Another Voyage on The Ship of Fools!

While catching up on back reading I ran across several op ed's that I want to bring to your attention but cannot print because I do not have a scanner.

Two appeared in Thursday's WSJ page A17. One by Kimberly and Fred Kagan entitled: How Prime Minister Maliki Pacified Iraq." The Kagan's methodically trace the steps Maliki has taken, the successes he has achieved and the progress the Kagan's believe have occurred beyond any reasonable expectations.

This is not something you are likely to read in the "drive by press and media," as Limbaugh tags them, because it is favorable and the far left doesn't really want our nation to excel or succeed because it goes against their own agenda, feelings and beliefs America is a bully, an intruder and is responsible for much of the world's dysfunctioning as well as pollution etc.. They lament our success and are made embarrassed by it and believe much of it was ill-gotten.

Above all they hate GW and would never give him any slack because he is the illegitimate president in their eyes.

Why won't Obama go to Iraq yet is willing to meet terrorist leaders? Does he fear he could be trapped into being brainwashed?

The second op ed is by Matthew Kaminiski and is entitled: "Bush Leaves a Robust Atlantic Alliance, After All." It is more acid in the eyes of Bush whackers because Kaminski suggests there have been two distinct periods that Europe had to deal with and matters have improved dramatically since 2005.

The author accepts the fact that Europe has not signed up for an unfettered hard power approach but GW's main German and French antagonists are also no longer in power and the overall alliance, Kaminski asserts, is far healthier, again, than the "drive by press and media" would have you believe.

A third excellent op ed piece appeared in Friday's Wall Street Journal, page A 15, by Juan Wiliams. It was entitled: "It's Time for Another Obama Race Speech." Williams suggests Obama did not address the essential issues he should have in his Philadelphia speech notwithstanding the, here's that phase again, "drive by press and media's" fawning praise.

Williams sets out a speech he says Obama must make because he is not known other than as "... a fresh face with an Ivy League education...an exciting speaker and a man who stands for much-desired change..." Williams takes Obama to task for ducking the implications of allowing himself to be defined by his associations with the Rev. Wright's , Obama's own playing of the race card and accusing those who question his shallow campaign antics as racists.

Williams pulled no punches and for those who may not know it, Juan is black himself.

I doubt Obama or his staff will urge Obama to do as Williams suggests because "deep mia culpa's" are not Obama's forte. Obama strikes me as too arrogant, too know it all to admit guilt and vulnerability other than in an offhand manner. It is perhaps evidence of his insecurity.

Williams wrote the article because he believes Obama will be meeting these "association" demons throughout the campaign and Williams writes Obama has not put them to bed, they are legitimate and ultimately must be addressed.

Michael Leeden discusses the issue of why the West is about to repeat the sins of the past in an op ed entitled: "Iran and The Problem of Evil." in Sat. June 7th's, WSJ.

Leeden rejects the argument of ignorance because we have plenty of knowledge and adequate studies of tyrannical regimes and their leaders. He does not allow Western intellectuals to slide off the hook of not recognizing fascists for what they are - fascists.

Leeden writes the fascists are with us again and the reasons given in the last century as to why we did not meet them were wrong then and should not be allowed to be resurrected now but they are. All people are not basically good and pursuing the path of reasonableness with those manifestly fanatical is actually a path towards national suicide.

He cites the rise in anti-Semitism, as I have, as another manifestation of deep fault lines that still exist and yet, are not being confronted. Leeden concludes Western democracies are always ill prepared for adversity, fear war and thus leaders find it difficult if not impossible to emerge until the battle is unavoidable.

Leeden does not predict we will be defeated but writes that if we are we have only ourselves to blame because we lack the collective will and resolve.

I submit the nation's unquestioning embrace of Obama is evidence of our desire to believe we can appease the dangers we face away. It is as if we are again taking a voyage on "The Ship of Fools" and placing our fate in the hands of an untested Messiah

Finally Kimberly Strassel wrote an op ed piece in Friday's June 6th issue of the Wall Street Journal entitled: "What We've Learned About Barack." Strassel makes a telling point when she writes Hillary was reluctant to hit Obama hard because Clinton did not want to offend Obama's supporters but the Republicans will show no such restraints. Strassel concludes the summer will be full of political fireworks.

Strassel's article fits hand and glove with Leeden's.

Time will tell whether McCain understands and is willing to arm wrestle. I was chagrined to hear Laura Bush explain away Michelle's outbursts as simply something taken out of context and her praise of Hillary for having fought a hard campaign. Laura Bush is a lovely First Lady. She has served out nation admirably but dis she go out of her way by turning the other cheek and for why? Was she trying to mollify the women who took Hillary's rejection personally. Why would Laura extend a hand to those who have portrayed her husband in such hateful ways, claiming he was evil, a fool etc.?

I have written constantly about the "racist" firewall Obama has placed around himself and his wife. He has been ably assisted by "the drive by press and media" and his don't tread on me stance and if you do, you are a racist. They also have done nothing to examine Obama and smoke out the real one lurking behind the facade. If Obama is elected we will, as I have said before, wake up the next morning and say to ourselves "We did what?" if we do not find out beforehand.

Obama could be our president for four or more years and it should be incumbent upon us to save ourselves grief now if in doing so we discover serious flaws. He has a short public history and that alone should concern us. We failed to do so with Ole Bill and we went so overboard regarding GW and the response backlash against Gore and Kerry we did ourselves a further disservice. McCain has been around long enough so we have a fairly good idea of who he is but he too deserves legitimate scrutiny.

The problem is so much current criticism turns hysterical and wanders off the reservation of what is constructive and legitimate. I surmise there is no way to avoid it because we are all partisan. However, we need to strive to rise above it and to make reasoned decisions if possible.

Yes I know, if the shoe fits wear it!

More intrigue over Olmert's political maneuvering and it may have backfired. (See 1 below.)

With one eye on the upcoming intra party elections, Ehud Barak decided politics wins out over incoming rockets.

My friend Chodoff wrote earlier the Gaza operation, even if it ever came off, would simply be for show and would result in needless casualties because no one is really serious about stopping the rockets.

Perhaps the Gaza build up has gotten beyond Israel's military ability to control because you cannot destroy terrorists if it causes casualties among civilians and that is Hamas' ace in the hole. He who hesitates is lost.(See 2 below.)

Excerpt of an article discussing how early warning military techniques have evolved. (See 3 below.)

More evidence of why we are now winning in Iraq. You will not find this in the "drive by news and media." Why? Because it proves the nay-Sayers are wrong and is just one more embarrassment the press and media folks need to be bury because it does not support their desire to portray America on its knees. If you can't resurrect Viet Nam what good are you?

Attack everything America does, stands for and highlight only our failures. That way the press and media spread doubt and help increase frustration. This lays the groundwork for change and change, somehow, always means introducing expanded government into the solution equation. Another way of restricting freedom and increasing dependency - a worthy sought after goal of socialists.

Attack private enterprise as corrupt, greedy and non-caring (which it often is.)and , as an example, do so by disparaging WalMart. Assert Capitalism is evil because of the way it divides wealth and creates disparity between haves and have-nots. Play off the discontent spawned by the absence of fairness and raise the specter of entitlement. This is what the political battles have come to be and are increasingly about.

Challenge national leadership, cast doubt on every decision, because some are certainly going to be wrong, and you move the defeatism goal post further in your direction.

Our political campaigns have become a clash between extremism and the more you embellish disparities, distort facts and introduce bias the more the media and press can and will control and shape the debate and even the outcome. Outcomes are the ultimate goal and if they run roughshod over facts it is all in the interest of betterment and fairness.

The fact that one man's fairness might be another man's detriment is irrelevant because freedom to create, to be independent, to excel is dangerous and, above all, unfair. It's all in Ayn Rand's novels, Orwell's 1984 and Gulliver's Travel. (See 4 below.)

I am leaving town again and will be gone from June 14 to 25th. Upon my return Marshall Goldman, expert on Russia, will be speaking and reviewing his new Book about his private meetings with Putin and The New Russia.

Dick


1) Kadima primary plot backfires on Olmert
By GIL HOFFMAN



Labor chairman Ehud Barak is set to announce on Thursday morning that he still favors dissolving the Knesset and initiating an early general election, despite Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's announcement a day earlier initiating a primary in Kadima, sources close to Barak said Wednesday night.


The Jerusalem Post reported exclusively Wednesday, Olmert intended to authorize a primary to replace him, a step toward ending his political career. Olmert confirmed the report at a meeting in his office at the Knesset with Kadima MKs Tzahi Hanegbi and Eli Aflalo.

"The process has been put in motion," Hanegbi said following the meeting. "The prime minister instructed us to act quickly to set the rules for primaries in Kadima. The path to primaries is paved."

Olmert's associates said that one of the goals of his decision was to try to prevent the passage of Likud MK Silvan Shalom's bill that would disperse the Knesset and set a November 11 election date. But that goal appeared to have backfired, as both Labor and Shas officials said they would still vote for Shalom's bill unless a date was set for the primary.


Hanegbi said there was no chance of a date being set by the time the bill was expected to be brought to a preliminary vote, on June 28. He said that due to the challenges of changing Kadima's charter, it was also unlikely a primary date would be set before the cross-examination of American Jewish financier Morris Talansky, the main witness in the investigation that is undermining support for Olmert, on July 17.

The Kadima faction will begin discussing the date of the primary next week. Sources close to the Kadima candidates said the most likely date for the race was September 2.

Sources close to Olmert said he had still kept hope alive that following Talansky's testimony, Israeli citizens and politicians would have a change of heart about him that would enable him to remain prime minister and perhaps even run in the Kadima primary. An official who participated in Wednesday's meeting said that Olmert appeared to resent the need to deal with the primary.

Labor secretary-general Eitan Cabel said that not setting a date for the primary and allowing Olmert to seek reelection canceled out any benefit to Olmert's announcement.

Barak's associates said the decision by Labor ministers last week to back dispersing the Knesset had not changed.

"[Olmert's announcement] is a step in the right direction but we are not satisfied," a source close to Barak said. "Barak is not looking for an excuse to vote against dispersing the Knesset. Kadima leaders must demand that Olmert go further."

Loyalists of Barak, Livni and Public Security Minister Avi Dichter took credit for forcing Olmert to reluctantly take the first step toward leaving office with both their public comments and their political work behind the scenes.

Livni declined to comment beyond statements she said Tuesday about Kadima needing to take political steps to avoid becoming irrelevant.

Shas officials said Olmert's announcement did not change anything for them, adding that the party would still vote for dispersing the Knesset unless Olmert raised child welfare payments.

Shalom said he had received commitments from Labor that they would still support his bill unless the Kadima primary was held by July.

Shalom's bill might be delayed from June 18 to 25, because Barak will be in Paris next week and Shas chairman Eli Yishai will be visiting Germany.

Likud MKs accused Olmert of using political tricks in an effort to stay in office for as long as possible.

"This is just another stinking maneuver by Olmert intended to avoid elections and stick to his cabinet seat while telling the citizens of Israel who want him to leave office to go to hell," said Likud MK Yuval Steinitz.

2) Analysis: From 'closer-than-ever' operation to truce
By YAAKOV KATZ



Last Thursday, a few hours after 51-year-old Amnon Rozenberg was killed in a mortar attack on kibbutz Nir Oz, Defense Minister Ehud Barak headed down south for a meeting with local council chiefs in the wake of the escalation on the Gaza front.


"A military operation is closer than ever," Barak told the council heads. "And it may even precede a cease-fire."

This was not the first time Barak spoke of a "closer-than-ever" military operation. He has been using that phrase since taking office last June. Take another example from September last year, when Barak said in a radio interview that "we are nearing an extensive operation in Gaza." Ten months have passed since that interview, and the large-scale operation has yet to happen.

On Wednesday, after months of stalling, the security cabinet finally made a decision not to launch an operation, but to proceed with the Egyptian-mediated cease-fire track. On Thursday, Barak's senior aide Amos Gilad will fly to Cairo to convey Israel's official decision to accept the truce.

The cabinet meeting began Wednesday morning with many of the ministers flexing their muscles. Vice Premier Haim Ramon said in an early-morning radio interview that he would push for "toppling the Hamas regime." The only way to do that, he said, was to launch a large-scale operation in Gaza. Other ministers - such as Public Security Minister Avi Dichter and Transportation Minister Shaul Mofaz - were also said to be in favor of a military operation.

Nevertheless, the cabinet came out with a decision to nix a Gaza op for now and instead give the Egyptian track one last chance. According to officials involved in the talks with Egypt, a cease-fire will likely go into effect before the weekend.

The person who pushed the cabinet for accepting the truce was none other than Barak, the same Barak who said less than a week ago that a military operation was closer than ever.

There are a number of reasons behind Barak's decision, but first and foremost - like almost everything these days - it has to do with politics. With the elections around the corner, Barak, as chairman of the Labor Party, needs to focus his attention on politics. An operation in Gaza would not allow him to do that.

There are also other, more professional considerations. First, Israel does not want to insult Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. A rejection of his country's cease-fire proposal would constitute a slap in the Egyptian leader's face. While relations with Cairo are shaky, Israel does value its strategic ties with Egypt, which today is one of the few Arab and Muslim countries that has formalized ties with Jerusalem.

Secondly, if Israel had rejected the offer and instead embarked on an operation, it would have been perceived - in this case - as the aggressor, since Hamas would be able to claim that it was prepared for a truce but Israel was not.

Lastly, there remains the question of what the goal of such an operation would be. Since last June - the same month that Hamas ran down Fatah forces and took over Gaza - nothing has changed dramatically as far as creating an exit strategy for Israel following an invasion of the Strip. Fatah is incapable of returning to control Gaza, and the likelihood of a multinational force deploying there remains slim.

3) Extended horizons: early warning assets expand their repertoire
By Richard Scott

During the latter stages of the Second World War, as US and British naval forces faced the fierce onslaught of Japanese air attacks in the Pacific, the need to provide extended surveillance and threat warning became apparent. With shipborne radars limited by the radar horizon, the answer, proven through the US Navy's (USN's) pioneering Project 'Cadillac', was to fit a search radar in an airborne early warning (AEW) aircraft, launched from and recovering to an aircraft carrier, which could act as a radar picket positioned 'up threat'.

In 1982 the Falklands (Malvinas) conflict provided a stark reminder of the vulnerability of surface forces operating in a hostile air environment without AEW support. The absence of such a capability in the face of sustained air attack gave the UK Royal Navy (RN) insufficient warning to counter threats at long range, and directly contributed to the loss of several ships.

The last two decades, however, have seen a shift away from classic 'open ocean' AEW and intercept control. Instead, there has been a move towards a broader spectrum of littorally focused missions such as: airborne battle management command and control; strike control; maritime domain awareness; border and coastal surveillance; search and rescue; and disaster/humanitarian relief co-ordination and control. This evolution of carrier-borne airborne surveillance and control is today reflected by developments on both sides of the Atlantic.

Northrop Grumman, through what was the Grumman Corporation, can trace a history in AEW and control going back to the mid-1940s, when a TBF-3 Avenger torpedo bomber was modified to carry a first-generation airborne search radar. It later developed the E-1B Tracer (a derivative of the C-1 Trader carrier onboard delivery aircraft) for the USN in the mid-1950s.

In 1964 the USN introduced Grumman's E-2A Hawkeye, the service's first purpose-designed carrier-borne AEW aircraft. The E-2A was later upgraded to E-2B standard through the introduction of a (then new) programmable high-speed digital computer.

The next major evolution of the Hawkeye, the E-2C, began in 1968 with the first prototype flying in 1971 and deliveries of operational aircraft to the USN began two years later. During the course of its career, the E-2C marquee has itself been the subject of five substantive system upgrades, culminating in the current production Hawkeye 2000 configuration (the last two aircraft built to this standard are due for delivery in 2009).

Entering initial service from 2003, Hawkeye 2000 expanded on the previous E-2C Group II marque by introducing a Mission Computer Upgrade/Advanced Control Indicator Set (MCU/ACIS), integrating the Co-operative Engagement Capability (CEC) using the AN/USG-3 common equipment set, replacing Mini-DAMA communications with an ARC-210 communications set and introducing the Lockheed Martin AN/ALQ-217 electronic support measures (ESM) system in place of the elderly AN/ALR-73. A vapour cycle upgrade was undertaken to meet the increased avionics cooling requirement, while also introducing an environmentally friendly cooling refrigerant (R-134a).

New Hamilton Sundstrand NP2000 eight-blade propellers have also been brought into service aboard Hawkeye 2000. These offer a range of benefits including higher reliability, lower vibration and noise, improved speed governing and response, smoother engine shutdowns/starts, reduced feather drag, and no engine/propeller/airframe loads issues.

Almost 45 years after the E-2A entered service, the latest evolution of the Hawkeye line is today in flight testing ahead of its scheduled 2011 initial operating capability. Its appearance remains recognizably common with an antecedent now several generations removed, but the radar and associated mission system of the new E-2D Advanced Hawkeye (AHE) will offer functionality and performance un-dreampt of when the original Hawkeye made its debut.


4) Suicide recruits dropping in Iraq:Mirrors losses in the field, U.S. says
By Rowan Scarborough


The United States is seeing a sharp drop in the number of foreigners entering Iraq to become al Qaeda suicide bombers, according to intelligence and Bush administration sources.

An administration official and a military adviser to Iraqi commanders attribute the decline to a fairly new phenomenon: Al Qaeda's call for mass killings in the name of Islam is losing some of its appeal with young Arabs in North Africa and Saudi Arabia, where most of the bombers originate.

The decline also parallels the battlefield losses al Qaeda has suffered in the past 12 months in Iraq's Anbar province and the greater Baghdad region. This has made it more difficult for al Qaeda in Iraq to facilitate the secret movement of foreigners from the Syrian border to safe houses where they are trained and assigned a target.

"There has been a sharp decline in the amount of suicide bombers coming into Iraq," said a senior intelligence official who spoke on the condition of anonymity. "It's harder for suicide bombers to get into the country. The al Qaeda in Iraq is a shadow of what it once was. And Iraq is a more hostile area for suicide bombers to operate."

The senior official said al Qaeda suicide attacks averaged 50 per month last year, but are as low as 20 a month now.

"They are still cause for concern," the official said.

According to the latest Pentagon report on stability in Iraq, the number of all attacks in Iraq dropped from 1,500 a week in February 2007 to 450 a week in February 2008.

Last year, U.S. military officials say, Sunni Arab Iraqis in large numbers began rejecting al Qaeda's harsh ways and started aiding allied troops in ridding terrorists from their neighborhoods.

A Bush administration official who monitors Iraq confirmed the sharp decline. This official depicted it as a long-running trend that began last year and continues today, rather than just brief dip. "There is no question there are fewer suicide bombers inside Iraq," the official said.

A military intelligence officer previously has told The Washington Times that interrogations of captured foreign fighters showed that most bombers came from Saudi Arabia and North Africa.

This source said al Qaeda operated three main routes: ferrying recruits from Syria into Mosul in the north, into Baghdad in the heart of the country, and into Anbar province in the west.

The senior intelligence official said that "the al Qaeda in Iraq network that would have supported bringing these people in, [is] a shadow of what it once was. They lost a lot of their key people."

Perhaps the most telling blow was the U.S. air strike in 2006 that killed Abu Musab Zarqawi, the founder of al Qaeda in Iraq whose persona in the Arab world helped coax disaffected youth to heed his call for jihad and martyrdom.

Today, the U.S. thinks the last al Qaeda bastion is greater Mosul, where Iraqi and American troops have been conducting counter terrorism strikes since the winter.

"I think they have been operationally defeated since the end of 2007," said retired Army Gen. Jack Keane, an adviser to top commanders in Iraq who toured the country in March.

"The command doesn't want to say that, but they cannot muster complex operations like they used to do in the past, nor sustain a level of operations like they have done in the past," he said. "The effort in the north is to bring this to a culmination. I call it, 'finish the al Qaeda.' "

However, he added that being a terrorist organization, al Qaeda "will never go completely away."

In the current edition of the New Republic magazine, terrorism experts Paul Cruickshank and Peter Bergen, who has written a biography of al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, document what they think is a pronounced shift by Muslims away from al Qaeda.

"Why have clerics and militants once considered allies by Al Qaeda's leaders turned against them?" the two writers ask.

"To a large extent, it is because Al Qaeda and its affiliates have increasingly adopted the doctrine of takfir, by which they claim the right to decide who is a 'true' Muslim," they write.

The authors note that al Qaeda's suicide bombers have killed more than 10,000 Iraqis, most of them targeted simply for being Shi'ite.

"Recently, Al Qaeda in Iraq has turned its fire on Sunnis who oppose its diktats, a fact not lost on the Islamic world's Sunni majority," the authors wrote.

They argue that a significant event in the burgeoning anti-al Qaeda movement was the defection last year of Noman Benotman. A Libyan Muslim extremist, Benotman once worked to overthrow secular Arab governments, but now seeks peace in his home country.

In November, he sent a public letter to Ayman al-Zawahri calling on the al Qaeda No. 2 man to end terrorism operations around the world.

In raids this year, coalition forces have discovered kidnapped pre-teenage Iraqis being programed by al Qaeda for suicide bombings - perhaps a sign that it is more difficult to recruit foreigners.

"Foreign suicide bombers have fallen off in 2008 compared to 2007 rather significantly," Gen. Keane said. "Motivation to come to Iraq is down in the Sunnis Arab states because many believe the [al Qaeda] operation in Iraq is a lost cause. Also it is well known that it is far more likely they will not accomplish the mission because [al Qaeda's] capacity to receive them and protect them is diminished greatly."