Southern Strike 2020

Closing Thought–17Feb20

This may not be of much interest to most of my readers……I just want to point out the training that our troops must go through……….

I am a student of conflict and these days we fight terrorists not so much grand armies…..and my area has been part of the training to fight our enemies…….

Gulfport Combat Readiness Training Center CRTC

Special Tactics Airmen and Green Berets from the 3rd and 20th Special Forces Group participated in Southern Strike 2020. The event was a large-scale, joint multinational combat exercise hosted by the Mississippi Air National Guard. This exercise provided special operators a unique training opportunity that provided tactical level training for the full spectrum conflict.

This rundown is from sof.news……

Exercise Scope. The time frame of the exercise was from January 30 to February 13, 2020. The Southern Strike exercise is a National Guard Bureau (NGB), Title 32 funded, tactical exercise program. The Joint Exercise Control Group (JECG) is comprised of military and civilian personnel with extensive SOF experience. The Mississippi National Guard hosts and supports this annual event.

Training Areas. The large-scale exercise took place in Mississippi at several military installations. Many of the primary (C2) events took place at the Combat Readiness Training Center (CRTC) in Gulfport, Mississippi. Outlying locations provided many of the field training opportunities. These included Camp Shelby, Fort Morgan (AL), Camp McCain Training Center, and Naval Air Station Meridian.

Participating Units. More than 2,000 service members from 22 states – and some international participants as well – conducted missions designed to enhance their effectiveness. The participating air units came from diverse fields to include ISR, close air support, airlift (fixed and rotary), and Aeromedical Evacuation. Active duty, National Guard, Reserve units were all represented. The countries of Bulgaria, Uzbekistan, and the Netherlands all provided military personnel.

List of Units:

  • 3rd Special Forces Group
  • 20th Special Forces Group
  • Dutch SOF
  • Air Force Special Operations Surgical Team (SOST)
  • 125th Special Tactics Squadron (STS) (ANG)
  • 183rd Airlift Squadron
  • 1st Battalion, 185th Aviation Regiment
  • Naval Mobile Construction Battalion 133 (Seabees)
  • Helicopter Maritime Strike Squadron 60
  • 49th Fighter Training Squadron
  • 119th Wing
  • 266th Range Squadron
  • And many more . . .

Exercise Features. The Southern Strike 2020 event featured counterinsurgency, air supremacy, close air support, en route casualty care, non-combatant evacuations, maritime and riverine special operations. In addition, staffs were provided the opportunity to further develop staff functions and procedures.

SOF Ground Unit Training. Ground units from Special Tactics, 3rd Special Forces Group, and the 20th Special Forces Group conducted a variety of missions supported by air assets. COIN, Direct Action, Close Air Support, and other missions were exercised. There was a lot of air activity due to the huge role played by the air units. This afforded the SOF ground elements plenty of opportunities to conduct air infils, exfils, close air support calls for fire, helicopter hoist operations, and more.

Our military is prepared for the wars to come…..

Personally I would prefer that we worry about the failure of our infrastructure….we have always had a superior military….

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

A Brokered Convention?

We are only two votes into the season and the media is already trying to generate chaos…..they are trying to lessen Bernie’s impact….but they are now trying to float the idea of a brokered convention…..

The magic number is 1,990. But as New Hampshire prepares to vote on Tuesday, an analysis at the Hill suggests it’s increasingly possible none of the Democratic candidates will collect the necessary number of delegates over the next several months to clinch the party nomination. Which means one thing: a brokered, or contested, convention in which the nominee will have to be sorted out in unconventional fashion. The Iowa caucuses, for example, typically winnow the field, but nobody has dropped out after this year’s fiasco. The story by Jonathan Easley notes that Michael Bloomberg’s entry into the race has raised the chances of a brokered convention. “It’s possible, it’s quite possible,” says Chris Spirou, former New Hampshire Democratic Party chairman.

“I think Bloomberg entering into this thing provides a much greater possibility of a brokered convention,” he adds. Another Democratic strategist in the state, Jim Demers, points out an irony: If candidates dropped out, that would help avoid such an outcome, but nobody is doing that amid the uncertainty. “There’s a real possibility of a brokered convention and that in itself may be enough to serve as motivation for some who might have otherwise dropped out, to hang around longer to see if they can’t have a place in this thing and play a part in determining the nominee.” At least one candidate may be swayed by what happens in New Hampshire, however: The AP reports that Colorado Sen. Michael Bennet says he needs at least a fourth-place finish to go on.

Personally I think there is the possibility but at this point in them campaigns I feel it is a bit too early for such predictions.

The MSM would like to see this happen for it would make the Dem convention a more interesting coverage….without it it will be boring and nothing to write about for the media….at least the MSM would not have to make sh*t up.

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

A ‘What If’ For 2020

Over the weekend I heard a disgusting proposal……

A Horror Scenario for 2020!

The talk of the media world is Bloomberg and his purchase of the candidacy in the Dem field…..personally I just think he is a rich guy that is afraid that if Bernie wins he will have to finally pay taxes….but that is just me.

I read that an idea is being floated around the internet for a running mate for Bloomberg if he spends enough to pay the nomination…..Hillary Clinton.

Matt Drudge is running a red headline across his Drudge Report on Saturday about a provocative, but unconfirmed, political scoop: He says Mike Bloomberg is considering Hillary Clinton as his running mate. The blurb (see this Drudge tweet) quotes sources close to the Bloomberg campaign as saying that “polling found the Bloomberg-Clinton combination would be formidable force.” In addition, Drudge reports that Bloomberg is weighing the possibility of changing his official residence to Florida or Colorado, where he owns homes, to avoid the issue of having two New Yorkers on the same ticket. Neither Bloomberg nor Clinton has confirmed or denied the story yet.

Drudge is also linking to coverage of his reporting, including a New York Post story that notes Clinton and Bloomberg were spotted having dinner together in December. Mediaite reports that former Clinton aide Zerlina Maxwell said she was “highly skeptical” Saturday when asked about the report on MSNBC. She also referred to Bloomberg as a “deeply flawed candidate” and tore into his mayoral record, with criticism of the NYPD’s “stop and frisk” policies and more.

Is this possible?  Or just Drudge trying to control the news cycle for awhile?

Besides Clinton is a proven loser….so why choose her that could command all that hatred and make the man a loser as well?

Are the Dems that pathetic and desperate?

Clinton will just not go away….she lost and she should f*cking get over it and spend some quality time with her grandchildren.

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

VOTE!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Professor’s Classroom

A simple quiz from IST in 2007….enjoy…learn stuff! chuq

In Saner Thought

OSIM! Since this has become less popular over the weeks, I will make it as simple as possible, but still it will require thought.

Which American President is a National Hero In South America? Which country and why?

OK class! The word has been spoken, the question awaits. Keep answer simple and to the point and when finished DO NOT AWAKE ME!

View original post

Our Iran Policy

Now that things have settled down a bit in the Middle East we have a new person in charge of Iranian policy…..a worm of a person, David Wurmser.

He is a crappy choice for he was ass deep into our policies to invade Iraq and now he has his grubby stubby fingers in our policies around Iran…..how will that end?

David Wurmser was a longtime advocate of war with Iraq in the Bush administration. Eventually, he got what he wanted, and it was a total disaster. Now, Wurmser again has the ear of a president — this time, Donald Trump — and his sights are set firmly on Iran.

An influential neoconservative in President George W. Bush’s White House who became a significant force behind the push for war with Iraq in 2003, Wurmser has recently been serving as an informal adviser to the Trump administration, according to new reporting from Bloomberg News. In that capacity, Wurmser helped make the case for the recent drone strike that assassinated Iranian Gen. Qassim Suleimani.

https://theintercept.com/2020/01/16/david-wurmser-iran-suleimani-iraq-war/

He will be a voice of insanity that will lead down the wrong path….the same path he lead this country in 2003…..

There is something that could possibly help the situation without the use of violence….

Near the very end of his speech after the Iranian missile barrage, President Trump made the following remark: “ISIS is a natural enemy of Iran. The destruction of ISIS is good for Iran, and we should work together on this and other shared priorities.”

Why is this worth mentioning?

First, it is true. But more important, this simple fact, to the best of my knowledge, had never been acknowledged even in passing by senior members of the Trump administration over three years of public commentary about Iran.

There is a tendency to disregard such a statement as a throwaway line at the end of a speech that was marked by the typical Trumpian bluster, exaggeration, and braggadocio. But the menacing and self-serving context lends it even more significance. In international politics, interesting and potentially positive messages often arrive wrapped in venom and bile.

How the U.S. and Iran Can Work Together on Their ‘Shared Priorities’

Contrary to popular right wing thinking diplomacy does work….and is much preferable to war with its death and destruction.

Not to worry…..

The parallels are, admittedly, uncanny: An administration that is shamelessly lying to bamboozle the public into supporting the war. Neocons fanning out over cable news, arguing against all common sense (and all available evidence) that the citizens of a sovereign Middle East nation will applaud our military assault on them. A war effort spearheaded by a bunch of overconfident dummies who seem to think this whole thing will be a breeze, when it’s all too likely to be a disaster. A media that, all too often, lets lying administration officials go unchallenged when they flog their lies.

https://www.salon.com/2020/01/07/having-antiwar-deja-vu-thats-understandable-but-its-not-2003-anymore/

We can watch the events in the Middle East spiral down from 2003……..

The ramifications of the illegal, unnecessary and predictably tragic U.S. decision to invade Iraq are still with us. This includes the ongoing crisis with Iran, which brought us perilously close to all-out war in early January, resulted in the tragic downing of a civilian airliner and remains in a hair-trigger situation.

Those of us who opposed the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq raised questions regarding the Bush administration’s false alarmist claims about Iraqi weapons, weapons programs and weapons systems. But our opposition went further: We observed how a U.S. invasion and occupation would likely lead to increased Salafist extremism among the country’s Sunni population, a rise of terrorist groups, sectarian conflict and increased Iranian influence. Ironically, these predictable results were then used as an excuse for why the United States had to keep troops in Iraq for nearly nine years.

Today’s US-Iran Crisis Is Rooted in the Decision to Invade Iraq

Having lived through many wars of the US that were rationalized with lies….I do not see the Iranian situation any different…..(disclaimer:  this think tank has a Russian lean to it……but the information is worth a read)

Admittedly the news cycle in the United States seldom runs longer than twenty-four hours, but that should not serve as an excuse when a major story that contradicts what the Trump Administration has been claiming appears and suddenly dies. The public that actually follows the news might recall a little more than one month ago the United States assassinated a senior Iranian official named Qassem Soleimani. Openly killing someone in the government of a country with which one is not at war is, to say the least, unusual, particularly when the crime is carried out in yet another country with which both the perpetrator and the victim have friendly relations. The justification provided by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, speaking for the administration, was that Soleimani was in Iraq planning an “imminent” mass killing of Americans, for which no additional evidence was provided at that time or since.

It soon emerged that the Iranian was in fact in Baghdad to discuss with the Iraqi Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi a plan that might lead to the de-escalation of the ongoing conflict between Saudi Arabia and Iran, a meeting that the White House apparently knew about may even have approved. If that is so, events as they unfolded suggest that the U.S. government might have encouraged Soleimani to make his trip so he could be set up and killed. Donald Trump later dismissed the lack of any corroboration of the tale of “imminent threat” being peddled by Pompeo, stating that it didn’t really matter as Soleimani was a terrorist who deserved to die.

More Lies on Iran: The White House Just Can’t Help Itself as New Facts Emerge

The Congress has put its foot down (finally)…….

In a vote of 55-45, the Senate passed the Iran War Powers Resolution on Thursday afternoon, setting out opposition to any unauthorized war with Iran, and instructing the president not to deploy troops for such a war.

Voting was heavily along party lines, with Democrats and some antiwar Republicans managing to pass the resolution in the face of mocking opposition from the Republican leadership, who insisted the resolution could never survive a Trump veto, and was a sign of weakness against Iran.

The Senate Republicans supporting were Mike Lee of Utah, Rand Paul of Kentucky, Susan Collins of Maine, Todd Young of Indiana, Jerry Moran of Kansas, Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, Bill Cassidy of Louisiana and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska.

Trump has opposed the resolution, arguing overwhelming support for his recent hostility toward Iran. Trump has broadly opposed war powers challenges to his wars, arguing he is allowed to launch such conflicts without Congress.

A veto has the potential to be overridden in the House, but it so far looks unlikely that the Senate could do so. That may ultimately depend on growing opposition to the war by the time the override happens.

(antiwar.com)

Good for them….we have enough wars…..time to put the breaks on the conflict creation…..

I Read, I Wrote, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”