Sunday, January 3, 2016

Rule By Executive Order and Congressional Abdication. A Synopsis of the Dignity of Difference!



Beats "affluenza!"

Dagny's begins 2016
===
Congress has given away and/or allowed various presidents to take away much of its constitutional authority.

We now have a rogue president who believes he can do whatever he chooses by Executive Orders and his beginning acts in 2016 will be to impose restrictions on citizen's rights to acquire/purchase weapons and to release more radical prisoners held in Guantanamo with the ultimate goal of closing the base.

This president also has proven he has an empathetic penchant towards Muslims, many of whom  have become radicalized and cause a threat to world order and our nation's security.

This president has one more year in office and the question we must ask ourselves is 'after 8 years of his authoritarian rule will our nation survive?'

Obama told us he would bring about change and promised us hope. We knew his father believed America was a Colonial Power and Obama even wrote a book telling us he would implement his father's dreams but for a variety of reasons we ignored his warning and pledges. We knew Obama had associated with radicals, attended a church where the minister preached the damnation of America and even Obama's wife said she was not proud to be an American.  Yet, we still ignored these facts and assertions because of guilt, because his opponents were less than competitive and because he was a slick and gifted orator among other reasons.

We have endured seven years of Obama and now his ratings are ankle depth, his successes are minimal and were accomplished mostly by unconstitutional thuggery, lies and deceit and he still  has no effective strategy for defending against several of the most potent enemies our nation has faced in many decades - Iran, Russia, China, N Korea and ISIS.

He has added enormously to our nation's debt thereby, restricting our flexibility to meet these challenges and  has caused our military to decline, has created one vacuum after another only to be filled by radical Islamists, which he cannot bring himself to characterize as such.  He has bent over backwards to allow Putin to walk wherever he chooses while claiming our greatest threat is weather/global warming.

I challenge anyone, who is objective and clear eyed, to deny any of my above comments. (See 1 and 1a below.)

http://vladtepesblog.com/2015/12/14/pat-condell-on-donald-trump/

and

 http://safeshare.tv/v/ss5651aeb9c75fc
===
“When I heard that France had bombed a key ISIS stronghold, I turned on the TV to see if the White House was still there."
===
I have just concluded an insightful book (The Dignity of Difference by Jonathan Sacks)  while I was away and hope my review of it will do it justice. I believe it is relevant to what I have averred above.

Sacks integrates and explains economics and morality through the prism of Judaism.

I will begin my review by repeating some of what I posted in a previous memo. (See  2 below.)

When I recommended Sack's book to my dearest and severest liberal critic he sent me this reply:

"THIS is THE book to read!"


===
Savannah has a serious crime problem.

We have a new mayor, police chief, an excellent District Attorney and now we need to put in place a solid fourth leg on the law enforcement stool - a good Sheriff.

Residents of The Landings can vote in the upcoming election of a new sheriff.  I urge you to attend the SIRC presentation on Jan 28, to become more informed so you can vote intelligently.

Skidaway Island Republican Club
Presents:
True Perspectives
Chatham County Police Protection

Thursday, January 28, 2016
Plantation Club
Cocktails/Cash bar : 4:30 PM
Presentation : 5:00 PM
Sustaining members – Free
Regular members - $5
Non-Members - $10
All Welcome


​​Lee Smith is County Manager, Chatham County. He has over 28 years of experience in government and county management.

He will discuss the recent negotiations regarding the current joint City/County police force, and the new agreement between the county and the city as we move into 2016.What are the advantages or disadvantages? How will this affect our crime concerns?


For reservations:

Russ Peterson
598-9845 (russp16@aol.com)
or
Dick Miller
===
The degree to which Politically Correct 'ISM's are insane and are destroying our nation. (See 3 below.)

She forgot to add: ' and check for weapons?'
===
Random articles: (See 4, 4a, 4b and 4c below.)
====
Dick
========================================================================
1)
Conundrum 
  
Free people are not equal.  Equal people are not free. This is not a conundrum, but a truth!
    

The definition of Conundrum is something that is puzzling or confusing. 
  
Here are six Conundrums of socialism in the United States of America :   

1. America is capitalist and greedy - yet half of the population is 
subsidized.
   
  
2. Half of the population is subsidized - yet they think they are 
victims.
   
  
3. They think they are victims - yet their representatives run the 
government.
   
  
4. Their representatives run the government - yet the poor keep getting 
poorer.
   
  
5.  The poor keep getting poorer - yet they have things that people in other 
countries only dream about.
   
  
6.   They have things that people in other countries only dream about - yet they want  America to be more like those other countries.   
  
Think  about it!  And that, my friends, pretty much sums up the USA in the 21st  Century.  Makes  you wonder who is doing the math.   
  
These  three, short sentences tell you a lot about the direction of our current  government and cultural environment:   
  
1.   We are advised to NOT judge ALL Muslims by the actions of a few lunatics, but we are encouraged to judge ALL gun owners by the actions of a few lunatics.   
  
Funny  how that works.  And here's another one worth 
considering?
   
  
2.  Seems we constantly hear about how Social Security is going to run out of money.  



But  we never hear about welfare or food stamps running out of 
money
 !   



What's  interesting is the first group "worked for" their money, but the second didn't.   
  
Think  about it.....and Last but not least :   
  
3.   Why are we cutting benefits for our veterans, no pay raises for our military and cutting our army to a level lower than before WWII, but  we are  NOT stopping the payments or benefits to illegal aliens. 
  

"If  you do not take an interest in the affairs of your government, then you are  doomed to live under the rule of fools." ? Plato


1a)

Who Lost the Saudis?

Iran and Russia have an interest in toppling the House of Saud.


That headline question may seem premature, but it’s worth asking if only to reduce the odds that the Saudis are lost as we enter the last perilous year of the Obama Presidency. Iran and Russia have an interest in toppling the House of Saud, and they may be calculating whether President Obama would do anything to stop them.

This comes to mind watching the furious reaction by Iran and its allies to Saudi Arabia’s New Year execution of 47 men for terrorism. Most of the condemned were Sunnis, including members of al Qaeda, but the Saudis also executed prominent Shiite cleric Nemer al-Nemer, who had led a Shiite uprising in 2011.

“The divine hand of revenge will come back on the tyrants who took his life,” said Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Sunday, among many other denunciations across the Shiite Middle East. Protesters ransacked and set fire to the Saudi Embassy in Tehran before police belatedly stopped them. The Saudis responded by cutting off diplomatic relations with Iran.

Nouri al-Maliki, the Iranian ally and former Prime Minister of Iraq, put regime change on the table by saying the execution “will topple the Saudi regime as the crime of executing the martyr al-Sadr did to Saddam” Hussein. He was referring to the death of another prominent Shiite cleric in Iraq in 1980.

Iran already has ample reason to want to topple the Saudis, who are its main antagonist in the Shiite vs. Sunni conflict that has swept the region amid America’s retreat. The two are fighting a proxy war in Yemen, after a Saudi-led coalition intervened to stop a takeover by Iran’s Houthi allies. The Saudis are also the leading supporter of the non-Islamic State Sunnis who are fighting Syria’s ally Bashar Assad. Russia and Iran are allied with Assad.

Then there’s Saudi oil production keeping oil prices low. As the biggest exporters in OPEC, the Saudis have refused to cut production to stem a supply glut that has cut prices to $37 a barrel. This means Iran will get much less benefit from its renewed ability to export oil under its nuclear accord with Mr. Obama.

Saudi exports are also punishing Russia, the world’s second largest oil producer, which by some accounts needs oil at $100 a barrel to satisfy Vladimir Putin’s domestic promises. The ruble dropped to its lowest level to the dollar in 2015 last week on the prospect of still-lower oil prices. Russia and Iran would benefit greatly from internal Saudi turmoil or the threat of a larger regional war that caused oil prices to spike.
None of this means a direct Iran-Saudi conflict is imminent, though with dictatorships you never know. Iran had no good reason to fire rockets within 1,500 yards of the USS Truman last month, but it may have been testing to see how the U.S. would react. The Administration didn’t respond until the news was leaked, and then with a mild military statement.

The White House decision last week to walk back U.S. sanctions against Iran after its recent ballistic-missile tests may also embolden Iran to take greater risks. Iran’s leaders may believe the nuclear deal is a greater restraint on the U.S. than on their own regional ambitions. They can always threaten to leave the nuclear deal if the U.S. imposes new sanctions. The Revolutionary Guard may also believe they have more freedom of action given Russia’s support in Syria and its plan to deliver S-300 anti-aircraft missiles.

As for the Saudis, they can be forgiven for doubting that they can count on President Obama. Fairly or not, they concluded from the fall of Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak that this Administration will abandon its friends in a pinch. They saw his “red-line” reversal in 2013 in Syria, Mr. Obama’s accommodation to Russian revanchism in Crimea, and that he now may let Assad keep power in Syria. The Saudis intervened in Bahrain in 2011 without telling the U.S., and they recently formed a new Sunni-state coalition to fight Islamic State—again without the U.S.

The Saudis treat domestic dissenters harshly, but the Shiite cleric Nemer was no human-rights activist. Joseph Braude of the Foreign Policy Research Institute says that in the 1980s and 1990s Nemer was a leader in Hezbollah al-Hejaz, an armed group in Saudi Arabia’s eastern province. Nemer followed the teachings of Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini and declared the Sunni ruling dynasties in Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Kuwait to be illegitimate. While he later toned down his revolutionary rhetoric, by 2009 he was again advocating a military option.

***

The Saudis are often difficult allies, especially the support by rich Wahhabi sheikhs for radical Islamist mosques and schools around the world. But in a Middle East wracked by civil wars, political upheaval and Iranian imperialism, the Saudis are the best friend we have in the Arabian peninsula. The U.S. should make clear to Iran and Russia that it will defend the Kingdom from Iranian attempts to destabilize or invade.
========================================================================

2) A dear friend and fellow memo reader visited over the Holiday with his lovely wife and three charming daughters and he brought me Rabbi Jonathan Sacks': "The Dignity of Difference."

We drove out to Tybee today and sat and read on the beach. I began this insightful book which Sacks; wrote it in 2002.   I have only read The Prologue and two chapters but he is very prescient.  I had the distinct pleasure of hearing him speak in D.C several years ago via a TV link from London, his home.

After the Prologue, Sacks begins  Chapter 2 entitled "Globalization and Its Discontents," citing two equally possible scenarios.  He espouses the themes globalization is not new and yes, can be destabilizing. Furthermore, capitalism's 'perennial gale' of creative destruction causes threatening changes. Often those who feel threatened may turn to religion as a source of stability.

Chapter 3, ie entitled:  "Exorcising Plato's Ghost." Sacks explores the thesis, religion links man to God and thus, religion can only solve problems of a religious nature.  The politicization of religion has become a growing threat. The resurgence of tribalism is also a fragmenting threat but so is universal-ism.

Man must learn to accommodate differences and until he does, and is not threatened by them, confrontation is unavoidable.

Chapter 4 is entitled : "Control: The Imperative of Responsibility."  In earlier lives the understanding of the universe, limited as it might be, was also understandable. With expanding technology has come rapidity of change and our ability to grasp and cope with rapid change has increased our insecurity.

Personal liberation places greater responsibility on the individual and this brings to the equation of life how we handle morality and how we envision and construct a moral vision.

Chapter 5 is entitled: "Contribution: The Moral Case for The Market Economy."  Sacks believes markets serve mankind, not the other way round. Free markets (Capitalism) create  greater wealth, are consistent with freedom and  fostering creativity.  However, the market (Capitalism)  is not good at distributing the wealth it creates and the social consequences created are not always benign.

We are compelled to ask whether the economic system employed enhances human dignity, self-respect and does everyone participate etc.?

In Sack's view, ownership of property rights is synonymous with freedom and human dignity but without social structures and respect for individual rights we cannot achieve the worthy goals economics and the market (Capitalism) provides. The classic Judaic view is that governments are necessary for defense and social order and, thus, biblical Judaism favors limited government.

Through work, man manages to provide himself and his family with food. Consequently, work embodies spiritual value. Work also provides freedom and enhances man's ability to be creative.

Man's ultimate goal should be to alleviate poverty. The problem with the new unbridled economic order (free markets) is they have furthered the breakdown of social solidarity. Poverty results in social exclusions and this fate can become generational. Whereas market exchange can be a win-win this objective cannot be accomplished without a moral component.

Chapter 6 is entitled: "Compassion: The Idea of Tzedakah." Sacks believes our world is getting less equal and this fact, because of technology, is becoming more visible and thus, cannot be ignored.
A world where few prosper and many starve should offend our sense of fairness and will ultimately rend the fabric of human solidarity.

Sacks defines justice by two words Tzedakah and Mishpat.  The latter means  re-distributive justice or the rule of law. A free society must be governed by laws impartially administered where the guilty are punished, the innocent are acquitted and human rights are secured.

Tzedakah implies distributive justice which is less procedural, more substantive and combines two notions normally opposed to one another, ie. charity and justice. He cites the following example :a person gives something to another and thus, they are either entitled to what is given or it becomes a charitable gift. That said, an act of justice cannot be deemed charity nor can the reverse be true.

Again, the Jewish concept is that God owns all he created and man merely holds what he possesses in trust and since no one should be without basic requirements of existence those who have more are compelled to share and this relates to education, health care and other essential amenities.  Liberty cannot exist in a society whose citizens are deprived  and this is why Sacks believes the economic system must encourage freedom not "financial slavery." Protecting dignity and avoiding humiliation is a systematic element of rabbinical law.

Nevertheless, inequities, because of failed distribution, is no reason to abandon free markets (Capitalism.) because you do not cure poverty by destroying a wealth creation system.

Chapter 7 is entitled: "Creativity:The Imperative of Education." Sacks explains that the Jewish understanding of social justice involves alleviating poverty in a manner that makes for self-respect and independence and information technology is one way of accomplishing this worthy goal.

Since knowledge is power open and equal access to it is a precondition.  Without knowledge creativity is virtually impossible. It is arguable that education, that which you take with you, is at the heart of why Jews have survived whatever catastrophe to which they have been subjected.

Chapter 8 is entitled: "Co-operation: Civil Society and its Institutions." Three conditions that lead man astray - ferocity, avarice and ambition are also societal instruments that allow man to enjoy civil happiness if they are employed  to create co-operation (social capital) which can also bring about an essential element called trust.  Without fidelity, trust and person to person contact no social order could get under way.

When one observes today's social engagements they cannot ignore the breakdown of the family, waning church attendance, less neighborhood contact resulting in diminished habits of association. Consequently, when people are surrounded by strangers, they become more suspicious about motives of others and generalized this can result in lack of confidence in authorities and institutions.

Families are becoming downsized and outsourced. Parents spend less time with their children and children are increasingly bereft of two parents. Neither can one ignore the disconnect between employer and employee.  Loyalty no longer exist as it once did because employment is subject to the pressures brought about by globalization. Lack of stability has repercussions.

When the moral system encompasses economics  the virtues of industry are enhanced.Competition can be productive but unbridled and lacking a moral component it can become self-destructive. Sacks suggests the classic role of religion is to preserve the physical and metaphysical making them immune from market pressures.

Chapter 9 is entitled: "Conservation: Environmental Sustainability." Sacks argues, man is both master and servant of nature. Man must guard nature because, as noted previously, we are guardians and trustees on behalf of what God created.  Being guests on earth we do not own nature but are duty bound to respect its integrity.

Religion does not offer easy answers to difficult questions but rather provides a framework of thought for intractable issues. When we place the question of our obligation regarding nature beyond self and add the moral component that we have a responsibility to someone other than ourselves because we are not owners of the planet, resolution of this weighty issue should become somewhat easier to construct.

Once again the balance between production and consumption implies practicality, necessity and constrained judgement.

Sacks concludes the chapter by returning to his thesis that the sheer speed of change of modern markets has resulted in destabilization leaving ourselves less secure due to the resulting erosion of social ecology which previously provided support networks and systems of moral meaning.

Chapter 10 in entitled: Conciliation: "The Power of a Word to Change the World."  Sacks begins by stating the virus of hate may lie dormant but rarely dies and eventually mutates.  Retaliation is the instinctual response and historic grievances are rarely forgotten.

Forgiveness breaks the chain because it allows us to cease replaying yesterday's grievances.but can only be a relationship between/among free persons. Why? Because only free persons are able to change.

Sacks concludes this chapter by discussing the intractability of the Middle East.  Sacks believes specifically the one between Palestinians and Israelis is solvable and will result in a division of the land into two states coinciding with existing centres of population, a resolution of the Jerusalem issue and agreements regarding holy sites, joint supervision of shared resources and an international accord with respect to displaced refugees.  Though forgiveness seems inadequate considering the severity of the problem and height of distrust and cumulative grievances forgiveness is the only path through which peace can be achieved.  To arrive at the point of forgiveness both parties must start by beginning to hear each other and comprehend each other's anguish and anger.

Chapter 11 is entitled: "A Covenant of Hope. Sacks starts by stating nothing is inevitable in terms of civilization's survival.  He returns to his theme about the power of capitalism as well as its failures which have led to the break up of the family, disproportionate division of wealth and  the substitution of  the market price for moral value.

Though various societies have disappeared religion has not and will not because it is essential to reminding us of our sense of continuity with the past and responsibility to the future as long as we ask why are we here and what kind of world do we want to create.

Though we have reached globalization we have not perfected global governance.  Sacks asserts that civilizations do not survive because of strength but because of how they respond to the weak and their concern for the powerless

One of the beauties of capitalism is that it took minds away from war and, instead,  led to the pursuit of trade. However, the danger comes when people become absorbed in trade and drift away from great causes. According to Sacks, the greatest threat to mankind in the 21st century is not Obama's global warming but Sack's fear of elite individuals turning to a populist religious struggle against infidels and unbelievers.  Moral relativism is inadequate to defend freedom in the face of passion. Globalism involves decentralization of power and thus maximizes our vulnerability to acts of terror caused by radical individuals acting independently as opposed to nation states. The key to meeting these threats is through faith the world can reach a point where it makes space for difference, because difference enlarges rather than diminishes.

We must establish relationships secure enough to allow for co-operation since the goal must not be power but the pursuit of human dignity.

Mankind's objective must take the shape of covenants created without a goal of submission or dominance and ones that recognize diversity brings strength because the uniting of differences expands. Covenants must confirm the dignity of differences and rest upon mutual fidelity since God;s world is diverse.

Whereas optimism is the belief things will get better and is passive, hope is affirmative and suggests together things can improve and thus, by cherishing our own, we come to understand the value of others.

Personal comments: There is not doubt Sacks is brilliant and can take a complex thought and reduce it to understandable language

He rests his argument on a firm belief that through religion, faith and  overcoming fear man may more easily embrace distinctions and accept differences realizing this reduces conflict and strengthens the goal of human dignity.

I appreciate the fact that there is dignity in differences. However, history has proven when differences are stark they can become threatening and when totally incompatible cultures come in contact no amount of accommodation works because one's principles, prejudices and very security are challenged beyond that which is acceptable.  What it will take for man to move away from the game of "you be lets" is beyond my vision and hope for mankind.

What I found most fascinating and informative is the way Sacks integrates and interrelates morals and markets.

As I read, my view that liberals and conservatives proceed by understanding half the equation was re-enforced.  Liberals focus on the division of wealth with little regard for cost limitations and conservatism takes too narrow a view of wealth creation  paying less attention to the failure of re-distribution.

I was impressed by the fact that Sacks believes Judaism embraces Capitalism because it is the best economic system leading for achieving wealth creation, freedom and creativity. Sacks also confirmed my view that the breakup of the family, the shift away from mutual loyalty between employer and the employee, technology's impact on producing rapid change and the decline in morality were, in fact, real and should be of imminent concern.

His belief that a religion based radical terrorism is our greatest threat was confirming but not comforting because of Obama's dithering.

Though his emphasis on how mankind's intractable problems can be resolved is more hope than reality I understand, being a Rabbi and man of faith, it is natural he would take a more compassionate road.

That Sacks wrote this book in 2002 yet,saw clearly the threat of terrorism and the power of radicalized individuals proceeding under the guise of embracing religion would become the greatest threat to man kind, and Western Democracies were particularly ill prepared to cope, further re-enforces my view that Obama poses a threat that cannot be ignored,

That said, Obama also embraces and espouses much of what Sacks argues and one might argue Obama is light years ahead of where the rest of us are. Often the problem of being ahead of the times results in one not surviving the present. No doubt man's mistreatment of his environment is a warning and can be a legitimate concern. If,however, it is based on unscientific and politically motivated evidence and the cost of solutions outweigh the benefit this too must be weighed.  Furthermore, if one places threats in a wrong order then everything that is tried can become an impediment to attainment of anything and everything.

For those who enjoy having their comfortable assumptions challenged I urge you to read "The Dignity of Difference."
========================================================================3) After being interviewed by the school administration, the prospective teacher said:

'Let me see if I've got this right. 

'You want me to go into that room with all those kids, correct their disruptive behavior, observe them for signs of abuse, monitor their dress habits, censor their T-shirt messages, and instill in them a love for learning. 

'You want me to check their backpacks for weapons, wage war on drugs and sexually transmitted diseases, and raise their sense of self esteem and personal pride. 

'You want me to teach them patriotism and good citizenship, sportsmanship and fair play, and how to register to vote, balance a checkbook, and apply for a job. 

'You want me to check their heads for lice, recognize signs of antisocial behavior, and make sure that they all pass the final exams.

'You also want me to provide them with an equal education regardless of their handicaps, and communicate regularly with their parents in English, French or any other language, by letter, telephone, newsletter, and report card. 

'You want me to do all this with a piece of chalk, a blackboard, a bulletin board, a few books, a big smile, and a starting salary that qualifies me for food stamps.

'You want me to do all this, and then you tell me.......I CAN'T PRAY?
==============================================================
4)





Pentagon Building Cruise Missile Shield To Defend US Cities From Russia


The military moves to set up an expensive sensor-and-shooter network, but is the threat real?
The Pentagon is quietly working to set up an elaborate network of defenses to protect American cities from a barrage of Russian cruise missiles.
The plan calls for buying radars that would enable National Guard F-16 fighter jets to spot and shoot down fast and low-flying missiles. Top generals want to network those radars with sensor-laden aerostat balloons hovering over U.S. cities and with coastal warships equipped with sensors and interceptor missiles of their own.
One of those generals is Adm. William Gortney, who leads U.S. Northern Command, or NORTHCOM, and North American Aerospace Defense Command, or NORAD. Earlier this year, Gortney submitted an “urgent need” request to put AESA radars on the F-16s that patrol the airspace around Washington. Such a request allows a project to circumvent the normal procurement process.
While no one will talk openly about the Pentagon’s overall cruise missile defense plans, much of which remain classified, senior military officials have provided clues in speeches, congressional hearings and other public forums over the past year. The statements reveal the Pentagon’s concern about advanced cruise missiles being developed by Russia.
“We’re devoting a good deal of attention to ensuring we’re properly configured against such an attack in the homeland, and we need to continue to do so,” Adm. Sandy Winnefeld, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said during a May 19 speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, in Washington.
In recent years, the Pentagon has invested heavily, with mixed results, in ballistic missile defense: preparations to shoot down long-range rockets that touch the edge of space and then fall toward targets on Earth. Experts say North Korea and Iran are the countries most likely to strike the U.S. or its allies with such missiles, although neither arsenal has missiles of sufficient range so far.
But the effort to defend the U.S. mainland against smaller, shorter-range cruise missiles has gone largely unnoticed.
“While ballistic missile defense has now become established as a key military capability, the corresponding counters to cruise missiles have been prioritized far more slowly,” said Thomas Karako, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, in Washington. “In some ways, this is understandable, in terms of the complexity of the threat, but sophisticated cruise missile technologies now out there are just not going away and we are going to have to find a way to deal with this — for the homeland, for allies and partners abroad, and for regional combatant commanders.”
Intercepting cruise missiles is far different from shooting down a missile of the ballistic variety. Launched by ships, submarines, or even trailer-mounted launchers, cruise missiles are powered throughout their entire flight. This allows them to fly close to the ground and maneuver throughout flight, making them difficult for radar to spot.
“A handful of senior military officials, including several current or past NORTHCOM commanders, have been among those quietly dinging the bell about cruise missile threats, and it’s beginning to be heard,” Karako said.
While many of the combatant commanders — the 4-star generals and admirals who command forces in various geographic regions of the world — believe cruise missiles pose a threat to the United States, they have had trouble convincing their counterparts in the military services who decide what arms to buy.
Fast-track requests like Gortney’s demand for new radars on F-16s have been used over the past decade to quickly get equipment to troops on the battlefield. Other urgent operational needs have included putting a laser seeker on a Maverick missile to strike fast-moving vehicles and to buy tens of thousands of MRAP vehicles that were rushed to Iraq to protect soldiers from roadside bomb attacks.
Last August, at a missile defense conference in Huntsville, Ala., then-NORTHCOM and NORAD commander Gen. Charles Jacoby criticized the Army and other services for failing to fund cruise missile defense projects. NORTHCOM, based in Colorado, is responsible for defending the United States from such attacks.
“I’m trying to get a service to grab hold of it … but so far we’re not having a lot of success with that,” Jacoby said when asked by an attendee about the Pentagon’s cruise missile defense plans. “I’m glad you brought that up and gave me a chance to rail against my service for not doing the cruise missile work that I need them to do.”
But since then, NORTHCOM has been able to muster support in Congress and at the Pentagon for various related projects. “We’ve made a case that growing cruise missile technology in our state adversaries, like Russia and China, present a real problem for our current defenses,” Jacoby said.
One item at the center of these plans is a giant aerostat called JLENS, short for the Joint Land Attack Cruise Missile Defense Elevated Netted Sensor System. The Pentagon is testing the system at Maryland’s Aberdeen Proving Ground, a sprawling military complex north of Baltimore. Reporters have even been invited to see the tethered airship, which hovers 10,000 feet in the air.
JLENS carries a powerful radar on its belly that Pentagon officials say can spot small moving objects – including cruise missiles – from Boston to Norfolk, Va., headquarters of the U.S. Navy’s Atlantic Fleet. Since it’s so high in the air, it can see farther than ground radars.
JLENS is in the early stages of a three-year test phase, but comments by senior military officials indicate the Pentagon in considering expanding this use of aerostats far beyond the military’s National Capital Region district.
“This is a big country and we probably couldn’t protect the entire place from cruise missile attack unless we want to break the bank,” Winnefeld said. “But there are important areas in this country we need to make sure are defended from that kind of attack.”
New missile interceptors could also play a role in the network too.
“We’re also looking at the changing-out of the kinds of systems that we would use to knock down any cruise missiles headed towards our nation’s capital,” Winnefeld said.
Ground-launched versions of ship- and air-launched interceptors could be installed around major cities or infrastructure, experts say. Raytheon, which makes shipborne SM-6 interceptors, announced earlier this year that it was working on a ground-launched, long-range version of the AMRAAM air-to-air missile.
The improvements make the missiles “even faster and more maneuverable,” the company said in a statement when the announcement was made at the IDEX international arms show in Abu Dhabi in February.
The Threat
Driving the concern at the Pentagon is Russia’s development of the Kh-101, an air-launched cruise missile with a reported range of more than 1,200 miles.
“The only nation that has an effective cruise missile capability is Russia,” Gortney said at a March 19 House Armed Services strategic forces subcommittee hearing.
Russian cruise missiles can also be fired from ships and submarines. Moscow has also developed containers that could potentially conceal a cruise missile on a cargo ship, meaning it wouldn’t take a large nation’s trained military to strike American shores.
“Cruise missile technology is available and it’s exportable and it’s transferrable,” Jacoby said. “So it won’t be just state actors that present that threat to us.”
During the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, American and Kuwaiti Patriot missiles intercepted a number of Iraqi ballistic missiles, Karako said. But they missed all five cruise missiles fired, including one fired at Marine headquarters in Kuwait. In 2006, Hezbollah hit an Israeli corvette ship with an Iranian-supplied, Chinese-designed, anti-ship cruise missile, Karako said.
Shooting down the missiles themselves is a pricy proposition, which has led Pentagon officials to focus on the delivery platform.
“The best way to defeat the cruise missile threat is to shoot down the archer, or sink the archer, that’s out there,” Gortney said at an April news briefing at the Pentagon.
At a congressional hearing in March, Gortney said the Pentagon needed to expand its strategy to “hit that archer.”
An existing network of radars, including the JLENS, and interceptors make defending Washington easier than the rest of the country.
“[T]he national capital region is the easier part in terms of the entire kill chain,” Maj. Gen. Timothy Ray, director of Global Power Programs in the Air Force acquisition directorate, said in March at a House Armed Services Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee hearing. “We remain concerned about the coverage for the rest of the country and the rest of the F-16 fleet.”
Winnefeld said that the JLENS and “other systems we are putting in place” would “greatly enhance our early warning around the National Capital Region.”
In an exercise last year, the Pentagon used a JLENS, an F-15, and an air-to-air missile to shoot down a simulated cruise missile. In the test, the JLENS locked on to the cruise missile and passed targeting data to the F-15, which fired an AMRAAM missile. The JLENS then steered the AMRAAM into the mock cruise missile.
But there are many wild cards in the plans, experts say. While the JLENS has worked well in testing, it is not tied into the NORTHCOM’s computer network. It was also tested in Utah where there was far less commercial and civil air traffic than East Coast, some of the most congested airspace in the world. At a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing in March, Gortney acknowledged the project is “not without challenges,” but said that’s to be expected in any test program.
It is also unclear whether the JLENS over Maryland spotted a Florida mailman who flew a small gyrocopter from Gettysburg, Penn., to the U.S. Capitol lawn in Washington, an hour-long flight through some of the most restricted airspace in the country. The JLENS has been long touted by its makers as being ideal for this tracking these types of slow-moving aircraft.
Gortney, in an April 29 House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing about the gyrocopter, told lawmakers the JLENS “has more promise” than other aerostat-mounted radars used by the Department of Homeland Security along the border with Mexico and in South Florida. He deferred his explanation to the classified session after the public hearing.
Experts say JLENS can not just spot but track and target objects like cruise missiles, making it better than other radars used for border security.
Raytheon has built two JLENS, the one at Aberdeen and another in storage and ready for deployment.
If a cruise missile were fired toward Washington, leaders would not have much time to react.
“Solving the cruise missile problem even for Washington requires not just interceptors to be put in place, but also redundant and persistent sensors and planning for what to do, given very short response times,” Karako said.
Marcus Weisgerber is the global business reporter for Defense One, where he writes about the intersection of business and national security. He has been covering defense and national security issues for nearly a decade, previously as Pentagon correspondent for Defense News and chief editor of Inside the Air Force. He has reported from Afghanistan, the Middle East, Europe, and Asia, and often travels with the defense secretary and other senior military officials.

Iranian military officials say they are deploying a sophisticated new guidance system to ballistic missiles with a range of more than 1,000 miles.
The Emad missile system is in the hands of Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps, Brigadier General Hossein Salami said in a state-controlled Fars News report. It may be used in pending war games, Salami said.
Tests on the Emad missiles in October may have violated United Nations Security Council resolutions. The system is touted for its precision, described as “steerable” until just before impact. While it is primarily for conventional weapons, the missiles can carry nuclear warheads.
Despite that, Iranian officials say the system is defensive in nature.
“We don't ask for anyone's permission for boosting our defense and missile power,” Defense Minister Brigadier General Hossein Dehqan said in October.
Iranian leaders have repeatedly vowed to destroy Israel, and the Emad's range places Jerusalem and Tel Aviv within range. Iran also has helped Hizballah amass an arsenal of as many as 150,000 missiles in preparation for a future war with Israel.
The Obama administration's response to the Iranian missile tests thus far has been muted.
U.N. Ambassador said the United States is “deeply concerned” after the October missile test.
The State Department was “considering the appropriate consequences to that launch,” Stephen Mull, the official in charge of implementing the nuclear agreement with Iran told a Senate hearing Dec. 17.

Over the past few days, ISIS supporters have been circulating job openings in the Islamic State ranging from bomb maker to chef and fitness trainer.
The online posting was pulled from the “Message Of A Mujahid” video released this past spring by jihadist Abu Sa'eed Al-Britani — aka Omar Hussain, a former grocery employee from southern England.
Hussain frequently writes PR, including an appeal for doctors to come to the Islamic State and a detailing of the “culture clash” that Western jihadis experience in the caliphate, including Arabs who walk off with other guys' shoes and Chechens who throw their weight around.
In his listing of 10 jobs in the Islamic State, Hussain acknowledges that not everyone who might want to come join ISIS wants to fight, though “the distinction between a boy and a man is the act of fighting.”
Not surprisingly given the priority ISIS places on media, the first job listed is in this realm — given, he argues, ISIS' need to push back on the mainstream media. “All praise is due to Allah that Dawlah [Islamic State] has a strong foot on the media, but imagine if there was no internal media from us, so many misconceptions would be unanswered, so many arguments would not have been refuted. We would be totally silent in the face of the vicious onslaught from the media.”
Hussain then recruits for ISIS' healthcare sector, noting that their hospitals are sometimes “packed” and sometimes “the assistance, care and supervision of many brothers goes unchecked” due to a lack of doctors and assistants, including ISIS members who have been disabled in fighting.
“I do not wish to sound harsh, but my brother please fear Allah, stop treating the Kuffar [disbelievers] and come treat the wounds of your brothers,” he says.
Next on the recruitment list: chefs.
The kitchens where cooking is done for the jihadists “are about 30km behind enemy lines so it's safe from all firing,” Hussain explains.
To make sure that food, supplies, weapons and fighters are transported to the front lines, ISIS also wants mechanics to keep up their fleet of white pickups. “Vehicles play a big role in the work we do. Indeed it is a vital tool for a mujahid in all aspects of daily life,” he notes.
“And many times while driving over rocky terrain or over fields, and the continuous usage, they get damaged and parts get broken. So our own mechanics are very useful. Being a mechanic at the Dawlah garage is very handy and also a very rewardable job. So if you know mechanics, work in the Dawlah garage and assist the mujahidin with your skills.”
And then there's the bomb-making department.
“Ever wondered who assembles the cars and trucks that the brothers drive for their martyrdom operations? Ever wondered who makes the explosive belts? Ever wondered who places bombs on the roads between us and the enemy? The brothers in the bomb making department are the core and backbone of nearly every operation,” says Hussain. “…Imagine the reward in preparing a car packed with explosives for a brother to go detonate in enemy lines; you would get the same reward as the brother who pushes the button and sends 50 kuffar to hell.”
Others are needed just to man checkpoints around ISIS territory “where we mostly catch evil doers trying to smuggle” banned items such as cigarettes. “A fun and rewarding job indeed,” promises Hussain.
Next he makes a pitch to teachers: “Imagine the reward in nurturing a child upon tawhid and jihad.”
“The mujahidin spilt their blood for the establishment of the state, so the least we can do in appreciation and gratitude for them is to help bring up their kids with the correct Islamic teachings,” he notes.
And ISIS wants everybody from jurists to office clerks to work in the Sharia courts. “Oh, and spies get executed on the spot, so good luck to any kafir reading this who thinks he can get in!” Hussain adds.
The ninth job is something Hussain says he tried himself in Raqqa “and it is a very enjoyable task”: Islamic police. “They are the ones who carry out the public lashings and beheadings,” he says. “They walk the streets with their sticks, punishing all those who break the law.”
Finally, Hussain stresses that the Islamic State could use a few good personal trainers.
“Some brothers come in with a lot of extra 'barakah' [blessings] on them which needs to be burnt off, likewise some training camps also teach grappling, knife attacks and defenses, as well as all sorts of other defense tactics,” he said. “These are very important for a mujahid to learn and if you are good at any of these, you could train the new brothers in these camps. Fitness is important and if you want you can be every new mujahid’s first personal trainer.”

As we grapple with the continuing challenges of the Islamic State, it is clear that significant military efforts will be required. There are times when hard power has to be at the center of a campaign, especially against an apocalyptic cult that believes in burning, drowning, and torturing its victims while selling children into sexual slavery, among other horrors.
In terms of the military campaign, there are a series of clear steps that we should collectively undertake: building a robust command and control network; increasing intelligence sharing across the coalition; doubling the scope of the bombing campaign; upping the level of cyberattacks; cutting off financing; formalizing a special forces task force; putting in 15,000 troops to train local forces; conducting a multi-axis ground campaign against Mosul with Kurdish Peshmerga from the north and Iraqi security forces from the south; and drawing on the nascent Arab security coalition led by the Saudis to conduct ground operations in Syria.
There’s a growing consensus on the outlines of this military campaign, though admittedly, it won’t be easy to execute. What is far more difficult to outline is what tools and strategies will comprise the long game against the Islamic State.
In their seminal 2007 report, Professor Joseph Nye and former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage correctly pointed out that to solve the biggest problems we need a mix of hard and soft power — which they termed “smart power.” Of note, that commission included members like former Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel; Sen. Jack Reed, now the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee; Rep. Mac Thornberry, now the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee; and Marine Gen. Tony Zinni, a former Centcom commander. The most important line in that report is simple: “Soft power is the ability to attract people to our side without coercion.” That is the contest we are currently losing, and bombs and troops can’t comprehensively defeat the Islamic State without it.
The interesting question is this: What would a smart power campaign directed against the challenges represented by the Islamic State (which are of course broader than just that group) look like? What are the techniques; levels of resources; and strategies of cooperation, collaboration, and communication?
This is of course a big, complicated campaign, but if we are going to have a hard power campaign, what does the soft power side look like? I laid out some of this several years ago in a TED talk, but much has changed since then. As a starting point for today’s challenges, here are four suggestions on the soft power side of the equation:
1. Recognize that the cost will be high. At one point during the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States was spending close to $1 billion dollars per day. A soft power campaign against the Islamic State will not be as expensive, but it will be costly. Job creation, education, medical diplomacy, and infrastructure redevelopment could run up to $200 billion annually. But shared among a global coalition of 60-plus nations, it’s not an unmanageable cost. In addition to the hard power contingent of about 15,000 troops, we should be thinking about a surge of at least 5,000 more humanitarian workers from places like the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), including refugee camp organizers, humanitarian logisticians, medical personnel, and educators.
2. Seek a collective, truly international strategy for the region. Under the aegis of a big international organization like the United Nations or the International Committee of the Red Cross, convene the international soft power community. This would include national organizations like USAID, the British Department for International Development, and the Japanese International Cooperation Agency; the largest international humanitarian organizations (Doctors Without Borders, Feed the Children, Red Cross/Red Crescent); and other international nongovernmental entities (the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and regional agencies). This should be convened early in 2016 to produce a roadmap, donor pledges, and an accountable steering committee.
3. Focus on drafting and resourcing a powerful collective strategic narrative. At the heart of this strategy should be constructing a narrative to counter violent extremism in the Islamic world and build alternatives in those affected societies. In this area, one basic failure here is our approach. Too often people say to me, “You’re right: We have to get better in the war of ideas.” Nope. “The war of ideas” is as flawed a theory as “the war on drugs.” We need a “marketplace of ideas.” In practice, this means focusing on showing alternative positive paths, not simply portraying the negative side of radical Islam.
It is not axiomatic or an obvious given that what we believe in (democracy, liberty, freedom of expression, gender and racial equality) will sell best in that marketplace. So we need to show why we believe they are the right ideas, and that will require using better means of delivery (Internet, television, radio, leaflet); being able to respond rapidly to changing events (reshaping messages, highlighting successes on our side and failures on the part of the extremists); and providing more culturally attuned offerings (film, novels, poetry, games). The key to competing in the marketplace of ideas will be showing a vision of life that is positive and fulfilling (and in accordance with mainstream Islam). Not an easy sell, but impossible to achieve if we don’t try.
We also need to study and counter the narrative being received from the other side, which is nuanced and sophisticated, both in message and delivery. A recent article in the New York Times lays out what we are up against, and we need to recognize it will be a challenge to overcome it. This is the most important thing we can and must do.
4. Jobs, jobs, jobs. Not everything will be solved by employment, of course, but as an alternative to active jihad, the chance to build a life — steady employment, a healthy family, a financially viable community-based circle — will help keep some away from the fight. In any given insurgency, about one-third of the participants will be hard-core adherents who will not be won over by alternatives, no matter how cleverly presented or richly resourced; but about one-third are very winnable when presented with an alternative (e.g. a job), and another third will waver but conceivably could be weaned away or prevented from engaging to begin with. A private-public Marshall Plan-like mentality, which builds a business infrastructure in Syria and Iraq through a combination of grants and investment, can help. Organizations like the U.S. Overseas Private Investment Corporation, private-sector investors, and sovereign wealth investment funds could add to the effort.
Some cynics will say that this sounds laughable — yet over the past two decades, we have seen relatively quick economic recovery in bitterly war-torn zones from Rwanda to Colombia to Sarajevo. It can be achieved if the people of the region essentially want to love their children more than hate the sect next door. History has plenty of examples of rapid improvement in similarly terrible circumstances, including, of course, both Europe and Japan after WWII.
All of this will be expensive and hard, but compared to the alternative — simply relying on bombs or guns to defeat the Islamic State — it will be more efficient and effective, especially over the long term. We need hard power now to strike the Islamic State; but over time we need to bring soft power into the mix. And that is the only choice for dealing with the turbulence emanating from the Arab world today.
James Stavridis is a retired four-star U.S. Navy admiral and NATO supreme allied commander who serves today as the dean of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University.
=======================================================================



No comments: