This was beginning to sound too familiar. A president is calling for a new war based on his inherent authority while members of Congress warn that it is war or death for America. However, former NSA director (and my neighbor) Michael Hayden added a new element: explaining that air power is like “casual sex” and that we need greater commitment than the military equivalent to a one night stand. Of course, this one night stand is expected to last months and cost billions. President Obama has already asked for $500 million to just arm Syrian rebels despite the fact that we are now facing our own weaponry in the hands of ISIS (captured from our past supply of rebels and the Iraqi military). Sort of like Warren Zevon’s song to send “Lawyers, Guns, and Money” except we are leaving the lawyers behind on this one.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) told the American people that the choice is simple in going to war:
“[T]hey’re intending to come here. So, I will not let this president suggest to the American people we can outsource our security and this is not about our safety. There is no way in hell you can form an army on the ground to go into Syria, to destroy ISIL without a substantial American component. And to destroy ISIL, you have to kill or capture their leaders, take the territory they hold back, cut off their financing and destroy their capability to regenerate. . . . This is a war we’re fighting, it is not a counterterrorism operation! This is not Somalia; this is not Yemen; this is a turning point in the war on terror. Our strategy will fail yet again. This president needs to rise to the occasion before we all get killed back here at home.”
Graham was heavily ridiculed for his drumbeat to war in Iraq over the non-exist WMDs and previously called for war against Iran.
Graham however at least portrayed the war in relatively platonic terms. Former NSA Director Michael Hayden who was tied to both the unlawful torture and surveillance programs under the Bush Administration compared the U.S. air strikes as nothing more than enjoyable but meaningless “casual sex”:
“The reliance on air power has all of the attraction of casual sex: It seems to offer gratification but with little commitment. We need to be wary of a strategy that puts emphasis on air power and air power alone.”
No first base for Hayden on this date. Of course, given our continuing and perpetual military engagements, we are under Hayden’s terms something of a promiscuous power. Hayden clearly wants more of a commitment and long-term relationship. Something like . . . well . . . Iraq.
In the meantime, dating on Hayden’s term is not cheap. We are about to commit an initial half a billion dollars to just arming Syrian rebels — the same area where ISIS emerged with U.S. weapons to become the current menace. This is a collateral cost and does not include our direct military costs.
However, Obama insists that he does not need anyone’s approval to launch such a war as previously discussed. In a bizarre twist however the Administration is arguing that the President can always rely on Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), which authorized attacks against Al Qaeda and those who “planned, authorized, committed or aided” the September 11th attacks, or who harbored said persons or groups. The problem is that that authorization occurred 13 years ago and the Islamic State happens to be the moral enemy of Al Qaeda at this point. Thus, Obama is claiming that he is fighting Al Qaeda by waging war on its enemy (while of course claiming that he needs for such authorization).
Perhaps Hayden is right. War, like dating, is just too confusing, too expensive, and just a bit dangerous.
JT, if Michael Hayden was my next door neighbor, I’d invite him over and offer some brandy. The good stuff, not the cheap stuff.
Then after a couple of drinks, get him talking more about this “air power and casual sex” concept. And bounce some more ideas around.
Darren, Other ME nations need to step up but Obama needs to stop pandering to the f@ckin’ Turks. They’re the reason we are not arming the Peshmerga. Give the Kurds all the arms they need. That and our air support is enough to crush ISIS.
Bush HW, Clinton, Bush W, Obama
Four consecutive presidents have waged war in the land called Iraq.
Blood thirsty generals, retired, paid for by MIC to prostitute themselves out there for some extra cash from their contractor buddies. Whores!
We’ve always been at war with East Asia… 1984
General Hayden is correct in what he is quoted here as saying. ISIL is not going to be destroyed by airstrikes alone. From a strategic and military point of view I agree fully with what he said.
As to the question of who is sent to be on the ground., that is a politician’s decision.
ISIL is not going to go away by being kind to them. From what I have been reading ISIL’s main tool in its success so far has been its brutality. It is well equipped, has above average strategy for the area, but the US military given its combat experience over the last ten years would have ISIL for lunch if fully deployed to attack it. But the question remains why we should not let other nations directly threatened in the area step up to the plate and offer their own militaries.
I think they should and others. But it would be foolish to think the situation would be best if we stayed out completely. We have the mechanisms to coordinate and provide strategic planning better than anyone involved. I think it is foolish to think that we are not going to send combat troops there. Perhaps special forces or ones to provide integration.
It is time for other nations to step in and not just sit back and let us go at it alone.
Nick: “The Pope, who is a very holy and loving man, sees this as a war that must be fought.”
Let’s hear it from him:
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2014/08/18/pope-punts-on-american-airstrikes-in-iraq/
That was a month ago. Let’s see what else is out there.
https://twitter.com/jricole/status/511940884695224320
[music]
…these boots are made for walking
And that’s just what they do.
One of these days these boots are gonna walk all over you.
Are you ready Boots?
—
We should not equate this problem with war. A nation state declares war on a nation state. Now this ISIS or ISL or however ya spull it, proclaims themself a nation. Not so fast. Until they are in the UN and have boundaries and what not they are still a group of “land pirates”. Land pirates are the same as terrorists. They know not the Law of Nations. We ask Congress to give the President the authority to kill these land pirates under Article I, Section 8, clause eleven. I am going to print the Article I, Section 8 in its entire text in a new comment.
Blair Witch Project lives on the Hill
http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/6734gx/a-nightmare-on-graham-street
DBQ, “There can be no peace w/o victory.” Old Man Bush, W and Obama have tried half measures. The problems only get worse.The ME culture respects raw strength and victory. They see us as weak. We need to crush ISIS and do it ruthlessly. Arm the Peshmerga, they are ruthless and motivated.
Paul C. Schulte
There are reports that that ISIS/ISIL have been coming across the porous border with Mexico.
= = =
That was Al-Q back in ’06.
Again:
ISIS is worse than Al-Q which was worse than Bin Laden which was worse than Saddam which was worse than the Soviets…
Max-1 – an article on the threat across the border. Read the entire article, please.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/16/us/us-pushes-back-against-warnings-that-isis-plans-to-enter-from-mexico.html
“Pope Rejects Extra Security on Trip Despite Potential ISIS Threat”
http://abcnews.go.com/International/pope-rejects-extra-security-trip-potential-isis-threat/story?id=25530992
Squeeky, There is a new documentary on HBO about the Westgate Mall massacre in Kenya. Savage animals. If something like that occurs here in the mall where some of the ostriches here shop, they’ll be calling for nukes. The Pope, who is a very holy and loving man, sees this as a war that must be fought.
Jesselyn Radack:
Surveillance Posing as Counter-Terrorism: Foreward to “The Rise of the American Corporate Security State”
Tuesday, 13 May 2014 11:33
By Jesselyn Radack, Berrett-Koehler Publishers | Book Excerpt
“”The Rise of the American Corporate Security State” examines the way corporate power behaves when it takes a dominant role in government policy-making and explains the advent of endless war. For profit-seekers, war is desirable for three reasons:
It is extremely lucrative for some companies.
The withdrawal of civil liberties is simpler in wartime because people are frightened.
The public accepts greater official secrecy because the nation is under threat of attack.
War justifies the dragnet electronic surveillance of Americans; the government claims to protect us by searching for the terrorists among us. The government also justifies withholding information about its actions, citing national security.”
Wow, so there is one thing Graham thinks we shouldn’t out source. The man is a fool so afraid of his right wing watchers that he will do ANYTHING to keep the quiet.
We should not be involved in a battle between two “death is better than life” groups. The Muslins should be taking care of this one and spending their money on it too.
No one (who is sane) looks forward to war. However, when war happens, when we go to war, we should go with the full intent to WIN. Kick a$$ and get it over with as soon as possible and as decisively as possible. We need to commit to the war and we need to commit to the aftermath of the war.
Air strikes are not going to WIN a war, and Hayden is absolutely correct. It is like casual sex. Feels good at the moment, but accomplishes nothing in the long scheme of things. There is no commitment, no follow through, just a one night stand……..and a good chance that you will just catch and spread STDs.
We never really finished the war in Iraq. We tried to play it safe and politically correct so as not to offend anyone and not hurt anyone and when Obama got in he couldn’t get out (surrender all the gains) fast enough. Guess what! War is offensive in many senses of the word. Offensive to the sensibilities. Offensive in the sense that if you don’t go ON the OFFENSE you are going to lose. War hurts people. People die. At least let their deaths have a purpose other than to make some weaselly politicians look good. WIN or lose. Go all out.
You can’t go halfway into war. The result is what we have now. A metastasized enemy, dead American soldiers to no purpose, billions of wasted dollars and a demoralized tired public.
Go to war to WIN. Make the commitment.
@ Squeeky I recommend a Glock 45 caliber with laser sights. Or a Glock 42 also with laser sights, a .380 ,and a nice handgun for a woman who has smaller hands than a man. Easily packable and compact. I don’t plan to be at the mall. My 12 gauge shotguns will do nicely for close up and personal protection and the .223 deer hunting rifle with scope is good for distance.
“There are reports that that ISIS/ISIL have been coming across the porous border with Mexico. ”
What reports? Did they bring WMD with them? Let’s bomb the border!
“And if you don’t think this war can be won without putting lots of boots on the ground, you are just silly.”
What war? The one you’re mongering for?
Even Rumsfeld worried that we were creating terrorists faster than we were killing them.
And if you don’t think this war can be won without putting lots of boots on the ground, you are just silly.
There are reports that that ISIS/ISIL have been coming across the porous border with Mexico. As we saw with 9/11 it does not take many to do a lot of damage.
Squeeky how many American soldiers lives does it take to make one feel safe? What about the future terrorists that are already here, or the ones who are getting radicalized over the Internet?