Undoubtedly Bone-Spurs, well known as a horn-dog, got his inspiration from the appearance on Fox News of Gallagher's wife Andrea. And also from San Diego Congressman Duncan Hunter, another horn-dog who allegedly used campaign funds to help pay for his extramarital affairs. And of course Breitbart had a lot to do with Bone-Spurs interference in the rocks and shoals of justice.
In Gallagher's court martial the Navy prosecution team was outlawyered by his high paid civilian law firm, expensive but paid for by donations solicited on Breitbart and Fox.
Charges against Gallagher were:
- Attempted Murder;
- Premeditated Murder;
- Aggravated Assault with a Dangerous Weapon (two counts?) on non-combatant;
- Discharging firearm willfully as to endanger non-combatants;
- Obstructing Justice (three counts);
- Wrongfully pose for an unofficial picture with a human casualty;
- Wrongfully complete reenlistment ceremony next to a human casualty;
- Wrongfully Operate a drone over a human casualty;
- Wrongful Use of a Controlled Substance – Tramadol Hydrochloride;
- Unlawful Possession of a Controlled Substance – Sustanon250
The other fishy thing is the dropping of the charges regarding use of steroids and opioids. That would seem to be easy to prove, but apparently it was not. The steroid use coincides with the reports of his aggressive behavior - not only the alleged killing of the teenage POW, but his indiscriminate and reckless sniper shots, and randomly spraying neighborhoods with machine gun and rocket fire. "Other snipers said they witnessed Gallagher taking at least two militarily pointless shots, shooting and killing an unarmed old man in a white robe as well as a young girl walking with other girls." And that he "boasted about the large number of people he had killed, claiming he averaged three kills a day over 80 days, including four women."
So he is free now with rank restored. The American people will foot the bill for his pension. The American military will have problems for years in the future for Bone-Spurs handling of this. America's reputation is besmirched. And some Americans, troops and civilians, will pay with blood because of it.
The Navy should never again let him serve in a Seal Team or in a training role. IMHO they should assign him to be the senior corpsman in a VD ward of a naval hospital or clinic, preferably a remote one. And monitor him with frequent drug tests. But the Navy brass has Bone-Spurs looking over their shoulder on this. They damn sure don't want to lose funding for a new carrier or some other high end item, as they know that Bone-Spurs has a vindictive streak. So they'll toe the line.
If we are lucky Gallagher will retire, and stay off of Fox and Breitbart. But I fear that ain't gonna happen.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddie_Gallagher_(Navy_SEAL)
Don't they have the Thule base for such people?
ReplyDeleteI know, it's USAF, but that's just a question of whether they want him there.
AF would never take him. But the Navy has ships cruising the Arctic. And there is talk of a Joint USN/USCG port on the Bering Sea.
DeleteMaybe Gallagher needs another ribbon:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navy_Arctic_Service_Ribbon
That old joke about going to Thule or Antarctica doesn't really apply anymore. Shit-bags that can't be kicked out are usually given desk jobs with as little authority as possible.
DeleteOld jokes are best.
DeleteThe bottom line for anyone in command authority is that this dude (along with the other two criminals ol' Five-Deferment Donnie let off) simply can't be trusted. Not as a subordinate, not with any sort of mission that requires any degree of discipline and intelligence. Not ever again. They've been given a "get out of jail free" card. They're "good-order-and-discipline" land mines waiting to get stepped on.
ReplyDelete(And, FWIW, my understanding is that the special teams - all the special teams, regardless of branch - are a pretty tight community. Not as they were before these imperials wars, because they've been tasked too hard and expanded too much, but still pretty close outfits. This joker's own team dimed him off. Which, IMO, means 1) he was such a ginormous asshole that the people who worked most closely with him couldn't stand him, and/or 2) he was running around like a nut doing crimes in a COIN environment, endangering his own team and the rebellion-suppression mission of his higher. That says something pretty damning about his effect on his own outfit)
So how the hell are you going to trust this dude to EVER go back into that environment again and carry out the mission he's tasked with? To not turn his own team, and, consequently, my (the theatre/AO commander's mission) into a chaotic shitshow? Especially now that it's been made brilliantly clear to him that he's untouchable - that he can, practically speaking, kill whoever he wants to whenever he wants to without consequence.
Vann supposedly said something to the effect that the best counter-guerrilla weapon is a knife; this NCO is a goddamn dud round that can and will go off at any time. I'm his team commander, or the CO of the conventional unit whose AO his team is operating in? I'm getting his outfit the hell out of that AO most quick smart, because he's going to make more G's than he kills.
I think the Navy is being stand-up here, but is being forced to confront this because of the DOPUS' belligerence when there's better ways to deal with this schmuck. If I was me, if I was the flag officer in charge of the Navy's Special Operations outfit, I'd salute and move out smartly...and then this sonofabitch would find himself NCOIC of every shit detail I could find him. He'd count socks in SEAL supply rooms until his DEROS, and then he'd inspect porta-potties in every FOB from now until his ETS. He'd be the official Coffee Bitch of some shore station Ops office. He'd be paid his E-7 rate without every being an actual "Chief Petty Officer" again.
In the big picture, though? This is just a reminder that, as Sun Tzu warned us, long wars don't ever benefit the polity that fights them. This dude (and the DOPUS!) are symptoms, rather than the disease.
As a corpsman (medic), how could he do those things? Don't you medics have something similar to the Hippocratic Oath?
DeleteOr was he a Seal first, and then just got a minor medical qualification later? Aren't all those guys supposed to have multiple MOS's?
SecNav Spencer and at least some of the admirals are pushing back against Bone-Spurs, very lightly of course but not being complete arse licking yes men.
All the armed services have positions that do not have a requirement for some particular specialty. I'm a living example.
DeleteMy last posting was to an ORARNG permanent training facility. I was assigned to the Range Control shop. My then-MOS was 13E, artillery fire-direction...but the position was MOS-immaterial. We had 11-series guys, engineers, I think at least one was a supply type. It was purely administrative support for the using units. It didn't matter if you were a Bosnian-language-specialist with a scuba identifier if all you were doing was overseeing issuing billets or ranges and inspecting them after the using unit was done with them; none of the jobs in the entire organization outside of the actual supply guys and the cooks had to be working in their MOS.
The Navy has to have the same sort of thing, shore stations that need billeting NCOs, MACOMs that have liaison people with contractors and/or suppliers (hence the porta-john inspector job)...and this is where I'd quietly put this joker. He'd never lead troops in my outfit, he'd never have a mission-essential combat-related job if I could help it.
There's no question in my military mind that this is where this dude is going to end up anyway.
But I think the brass has to stand up and be counted on this or accept that they're Donnie's punks. It's one thing to be subordinate to the CinC; it's another to accept that individual reaching down and making military justice decisions for individual troops. That means that they aren't the officers of anything.
Chief,
DeleteI think you're exactly right. Trump and his know-nothing supporters think they are doing a great thing for Gallagher and the SEALs, but in reality it's a big fat Bravo Foxtrot. He may keep his Trident into retirement, but he won't be part of the community any longer.
Unfortunately, I'm guessing he probably has a bright future as an "analyst" at Fox or some right-wing outfit.
Mike,
DeleteFrom my understand, SEAL medic is just an additional qualification unlike the other services which have a unique MOS for medics. And, as far as I know, the special operations medics do not have the protected Geneva Conventions status that regular medics and doctors do.
If the Navy handles their SOF people like the Army does my guess is that it works the other way around; you start with a rating in a certain specialty - so this dude could have started as a corpsman - and then when you pass the training course for the special teams, like the Q course for Army SF, you get an additional skill identifier as SF qualified. So you could start as a medic (MOS 91B when I was a line doc) and your basic E-4 and below medic would be a 91B10. When you got through jump school you got a "P" identifier (91B1P). Ranger grads got a "G", SF guys an "S", so an E-6 grade SF medic would be a 91B3S.
DeleteThere were "additional skill identifiers", too, so, for example, if the SF doc went to drill sergeant school and passed he'd be something like a 91B3SX.
Anyway, point is that this joker might have been a corpsman first, then got his skill badge.
But speaking as a horndog, Andrea IS smokin' hot.
ReplyDeleteSo there's that.
Her media savvy is what got him off. And she will continue to make him even more of a celebrity. He has a good thing going with her, he best not F it up by continuing with the steroids.
DeleteThis reminds me of that "Rogue Warrior" jackass (Dick Marcinko, had to look him up) who got caught fiddling with federal cash when he was part of some sort super-secret red cell gimmick. Went to the brig and ended up with a book deal and is running around doing merc work and has some sort of wingnut radio show. I'm sure he and this goofball will get on like a house afire.
DeleteI used to be around the SEAL community and none of them married ugly women. Of course, the divorce rate was through the roof.
DeleteSupposedly DOPUS has backed down and will let the USN take whatever disciplinary action they deem appropriate with this guy: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/11/eddie-gallagher-trump-reverses-course-intervene-disciplinary-action-navy-seal.html
ReplyDeleteOr not. Trump shitcanned his SecNav over this nonsense; https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/navy-secretary-richard-spencer-fired-dispute-over-discipline-seal-n1090306
ReplyDeleteGood for SecNav Spencer for saying that tweets are NOT military orders. At last! That should have been known and understood long ago by all in the Armed Forces and DoD. And the same goes for the civilian departments as well.
ReplyDeleteBut DOPUS ain't done yet. He ain't gonna go along with anything other than a mild wrist slap.
Lissome Andrea ain't done yet either. She'll get a book deal and convince Rupert Murdoch and other saps to pre-purchase a 100,000 copies. And she'll promote a Gallagherfest that will bring on more decay in the soul of America.
i posted too soon. Looks like DOPUS believes his tweets carry the same weight as the ten commandments did for Calvin.
DeleteDid he shitcan Admiral Green also?
ReplyDeleteHaven't seen anything yet. Sounds like the WH is too busy shrieking and running around in circles because more evidence of skulduggery in the Ukraine business turned up, plus Rudy's pal Lev turns out to have tapes.
Delete"Daddy...what are tapes..?"
"Well, sometimes, when a mobbed-up real estate fraudster and a Russian prostitute hate a President very much..."
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBernie Kerik, a convicted felon, is the main guy on Gallagher's legal team who is now pushing Bone-Spurs to deep six Admiral Green. Kerik is NOT a lawyer, he is supposedly on the legal team as an investigator and strategist. But he is a long time buddy of Bone-Spurs. And he is the guy that managed to get Bone-Spurs' personal lawyer, Marc Mukasey, on the team.
ReplyDeleteGallagher himself is also denigrating Admiral Green on Fox & Friends interviews. He trash talked the Admiral's ego and claimed it was all about retaliation. Sounds like he has an ego problem himself. The idiot is still on active duty, he should let his lawyer talk for him.
But so far, the CNO and the rest of the Navy brass have Green's back. Will their support last? I'm a big fan of CHINFO Rear Admiral Brown's tweet on restoring "Gallagher to the pay grade of E-7" instead of saying "to the rank of Chief Petty Officer". A subtle distinction perhaps, but one that openly broadcasts the Navy no longer considers Gallagher fit to be a Chief.
He's not fit to chip paint on a goddamn garbage scow, so they kinda have that right.
DeleteInteresting take on this here (https://www.forbes.com/sites/craighooper/2019/11/25/navy-boss-richard-spencer-is-fired-over-repeated-missteps-new-nominee-already-picked/#160bd206f1fa) in Forbes, where the writer makes the claim that Spencer was uniquely vulnerable because:
1) He'd pissed off powerful Republicans in Congress, particularly Jim Inhofe, over problems with USS Ford,
2) A lot of the rest of the fleet didn't have his back because of some sort of administrative backstabbing that ended up with him jumping some guy named Gilday to CNO over someone named Moran who was the consensus pick for CNO,and
3) and I'll quote this wholesale, because I don't trust my understanding of USN policy to summarize it:
"Spencer was also preparing to drive significant and controversial changes in the Navy’s force structure—while juggling cost overruns and an inability to fully pay for everything in the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP). Premier big ticket Navy programs, the Ford class carrier, the Columbia class ballistic missile submarine, and the Virginia class attack submarine are not moving smoothly, and Spencer’s advocacy for unmanned platforms was falling flat with stakeholders worried that the technology wasn’t ready and that the Navy was about to repeat the mistakes seen on the Ford on a Fleet-wide scale."
So it sounds like Green may be on safer ground than Spencer was, just because the SecNav was in a bad way for other reasons before this who idiotic nonsense began.
And this is precious (https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-tells-allies-he-wants-absolved-war-criminals-to-campaign-for-him)
ReplyDelete"If Donald Trump gets his wish, he’ll soon take the three convicted or accused war criminals he spared from consequence on the road as special guests in his re-election campaign, according to two sources who have heard Trump discuss their potential roles for the 2020 effort."
I know that Ael will slap me up the backside of the head for this, but...THIS is exactly the problem with a volunteer armed force.
If you've had to serve with jokers like these people you get why having them running around with live rounds in a LIC/guerrilla war setting is a BAD idea. It's not that you can't have marginal people with weapons, although that's not ideal for the people around or in charge of them - you simply can't be sure that their heads will be trained in the right direction, or that they won't disregard their mission for some bizarre, fucked-up thing that pops into their skulls.
But 1) We the People have gone so long without actually dealing with this sort of shit that We have no frame of reference to understand why people like these aren't "heroes", and 2) the small self-selecting community of people who volunteer (and the even smaller multiple-self-selected group of people who compose the SF community are now so far removed from the general population as to practically comprise a separate species.
So Trump CAN take these worthless sonsofbitches to his Nuremburg rallies and get a big cheer, or people like Torturemeister John Yoo can get high-priced law school teaching gigs without the public really "getting" why these bastards are as much a danger to the ideals of the United States as Joe Goebbels or Osama were.
The whole "ideals of the US" thing is a whole 'nother nutroll, mind you...
I think Moran dropped out of the race for CNO because of bad vibes about the USS Fitzgerald and his continued friendship with Bad Santa. SecNav probably had nothing to do with him retiring.
ReplyDeleteI don't think Forbes knew what they were talking about. Gilday was a good choice, especially with his experience in cyber. So he skipped over several four stars, big deal! The military has not ever and never should guarantee promotions based solely on seniority. Sometimes dead wood has to be jumped over or cut back.
I don't get any sort of "Moran >>>> Gilday" from the Forbes piece. I think the writer was pointing out that Moran's appointment WAS popular with his fellow brass-hats (seniority being their gig) and picking Gilday chapped some of those sailors.
DeleteFWIW, the thing about Spencer pushing for RPVs seems to be a piece with that. I can see the brown shoe guys not wanting to give up a piece of the wild blue yonder, and the sub guys not wanting to turn over their patch of the briny to some fuckin' robot.
So, again, I didn't see the Forbes piece so much as a "firing Spencer was a bad move!" as it was a "Here's why Spencer was already halfway out the door" thing...
Perhaps the most unsettling aspect of this is some speculation I've been hearing - from some former GIs, among others - that these pardons are going to create an effective bypass in the chain of command and tie MAGA troopers directly to The Leader.
ReplyDeleteI mean...it's not too hard to envision. Some America Firster in uniform gets tired of having to defer to his "allies" or play by restrictive ROE and shoves a pistol in some dusky furriner's snoot or waxes some dude. He's charged, Trump pardons him. Now he owes Trump, not his superiors.
I honestly don't think Trump has actually thought this through. But he's also a mobbed-up guy (New York City real estate? Casinos? Y'think?) and that's how you ensure your goombas loyalty; you give to them, they give to you. And so I can see him thinking that he's showing "loyalty" to his loyal army, his Warriors for Trump.
And, like everything this goofball touches...it's not going to end well for the idea that the guys back in 1789 came up with.
The lying moron is -thankfully- rather incompetent. He would have a loyalist veterans movement sworn to personal allegiance if had the the competence of the buffoon Mussolini. He'd also have developed conspiracy theories about how the Democrats stabbed the troops in the back and sabotaged victory in Iraq and AFG.
DeleteSven - He is trying hard, but his bone-spurs-draft-dodging has kept that from happening. If he had been a vet himself, he might have pulled it off despite his incompetence.
DeleteThis makes banana republics look fine:
ReplyDeletehttps://eu.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2019/11/27/ice-arrested-250-foreign-students-fake-university-metro-detroit/4277686002/
It is all rather astounding...yes, the POTUS is the CnC, but usually the POTUS is the one who lines the ducks up politically, and it's the Generals who ensure that they will execute the CnC's commands when commanded.
ReplyDeleteAt least that is what I thought
but
perhaps, trump tried on a military jacket, liked what he saw in the mirror, had a vision of himself as Andrew Jackson, and decided that he too, can be General.
and
honestly at this time, I'm not sure we could fight a forest fire with trump at the helm, much less a war.
We live in interesting times...of which, honestly, I want out of as of yesterday.
Sheerakahn -
DeleteThe Moron thinks he is still the cadet captain at NYMA. Back then as a six foot teenager he could bully the little guys yet suck up to the instructors and upper classmen. That has been his modus operandi for 60+ years.
If we get into a war situation, whatever half-assed strategy the douchebag tries to force on the generals/admirals is going to be a disaster.
I just finished Hamilton's The Mantle of Command about FDR's first year as war president, and it had a long discussion about the political and military crisis in 1942, when a bunch of people in DC, including Secretary of War Stimpson and Army chief Marshall, were wild for the idea of a cross-channel invasion. FDR was dead against it, primarily because he believed that the Allies didn't have either the technical or organizational abilities to pull it off. He insisted on a North African invasion, and after a tremendous amount ot political infighting got it.
DeleteSo Presidents DO sometimes reach down into the level of grand strategy or even strategy. But for Donnie to be farkling about with courts martial? That's both idiotic and dangerous.
Must have been awful early in 42. Arcadia Conference ended in mid January. And Patton's Desert Training Center in the Mojave Desert was activated by the War Department on 1 April.
DeleteAnd FDR's viewpoint was NOT based on personal opinions or Trumpian WAGs. It came from agreements with Churchill and the the Brit Imperial General Staff who had been fighting since Sep 39. Plus his experience in the Navy Department during WW1 gave him a better consideration of what was needed in shipping required to pull off such an opposed landing - hulls that the Navy did not yet have in 42. And most commercial shipping was committed to Lend-Lease deliveries. FDR's personal Chief of Staff and close friend was former CNO Admiral Leahy, who was the most senior military officer in all of the US Armed Forces at the time, and Chair of the newly formed Joint Chiefs. Between the two of them and Admiral King they had a damn good understanding of what it would take to land in Europe. Thirdly, regardless of the 'Germany First' grand strategy agreed to by the US & Brits, FDR & Churchill had also committed to divert ships to the Pacific in 42 - to keep logistic lines open to the Aussies and to support ABDA Command.
Presidents should help to shape strategy. Based on an appreciation of geopolitics and internal politics, and a knowledge of industrial capacity. NOT based on a personal political agenda nor should it be based on the personal bank account of the President and his family.
Hamilton's work covers from late '41 to late '42, and it sounds like the organized objection to Torch lasted well into the summer of '42. Hamilton states that Stimpson was pushing for "Bolero" (the channel crossing) into June and July, and drafted a letter to FDR on August 10 arguing for it and against Torch. He'd sounded out Marshall on 8/9/42 about Torch (then called "Gymnast") and Marshall had nixed it. It wasn't until he saw the draft letter turned up that he backed off, and Stimpson, seeing he'd lost Knox and Marshall, backed away, too.
DeleteWell...Hamilton says that Churchill was part of the problem more than part of the solution as far as the issue of where the US forces should go. He wanted them to be placed under British command - either in Egypt, or in Burma, or both. He's actually fairly harsh to Churchill in particular and the Brits in general, and makes a lot of FDR's unwillingness to humor Churchill's imperial obsessions. It was only after repeated British defeats that reduced Churchill's influence that he was forced to become the junior partner. (Hamiton is pretty harsh on Churchill...)
As far as it goes, FDR seems to have been willing to listen to sensible pushback to his wants. He wanted Torch to go off before the off-year elections in November and understood that the objections to his timetable were sensible and based on operational realities (and the Democrats took a hiding in '42, BTW).
Hamilton DOES discuss Leahy's role in depth, and, yeah...he was pretty critical.
The interesting thing to me is that I've always been really conflicted on Torch. It was really the only realistic "second-front" option in the ETO...but it led to the bloody Sicilian and Italian Campaigns that always seemed to be a military dead-end (or that, at best, cost too much for what they gained). I understand why it was necessary, but it just seems to have led down a blind alley; Rommel was beaten, and North Africa was important only inasmuch as the Germans could use it to threaten Suez. And having American forces in North Africa made Sicily look irresistible...so it kind of ended up leading to trouble down the road.
I suspect the Brit withdrawals at Dunkirk, Narvik, and Trondheim also shaped FDR's thinking. And the disaster at Dieppe in mid-August probably sealed the deal for Stimson and Marshall.
DeleteWhy was Hamilton critical of Leahy? IMHO Leahy, although not an Éminence grise during the war, deserved a lot more credit for the outcome.
As for Hamilton, anyone who writes a three volume tribute of Monty has a mile wide blind spot. But that probably is inbred into all or most Brits. I'll have to get one of his books to figure on whether Hamilton is a hack biographer or a real historical researcher.
People ignore Spain in hindsight.
DeleteSpain had insufficient military power to defend itself if the Western Allies got an entry through the Portuguese ports of Lissabon and Porto.
The Allies might have become stuck in Spain or the Pyrenées, but Germany and Italy would have been forced to divert many more resources than for the Tunisia and Italy campaigns. The front would have been very long and the Spanish would have contributed near-zero munitions or modern arms.
Sven -
DeleteSounds good! But why risk pushing Spain out of their so-called neutrality? Even if Spanish neutrality was a sham and paper thin, by throwing Spain on the side of the Axis you jeopardize relations with Mexico, Argentina, Venezuela and much of Latin & Central America. Gibraltar? Spain couldn't take it, but they could extend an invitation to Germany to do it for them as soon as Allied troopships started unloading in Portugal. The OKW's Operation Felix to take Gibraltar had been planned since July of '40.
Ditto for the risk to Portuguese neutrality. The Azores were critical for the war effort. And even if Brazil had been independent for over a century they would have sided with their co-linguists. A preponderance of Brazilian Army officers were pro-fascist, as were many senior government officials. There was also over a million German expatriates living in Brazil. If you invade Spain via Portugal then 'Plan Rubber' to occupy Brazil would have had to be implemented diverting divisions from the main war.
Mike: I wasn't clear about Leahy; Hamilton's point was that he (Leahy) was critical to the successful prosecution of Gymnast/Torch vs Bolero (D-Day in '42). He was able to establish a pro-Torch consensus within the War Department to counteract Marshall (and King - he was a Bolero enthusiast until midsummer, tho less so than wanting a Pacific-first pivot).
DeleteOverall I wasn't particularly impressed with Hamilton. He seems to have a very simplistic take on the British in general; incompetent when they weren't outright cowards. He's scathing on the subject of Churchill's military stupidity and his poor choice of military leadership, and his discussions of issues like MacArthur's role in the SW Pacific seem fairly crude, as well. He does seem to have a solid grasp of FDR both as a man and as a leader, but over all I'd like to find a historian with a less-pop-fiction feeling...
Sven: I suspect that a "Spanish Campaign" would have been only a little less costly than Sicily and Italy, and, as mike points out, the global geopolitical liabilities would have been severe.
ReplyDeleteI suspect that the Spanish would have been more useful than you'd think. I don't see the Falangist army being as hopeless as the Italian one was by late 1942; I doubt you'd have gotten the sorts of mass surrenders that ended up with the Franco government, like Italian government, knocked out of the war by '43. The terrain would have been more forgiving, but a hell of a lot larger.
At the same time, the size of the Iberian peninsula WOULD have forced Hitler to pull a lot more resources to try and defend it - assuming he would have. And, as mike points out, a Spanish Campaign might have created trouble in South America...
Lots of whatifs there.
And wouldn't invading neutral countries be a war crime itself? I would think that would be codified somewhere, the Hague Convention perhaps.
ReplyDeleteI suppose you could make a case that Spain was NOT truly neutral. Spain's 45,000 volunteers that fought with the Heer in the Siege of Leningrad and at Krasny Bor could have been considered a breach of their neutral status. As also could their supplying key war materials to the Axis.
But I don't believe you could make the same claim for Portugal. Although neutrality was not a guarantee against Allied invasion and interference. Case in point being Iceland.
The Allies of WW2 did not shy away from attacking neutral countries (and I wouldn't even count the occupation of Denmark as an example).
DeleteNorway was invaded by Germany because Germany moved FIRST.
USSR was attacked by Germany because the British and French just barely aborted their prepared air offensive against Baku in 1940.
Sven -
ReplyDeleteDenmark???
Re Norway, were you referring to the Altmark?
Re Baku, the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact turned the Soviets into a de facto ally of Germany. Despite their claim of neutrality they participated in the dismemberment of Poland, invaded Finland and the Baltics, and supplied millions of tons of war materials to Hitler, . No way they could have been considered neutral or non-belligerent. Besides, there were many other reasons that Hitler invaded: Lebensraum, agricultural resources, and his hatred of both Slavs & Bolsheviks.
I meant Iceland, which was part of Denmark.
DeleteNorway: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plan_R_4
The Allies were intent on invading Norway just as illegally as did Germany few weeks later.
Hitler had screws loose. He was pretty much like al-Baghdadi - picking fights all the time, eventually getting killed because he did too much in parallel. There are the usual explanations for the attack on the USSR, but those seem unnecessary considering that he proved his capability to completely needlessly declare war on the U.S. when it was guaranteed to be distracted for years to come.
I think he was just an idiot who stumbled the stairs upwards because he was in the right place at the right time with enough terrible people around him.
The past few years reminded the world that such people really do exist and really do succeed to some degree.
Iceland recognized Christian X as King of Iceland. But they claimed to be a sovereign nation. They only had a "Personal Union" with Denmark, not a real union. If they had been part of Denmark, then the Brits would perhaps have been justified in invading after Denmark was occupied by Germany. Similar to the Brit occupation of the Faroe Islands, which were Danish territory. But if they were autonomous and NOT ruled by Denmark, then the Brit invasion and breach of neutrality makes it a crime. But nobody prosecutes the winners.
Deletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_union
JFC. This gazoo is NOT going to let up on his demand that the armed forces of the Arsenal of Democracy commit AND celebrate war crimes: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/31/us/politics/trump-navy-seal-war-crimes.html
ReplyDeleteI mean...what the fuck? Where do you stop with this? At the point where you demand that the U.S. Army Special Warfare School begin using Joachim Peiper as an ideal?
Damn this fool, and all his minions.
I'm torn.
DeleteOn the one hand it is idiotic madness to publicly take the medals away. It is a twofer for Trump. It is a warning to military JAG officers to go easy in the future on Trump's bad boys, in other words: "leave the war criminals alone". Plus It is unmitigated revenge tactics on behalf of Gallagher and his Fox buddy promoters.
On the other hand why did JAG officers rate a medal for doing their duty? Was there something above and beyond in their perfomance on this case?
Because it's Today's Action Army! Like the Special Olympics, everybody gets a medal!
DeleteI'd like to humbly redirect your attention to what I wrote here
ReplyDeletehttps://defense-and-freedom.blogspot.com/2019/12/a-puzzle-about-americans-and-daesh-in.html
Feel free to disregard the first part if you think it's unnecessarily divisive. The part that follows is the real thing. I really wonder why I didn't see the media pick it up. Makes me feel unsure if I maybe overlooked something. No doubt dozens of think thankers and hundreds of officers as well as dozens of journalists must have become aware of the same thing before, but I did not see anyone raising this topic in public.
Then again, I don't read 'security policy' publications religiously.
The first part is the most comically sad and revealing. Yes, it's painful and idiotic; as a GI it makes me imagine how a defense attorney must feel when my client is on the stand bellowing "I din't kill Rocko! I coun't kill Rocko, 'cause I wuz busy killin' Luigi when Rocko got whacked!"
DeleteYes, I know that I and my peers were imperial grunts, but the thing was that we weren't supposed to SAY so. We were "defending our freedoms"! To just blurt out that "We're taking the oil" is to paint a fucking target on the back of every GI as just a goddamn pirate and thief. It's accurate, but mind-bendingly stupid at the same time.
As for Tanf...I think what's going on is that the power-players in the Pentagon and the deep state GOP foreign-policy weiners want to have GIs in place to, as you say, continue to play Great Power reindeer games in the Middle East.
But they realize that if they put these guys in the northeast they're going to get some of them whacked, and Trumpy Bear has made it clear that he's no okay with that.
So they've stashed the guys down in the worthless desert in the southeast and TOLD the DOPUS that they're "securing the oil", knowing full-well that the dingus can't read and doesn't watch anything but FOX, so chances are he doesn't have the slightest idea where the joes are and what they're doing.
It's kind of smart, in a cynical, idiotic kind of way; foreign policy in the Time of Trump.
The NATO summit should be fun, though...
"So they've stashed the guys down in the worthless desert in the southeast and TOLD the DOPUS that they're "securing the oil", "
DeleteThere are still troops in the NE in or aroung the Rumeilin oilfields.
And I'm sure the Moron knows, or at least was once told, that the al-Tanf troops are there to defend his buddy Netanyahu.
DeleteAs Sven points out, the GIs in the NE are largely little penny-packets of SF and advisor outfits. I doubt they're securing much of anything other than themselves.
DeleteAnd it seems bizarre that the Tanf concentration is doing more to stop Iranian commerce than would go through the crossings further north. I'm sure it does...but it seems like a long and roundabout trip to go through Tanf from the border crossings into Iraq.
The M2 Baghdad-Damascus Highway is the straightest and most direct route. It crosses into Syria at the al-Waleed border crossing which is at al-Tanf.
DeleteThe International Road paralleling the Turk border is much too far to the north to be of use to Iran and it is at risk from Turkish backed Sunni headchoppers. It also could easily be blocked by US troops there in the NE corner at the Rabia border crossing. Route Four from Abu-kamal through Deir ez-Zor and then route 42 or route Seven to Homs are possible but lengthy and in need of a great deal of rebuilding. Plus are at risk from daeshi ambushes (the ones the Moron claims to have utterly defeated).
The al-Tanf concentration looks huge on the map, but the us presence is a small detachment of Special Ops. The 50 kilometer deconfliction zone around al-Tanf is patrolled by US backed Maghawir al-Thawra (MaT) Arab militia. And the airspace of that zone has frequent combat air patrols. As far as I know the majority of the US troops (now what - 600 to 800?) are still in the northeast.
Look at the map I showed, look at the quantity of U.S. troops (600...1,000). The notion that they're protecting oil fields is ridiculous.
DeleteBesides, protect from whom? Assad's forces can move into the Kurdish areas now only because the lying moron arranged for the recent Kurdish invasion with his ineptitude. He drove the Kurds into Assad's arms.
Daesh could not make use of the oil for want of territorial control and protection against sabotage of individual oil wells (or the full length of pipelines) is a ludicrous idea.
Sven -
ReplyDeleteIt has been obvious for a long time that the American garrison in al-Tanf along with the Syrian Maghawir al-Thawra militia was to keep the Iranians from using the M2 Baghdad-Damascus Highway to supply missiles to Hezbollah in Lebanon (and to the SAA). Originally it was meant as a base from which to thrust from the south against the Daeshis in the Abu Kamal district on the Euphrates. But that was finessed by Assad and the Russians in their late 2017 offensive. So now the al-Tanf garrison has turned into doing Netanyahu's dirty work for him by blocking the al-Waleed border crossing and the M2.
As for the oil, Trump reiterated his idiocy again today. He said "'I kept the oil"; and "we have total control of the oil'" plus "we can do with the oil what we want". This is a war crime. I am completely flummoxed as to why the Western press hasn't called him out on this and demanded he face the music of the Hague.
BTW, I believe that ISW map is a bit out of date, despite their claim otherwise.
see reply at my place
DeleteBy the way Sven, nice post on your blog re: the Leopard 2 in the hands of Turk-backed headchoppers in Syria.
DeleteI'm assuming from other articles online that the YPJ lady missileers took out the Leopard. As the Kurdish proverb states: "A Lion is a Lion – whether it is male or female". Did they use a Russian-made Konkurs or a knock-off? Who provided them: Iraqi Kurds? Assad? US? Iran? There are 30 plus countries where they are still in use.
Actually, Germany delivered Milan missiles to the Kurds. It could even have been a Franco-German made missile that blows up a German-made tank.
DeleteWiki says yes, the Syrian Kurds have Milans. It seems we (the coalition) did supply the YPG with Milan missiles. Plus they can probably get resupply from Iraqi Peshmerga stocks if their source in the West is cut off.
DeleteHave you done a post in the past comparing effectiveness of various ATGMs?
No, I have just repeatedly railed about the issue that the Russians usually have a counter to a ATGM within less than 210 years, and the last real ATGM innovation (thermal camera head) has been understood by them as #1 priority since the 80's.
DeleteThe easiest way to defeat them is camera-based missile early warning coupled with quick deployment multispectral smoke. Look at the Youtube video about Rheinmetall ROSY, for example. It could quite easily defeat the likes of Javelin and Spike.
I championed CKEM (HVM) as the way to go for ATGMs, up to the point that tanks maybe shouldn't have long guns bigger than 90 mm.
*"within less than 20 years"
DeleteSven -
ReplyDeleteThat ISW map you showed is not representative of the forces on the ground. ISW is a neocon thinktank, perhaps neocon/neolib as they claim to be non-partisan. It looks like the map was published based on Trump's statement that he was pulling the troops out of northeastern Syria. Yes they pulled out of Manbij and they pulled out of Erdogan's so-called security zone. But many of them are still in northern Syria, mostly to the east of Qamishli near the Rumelian oilfields. But I would not be surprised if there were also US contingents south of that near the ash-Shaddadi field and even further south near the Omar fields. Plus they occasionally accompany SDF forays west, coming close to SAA and Russians. No hot war yet that I have heard of. Someone is still doing deconfliction.
Three weeks after DOPUS claimed he pulled out US troops, the CH-47s and Apaches of the al-Baghdadi operation were refueled at a US Army FAARP west of Raqqa, probably the American base at Usuriyah.
Plus they are still running anti-daesh ops in Syria despite what the Moron claims.
It's mostly a map of territorial control, not presence.
DeleteStill, it's obvious that the presence in the marked area is not about oil fields.
The troops on the ground, CentCOM, and the Pentagon don't give a damn about the oilfields. They allow the SDF take crude oil from those fields to sell to middlemen who sell it to Assad. Which makes a mockery of the Moron's statements about the oil.
DeleteThe ISW map has serious deficiencies. But any map in a fluid situation needs to be updated frequently.
So, in case we've forgotten the origin of all this discussion, the foxy ol' war criminal has decided to pull the pin or whatever squids call grabbing a hat and heading for civvy street (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/11/26/navy-seal-eddie-gallagher-retire-review-canceled/4305553002/)
ReplyDeleteI'm sure he won't fade away, though. We'll be treated to the felonious sonofabitch barking his opinions on various wingnut welfare outlets as if he wasn't a walking, talking example of why there are supposed to be some bounds to human villainy, even in war.
In other news, Donald the Dove has announced that he's pulling more Americans out of the Middle East to #endendlesswars...(https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-administration-considers-14-000-more-troops-for-mideast-11575494228)
Wait. What? Oh, sorry, I'll come in again.
Good riddance to Gallagher. Too bad that he is headed to Easy Street funded by Faux and their friends.
ReplyDeleteI saw the WSJ article. Not sure what to make of it. Is it DOPUS? Or is the Pentagon getting nervous about an IRGC paranoid reaction to the internal demonstrations and riots in Tehran and Mashhad, which they tend to blame on external actors?
FWIW, several DoD sources are denying this. So it may be disinformation, or just a trial balloon, or it may be OPSEC...who knows.
DeleteOr maybe some back of the envelope contingency planning by a subordinate command? CentCOM's General McKenzie had been grumbling in the past about lack of resources to counter another Iranian slap of the Saudis.
DeleteHaaretz is claiming it is the Israeli government that is asking Trump for the 14K:
Deletehttps://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/israel-pushed-trump-to-send-14-000-troops-to-the-middle-east-report-claims-1.8227946
https://www.duffelblog.com/2019/12/trump-wants-eddie-gallagher-to-do-that-watermelon-smash-thing-at-white-house/
ReplyDeleteYou want even creepier? I'll give you creepier: https://washingtonmonthly.com/2019/12/07/trump-is-aligning-the-military-with-the-russian-white-supremacist-criminal-syndicate/
ReplyDelete"The second annual Reagan National Defense Survey, completed in late October, found nearly half of armed services households questioned, 46%, said they viewed Russia as ally.
Overall, the survey found 28% of Americans identified Russia as an ally, up from 19% the previous year.
Generally, the pollsters found the positive views of Russia seemed to be “predominantly driven by Republicans who have responded to positive cues from [U.S.] President [Donald] Trump about Russia,” according to an executive summary accompanying the results.
While a majority, 71% of all Americans and 53% of military households, still views Russia as an enemy, the spike in pro-Russian sentiment has defense officials concerned."
I don't think that GIs need to see Russia as "an enemy". But the notion that the petro-kleptocracy that is the former Soviet Union is "an ally"? That's fucking nuts. There's no reason for any serviceperson to see any particular polity as "an enemy"; the "enemy" of a professional military is what- and whoever the national command authority says it is/they are. Of course individual service members are going to have opinions about other countries - I was unusual amongst GIs in that I was vocally contemptuous of Israel as "an ally".
But...Russia? Seriously? That suggests that these MAGAts have not just been drinking the Kool-ade, but are completely sozzled. While they do not have to be an "emeny", Russia is a competitor on the global stage and, most particularly, Russia is an kleptocracy that should, by its very nature, be a natural rival of a popular democracy.
That these MAGAts don't see that says something, and I'm not sure whether it's about the state of Russia, or the state of the United States as an actual "democracy"...
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/national-politics/article238150139.html
ReplyDeleteWell, I'm shocked. Shocked!
DeleteBe shocked once more:
Deletehttps://washingtonmonthly.com/2019/12/07/trump-is-aligning-the-military-with-the-russian-white-supremacist-criminal-syndicate/