Fired Up, Ready to Go

--Meaningfulness, Parvez Taj

If everyone is thinking alike,
someone isn't thinking,
--General George Patton, Jr.

You don't need to think. You need to drive.
You need speed. You need to fire it up.
--Talladega Nights (2006)
______________

H & I is not a street corner in D.C. -- it is the use of artillery called "harassing and interdicting fire". U.S. forces have used this technique since Christ was a corporal.

Simply stated, artillery fire is put out onto likely enemy avenues of approach and likely assembly areas on an intermittent and unpredictable manner. Now it seems in the Phony War on Terror (PWOT ©) the U.S. has taken this concept to another level.

In the Vietnam war, H & I was a daily occurrence and was based upon the assumption that anything moving at night was hostile, and therefore should be served up a healthy dose of U.S. firepower. If the Commies didn't understand the joys of democracy, at least they would enjoy our death-dealing firepower.

The only problem was, everything that moved at night wasn't Vietcong or North Vietnamese. Sometimes, the citizens of a country want to move about in their own country. Call it, the audacity of hope.

Now in Pakistan and Iraq, CIA Director Leon Panetta says drone missile strikes have been "successful at disrupting insurgents" (Drone Attacks Inside Pakistan Will Continue, CIA Chief Says.) He also said "U.S. aerial attacks against al-Qaeda and other extremist strongholds inside Pakistan would continue, despite concerns about a popular Pakistani backlash. "

Mr. Panetta, with little experience and seemingly less brains is disrupting insurgents, which translates, killing their hadji asses. For good measure, he throws in the "T" word just to keep us shivering in our boots: "Nothing has changed our efforts to go after terrorists, and nothing will change those efforts."

Just as with Mr. Bush, nothing can stop a policy, certainly not an intrinsic flaw. We are so enamored of the HOW of killing people that we fail to ask, WHY?

All extremists are not insurgents, all insurgents are not terrorists, all terrorists are not al-Qaeda. [Big green print, for St. Patrick's Day, and our Ranger readers -- this means key point, o.k.? Charlie Mike!]

What is the relevancy to the PWOT? Why are we killing insurgents who may or may not be a real threat to America? They may be anti-American, but possibly this is a reaction to our in-country policies (just imagine Predators flying over your next party.)

Historically insurgents have been communist, socialist, nationalist or religious, so it is meaningless to lump the players into such a nebulous pulp, which is a fiction. Whatever their affiliation, the extremists in Afghanistan and Iraq are not capable of projecting their hatred and violence to The Homeland ®. It is questionable that they are thinking that far into the future.

The focus in the PWOT should be the destruction of al-Qaeda and its leadership, which should be clear and distinct. This clarity is compromised by the Panetta types who do not grasp the problem, nor the concept of realistic threat analysis.

Capability --> intent --> why? This is the basis of all mission analysis and assignments, and this is exactly why the U.S. will destroy istelf fighting the PWOT. We lack the focus and unity of al-Qaeda. Al-Qaeda's actions are pinpoint and have a unity of action, where ours are willy-nilly and similar to the proverbial bull in the china shop.

Where is the progress in our vaunted war fighting abilities? We now have a non-military entity like the CIA killing people with million dollar missiles -- wouldn't an artillery round be much cheaper?

The U.S. answer to terrorism is as screwed as our response to the failing banks. Reality is not our focus, and one day the money will run out.