MEGATRENDS: The War Ahead    
 The War Ahead11 comments
There are active insurgencies in Afghanistan and Iraq. Although the conditions are better suited for an insurgent in Afghanistan, there is a much-lower intensity of insurgency being mounted there. This is primarily due to Afghanistan’s war weariness after several decades of kaleidoscopic conflict and their lack of social progress under a succession of externally-imposed and internally-generated regimes. The insurgency in Iraq is more intense, but the Iraqi insurgency lacks many of the likely prerequisites for a successful insurgency. At this stage, there is no evident sanctuary area across an international boundary.

There is no major power providing arms, medical support and training across an international boundary. The insurgency is primarily found among the Sunni Arab minority–a minority with a history of privilege and power over their Shia, Kurdish and Assyrian countrymen. Their base for popular expansion is constrained and attacks against other ethnic or religious groups can only invite serious retaliation. The insurgency is urban-based, rather than rural- based–historically a recipe for defeat.

There are thousand of eyes in the cities and the government has the advantages of mass and movement in the cities. The insurgency is not a coherent, well-organized effort. There is no apparent insurgent national strategy or overarching ideology. Insurgent force organization is primarily at the squad and platoon level.

How then do the insurgents believe that they can defeat the United States? They apparently believe that they can use tactical success for operational and strategic impact. The United States, on the other hand, is conducting a tactical fight, but is it engaging the insurgents on the operational or strategic levels? Now insurgency is primarily a tactical fight militarily and, in Iraq, the divisions are responsible for the tactical fight. CENTCOM is the operational headquarters and is responsible for the overall military effort. The administration is responsible for the strategic fight.
Getting In

In the aftermath of 9/11, the administration correctly focused its attention upon the immediate threats posed by Al Qaeda and the Taliban. Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda believed that the United States was a casualty-averse paper tiger. Looking at Somalia, they saw how the US aborted its mission and left after losing 18 dead. Subsequent attacks on the American Embassies in Africa and on the USS Cole drew only feeble retaliation in the form of ineffective cruise missile attacks on tents and a pharmaceutical factory.

This apparent lack of resolution convinced the Al Qaeda leadership that an attack on America proper would result in a cringing nation ready to accept the demands of Al Qaeda–withdrawal from Saudi Arabia, abandonment of Israel, economic and military withdrawal from the Middle East, payment of premium rates for energy and the like. This was a strategic miscalculation. Somalia was a humanitarian mission gone bad–and if the locals would rather kill than feed their own, a plague on all their houses. America had been attacked and the nation was at war.

On the strategic level, the administration has not asked for sacrifices from the US civilian population. The president responded to 9/11 by asking the American people to be vigilant at home but to go out and spend to keep the economy going and to not savage their fellow Americans who worshiped Allah. On the operational level, CENTCOM planned and launched Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) in Afghanistan and later Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) in Iraq.

The countries were quickly occupied. Since then, insurgencies have grown in both countries, but is the insurgency being treated as a series of campaigns or as a tactical problem? In both cases, a cardinal issue is the exact source and nature of the emerging insurgency in terms of the political-military objectives of the opposing side. The question now is whether the paper tiger model from Somalia drives the current insurgency in Iraq.

Given the complex elements that make up that resistance, which includes Baathist holdouts, Sunni nationalists and fundamentalists, criminal elements, and foreign jihadists, is it correct to assume that the insurgent strategy is still driven by just inflicting casualties upon US forces? Or has the game changed?

The evidence is that the game has changed. Iraqi historical experience is less about casualties than the unwillingness of the colonial power to keep large numbers of its own forces in country for a long time. Winston Churchill, while serving as Colonial Secretary, responded to the Iraqi insurrection with few British troops, more local militia, and air power.

The insurgent goal is not just body count but also keeping forces tied up in theater for a long, long time. If the insurgents think that the US will leave or reduce its numbers significantly in the short term – then they will attack and humiliate the Iraqi military before it can get its confidence and become a professional, competent opponent. Eventually, cost and public support will determine the size of the US force deployed in theater and not US deaths.
Enter the IED

The insurgents determined that direct battle with US and coalition forces was going to result in defeat, so they began a war of guerrilla attrition, employing long-range attacks with rockets, mortars and RPG-7s. They also began mining the roads and using Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs–basically home-made bombs) to attack the US weakness–its supply columns and support traffic.

The IED battle is an evolving dialectical contest between the bomber and the target. It began with hard-wired IEDs. When the target began looking for wires, the bombers began using garage door openers, cell phones or toy car remote controls to detonate the devices. US Forces then began jamming these frequencies or broadcasting them in order to detonate the devices prematurely. The bombers then started hard-wiring the IEDs and burying the wires.

The US science community is now working on a variety of bomber counters such as explosive sniffers, improved armor, EOD robots and remote circuit detectors. Field commanders are using increased patrols, CCTV, bulldozed and cleared roadsides and increased air transport to counter the threat. Each of these responses will eventually be offset through a change in bomber tactics or technology. The real question is, what does the enemy do during the interval when the counter is effective?

The first answer is to change the target. If the US forces are suddenly IED-proof, then other coalition forces or the Iraqi military are still vulnerable since the US will equip its forces first. Once the coalition and Iraqi military are safe, the shift will be to Iraqi police, frontier and customs forces, NGOs, commercial transport, school buses or whatever.

The purpose of the IED is to demoralize, to create a feeling of insecurity and to make people timid and cautious, not to destroy a fighting force. Should a counter somehow make all of Iraq IED-proof, the next answer is to change the locale. IEDs might then appear in Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Egypt, Iran, Indonesia or Spain.

US vehicle-hardening and tactics have decreased the effectiveness of IED attacks, but this is not that important in the insurgents’ vision. The insurgent does not need to destroy the occupation forces to be successful–they only need to create insecurity and instability. The IED, regardless of its effectiveness, causes apprehension among the coalition forces, consumes or occupies major amounts of resources and, most importantly, gives the insurgent exposure in the media and information battle.

Short of an all-terrain, all-weather 100% effective IED counter, the IED will remain the insurgents’ primary weapon for the foreseeable future. They are easy to assemble, the components are plentiful and the risks of a failed attack are low. From a cost/benefit perspective, the IED has a much higher expected value than more conventional attacks and has the benefit of little risk to the insurgent. It does not require a large, well disciplined force.

It is perfect for the loosely knit insurgency of Iraq. The insurgent shift to targeting Iraqi security forces with IEDs is not only due to decreased coalition vulnerability thanks to improved coalition equipment and tactics. It is also due to insurgent fears that a strong and confident Iraqi security force will bring security and stability.

The Iraqi insurgency has used the IED as the main means to combat coalition troops and, increasingly, Iraqi security forces. However, normal Iraqis are feeling more animosity toward the insurgents as civilian casualties grow from the IED attacks. This growing animosity will work against the use of IEDs. The best IED-counters pale in comparison to angry citizens upset about problem makers in their own communities. Iraqi on Iraqi violence has a much greater impact on the Iraqi civilian community than Iraqi on American violence.

Should the counter void the effectiveness of all IEDs everywhere, the enemy has two choices–wait it out until the counter can be overcome or resume the attack by other means. Resuming the attack by other means will most likely involve the mass use of simple, available technology–the RPG-7 employed in mass groups, the explosive charge built into new construction and the suicide bomber. Demoralization of the force with cheap drugs is a more subtle approach.

The enemy will attack the weak points–not in the hope of defeating the force, but of demoralizing it. Chemical or biological attack will probably remain a fantasy, although infrequent attacks on dining facilities and the like are possible. The war is now being fought at the psychological level and the most effective weapons will serve that fight.
Facing the Future

The insurgents look at what aided past insurgencies–the Mujahideen against the Soviets in Afghanistan, the Palestinian and Israeli insurgents against the British, the Adenese and Yemenese insurgents against the British, the Egyptians against the British, the Kashmiris etal against the Indians and the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong against the Americans. What mattered most to the guerrillas was not tactical victory. In fact, tactical victory was superfluous.

What mattered most to the insurgent was survival. The Viet Cong insurgency effectively committed suicide in the Tet offensive in search of tactical victory. The North Vietnamese carried on with a conventional jungle war against the Americans. The demise of the Viet Cong was converted into a psychological blow against continued US involvement in South Vietnam–hawking the popular uprising that never occurred.

There is no North Vietnamese Army to carry the load in Iraq, but the local insurgents have not destroyed themselves either. The insurgents are faced with a weak Iraqi National Army and police force that can be compromised before they ever get into the field and become effective. The way to compromise the security force is to split the country on religious and ethnic lines and so undermine the new government’s instruments of compellence .

On the assumption that the US will draw down and gamble on training effective Iraqi forces quickly, the insurgents will attempt to preempt the effectiveness of the new force by initiating a civil war. Larger regional implications, religious differences and the chance to draw Iran and/or Turkey into the conflict would serve their ends.

What the insurgents need is a war-weariness among the American populace and a murderous frustration among the Iraqi civilian population. IEDs haved filled that role–not for the harm that they do but for the steady casualty rate they produce and the repetitive broadcasts that they get in the news. The insurgents are attempting to attack the US on the operational level by demoralizing the forces with the IED threat and the strategic level by sapping the will of the US population through a protracted conflict.

The US responds to the IED threat on the tactical level alone, treating it as a force protection issue. As such, the US has been tactically successful and the bombers have now turned to targeting other, less-protected groups–the Iraqi Armed Forces, the Iraqi police, Iraqi government, NGOs and civilians. The US concern for force protection does not extend equally to these groups. This is more than a tactician’s war. It should be a series of campaigns leading to Iraqi and Afghan control of their own countries and local defeat of the insurgency.

The Iraqi insurgents would like to land a strategic psychological blow against America. Homeland Defense has made this difficult. Tactical attacks, such as the use of anthrax or poisons in a US Armed Forces dining facility or the detonation of explosives which have been incorporated in the construction of a new building may produce tactical effects which can be turned to strategic advantage. However, the main targets are now the indigenous forces, the infrastructure, the economy and the civilian population.

The information war is an important component of the on-going psychological contest. Much depends on comprehending what Iraq’s diverse and traumatized population understands to be a better future. Kurds, Shia and Sunni Arabs of different tribes and clans from town and cities will have to engage in those discussions. Winning this war will require an effective partnership between US-led coalition and the newly elected Iraqi government.

Victory will depend on our partner’s able to mobilize Iraqi society to build a better future, stand up an effective security force to resist the insurgency, and isolate those now under arms. The insurgency’s only hope is to demoralize the Iraqi troops, police, and populace before that can happen. This will not be an easy fight but it is one that can be won.



17 Aug 2007 @ 08:06 by vaxen : Yes, we care:
“I don’t know what you mean by ‘glory’,” Alice said.

Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. “Of course you don’t-- till I tell you. I meant ‘there’s a nice knock-down argument for you!’”

“But ‘glory’ doesn’t mean ‘a nice knock-down argument’,” Alice objected.

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean-- neither more nor less.”

“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”

“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master-- that’s all.”

The Book:

The CD:


Upholding the Law:

Order all three: What I need:  

17 Aug 2007 @ 08:13 by vaxen : Oh...
concerning the above article? It is mostly nonsense. As an example: Blaming the fictional 'Al Quaeda' for the U.S.S. Cole. Read between the lines, though...

If you are wise you'll see where this type of fiction is coming from and not be deterred in your quest for justice and liberty for all. After all, that really is the American way. Not the faux way of the current 'liars in wait' in Washington D.C. that proverbial 10 square miles. But, when you consider that pappy, I mean poppy, Bush is none other than Teslas 'Curious George,' the pieces of the puzzle will slowly start coming together. Thousand year Reich? ;) Right...

The Hesseniim wrote a work entitled "The war between the sons of light and the sons of darkness. One of them must have been named Hegel. ;) Hegel, Kant, and Gide sailed off in a wooden shoe. Over the sea of candlelight into the foggy dew...never more to be seen again. Pity, eh wot?

Humpty dumpty sat on a wall.
Humpty dumpty had a great fall.
And all the kings horses,
And all the kings men,
Couldn't put humpty...
Together again.

Know who Humpty is?
I left a clue in the above the above.
God I'm Rich!  

18 Aug 2007 @ 18:20 by a-d : Any parallells????

( if this is too long (of a comment, Honey, then just delete it and let it be suffice to have people go to the link site):

" Which Hidden
Power Created Hitler?
By Henry Makow PhD

The man who became the personification of evil probably was the puppet of larger forces still in control of the world.

This view is supported by a curious little-known document entitled "I was Hitler's Boss" by Captain Karl Meyr published in the New York- based magazine ("Current History") (November 1941.) sources/40s/41currhist/41vCurrHistHitlersBoss.htm

As Hitler's boss in the "Instruction Dept." of the Reichwehr in Munich, Capt. Mayr had "daily contact" with Hitler for 15 mos. (March 1919- June 1920.) Corporal Hitler was charged with propaganda functions and infiltrating labor groups.

Mayr portrays Hitler as a "tired stray dog looking for a master," a mere factotum first of General Ludendorff and then of Goering, considered dispensable after fulfilling his purpose.

While I believe Captain Mayr, who later opposed Hitler (and died at Buchenwald) wrote the essay, it may be "black propaganda." Published the month before the US entered the war, it may be designed to create division between Hitler and his designated successor (Goering), and to anger Hitler by belittling him.

The editor of "Current History" was "Spencer Brodney." His real name was Leon Brotzky, and he was a long time Communist. "Current History" was published quarterly by the (New York Times) Company, the organ of the central banking cartel.

Nevertheless, although black propaganda spins the truth, its effectiveness depends on including a considerable amount of fact. Much of what Mayr says is consistent with other sources. I will provide a summary of his most credible revelations and then briefly consider the implications.


Capt. Mayr says that in 1919, Hitler was "one of the many thousand of ex-soldiers who walked the streets looking for work. A this time, Hitler was ready to throw in his lot with anyone who would show him kindness...He would have worked for a Jewish or French employer just as readily as for an Aryan". He was "totally unconcerned about the German people and their destinies."

He "tried to enter the postal service as a mail carrier. His services were refused because he was unable to pass the intelligence test. His school education in his Austrian village would have been quite sufficient, but his mental capacity suffered after he was gassed in the war."

Hitler "talked and walked in his sleep and made himself generally a nuisance." He had no friends, and was shy and self conscious because of a "deformity [which] made him unlike other men-in my opinion this infliction made Hitler a lone wolf and outsider." (Hitler apparently had only one testicle. Funny that Mayr doesn't mention this detail if he is trying to discredit Hitler.) Hitler was "continually chaffed by his comrades."


According to Mayr, General Erich Ludendorff (1865-1937) the hero of World War One met weekly with a coterie of industrialists at the Hotel Four Seasons in Munich and plotted vengeance for Germany's World War One loss.

The challenge was to mobilize the dispirited German worker to fight again. Ludendorff decided they needed a Joan D'Arc figure, a common person who heard God's voice, to lead them into battle. He even roamed the Bavarian Alps looking for a "red headed peasant girl" who could be sold as a divine messenger.

Ludendorff and his friends " were like Hollywood scouts looking for talent..." At the same time Hitler was involved in an army "experiment." He was given money to hold meetings of the German Workers Party in taverns and buy everyone beer, sausages and pretzels. After some rousing songs, when everyone felt "happy and grateful," Hitler would jump on a chair or a table and started with "fellow-workers, Germany, awake!"

"In such a genial atmosphere it was a pleasure for workers to awake and manly applaud everything." Mayr writes. "The experiment with Hitler considered highly successful by his sponsors." Hitler got the job of being Joan D'Arc.

"The programme was carefully concocted to fit with the wishful thinking of the majority." The leaders knew "a minority must suffer, and so the German Jews were made the chief scapegoats because their destruction would gain millions of votes for the Nazis. Small shopkeepers hated Jews because they owned the chain stores; farmers wished their destruction because they were indebted to Jewish bankers; even intellectuals were jealous because Jews held lucrative positions in the arts and sciences and professions. The Communists also had to be destroyed, but that was because they took their orders from Russia and would never vote for an Imperial Germany."

"The Nazis salesmen offered anything and everything to make the people war minded...Therefore, their sales talk was: Germany is a have-not country; other nations have all the wealth; Germany must fight them successfully, and so be entitled to that wealth."

Thus the Nazis catered always to the desires of majority. "No one cared what happened to Germany as long as the result was restoration of the good old days..."

Hitler was looked upon as "a good salesman for the Nazi ideology, who would be paid off when he was no longer needed."


Mayr maintains that Hitler never was the real leader of Nazis. "As a leader, Hitler is probably the greatest hoax ever played on the world... His reports always had to be rewritten... His intellect was not higher than that of an eight-year-old child... Hitler has never been capable of making a decision of his own...he certainly never wrote a line of "Mein Kampf"; ...[but] was of course proud to sign his name as author of a book."

"Before every important speech Hitler was, sometimes for days, closeted with Hess who in some unknown way, got Hitler into that frenetic state in which he came forth to address the public. Just before Hitler had appointments to receive statesmen or foreign correspondents, he was minutely coached as what to say. Sometimes when unexpected questions were put to him, he just walked away, or started his senseless political ranting."

Ludendorff soon lost control of Hitler to Ernst Roehm and Hermann Goering who engaged in a bitter war for Nazi supremacy that lasted a decade. Finally Goering won the battle in blood purge of June 30, 1934. By this time, Mayr had become associated with Roehm. We assume this is the basis of his information.

"The way was now clear for Goering and he lost no time. Conscription; occupation of the Rhineland; total rearmament; intervention in Spain; invasion of Austria, Czechoslovakia, Poland and other countries followed."

"Germany has many Fausts, but their Mephistopheles is Goering who was able, through crafty propagandists like Goebbels, to sell Hitler to the entire world as a patriotic superman. Goering alone engineered the burning of the Reichstag and had a feeble minded boy executed for it...It was he that arranged that Hitler got the false material to convince him that Roehm intended to kill him unless he killed Roehm first. Goering's fawning on Hitler sheer hypocrisy designed to mislead public opinion."

The prevalent view is that Goering was an ineffectual leader, who preferred to go hunting and collect (steal) art than run the Luftwaffe. Supposedly he lived in fear of Hitler.


Mayr's view of Hitler is in stark contrast with the conventional one. Either Mayr is lying or the majority of modern historians are engaged in building Hitler up to seem like a credible leader and personification of evil.

I believe that Hitler was stage managed by the Illuminati, i.e. Masons organized around the Rothschild's desire for world tyranny to protect their monopoly on credit. I believe someone like Lionel Rothschild was referring to a Hitler figure when he wrote in the "Protocols of Zion":

The Secret Masonry is setting up "our own, to all appearance, off position, which in at least one of its organs will present what looks like the very antipodes to us. Our real opponents at heart will accept this simulated opposition as their own and will show us their cards." (Protocol 12.11)

Jon Bjerknes has shown that the Rothschilds belonged to a heretical Jewish sect, the Sabbateans, who believed that, as King of the Jews. the Rothschilds were destined to rule the world.

In the Protocols, Lionel Rothschild, talks about his world control by virtue of his credit monopoly. He says that when he "comes into [his] kingdom," he'll make sure private individuals like himself no longer exercise this power.

He also says that if any state raises an objection to Rothschild domination, "it is only pro forma, at our discretion, and by our direction, for their anti-Semitism is indispensable to us for the management of our lesser brethren." (Protocol 9)

My current hypothesis is that there is a direct line between Hitler and the Rothschild agenda, through a long line of "cutouts" (agents). Some of these cutouts were "useful idiots" like Erich Ludendorff who retired from politics when he realized Hitler was financed by Rothschild's Bank of England.

Certainly Max Warburg, Chief of German Army Intelligence, member of the banking family, and Meyr's real boss, was the Rothschild point man in the "Hitler Experiment." Through the "secret masonry" the central bankers created both Communism and Nazism which, thanks to WWII, advanced the destruction of Western (Christian) civilization.

The human race is fast becoming the Rothschilds' ant farm. Thanks to their control over the media and education (through cutouts), information and entertainment are mostly tools for social control and behavior modification. Obscure documents like Captain Mayr's "I was Hitler's Boss" remind us that we are manipulated in the most egregious manner.


Related: Hitler Used Rothschild Banker's Typewriter

Did Illuminati Bankers hire Hitler to Start WWII?

and Did Bormann Run Hitler for the Illuminati?


Thanks to John Hankey for bringing Meyr to my attention. John is the
Creator of *JFK II-The Bush Connection,* a video available online.

{http://%20 docid=-3967677791931129793&q=jfk+ii+the+bush +connection&total=35&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1}
Henry Makow Ph.D. is the inventor of the game Scruples and author of
"Cruel Hoax: Feminism and the New World Order." ( His
articles can be found at his web site
He enjoys receiving comments, some of which he posts on his site using
first names only. ( "

I sure can see a few!.... ; )

Totta kai!... SINÄ ( ja minä ja kaikki muut...)


19 Aug 2007 @ 17:43 by vaxen : Ja minna...
Just edited it a bit. Long commentaries, ANY COMMENTARIES, are Velkommen, kaikki muut. ;) Heh, heh...

Open Source Solutions
Division 7
Department 21


23 Aug 2007 @ 10:49 by jazzolog : That Ol' Bottom Line
What gets to me...and really tests my fury how whatever criticism is elicited by these horrendous foreign policies seems to be way off the mark. How many hours of drivel have ticked by on every aspect of our global adventures EXCEPT the profits being enjoyed? Does no one suspect that our armies are where they are to protect global business interests? And as long as the ledgers show unimagined monetary gains, this Administration can do no wrong.  

23 Aug 2007 @ 23:02 by vaxen : Yes bro...
there are those of us who do 'suspect' that very thing. But short of a fully armed revolution right here, planned for I might add, what are we to do? Stop voting for the pigs that do this?

When the rest of this so called civilization here in America are so totally oblivious and seemingly brainwashed to accept anything their slavemasters tell them?

Hey, but Cindy is running for Congress! Woop, woop! Like that will change anything for all the rummies on capitol hill are bought and sold like so many donuts or is it donut holes? We could all leave? It'll chase us wherever we go...I know!

I just waas offered $45,000,000.00, t he other day, shipped to me straight from Baquba! A seargent of an outfit there needs a place to send the filthy house seems ideal, but...can he trust me? 35% in it for me! Hahahahaha

Tis what happens when a Nation sells its' soul for imaginary gain. Fiat script, worthless, as the Chinese are beginning to find out. And we are borrowing money from Japanese and Chinese central banks? Who is kidding who in all this mind rot?

Gold is coming back, I hear...and I say: So what? What matters it if you gain the whole world and lose your soul in the process. Take a look at all the self help crap out there...

All brainwashing Joe and Sally six pack into an ever increasing "success" on the 'treadmill!' Profit? Yeah, follow the money trail. There is no money and the UNITED STATES has been bankrupt almost sionce day one!

It is a horrible imp[lant, enslaver made, tailor made, to reduce the human being into a worthless pile of dung. Then they burn the dung! Who are they?

It should be getting relatively easy even for the stupidist amongst us to see...but lemmings, after all, are taught from the cradle to the grave not to think for themselves. There is always some new 'leader' out there to follow.

Cindy Sheehan will have tales to tell when she gets back from Amman! Ha
! More of the same old same old...grab and ax and play your heart out. Let your blues fill the night with bright light, with sadness, with song...let the drones dance.  

29 Apr 2016 @ 06:25 by Bandar Togel @ : brilliant! I would like to share this ar
Togel Online Singapore
Togel Online Hongkong
Bandar Togel Singapore
Bandar Togel
Togel Online Terpercaya
Bandar Togel Online Terpercaya
Togel Online
Agen Togel Online Terpercaya
Agen Togel Online  

15 Sep 2016 @ 03:33 by Saurabh Yadav @ :  

16 Oct 2016 @ 19:24 by trio4d @ : agen bandar togel
was very helpful and very useful
articles that you provide very helpful and nice to everyone thanks
Buku mimpi  

28 Nov 2016 @ 16:24 by yakuza4d @ : togel online
After read a couple of the articles on your website these few days, and I truly like your style of blogging. I tag it to my favorites internet site list and will be checking back soon. Please check out my web site also and let me know what you think.
cara main
buku mimpi  

18 Dec 2016 @ 04:51 by xender for pc @ : xender

Your Name:
Your URL: (or email)
For verification, please type the word you see on the left:

[< Back] [MEGATRENDS] [PermaLink]?