruits of Weakness”. JB is right in stating that Obama fears the military. JB is wrong in framing this challenge in terms of the 2010 election. POTUS does not fear elections.

Obama is like a man beating a dog to death with a club. Once the fur starts flying, his most formidable opposition will be the U.S. military. The conquest of the civilian sector has been relatively easy for Obama who entered office with the tables already set: a compliant press, corrupt unions, and industries willing to sell their souls for the privilege of surviving as conduits to Obama’s revolution. In addition, academe and the political wing of our religious institutions had also long ago signed on.

Obama’s challenge will not come from within his own party. It will not come from Republicans – or the Tea Parties for that matter. It will come from the military. The open question is: Will it stand in support of American principles? Or will it be used to enforce Obama’s alien vision of America? We can only hope it will ultimately decide to stand with the people, either by refusing orders or by actively pursuing and bringing the rogue elements within our government to heel.

First They Came...

"THEY CAME FIRST for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communists.

THEN THEY CAME for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

THEN THEY CAME for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

THEN THEY CAME for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant.

THEN THEY CAME for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up."

The above is a popular quote attributable to Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984) about the inactivity of German intellectuals following the Nazi rise to power and the purging of their chosen targets, group after group. The present ‘health care’ drama is a classic modern-day example of just what the good German pastor was talking about. Legislators are being given a false choice to vote either yes or no on a deeply flawed bill. In effect, they’ve been given a loaded gun. Either way they vote, they fatally damage themselves and, with it, their institution.

Some of our representatives have already recognized the ploy. After a long and prolific career sucking at the public troth, they have recused themselves; jumped ship. It was the only way to avoid a virtual bloodbath of embarrassment. Their intimate and long association with Washington high jinx has taught them that the gig is now up; that the progressives now rule; and that there are no longer any rules.

They recognized that they’ve been playing along without it ever having occurred to them that some day they too might stand in the cross hairs. They’d stood by and watched as the courts have been polluted; as once mighty industrialists and financiers have been dragged in front of congressional kangaroo courts and publicly castrated; as the desperate cries of the American people have been deliberately ignored; as our country’s founders have been discredited; our Constitution shredded; our press hobbled; religion disparaged; etc.

There’s no one left to save them now. Even the occasional sane utterance is but spit in the wind. The progressives are on the march. What will stop them? The military? What, military? You mean the one that’s still arguing about ‘don’t ask; don’t tell’? The military that’s already been issued its own poisoned pill to swallow?

Why Are We There?

Let’s step back for a moment and ask the question, “What do we hope to accomplish in Afghanistan?” Is it nation building? No. Is it to prop up an illegitimate puppet government there? Not in so many words. Is it to protect the homeland? Hardly. Is it for oil? Officially speaking, no. Is it to protect Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal? It’s a concern, but no. So why are we there?

As time goes on, this question is becoming harder and harder to answer. If the way in which we’re fighting this war is any indication, it does not seem to be critical that we should win. So why are we there? To maintain a presence? To remain a factor - to reserve a seat at the table where the ultimate solution for the region will be decided? Perhaps.

It seems to me, that if we want to remain relevant in what happens in this tortured region, we must be certain of what we ourselves hope to accomplish. Such clarity, unfortunately, is not readily apparent. We appear to no longer believe in human rights. We no longer believe in democracy. We no longer believe in free market capitalism and the energy that sustains it. We no longer believe in American exceptionalism. We no longer believe in Israel. We no longer believe in ourselves. So, why are we there?

Is it perhaps to inflict another crushing blow on our military; to re-create Vietnam, April, 1975? Is it our stealth desire to install an Islamic Caliphate in the region? Is it to overwhelm global political systems to the point of ushering in a world-wide economic and political collapse; hence, revolution; to clear the tables of any and all evil Western influence?

When Bush spoke of the “axis of evil”, we had the last indication of a strategy that had the potential of advancing America’s largely benign influence. With one or two coherent, coordinated strokes we could envision a victory that would bring peace to the region by holding any corrosive elements at bay; assuring the uninterrupted flow of oil to western nations; and securing Israel’s right to exist.

All of that has been officially disavowed now. There is no longer any reason for us to be conducting any foreign campaigns; no reason to spill the blood of our bravest and finest. Why then are we there? All that makes sense at this point is that we are aiming to blunt the last arrow in our quiver that stands in the way of total chaos.

In the Valley of Elah

There have been a whole crop of Hollywood movies released recently that were declared to be ‘anti-war’ - hence, anti-Bush - ("Rendition", "In the Valley of Elah", "Body of Lies", etc.). Such films had been successfully dubbed "anti-American" by the 'vast right-wing conspiracy’ and, as a consequence, have done rather poorly at the box office; some went directly to DVD. It is only recently that a few of these have arrived at our local library and I've had a chance to see them (without having to go too far out of my way).

Overall, I was pleasantly surprised. These films are on the whole articulate, exciting, and very well made. Penn, Clooney, DiCaprio, Sarandon, etc., commonly associated with the Hollywood Left, are all first-rate actors. The scripts and direction are tight. There is an anti-war message, of course. But there is no doubt that these films are inspired which, for me, lifts them above the purely mechanical constructs of propaganda.

Even more significant is the fact that these films reflect the Zeitgeist. They ask the question, “What are we doing – and why?” No doubt, top to bottom, we have lost our way. We no longer understand war (which essentially amounts to “killing and breaking things”). We go to war trying not to kill; trying not to destroy. We go to war with the aim of ‘changing hearts and minds’; with an eye towards “nation building”. Then, we act surprised when we get our asses kicked.

Even more disturbing is what we’re doing to our military. By getting away from the essence of war, redefining it as a kind of charitable ‘meals on wheels’ operation, we effectively change the mission for which our military men and women have been trained. They then face a task (which even we have trouble articulating), without the slightest idea of how to approach it. Soldiers in today’s army don’t only have to worry about the enemy, but also about legal bureaucrats back home who want to score political points by hauling them into court.

Meanwhile, our sixth century enemy throw-backs have not yet been ‘enlightened’. They’re still quite comfortable fighting their wars under the old rules.

This is unacceptable. Either we fight to win; or we don’t fight at all. Either we are willing sacrifice the blood of our kids for some kind of tangible return, or we bring them back home. Containment is a job for the police. ‘Nation building’ is a job for churches and charities. The military ‘kills and breaks things’. That's all it does.

Our inability to grasp the nature and purpose of war is because we’ve abandoned the principle reason for it: PROFIT. We’ve cast ‘profit’ as a dirty word. Even if we are doing something for profit, we prefer not to articulate it as such. Typically we say we don’t go to war for oil – though that’s exactly what we’re doing. Then we catch ourselves and allow someone else to run off with the spoils. We’ve shed our blood and have nothing to show. But, at least our secular souls were saved. As we then root around to come up with an excuse for all the carnage of which we were clearly a part, we take comfort in the fact that once again the evil of all evils – our military – has been tarnished.

Serious Enough

From the evening of December 24th to the 6th of January it's been a tradition at our house to put electric candles in the windows. We generally turn the candles off at around 12 midnight.

Sometimes, especially around the holidays, my brother comes up on weekends to spend the night. In order to avoid traffic, he generally leaves his house late. When I'm expecting him, I'll still turn off the candles before going to bed, but I'll leave the one in the kitchen window (that’s facing the driveway) on for him. When my brother does arrive in the wee hours of the morning, I can expect him to turn this one off as well.

It has happened that my brother never arrived at all; in which case the kitchen candle is still lit when I get up in the morning. As the temperature outside often drops below freezing at this time of year, there'll be a halo against the frosted window where the candle had shone. It’s the only window - in a house with 27 windows - that exhibits this obvious feature.

Now, one could ignore it altogether; or one could take note of it without being curious; or one could investigate as to why this should be so; say, at nine-thirty in the morning (after all the candles have been turned off). It should be relatively easy to walk it back and reconstruct exactly what happened and why.

I cannot understand this insistence by otherwise intelligent people in our country who continue to claim that Barack Hussein Obama is a friend of the CIA; of the military; of capitalism; of America itself, when indeed all clues point to the contrary. It’s exactly like saying, "we know there’s global warming (because a little birdie told me); now let’s go out there and prove it scientifically. But, oh my! The factual data disproves our theory. What to do now? I know: we’ll simply fudge the data; we’ll outright lie if we have to. One way or another, we’ll prove that there’s global warming and that mankind is the cause of it and that the very exhaled breath of human beings puts the entire planet at risk and therefore 80% of the planet’s people will have to be eliminated; and therefore, for the first time in history we will have managed what has never been done before: justified mass murder on moral grounds. God we’re good!"

Same with Obama. Look at the evidence of all that’s happened since Obama has assumed office. Look at all the stuff that’s come out about him: his beliefs; his associations; his appointments; his actions, past and present. And you still think he’s not a Leftist? A Marxist? A fascist? That he just loves the military, capitalism, freedom and America to death?

So, when things go wrong, we use phrases like ‘amateur’ to describe him; like ‘not ready for prime time’; or if we really feel like being cruel, ‘inept’.

No, folks. It’s deliberate! And we all know it, even if we can’t get ourselves to say it yet. All the evidence is there - iust like the circle on my kitchen window that tells a wider tale. And it’s serious. Serious enough to start thinking about impeachment.

Change (you can believe in)

Barrack Hussein Obama went into the 'enemy camp' last night and laid down the law. He basically said that he will be sending 30,000 of our finest into that hellhole, also known as Afghanistan - to do what? Unknown. And then, almost immediately, he’ll pull them out again. You can just imagine what happens next.

Then, after everything falls apart over there, after he’s been safely elected to the second of his interminable terms, he'll declare victory – not over the Taliban or Al Qaeda, but - over the American military, that last remaining rancid remnant of the previous Bush administrations, that will now find itself utterly disgraced and humiliated, proving the point that any demonstration of military might will never again work in Obama’s vision of the new world order that is happily promoted by leftists, progressives, warmers, vegetarians, eco-anarchists, lap-dancers, etc. the world over.

It’s the same predictable MO that was used to bring down our economy, health care, the automobile industry, etc. Break it, and sweep it out with the refuse. Thank you Mister President for giving us yet another piece of the puzzle to the enigma you have labeled so artfully “change” (you can believe in).

Which Side Will the Military Take?

>(all the while no one in the military knows if they are deploying or not and for how long)<

Anon - Good observation, but it doesn't apply to the military alone. No businessman in this country can plan ahead either. He doesn't know whether to scale back or expand; invest or cash out; hire or lay-off. We're in a holding pattern here with this administration. We don't know what to expect.

Actually, we do know. But when we talk about it, we're looked at as crazy, right-wing, anti-progressive Neanderthals. Personally, I feel, it's deliberate. It's impossible to believe that a government could be making that many mistakes so consistently. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day. Obama and his stooges in the media and elsewhere have yet to be right a single time.

So, what's the plan? It has got to be to diminish America's last remaining strengths, the economy and the military. I'm beginning to believe that our military is actually in Afghanistan to lose. That way, the Left can paint them as losers, cut funding, proceed with disarmament and claim they’re saving a bunch of money. It'll also send a signal to our enemies (which are Obama’s friends) that it's now open season on American interests throughout the world. Believe it or not, Obama's biggest obstacle to becoming leader of the world (in his mind) is America.

Here at home, it's not difficult to imagine Obama's blow-out (the dollar and other) policies will lead to some kind of civil strive, likely pitting the general population against the government. The standard question in all such situations is, "Which side will the military take?"