In the Crosshairs- Congressional Ass-Assins

Posted By Uncle Jimbo

A rant on the foolishness being perpetrated by the House Intel Dems who are fashioning a controversy about a CIA non-program that was briefed to their leaders and covered in the NY Times. Clowns.

On the legality of targeting al Qaeda leaders

Posted By Uncle Jimbo

h/t Instapundit

The answer is of course it is legal, under international law (well at least our interpretation of it), US law and common sense to kill terrorists anywhere, any time, any place. Now there are those who would argue that the ban on assassinations prohibits us from targeting al Qaeda or other terrorists, but those people would simply be wrong. This right is based in the concept of self defense, nothing more nothing less, not the Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF) passed by Congress after 9/11 that allowed us to kill anyone involved with those attacks, no UN resolutions, nope good old-fashioned self defense doctrine is accepted to justify whacking tangos of any flavor.

Read the analysis and the paper cited at the link to Volokh Conspiracy if you want more detail on the legalities, but they are pretty clear and pretty simple. Terrorism is the same as pointing a gun at an entire country, or world for that matter, and if you catch a bullet for doing so well tough shit. We don't need to ask permission or beg forgiveness and the President doesn't need to ask Congress. He still needs to inform the leadership of covert ops as required by US law, but he doesn't need their blessing.

After 9/11 most folks assumed we were doing everything in our power to kill or capture anyone associated with al Qaeda, but many also might have assumed some authority to do so was needed. If so it resides in Article II of the Constitution where the President gets his Commander in Chief authority. Hunting and killing terrorists is not war and so I will join the Obama administration in foregoing the moniker "War on Terror" instead we can re-brand it as the "Terrorist Hunting Worldwide Authorization Card for Killing or THWACK.

This license is good for all manners of helping tangos assume room temperature from banging them in the temple joint with a rock, Lopping their heads off with a scimitar, Ventilating their craniums with a 7.62x51 rd, or returning them to their component molecules with any manner of precision-strike weaponry Hellfire on up.

So lets get these licenses distributed to all agencies with knuckle-draggers on staff, and an appropriate bonus program for successful exterminations. SInce Congress has such an interest in hearing about such things we can even put the heads on pikes at the Capitol so they can keep count. Happy hunting.

Readership Survey Results

Posted By Uncle Jimbo

We asked, you responded. We appreciate it and here are the results below the fold. Nothing too shocking, but useful to us as we talk to advertisers.

Continue reading "Readership Survey Results"

BLACKFIVE Readership Survey

Posted By Uncle Jimbo

I posted this Friday and we have gotten an excellent response so far, and yes I will post the results when it is done. Here is the survey for those who haven't seen it yet.

OK everyone. We have put together a quick 12 question demographic survey that we would really appreciate you taking the time to do. It is designed to give us information about our audience for advertisers. It will be very helpful as we try to improve the site and provide more original reporting. No personal info is required and you will not get any emails or anything as a result of taking it. Just click 12 little questions and you are done. Thanks in advance.

The survey is here.

One Year Anniversary- Battle of Wanat

Posted By Uncle Jimbo

One of the biggest pitched battles of the war in Afghanistan happened one year ago today. The Battle of Wanat happened at a vehicle patrol base that was attacked by approx. 200 Taliban and cost the lives of 9 soldiers of the 2nd of the 503rd, 173rd ABN along w/ 25 wounded. They killed scores of Talibs and contrary to some reports were never over run, but the cost was high. We have discussed the battle and those who fought it many times, here are some of those stories.

Honoring CPL Jonathan Ayers

"The guys that died there were my friends"

Six year old accepts Silver Star for his Dad

Wanat awards at Ft. Benning Airborne Walk

Thanking the kids who sent them socks

It is hard to look at this fight and call it a victory, but that is the truth, a hard-fought, painful, costly one for sure. These guys were only 10 days from going home and they got this after 15 months in that hell hole. I have read the AARs and many accounts of the battle and have heard the stories personally from about 10 folks who survived. Some have attempted to blame the command for establishing the outpost or for the time it took to negotiate the land deal. It was far from an ideal situation, but rarely are things ideal in war. What is certain is that the men of Chosen Company fought bravely and with honor for their brothers and their country. Godspeed to the fallen and Blue Skies to the survivors.

Tanker Babe spent the weekend in New Hampshire with some of these guys and has plenty of stories and pictures.

CIA Assassination program

Posted By Uncle Jimbo

Apparently it is time to discuss another classified CIA program in public for political purposes. The leak comes from one of the two usual suspects, Congress as opposed to the media this time. Outraged Democrats looking to cover Nancy Pelosi's exposed ass have decided to play games with what ought to remain a secret matter. Pelosi had claimed the CIA lied to her about waterboarding and other matters in direct contradiction to evidence saying it hadn't. Now a group of Dems on the Intel Committee have decided they can help rehab her rep, score some political points against the evil Bush regime and distract the public from the economy by giving the media some red meat. Strange how the Bush crime family comes back in focus once the cunning plans to save the economy and country fall flat.

Let's take this supposed failure to inform Congress for a moment. We don't know for certain what the hell it actually is or was, but let's accept the leaked versions for argument's sake. This was feasibility planning and perhaps training in support of the 2001 Presidential finding authorizing the capture or killing of al Qaeda leaders. It is not alleged that any operations were planned or even seriously contemplated, but simply that the CIA brainstormed the contingency that they might need to scarf up or kill senior terrorist leaders. That seems to be an eminently sensible thing for them to be doing and in line with contingency planning for hundreds of other potential missions they could be tasked with. The question here is whether these actions required notification of Congress. I have no idea. There are laws governing this and obviously a certain level of activity coupled with a likelihood of action would trigger such a notification threshold. The current leaked info doesn't seem to show any actions contemplated and seems more like ongoing brainstorming.

Let's leave the political grandstanding aside for a moment and focus on the substance of such a program.

Amid the high alert following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, a small CIA unit examined the potential for targeted assassinations of al Qaeda operatives, according to the three former officials. The Ford administration had banned assassinations in the response to investigations into intelligence abuses in the 1970s. Some officials who advocated the approach were seeking to build teams of CIA and military Special Forces commandos to emulate what the Israelis did after the Munich Olympics terrorist attacks, said another former intelligence official......Also in September 2001, as CIA operatives were preparing for an offensive in Afghanistan, officials drafted cables that would have authorized assassinations of specified targets on the spot.

One draft cable, later scrapped, authorized officers on the ground to "kill on sight" certain al Qaeda targets, according to one person who saw it. The context of the memo suggested it was designed for the most senior leaders in al Qaeda, this person said.

Eventually Mr. Bush issued the finding that authorized the capturing of several top al Qaeda leaders, and allowed officers to kill the targets if capturing proved too dangerous or risky.

Well now that is some fun stuff there, "kill on sight" oooh sounds scary. But let me ask a simple question here. Don't we do that regularly using UAVs? We identify an al Qaeda leader, we target him and we "kill on sight". I mean how does the weapon we use factor into that equation at all? Is it somehow OK for a guy sitting in Las Vegas to push a button and vaporize a bad guy, but not for another guy to put 2 1/2 pounds of pressure on a trigger and accomplish the same thing? Assassinate is a very charged term usually involving members of another government. That is not the case here, this is more of an adjustment to global rules of engagement allowing identified terrorist targets to be ventilated. I don't see any problems with that at all. If we get positive ID on a terrorist anywhere on earth, we should make the calculus as to whether they can be captured. If not then a swift trip to room temperature ought to be next on the agenda. I am curious what the argument against such a policy might be.

UPDATE: AP reports this:

WASHINGTON – Government officials say the secret intelligence program canceled by CIA Director Leon Panetta in June was meant to find and kill or capture al-Qaida leaders at close range rather than target them with air strikes.

So this looks even more like an attempt to modify our tactics to ensure we only kill bad guys and not civilians. That will not be tolerated, obviously.

UFC 100, Memphis & Hooters

Posted By Uncle Jimbo

This is another fairly simple puzzle. I love Mixed Martial Arts, there is a great event this Saturday with many epic battles. I am in Memphis, the event will be broadcast at Hooters, I will be watching here.

Join for a beer if you wish.

BLACKFIVE Readership Survey

Posted By Uncle Jimbo

OK everyone. We have put together a quick 12 question demographic survey that we would really appreciate you taking the time to do. It is designed to give us information about our audience for advertisers. It will be very helpful as we try to improve the site and provide more original reporting. No personal info is required and you will not get any emails or anything as a result of taking it. Just click 12 little questions and you are done. Thanks in advance.

The survey is here.

New Majority commenters dump on 9/11 families

Posted By Uncle Jimbo

Elise Cooper who has contributed several pieces here at BLACKFIVE, has a post up at the New Majority about a meeting between members of the Justice Department and families of those killed on 9/11.

The Attorney General, Eric Holder, attended only the June 16th meeting and stayed for only one out of four hours.  Debra Burlingame, the sister of the pilot of American 77 that crashed into the Pentagon, explained that the families asked substantial questions which were either not answered or hardly answered.  She stated that “Holder was sorry he walked into that room.  For one hour they did not accept his platitudes.  The questioning was aggressive, hard, and pointed.  They got the message that these people were not going to be satisfied with the celebrity appearance and vague remarks. “

While it was a kind gesture to hold such a meeting, some of the elements showed a lack of tact, such as having a former counter-terrorism counsel for Human Rights Watch participate. This woman, Jennifer Daskal, who is now a member of the Justice Department Detainee Review Task Force has written that military commissions were “illegitimate, dysfunctional, and a kangaroo court.”. The families feel that the meetings with them were simply to provide political cover as the administration moves forward granting more rights to the detainees at Gitmo. While that point can be argued the comments at NM are inarguably offensive. I find it incomprehensible that someone can find more common ground with terrorists than with those who lost family members to terrorism. Here is the first comment.

These are people like Burlingame whose names we’ve been reading for years arguing that we should invade Iraq, Hussein was behind it all, we need to go to war with Islamofascism, etc. etc. In short they’ve hijacked a national tragedy to promote a series of actions that have been enormously costly to the national interest and almost entirely counterproductive. Give it a rest. The adults are now in charge.

New Majority purports to offer a way back from the wilderness for Republicans or a third way between left and right. I have to say it has not impressed me and if these clowns represent the audience, I'll decline the offer to follow them.

Where in the world is Uncle J?

Posted By Uncle Jimbo

This should be kindergarten level. If anyone wants to play, I will be here through the weekend.

Helping the troops by screwing them

Posted By Uncle Jimbo

Greyhawk points out how a new policy "protects" our troops who are renters from forced moves when their landlords are foreclosed on. Turns out this simply saves the gubmint a few bucks by screwing our junior enlisted folks. How 'bout that quality of life eh?

In May of this year, however, President Obama signed the Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act of 2009 - part of the larger Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009. Under the terms of this law, tenants are "protected" in case of such a foreclosure in that they can not be evicted prior to expiration of an existing lease. (An exception - if the "new" landlord sells the property to a buyer to use as their principal residence the current tenant is allowed 90 days to vacate.)

As a result, military families now won't be forced to vacate until their lease expires, therefore their move may be delayed a bit - but they will no longer be reimbursed for the expenses of that move because it's due to a normal lease expiration - not a foreclosure action. They'll still have to move - maybe with a bit more advance notice but no reduction in hassles - only once again they'll be the ones writing the checks.

Bravo, well done.

The Second Afghan War

Posted By Uncle Jimbo

There are signs that our military leaders have learned lessons from both our 7 years of operations in Afghanistan and our successes in Iraq. They have begun a major shift in strategy and tactics to reflect that. We have discussed some aspects of it here including the decision announced to limit bombing of residential dwellings even if we are receiving fire from them. While this decision may seem counter-intuitive at first. when examined in the framework of a larger shift toward safeguarding populations v. killing bad guys it becomes very understandable.

This same change in Iraq, to take territory and then stay there alongside the populace, was instrumental in shifting public opinion in Iraq. In conjunction with increased security from local forces it led to our ability to let the Iraqis take care of themselves. A similar strategy is now being employed in Afghanistan, but faces many more challenges. The Afghan security forces are near useless as currently constituted. Tribal issues make it almost impossible for any national forces to be used in an area where they are not native. Our training efforts have focused on attempting to put together Afghan police and military units but the problem is that other than perhaps Hamid Karzai there are no Afghans. There are a patchwork of tribes and villages and cliques that speak different languages, hold centuries long beefs and don't see themselves as part of this larger, artificial thing we call Afghanistan.

When the Anbar Awakening happened in response to al Qaeda brutality, local sheiks said "enough" to the outsiders who were wreaking so much havoc in their areas. They formed their own security forces to combat them and safeguard their people. US forces midwived these actions and supported the efforts of what became the "Sons of Iraq". local folks protecting their neighborhoods and villages. To do the same in Afghanistan is a much more challenging puzzle as the same model must be adapted and constructed dozens of times for different tribes and we must be willing to stay and share the danger as they stand up against the Taliban and al Qaeda. Instead of kicking on doors and confiscating weapons, we have to prepare to arm villagers and stand with them when the militants come to pressure them.Complicating things further is the sheer number of separate places we must do this in some of the most hellacious terrain on the planet.

Our ability to place troops on the ground and support them in the case of concerted attacks against them is limited. We must be very judicious in how we expand our footprint and attempt to deny the enemy the ability to mass forces to attack these new outposts. This will be slow and difficult and requires a long war mentality. Alliances with tribal leaders must be formed and fostered, and then we must empower them to secure their own people. We must help them increase quality of life, hovel by hovel. They must begin to see that working with us causes less killing and strife and then they can be expected to work with us.

Call it oil spots or whatever you want, but we have to strategically spread security and prosperity out in a de-centralized fashion. The national government and security forces have almost zero credibility and it will take much greater efforts to change that. Commanders at the local level have the ability and expertise now to build personal relationships and to show concrete results. They are the building blocks for this strategy, they and the strategic corporals can show both physical, moral and ethical courage that can win the tribal leaders over. We don't want them on our side as much as we need to convince them we are on their side. This will take concepts like returning the same units to the same locations in rotation, leaving cadres of officers and NCOs in the same AOs for extended periods to build a continuity that lasts beyond one unit's deployment. And most of all it takes a commitment from our government to support these efforts over a time fram longer than the next election cycle. That is one of the biggest dangers to this new strategy.

Exclusive interview w/ author Brad Thor

Posted By Uncle Jimbo

Elise Cooper for BLACKFIVE

New York Times Number one bestselling author Brad Thor has written a new book, “The Apostle.” This fictional book is centered on rescuing a hostage, Dr. Julia Gallo, who is held by the Taliban in Afghanistan.  To head the rescue team, the American President enlists Scot Harvath, a special forces’ operative.   The book’s sub-plot involves a secret service agent, Elise Campbell, who overhears the possibility of the President’s involvement in the death of one his aides.   Blackfive.net had the opportunity to interview Mr. Thor about his new book.

Mr. Thor stated to Blackfive that “as a political thriller writer my job is to be as current as tomorrow’s headlines and to speak with as much firsthand knowledge as possible.” When reading fiction do the readers wonder where fantasy becomes reality? A good fictional political thriller must have plots, sub-plots, and themes that are believable.  There were a few themes in “The Apostle” which could have been based on a realistic situation. 

First, there is the Secret Services’ quandary of overhearing a delicate, personal matter.  In reading this, one reverts back to the Clinton years when there were numerous reports of the President’s infidelity.  How many of Thor’s readers remember the secret service agents being compelled to testimony about President Clinton’s contemporaneous activities?   Thor commented about the secret service agent, Elise Campbell that he wanted her character to have her “own mystery to unravel with and wrestle with her own points.”

Continue reading "Exclusive interview w/ author Brad Thor"