RSS
 

Archive for the ‘Current Affairs’ Category

Losers in War? Should the United States be on this List?

14 May

Here is a little trivia  to think about.  Look at the criteria and listings of nations with losing records in 20th Century wars and answer this question:  Does the U. S. belong on this list?  Excerpted from The History Guy: Nations With A Losing Record In War.

Criteria: A nation
is on this list if they
have lost three or more inter-state wars in a century
OR they lost a half million troops and/or civilian
casualties in a single losing inter-state war.

Nations which were ultimately on the winning side
in the World Wars, such as Rumania in the First World War, France and
Poland in the Second World War, are counted as losing. In each case,
they were defeated in their military confrontations with Germany and
occupied until liberated by their allies. Though they were ultimately
on the winning side, they did temporarily lose their freedom as a
result of military defeat and enemy occupation.

 

Note: Civil Wars do not count, but colonial
conflicts do count. For example, if the French fought a civil war
among themselves, that would not count for this list, but if they
lost a war against a colony seeking independence, as they did against
Vietnam and Algeria, that would count as a defeat.

 

Russia/Soviet
Union:

Russo-Japanese War (1905)-Russia
   lost to Japan.
   
   

First World War (1914-1918)–Even though
   Russia belonged to the Allies from the beginning of the war, after
   the Communist revolution, the new government made a separate peace
   with Germany and surrendered huge tracts of land to the
   enemy.

   
   

Afghanistan War (1979-1989)–The Soviet
   Union did not militarily defeat the Afghan guerrillas.

   
   

Cold War (1946-1991)-The Soviet Union
   lost the long Cold War and fell apart.

   
   

Chechnya War (1994-1996) Post-Soviet
   Russia gave up trying to subdue the rebellious Muslim region of
   Chechnya.

 

 Ottoman
Empire/Turkey:

Italo-Ottoman War
   (1911-1912)
   
   

First Balkan War (1912)–

   
   

First World War (1914-1918)-

   
   

 

Iraq:

First Arab-Israeli War (1948-1949)
   –See Arab-Israeli
   Wars
   
   

Six-Day War (1967)–See Arab-Israeli
   Wars

   
   

Yom Kippur or Ramadan War (1973)–See
   Arab-Israeli
   Wars

   
   

First Persian Gulf War (1980-1988)
   

   
   

Second Persian Gulf
   War (1990-1991)

   
   

Third Persian Gulf
   War/War in Iraq
   (2003-Present)

   
   

 

 Bulgaria
:

Second Balkan War (1913)
   
   

First World War (1914-1918)

   
   

Second World War
   (1941-1945)

 

Germany
:

First World War
   (1914-1918)
   
   

Second World
   War (1939-1945)–Both wars
   resulted in millions of German deaths and the loss of huge tracts
   of German territory.

 

France:

Second
   World War
   (1939-1945)–France was utterly defeated by the Germans and
   remained an occupied country until freed by the U.S., Britain,
   Canada, and other allied nations.
   
   

First Indochina War (1946-1954)–See
   Wars
   of France

   
   

Suez/Sinai
   War (1956)–Even though
   France and her allies, Britain and Israel, enjoyed military
   success, political factors forced the allies to withdraw from
   Egypt. France and Britain did not achieve their war goals. See
   also Wars
   of France

   
   

Algerian War of Independence
   (1954-1962)–See Wars
   of France

 

Portugal:

Angolan War of Independence
   (1962-1975)
   
   

Mozambican War of Independence
   (1962-1975)

   
   

Guinea-Bissau War of Independence
   (1962-1975)–Note–Portugal decided to grant independence to
   these rebellious colonies following an internal military coup in
   1974.

   
   

 

Serbia
/Yugoslavia:

              First World War (1914-1918)–Even
   though Serbia belonged to the winning side, the nation suffered
                military defeat in 1914, and occupation by Germany,
   Austria-Hungary, and Bulgaria until 1918, when                   Allies defeated the Central Powers.
   
   

              Second World War
   (1941-1945)–Even though
   Yugoslavia belonged to the winning side, the nation       suffered  military defeat in 1941, and occupation by Germany, Italy, and
   Bulgaria until 1945, when the Allies           defeated the Axis.

   
   

Kosovo
   War (1998-1999)–NATO forced
   Serbia to give up control of the province of Kosovo.

 
No Comments

Posted in Current Affairs, History, Wars

 

France at War: French Military Victories and Defeats

12 May

Here is some  information on the wars and military conflicts of France from World War I in 1914  to the present. Since 1945, France has engaged in several large wars (Indochina, Korea, Algeria, Suez, the First Gulf War) and numerous small colonial conflicts and post-colonial interventions in African nations. To access specific wars or conflicts, click on the red/maroon colored links.

Despite recent jokes concerning French military defeats and victories in French military history, France has a fair share of victories in the Third World, and as a valuable member of NATO and the Western allies in the Cold War and beyond.

World War One (1914-1918)

Intervention in the Russian Civil War (1918-1921)

Rif War (aka-Abd el-Krim Revolt) (1919-1926)

French Conquest of Syria (1919-1920)

Memel Insurrection (1923)–Following World War I, the French military controlled and administered the city of Memel on behalf of the wartime Allies, in the Baltic Region. Lithuanian residents rebelled against the French army on January 11, 1923. Troops from Lithuania joined the rebels and seized control of the city. The Allies accepted this takeover, and Memel in effect became part of Lithuania.

The Ruhr Invasion (1923-1924)

Syrian Druze Revolt (1925-1927)

France/Syria/Lebanon Druze Revolt 1925-1927

The Nghe-Tinh Revolt (1930-1931) A Vietnamese peasant revolt with backing and support from the underground Vietnamese Communist Party. French forces suppressed the local soviets (A soviet is a council of peasants, workers or soldiers in a socialist or revolutionary form of government) which formed in local villages. Many of these revolutionaries were arrested and at least 80 were executed by the colonial government. . See also The Wars of Vietnam.

Yen Bai uprising (Feb. 9, 1930) A rebellion launched by the Viet Nam Quoc Dan Dang, (VNQDD — Vietnamese Nationalist Party–See external link) began as a planned mutiny of native Vietnamese troops in the Yen and Bai garrisons. Other attacks on Son Tay and Lam Thu failed. The French suppressed the uprising, arresting executing many VNQDD leaders. Several villages were bombed and shelled by French forces. . See also The Wars of Vietnam.

Syrian Revolt (1936)

World War Two (1939-1945)–France was conquered by Germany in 1940, and liberated by the Allies in 1944.

Franco-Japanese Border War  (Sept. 22, 1940-Sept. 24, 1940)–Soon after France fell to Germany, Japan sought passage through French Indochina in order to attack Nationalist Chinese forces near the border. French authorities in Hanoi refused, prompting Japan to launch a ground attack on the French border forts at Long-Son and Dong-Dang. Two days later, Japanese aircraft bombed the port city of Haiphong and the Japanese navy landed troops at the port. During the two days of fighting, nearly 800 French troops were killed. (Part of World War Two for France)

Franco-Thai Border War (Jan. 9, 1941-Jan. 28, 1941)–Thailand, then an ally of Japan, initiated an invasion of French Indochina after early border skirmishes from November 1940. After early successes, the Thai forces were forced back by French reinforcements. At sea, the French navy, in the form of one cruiser, wiped out nearly one third of the Thai navy off the island of Kho Chang on Jan. 17. Japan arranged a cease-fire on Jan. 28. Per a written agreement signed on March 11, France gave portions of Laos and Cambodia to Thailand.
                         
Franco-Syrian War (May, 1945)–At the conclusion of the Second World War, French troops put down a rebellion in the French-controlled Arab nation of Syria.

The First Indochina War (1945-1954)–A French colony since the late 1880s, Indochina was made up of the countries of Vietnam, Cambodia,and Laos. Communist insurgents led by Ho Chi Minh defeated French forces, causing the independence of Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos. As a result of the peace agreement, Vietnam became divided into Communist North Vietnam and the pro-Western South Vietnam. This conflict was a precursor to the American-Vietnam War.

The Cold War (1945-1991)–France participated in the Cold War as a member of the Western alliance, NATO, and also through its own policies in Africa and elsewhere promoting  pro-French and pro-Western attitudes and alliances.

The Madagascar Revolt (1947-1948)–The French military put down a rebellion in the colony of Madagascar.
The Korean War (1950-1953)–France contributed military forces to the UN Army fighting the Communist North Koreans and Chinese.

Tunisian War of Independence (1952-1955)–Guerrilla war of independence against the French began in Tunisia, led by Habib Bourguiba.

Moroccan War of Independence (1953-1956)

Franco-Tunisian Border Conflict (1957)

The Algerian War of Independence (1954-1962)–A French colony since the 1830s, Algeria gained independence in 1962 after a long and violent war against France.

Suez War (1956)–France, Britain, and Israel invaded Egypt.

Basque Separatist Campaign (1958-Present)–The Basque region is divided between Spain and France. The Basque liberation front, ETA, has carried out a campaign of urban terrorism in an attempt to gain independence/autonomy. As most Basque territory is in Spain, the bulk of the campaign has been directed at the Spanish, though French targets have been hit. France and Spain largely cooperate in suppressing ETA.

Second Franco-Tunisian War [The Bizerte Incident] (1961)

Gabon Intervention (1964)

First Katangan War (1977)

Second Katangan War (1978)

Shaba II: The French and Belgian Intervention in Zaire in 1978

Central African Republic Intervention (September, 1979)–France organized and aided a coup to overthrow Emperor Jean-Bodel Bokassa. French troops were flown in from Europe and installed former President David Dacko.

Intervention in Lebanese Civil War (1982-1984)–France, along with the United States, United Kingdom, and Italy, sent troops to act as peacekeepers in the Lebanese Civil War and the Invasion of Lebanon by Israel.

New Caledonian Uprising (1984-1985)

Gabon Intervention (May, 1990)

Second Persian Gulf War (1991)–France contributed military forces to the UN force to liberate Kuwait from the invading Iraqi army of Saddam Hussein.

Intervention in Somalia (1991-1992)–France contributed military forces to the UN peacekeeping force in Somalia.

Central African Republic Intervention (April, 1996)–French troops put down a C.A.R. army mutiny.

Central African Republic Intervention (May, 1996)–French troops put down another C.A.R. army mutiny.

Central African Republic Intervention (Nov. 1996-Jan. 1997)–French troops put down yet another C.A.R. army mutiny.

Kosovo War (1999)-France contributed military forces to the NATO effort to protect the Kosovo Albanians from the persecution by the Serbian military and militias.

Afghanistan War (2001-Present)-France contributed military forces to the Allied/NATO effort to overthrow the Taliban following the terror attacks of September 11, 2001. France continues to supply troops and aircraft to operations supporting the new Afghan government against Taliban and al-Qaida insurgents.

Ivory Coast (Cote de Ivorie) Intervention (2003-Present)-France intervened to bring a halt to the civil war in its former colony. During one clash, the French military avenged the death of several troops by destroying the small Ivory Coast air force as it sat on the ground.

Central African Republic Intervention (2006)–French troops and aircraft aid the government against rebels.

 
1 Comment

Posted in Afghanistan War, Current Affairs, History, Wars

 

America and France: A Long Relationship Spanning War and Peace

10 May

The recent election of  Nicolas Sarkozy as the new President of France brings the issue of French-American relations to mind.  The U.S. and France have a long but strange relationship, often centered on the question of war and peace, that literally goes back to before the founding of the United States as a nation.

When the original Thirteen Colonies were indeed colonies of the British Empire and Canada belonged to France, nearly continual warfare blazed across the frontier between English and French America.  Eventually, the British won the wars and expelled the French Empire from Canada, but this conflict helped spark the idea of autonomy and outright independence in the minds of many influential American-English colonists.

As most school children in America know, France was America’s most important ally in the War of Independence.  French aid was critical to the British defeat, but the consequences of this military intervention for the French monarchy were eventually negative.  Part of the economic problems France experienced which led to the French Revolution (which broke out only 8 years after the Franco-American victory at Yorktown), were brought on by the financial burden of fighting the Revolutionary War in America, as well as the philosophical and political ideas that crossed the Atlantic from America. 

Ironically, many Americans were horrified by the violence of the French Revolution, and tensions built up that led to the so-called "Quasi-War" between the United States and Revolutionary France.  This naval war lasted from 1798 to 1800.  Two years later, the new French Emperor, Napoleon I, sold France’s Louisiana colony to the United States.  He needed the money to fight his wars against Britain.  The Louisiana Purchase, as it is known in the U.S., effectively doubled the size of the country.

Relations between the United States and France reached another low point during the American Civil War, which coincided with a French invasion of Mexico, which is America’s southern neighbor.  France (and Britain), considered intervening in the Civil War on behalf of the breakaway Confederate States of America (the South).  President Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation, which freed a majority of American slaves, along with U.S. victories in the war, convinced France and Britain to remain neutral.  Following the fall of the South in 1865, the U.S. supported the Mexican government both diplomatically and militarily (there was a very real threat by the U.S. to send in troops).  This support helped the current French Emperor, Napoleon III, to end his ill-conceived war in Mexico.

For the remainder of the 1800s, the U.S. pretty much ignored European issues.  The outbreak of war in Europe in 1914, in what would eventually become known as World War One, set the scene for America’s first military intervention in Europe.

America declared war on Germany and her allies in 1917, and millions of U.S. troops entered France to help her fight the invading Germans.  Many Americans saw this aid to France as payback for French help against the British in the American Revolution.  The U.S. later saved France again when we again sent millions of troops to liberate her from the Germans in World War Two.  (See the Invasion of Normandy).

After World War Two, America and France both joined (as founders) the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, (NATO), which was created in order to stop the spread of Communism in Europe. Since the end of World War Two, the U.S. and France have been allies in the Korean War, the First Gulf War, and in the current War in Afghanistan.  We have also supported each other in other ways as well.  For example, when France fought in Vietnam in the 1940s and 1950s, the U.S. supplied a great deal of military material and money to help the French fight against the Vietnamese Communists. 

The two old allies have disagreed sharply on several issues, such as the Anglo-French Invasion of Egypt in 1956 and the current War in Iraq, but overall, history shows that France and the United States are old, old, friends.  Friends who occasionally squabble and argue, but when it comes down to it, they do support each other.  The election of Sarkozy, who readily admires America and American culture, should help ease recent tensions between the two allies.

 
1 Comment

Posted in Afghanistan War, Current Affairs, History, Wars

 

Background on the Yugoslav/Balkan War: Is a New Kosovo War Brewing?

06 May

Recently, tensions have been growing in Kosovo, as the Albanian-speaking Muslim majority  moves toward voting for full independence from Serbia.  In response to this movement, veterans of Serb irregular forces, or militias are gravitating toward the Serb-inhabited areas of Kosovo.  These Serb fighters are threatening to launch a rebellion against the Kosovars if they seek independence.  Below is some background information on the Yugoslav Wars of the 1990s and early 21st Century.

This post (below) is excerpted from the History Guy page on the Third Balkan War.

Yugoslavia (literally, Land
of the South Slavs), was a nation born out of the ashes of World War
One, created through the merger of the mostly Catholic regions of
Slovenia and Croatia with the Eastern Orthodox Kingdoms of Serbia and
Montenegro. Included in the new nation was the land of Bosnia,
ethnically and religiously divided among Catholic Croats, Orthodox
Serbs and Muslim Slavs. In southern Yugoslavia lay the region of
Kosovo, a fairly new addition to Serbia, containing a largely Muslim
population which spoke Albanian. Until World War 2, this land of many
nationalities held together fairly well. Then, with the Axis invasion
of 1941 and the subsequently brutal occupation by the Germans and
Italians, the old ethnic divisions surfaced into a very bitter civil
war. This conflict primarily pitted the Croats, who allied themselves
with the Axis, against Serbs. Following the war, the Communist
dictator, Josip Broz Tito, reunited Yugoslavia with a firm hand,
imprisoning nationalists from all sides. Following his death 1980,
the system he held together slowly began to unravel.

By 1991, the Serbian
politician Slobodan Milosovic gained power in Yugoslavia through
inciting Serb nationalism. Along with growing nationalistic feelings
in the other parts of Yugoslavia, the day came when Slovenia and
Croatia declared independence from what they saw as a nation
dominated by Serbs. The Yugoslav Army attempted to prevent the
breakaway republics from leaving, but soon failed. Serbs living in
southern and western Croatia then attempted to break away and form a
new nation called Krajina. In 1992, Bosnia also broke away from
Yugoslavia, precipitating yet another war. In southern Yugoslavia,
the region called Macedonia broke away peacefully to form an
independent nation.

 

Below is a listing, with
some detail, of what can be called "The Third Balkan War." Yugoslavia
is a part of the Balkan Peninsula in southeastern Europe. The first
two Balkan Wars were short conflicts at the start of the Twentieth
Century. As this war can be divided into wars within wars within yet
more wars, each separate conflict is indented, showing which larger
war it is a part of. As the former Yugoslavia continues to subdivide
itself with each new conflict, more wars are added. The latest
conflicts are the Kosovo
War of 1998-1999, the
Presevo
Rebellion of 2000-Present,
and the new Albanian
Uprising in Macedonia,
which began in March of 2001.


Third
   Balkan War (1991-Present)-The breakup of Yugoslavia can be seen as one long conflict divided into at least nine (and counting) separate wars, rebellions and  uprisings, all which involve parts of the disintegrated Balkan nation.
   
   
       
    Yugoslav
Civil War (1991-1992)-The breakup of Yugoslavia as one nation, involved two separate but
                   related wars. The Yugoslav regions of Slovenia and Croatia declared independence from the Belgrade                government.
      
      

            Slovenian
  War of Independence (1991)-Slovenia’s war against the Serbian-dominated Yugoslav Army             was short and victorious. This was due in part to Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic’s realization                 that his main worry was the war in neighboring Croatia.
         
         

            Croatian
War of Independence
  (1991-1995)-Croatia  fought both the Yugoslav/Serbian Army and Serb             rebels in the Krajina region.

                Krajina
  Rebellion (1991-1995)-Croatia’s Serb minority attempted to form a separate nation during
                      the Croatian War of Independence from Yugoslavia. The Serb rebels succeeded in driving the                             Croatian military
out of the Krajina region bordering Bosnia. However, in  May of 1995, the Croatian                     Army launched an effective offensive (Operation Storm), which forced an end to the  Krajina                                 Republic. As a result of this action, most Krajina Serbs fled into Serbia in a form of "ethnic                                      cleansing." The Yugoslav/Serb Army aided the Krajina rebels. Many of these Serb refugees settled                     in  the Voyvodina region of northern Serbia, but some of them moved to the Serb province of Kosovo,                 which erupted into war in 1998.
            
            

                During the Bosnian War, airplanes from Krajina bombed Muslim held Bihac in Bosnia. Following this,                 NATO warplanes bombed the Serb airfield at Udbina in Krajina.

 

Bosnian Civil War (1992-1995) -Also  involved Croatia, Yugoslavia/Serbia and NATO. In April of 1992,  Bosnia declared independence from Yugoslavia. Almost
  immediately, the Bosnian Serb population rebelled against the  Muslim and Croatian portions of the new nation. Parts of the war saw the Muslims and Croatians cooperate against their common foe, but from 1993-1994, Bosnia saw a three-way war when
the Muslims and Croats battled each other as well as fighting  the Serbs. Troops from Serbia/Yugoslavia and the rebel Krajina area entered Bosnia to aid the Bosnian Serbs, while the Croatian Army aided the Bosnian Croat forces. In April, 1994, NATO forces began selected, limited bombing of Serb positions
around the capital of Sarajevo in an attempt to force the Serbs  to the peace table.
      
      

On February 5, 1994, Serb artillery hit a marketplace in Sarajevo, causing severe civilian casualties. This caused increased
American pressure on the Muslims and Croats to stop fighting
each other and unite against the Serbs. On Feb. 23, both sides  signed a cease-fire, which soon led to the formation of the Muslim/Croat Bosnian Federation.

      
      

August 28, 1995, Serb mortars cause 37 civilian dead in Sarajevo.
Major NATO (Operation Deliberate Force) airstrikes against the
Serbs began on August 30 and continued until a bombing pause on
September 14. U.S. airpower contributed 65.9% of the NATO air sorties. At this point, the Bosnian Serbs agreed to end thefighting and participate as a part of the Bosnian nation.
      

      
      

Fikrit  Abdic Uprising (Autumn of 1993-1995)  –In addition to fighting the Serbs and Croats, the Bosnian (mostly Muslim) government also had to deal with an uprising  by a Bosnian Muslim businessman named Fikrit Abdic.  He allied himself with local Serb forces against the  government. In July, 1995, Bosnian government forces
captured Abdic’s stronghold in the Bihac region.
  News article on Bihac Muslims following Abdic’s fall.

      
      

Sources on the
Bosnian War:

      
      

CRS 93056: Bosnia: U.S. Military Operations

      
      

Former Yugoslavia Chronology

      
      

Bombs Over Bosnia: The Role of Airpower in  Bosnia-Herzegovina

      
      

Unconquered Bosnia–Website
      containing numerous articles on the Bosnia War.

      
      

NATO and U.N. Involvement in Bosnia

      
      

Kosovo
War (1998-1999) Links Page-Also  involved NATO. Ethnic Albanians living in the Serbian province  of Kosovo sought independence from the Yugoslav Serb government  in Belgrade. After a 78-day bombing campaign by NATO forces,
      the Serbian army evacuated Kosovo. See also The History Guy: Warfare and Conflict Between Kosovar Albanians and Serbs Since 1912.

      
      

Presevo Rebellion (2000-2001)-One of the latest conflicts to come out of the Yugoslav breakup is a small (so far), rebellion by ethnic Albanians living in the
     Presevo Valley region of Serbia. This area borders on  Kosovo.

      
      

Albanian Uprising in Macedonia (2001)-The  latest conflict to come out of the Yugoslav breakup is a
violent rebellion by ethnic Albanians living in the area of
     Macedonia bordering on Kosovo and Serbia. Macedonia is thesouthernmost of the new post-Yugoslav nations. Albanians form a sizable minority in Macedonia.

      
      

 

 

SOURCES:

1. Kohn, George
C. Dictionary
of Wars. New
York: Facts On File Publications, 1986.

3. Langer, William L.,
ed. An Encyclopedia of World History. 5th ed. Boston,
Massachusetts: Houghton Mifflin, 1972.

4. Banks, Arthur S., ed.
Political Handbook of the World: 1994-1995. 5th ed.
Binghamton, NY: CSA Publications, 1995.

5. Internal
Wars and Failures of Governance,
1954-1996–By
the State Failure Project.

 
No Comments

Posted in Current Affairs, Wars

 

Turkey: To Coup, or not to Coup, that, is the question!

02 May

Turkey is facing a major crisis between its history of secular (non-religious) government, and the aspirations of the current ruling political party.  Many urban Turks support the continuation of the secular political culture, while many rural Turks, who are generally more religious, favor laws and policies that reflect a religious outlook on life and politics.  Many nations deal with similar issues through debates and elections, but Turkey is unique: a Muslim, pro-Western democracy which belongs to NATO and is currently seeking admission to the European Union (EU).  It also has a history of the military stepping in to preserve the status quo.

Four times since the founding of the Turkish Republic in the 1920s, the military has stepped in to effect a change in government. Now, in the spring of 2007, tensions in Turkey are mounting as military leaders are once again issuing warnings to the government of the ruling conservative Justice and Development Party (AK Party) . Massive street protests by hundreds of thousands of urban secular Turks protesting the perceived religious bias of the ruling party, but also hoping that a new coup does not occur. 

A leftist May Day protest turned violent this year, with hundreds of protesters injured and hundreds arrested.  The violence of the police response is indicative of the tensions in Turkey.  The ruling AK party is also trying to change the constitution to allow for a more powerful, popularly elected president.  The president is currently elected by the parliament.  Secularists fear that this change would make it easier for a religious Islamist candidate to become president, and would also give him more authority to change laws and policies related to education and other issues that secularists and religious conservatives differ on.

Turkey is a member of NATO, and is a steadfast ally of the United States, (and, oddly, for a Muslim country, an ally of Israel).  A military coup could lead to violence, or even to a civil war.  A similar situation existed in Algeria in the early 1990s, when the military there overturned the results of an election won by an Islamist party.  The result of that coup was a long civil war that claimed at least 200,000 lives.  With the current war in neighboring Iraq, it is not hard to see a very bad situation if al-Qaida or other radical Islamist groups were to gain a foothold in a Turkey racked by civil war or some other sort of underground Islamist resistance to military rule.

A coup in Turkey, in the current political climate in the Middle East, could lead to a disastrous situation for the entire region.  And, don’t forget, when we talk about "the entire region" in relation to this country, part of Turkey is also located in the Balkan region of Europe.

The History Guy: Military Coups in Turkey (1960-1997)

http://www.boston.com/news/world/middleeast/articles/2007/05/02/turkish_violence_marks_may_day/

 
1 Comment

Posted in Current Affairs, Wars

 

Passing the Buck, and Hurting the War Effort

30 Apr

You have to look carefully in the newspapers to see it.  An enigmatic
title that evokes memories of the "Drug Czar" position from
administrations past.  The new phrase is "War Czar," and the first I
saw it, the news stories were saying that the Bush Administration was
having trouble finding anyone who would take the job.

So, what
is a "War Czar" to do, if one is ever found?  As envisioned by Stephen
Hadley, the National Security Adviser, the person who takes this job
will be responsible for briefing the president every day regarding the
ongoing wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.  This person would also have the
authority to tell the various members of the president’s Cabinet what
to do. 

The problem is, no one seems to want the job.  At
least three retired 4-star generals have turned down the offer of a job
managing the wars.  Comments have been made that Hadley, the National
Security Director, is farming out an important part of his job,
possibly to pass any failures of policy off to the new person.  Maybe.
Other comments criticize the president for farming out HIS job.
Maybe.  As I see it, the biggest failure (among the individuals
involved), is that of the retired military officers who turned the job
down. 

Retired or not, they made a career of serving their
nation, and now, when their Commander-in-Chief calls on them to help
direct the wars against our enemies, the wars in which our servicemen
and women are dying almost daily, the wars which, if we fail, could
expand into more dangerous regional conflicts, they just said "no
thanks."
I think those generals have turned their backs on their
country.  It is true that the president has not done a good job of
inducing a sense of national sacrifice or ownership of the wars, as FDR
did in World War Two, but these generals should know better. 

If
they cannot stand up and show the nation what is needed to win these
wars, (because the president sure can’t do that), then who will?  Would
Patton, or Eisenhower, or Marshall, or Bradley, or MacArthur turn down
a similar request from their president?  Hell no!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/10/AR2007041001776.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/30/washington/30hadley.html

 
No Comments

Posted in Current Affairs, Federal Politics, War and Conflict

 

War Czar

30 Apr

You have to look carefully in the newspapers to see it.  An enigmatic title that evokes memories of the "Drug Czar" position from administrations past.  The new phrase is "War Czar," and the first I saw it, the news stories were saying that the Bush Administration was having trouble finding anyone who would take the job.

So, what is a "War Czar" to do, if one is ever found?  As envisioned by Stephen Hadley, the National Security Adviser, the person who takes this job will be responsible for briefing the president every day regarding the ongoing wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.  This person would also have the authority to tell the various members of the president’s Cabinet what to do. 

The problem is, no one seems to want the job.  At least three retired 4-star generals have turned down the offer of a job managing the wars.  Comments have been made that Hadley, the National Security Director, is farming out an important part of his job, possibly to pass any failures of policy off to the new person.  Maybe.  Other comments criticize the president for farming out HIS job.  Maybe.  As I see it, the biggest failure (among the individuals involved), is that of the retired military officers who turned the job down. 

Retired or not, they made a career of serving their nation, and now, when their Commander-in-Chief calls on them to help direct the wars against our enemies, the wars in which our servicemen and women are dying almost daily, the wars which, if we fail, could expand into more dangerous regional conflicts, they just said "no thanks."
I think those generals have turned their backs on their country.  It is true that the president has not done a good job of inducing a sense of national sacrifice or ownership of the wars, as FDR did in World War Two, but these generals should know better. 

If they cannot stand up and show the nation what is needed to win these wars, (because the president sure can’t do that), then who will?  Would Patton, or Eisenhower, or Marshall, or Bradley, or MacArthur turn down a similar request from their president?  Hell no!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/10/AR2007041001776.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/30/washington/30hadley.html

 
No Comments

Posted in Biography, Current Affairs, Wars

 

$400 haircuts while appealing to the Average Joe

29 Apr

Just wondering how it is that we always seem to have candidates who say they want to appeal to the average voter, and who say that despite their relatively immense wealth, they are really just like the rest of us.

What malarkey!  When John Edwards spends $400 to get his hair cut by a Hollywood hair stylist (not a barber, but a "stylist") how on earth are we to take him seriously when he blathers on about understanding the problems that poor people suffer?  And compared to him, most folks are poor.

Edwards often recites the story of how his dad was a poor millworker, and they all grew up in poverty.  He made his money as a trial lawyer, so, yes, he did make his money by earning it, unlike the Kennedy and Bush clans.  And, yes, he has the right to spend or waste his money as he sees fit.  But this man is running for President, and he is running with a campaign theme of "help the poor."  I don’t think he gets it.  He is contradicting himself by acting like a rich man with money to burn while at the same time he is bemoaning the state of this nation’s poor.

Bill Clinton, for all of his personal faults, came from basically a middle-class background, and was not a wealthy man until after his presidency was over.  For most of their marriage, his lawyer wife made more money than he did.  The $200,000 presidential salary was the most he had made up to that point in terms of salary.  When  he said that he understood people’s pain, it was believable.  John Edwards can’t get away with that one.  And neither can Romney, nor most of the candidates from either party.

A good column to read on the Edwards haircut issue is written by Leonard Pitts, Jr.  He is a columnist for the Miami Herald, and  he usually writes common sense articles on politics, culture, and life in America.  Read his column on the $400 haircut at http://www.miamiherald.com/285/story/88153.html

 
1 Comment

Posted in Current Affairs, Elections, Federal Politics, Presidential Candidates

 

Canada’s Afghan War

29 Apr

The War in Afghanistan is often forgotten in America against the backdrop of the violence in Iraq and the almost daily list of casualties from that war.  In Canada, however, Afghanistan and the war there have taken center stage in Canadian foreign policy and defense issues.

Canada, like the rest of the NATO allies, rushed to help the U.S. in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, joining the American military in liberating Afghanistan from the Taliban and its al-Qaida allies.   As the warfare in Afghanistan starts to ratchet up again this  spring/summer, Canada, which does not support the war in Iraq, is facing increasing casualties and is looking at those European NATO allies who they feel are not doing their part to help out with combat duties in the war.

2,500 Canadian troops serve in Afghanistan, and the government recently extended their mission until 2009.  54 Canadian troops have perished since 2001, which is quite a few, considering that Canada is more used to seeing her soldiers in peacekeeping roles than in actual combat.  The last major war with Canadian involvement was Korea, over fifty years ago.

So, what is the solution to the issue of the other allies, those with troops there, but who decline major combat roles, (see previous post on Dutch forces in Afghanistan)?  With hindsight, it is clear that the U.S. and the Allies should have put more combat forces in the fight early in the war to truly smash the Taliban, not just drive them back in to the mountains and over the border to Pakistan.  Hindsight is nice, but it does not solve the problem.  NATO should make a concerted effort to flood Afghanistan with combat troops, engage in a major offensive that does not end with the beginning of winter, and truly pressure Pakistan to end the Taliban’ s presence over the border.  Canada is right…the other allies need to step up in order to win this war.


http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/23/world/americas/23canada.html

 
3 Comments

Posted in Current Affairs, Wars

 

A Comparison of Dutch and American Counter-Insurgency Methods

15 Apr

A recent article in the New York Times highlights some of the problems
the Allies face in dealing with the Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan.

See http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/06/world/asia/06afghan.html

The Dutch regular army troops take a very different approach to
pacification than the Americans, British, Canadians, and other allies.
The Dutch focus more on making personal contact with the locals,
cultivating relationships, and, most unusual of all for combat troops,
they avoid combat with the enemy. 

Many of history’s best counter-insurgency campaigns focused a great
deal of energy, time, and resources, on denying the enemy forces the
use, cover, and allegiances of the local population.  Some, campaigns,
such as the British concentration camps for the Boer civilian
population and the Spanish attempt to squelch the Cuban Revolution in
the 1890s, used barbaric methods to achieve their aims.  (The British
won, the Spanish managed to tick off the Americans so much that the
U.S. intervened).  The Dutch method goes to the other end of the
spectrum to an extreme.  Be friendly, polite, build schools and roads,
and don’t kill anyone.  Even if they shoot at you.

Back in the 1990s, the Dutch participated in an Allied attempt to
protect Bosnian Serbs (http://www.historyguy.com/balkan_war_third.htm)
at a place called Srebernica.  The Dutch soldiers avoided combat, and
allowed the Serbs to slaughter 8,000 Bosnian men and boys.  If I were
an Afghan civilian making nice with the Allies in this war, and I have
to depend on the Dutch Boys from the Gandhi School of Pacification to
save my life from the Taliban or al-Qaida, I’d better have my funeral
plot picked out in advance. 

In all the talk of the "Surge" of American troops into Baghdad, one
facet of that increase of soldiers is that they are now supposed to be
actively patrolling neighborhoods and making face-to-face contact with
local civilians.  In this sense the American strategy in Iraq is
similar to the Dutch ploy in Afghanistan.  The comparison ends here
though, since we all know that the U.S. troops are going to defend
themselves and shoot back.

 
No Comments

Posted in Current Affairs, War and Conflict

 
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »