Ten Years in the Abyss

The ongoing violence in Egypt's major city reminds us that authoritarian leaders and regimes are better at putting down rebellions.  Although it remains to be seen how the situation will shake out in Egypt, the Muslim World is replete with examples of dictators crushing uprisings including Saddam's Iraq, the Taliban's Afghanistan Iran, and Syria.

The United States and its few allies have been combating a much more organized and dangerous form of violence for ten years: Militant Islamism.  This is a coordinated effort by many thousands of Muslims who believe Islam commands them to rid the world of all infidels or everyone who does not believe as they do.  This is not a political position that can be assuaged, bartered or compromised away as Western rulers want to believe.

What does this say about our long-term chances for success? As the film "Apocalypse Now" noted "Good does not always triumph over evil." The implication is that the forces of evil are willing and able to go to any lengths to prevail in the end and reasonable democratic leaders will eventually turn away from the abyss out of fear of becoming like the enemy. But was Rambo right? To win a war does one have to become war?  Current events in Lebanon, Egypt, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran do not bode well for Western hopes of a peace or even coexistence.  We seem to be fighting to not lose while our enemy is fighting for total victory whether that comes in the next year or in the next century.

Book Review: "Decision Points" by George W. Bush

 President Bush's book is not a traditional political memoir. It does not exhaustively chronicle his entire eight years in office, but instead discusses and explains the key decisions of his presidency. Supreme Court appointments, 9/11 and the War on Terror make up the central topics. "Decision Points" tackles these topics in Bush fashion: straight forward and unadorned. His simple prose may annoy the literary set, but the more practical minded will appreciate the refreshingly unaffected style.

The best chapter is the one that describes the surge of troops and change of strategy in Iraq near the end of 2006.  President Bush recounts the pressure he was under by the public and Democrat and Republican congressmen to withdraw troops and essentially admit defeat.  Bush makes it clear that he never gave up on the dedication of the troops or the aspirations of millions of Iraqis who who were struggling to build a better country.  His courageous decision and the Iraqi's ability to follow-through on their promises to help is an aspiring story of good triumphing over evil.

Those hoping for juicy White House gossip or the revelation of secret information will be disappointed. The war is ongoing so President Bush is restrained from releasing much new information, but the ultimate insider's account of a president at war is still compelling reading,

New Sniper Rifle for Troops in Afghanistan

The XM2010 Enhance Sniper Rifle will soon find its way into the hands of Army and Marine Corps snipers in Afghanistan. This is reportedly in response to recent data that shows the enemy are engaging the troops more frequently and from greater ranges than in the past.

A better rifle is a good thing, but it continues to annoy me that weapons and equipment seem to take an unacceptably long time to reach our troops. This latest example is defensive procurement as though the expansive, mountainous terrain of Afghanistan only recently revealed itself as a sniper's paradise. Why be on the defensive and wait and react to what the enemy is doing?

The troops should have long ago been given the weapons, training and initiative to go out and relentlessly hunt the enemy. In effect they have to beat the enemy at their own game because patrols that often serve as juicy targets for IEDs are not going to win the war.

(I have to point out that President Obama has made it pretty clear he is not really interested in winning, but only in turning the fight over to the Afghans.)

Why Are Small Ticket Items Too Expensive?

Not too long ago I wrote about the disappointment of the new XM25 grenade launcher.  The tragedy is two fold: one, the weapon was to be a replacement for the M16/M4 and two, it was to fire standard rifle ammunition as well as the programmable explosive rounds. While the weapon is undoubtably an advance, it is more of a baby step than a leap forward as it will not replace any rifles and there will probably only be about four issued to each platoon.

High costs were cited as part of the reason the rifle/grenade launcher design was dropped and why the launcher is to be issued in small numbers. This is disturbing as there is money for billion dollar F-22s and submarines. Just a couple of days ago a new multi-million dollar littoral combat ship was commissioned. All of these big ticket items are great additions to our military, but then certainly money can be found for an all new weapon for every infantryman.

Victor Davis Hanson's "In Defense of Defense"

Mr. Hanson wraps up his recent article in National Review magazine with the line,"A healthy economy is the best national security measure of all." Many would accept this as axiomatic, but in today's deficit and budgetary climate nothing, as they say, is off the table. Many in government and the public will be tempted to see the defense budget as an easy target for sizable cuts.

The Obama administration has added about $ 1.3 trillion in annual budget deficits in the last two years. There will be considerable pressure to off-set this with cuts in defense spending even though we have thousands of troops engaged in Iraq and Afghanistan, North Korea is killing South Koreans and Iran is full speed ahead with its nuclear weapons program.

Mr. Hanson points out that can and has left the U.S. as being perceived as weak and vulnerable. Our unpreparedness leading up to World War Two and the decline of the military in the post-Vietnam era proved to be damaging to our interests. It would be pure folly to not heeds these examples in the era of the Global War on Terror.

Book Review: "The Savage Wars of Peace" by Max Boot

The history of war is often thought of as a collection of the biggest battles and the most colorful characters, but Max Boot reminds us that you are more likely to find dirty little fire fights fought by quiet professionals.  Mr. Boot's chapter on the Filipino Insurrection that broke out in the wake of the Spanish American War when a American naval squadron captured Manila Bay from Spanish forces.

Modern ground warfare is increasingly marked by small, violent engagements and this has been particularly true of the Global War on Terror.  Small, violent engagements describes the jungle warfare American forces faced in the Philippines in the years 1899-1902.  The Army prevailed in this bloody conflict due to their training, toughness and some daring exploits that would likely be overruled today by the Pentagon.

"The Savage Wars of Peace" is a valuable on its own terms, but will be particularly helpful for those who are trying to gain some perspective on the ongoing war against militant Islamism.

Better Late Than Never?

After years of delays and technical problems the Army is finally beginning to deploy a new weapon to Afghanistan. A battalion of the famed 101st Airborne (Air Assault) is to receive the first shipment. Unfortunately this is not the long hoped for replacement of the M-16 and M-4 known as the Objective Individual Combat Weapon. This was to be a combination of a conventional rifle that would fire the standard 5.56 mm round as well as a new air burst 25 mm round and be issued to all infantrymen. Technological and financial concerns killed the ambitious project, but it has been partly resurrected as the Counter Defilade Target Engagement System or the XM-25. This weapon only fires the air burst 25 mm round and a squad will probably get only one.

This is being touted as good news for the troops and it is as much as any effective weapon in the hands of our troops is a good thing, but is this the best we could do?  The Pentagon is drawing up plans for all kinds of futuristic weapons and IT technology but a all knew rifle for all of our grunts is just a bridge too far?  I cannot help but wonder if the military has put too much emphasis on standoff weapons like UAVs and big ticket items like amphibious assault ships and left those at the tip of the spear with less than they could have otherwise had?