March 23, 2017

The Strategy, Tactics, & Logistics of Warfare, Subject to the Rules of Civility

Revolutionary France, on July 14, 1789
                           The first law of society is this:  If you do not have justice, you'll have
                           no peace.  The second law is that, if you liberate others, you'll liberate
                           yourself.  Conversely, if you enslave others, you will end up in a trap
                           of your own construction.

                           The Current Events Lesson for these days is that, even though there is
                           no world war in progress, the world have been at war at many theaters
                           of deadly operation for consecutive decades, dating back far before the
                           1930s, the 1840s, and even the 30 Years War.  It dates back to Martin
                           Luther's time, when a warring religion, called Protestantism, emerged.
                           In fact, technically speaking, war has been commonplace in the history
                           of mankind since the time when Caesar Augustus Pax Romana was
                           breached.  So, this is a fitting post for March 2017.

France in July, 155 years later (V-1 Rocket site bombed by the Americans)
                                     When Your Destiny Places You in the Arena of War ...

1a] The first assignment at the start of every war is that of putting out of commission
       the enemy's eyes & ears, as well as its ground-to-air defenses.  Hitting radar in-
       stallations, surface-to-air missile batteries, and communications posts are always
       Objectives #1, 2, and 3 simultaneously.

 1b] Equally important to General Objective #1 is that of disconnecting your enemy
       from his supply lines and drop zones.  It's far more effective to go behind enemy
       lines and end your enemy's ability to manufacture war materiel than to go to the
       front line and bring enemy platoons to their untimely end.  This means that, if the
       enemy is being supplied by another nation, then you have to attack the supplier
       nation, in order to end its ability to supply your main enemy.  If you are not go-
       ing to do this, don't go to war against the nation being supplied from elsewhere.

Even decorated combat vets taught us that, in war, there are no winners;
only the survivors of incendiary, smoke-flooded, and blood-ridden battles.
Keep in mind that those who didn't survive also received medals. 

1c] Of course, the other objective at the start of warfare is to achieve air superiority
       and to prevent your own ships from being blocked at bay.  This necessitates mine
       sweeping technology which involves the need for wooden ships, in order to pre-
       vent those ships from being mine magnets during the mine sweeping process.

   2] All wars are won in the Research and Development Department ... in the R&D
       Section.  This includes psychological research and troop training techniques.

  2b] Incidentally, the one war which gave military science a treasure of learning
        in the tactical arts was none other than . . . The Vietnam War.

  3] Never order a logistics unit to drive through a town during war.  Have it go the
      extra distance in circumventing the town, or else it will never drive to anywhere
      again.  Laziness is war leads to death.

4a]  If you see a structure that looks totally foreign and unrecognizable to you, and
       it's certain that it neither contains civilians nor is booby-trapped, either hit it or
       commandeer it and reverse engineer it.  The Nazis had no idea that the metal
       towers over which their pilots flew were the radar installations that alerted the
       British of the return of the German Luftwaffe.  The Nazis ignored the British
       radar installations.

5a]  Shock & Awe is an entire waste of time.  Your enemy will only surrender after
       he is drained and fatigued, not able to take any more of what he has been endur-
       ing.  Wearing down the enemy is more effective than initial shock & awe.  You
       must save your most devastating fire power for either defending yourself at the
       point of attack or for depleting your enemy's stockpiles.  Don't use ordnance
       for intimidation purposes, because it's a waste of time.  Howe tried to do so at
       the start of the American Revolutionary War.  He failed in the process.

5b]  It's an erroneous and arrogant presumption to think that you want your enemy
        to be intimidated and frightened by your arrival, as was publicly stated during
        the George WMD Bush years.  An enemy thinking that it is to face a strong op-
        ponent is one placed in a state of heightened awareness, and this state of aware-
        ness will be deadly for many of your troops.

        Instead, you want your enemy to be entirely unprepared for you.  You want
        your enemy to be lackadaisical when you arrive, thinking that you're nothing
        more than a Gomer Pyle.  Then, when your fire power strikes the enemy's line,
       frustration and bewilderment will rocket throughout his psyche, as he drains his
       emotional strength in trying to handle the fact that something much worse than
       what he anticipated struck for his jugular vein.  The lesson to memorize is this:

        Shock and awe will only work if you were originally underestimated by your
        enemy.  General Sun Tzu was the author of the time-tested military treatise,
        The Art of War.  Within it he stated: 
       
              "Even though you are competent, appear to be incompetent.  
                            Though effective, appear to be ineffective."

 5c] Nothing intimidates a person more than realizing that the poody cat he thought
        he saw in the distance turned out to be a full scale lion or a pack of wolves on
        a relentless mission toward him, entirely aware of where he is.  The fear of the
        unknown will drain the strength out of anyone.  When the enemy is emotional-
        ly drained, he loses the flag waving inspiration to fight back.  There upon, you
        win the psychological aspect of the war.  If you have not yet triggered the fear
        of the unknown in your enemy, then you have not yet won the war.

5d]  Achieving air superiority isn't optional in the tactical sense.  The British Navy
        learned this in Norway, as early as 1940.  When air superiority is guaranteed
        by one of the warring parties, the war's eventual outcome is generally ascer-
        tained.

        For example, at recent count, the United States generally has twice as many
        pieces of military aircraft as does China.  Even though China was said to have
        7,400 tanks to the US total of 5,600 or so, the outcome of any U.S./Chino war
        would be ascertained upon America securing its in-range air bases.  The U.S.
        Navy and Marine air units will shred Chinese armored units very effectively.
        A B-52 raid could destroy armored divisions in the spirit of the July 1944
        St. Lo Raid (Operation Cobra.)

  6] If you're escaping a mall or school that is under attack by terrorists, only crawl
       three or so feet away from a concrete, stone, or metal-girded wall.  If you are
       too close to the wall, a ricocheting bullet will hit you.

  7] If you are combating drugged-up terrorists, keep firing at each one, even if you
       already hit each one three times.  Death by gunfire usually comes from the en-
       suing shock to the body.  A drugged-up terrorist doesn't feel the shock.  Thus,
       if drugged-up terrorists are in the equation, a gun won't suffice.  Take posses-
       sion of a baseball bat, club, pipe, umbrella, knife, crowbar, etc.

 8a] If you are going to dock a ship during war, get your sailors off of it, or else you
       will have made them sitting ducks.  During the Falkland Islands/Malvinas war
       between Argentina and England, an exocete missile hit an aluminum clad ship
       at port.  British sailors were harmed and killed.  Aluminum reaches a higher
       temperature than does steel.

 8b] Incidentally, exocet means flying fish in French, and the exocet missile was a
       French invention.  Now, concerning the French ... the joke about them surrend-
       ering at the slightest breeze is a total lie.  Even during WWII, there were the
       Free French forces, commanded by Charles De Gaulle, and they never sur-
       rendered.   Neither did the French underground.

       If you believe that the French are cowards, then how do you explain Napoleon's
       army, the French empire, the Marquis of La Fayette, St. Joan of Arc, General
       Rochembeau,  the Battle of the Marne, Charles Martel, Charlesmagne, Simon
       of Montfort, the Battle of the Somme, and the Francs' victory over Danish Vik-
       ings during the Siege of Paris, as well as the Maginot Line?

 8c] Concerning this, it was in 1940 when the French had a mighty fortification on
       the German border called the Maginot Line.  One big problem.  The Nazi Ger-
       mans avoided the Maginot line, electing to outflank the French, instead.  Thus,
       it was the Germans who were afraid of the French, being that fear is sometimes
       a common-sense thing to follow.  So, the Germans went around French fortifi-
       cations, in circumventing the 500 buildings that comprised the Maginot Line.

       In the mean time, 15% of the French army weren't in the fight, because they
       were manning the Maginot Line that the Germans avoided.  The French did
       not expect the Nazis to invade France through neutral Belgium, thereby vio-
       lating the norms of international law.  In addition, the Ardennes was difficult
       terrain for armored units to cross.  So, the French didn't expect the Germans
       to use their very best troops to cross through the Ardennes.

        A million German troops and 1,500 tanks invaded the parts of France and Bel-
        gium not protected by the Maginot troops.  It was Operation Sichlschnitt, as in
        cutting with a sickle.   It was the ultimate flanking maneuver.  Therefore, it was
        not the French who avoided a fight.  It was the Germans who did.  Ironically
        enough, German military personnel were against starting a war on the Western
        Front.  Some of them attempted to assassinate Adolph Hitler even before the
        Nazi invasion of France began.

   9] Concerning surrounding your enemy, the danger of drawing your enemy into a
        trap is that your enemy is becoming concentrated in the process, with a concen-
        trated fire power ready to be fired upon your forces.  Compacted army units are
        powerful ones, at least for a short period of time.
Fort Pitt was surrounded, under siege on account of Pontiac dishonoring a treaty.
None the less, the Fort Pitt Blockhouse is still standing, meaning that the siege
failed, as the ancient commander, Sun Tzu,  would have forecast.

  10] It's more important to scatter the enemy than to trap and surround him.  A tiger
        whom you back into a corner will pounce you.  An enemy whom you surround
        will have an added incentive to fight, along with a dose of adrenaline and focus
        that your platoons won't have.  Never provide your enemy with the inspiration
        to fight.  Surrounding him will put him in the mindset one gets when he has no-
        thing left to lose.  As Gerald Celente once stated, "When people have nothing
        left to lose, they lose it."

  11] Needless to say, the objective in surrounding the enemy is to get the enemy to
        surrender its surrounded forces.  HoweverI} Governor Paulinus did not have
        the luxury of surrender to a Queen Boudicca who wanted every Roman on the
        British Isle dead,  II} The Francs did not surrender to the Danish Vikings during
        the Siege of Paris,  III} The Austrians did not surrender to the Turks during the
        1529 Siege of Vienna, IV} Jacobite troops did not surrender to Cromwell's army
        during the 1690 Siege of Limerick,  V} Union forces did not surrender to any of
        the Confederate forces at Little Round Top,  VI} The Russians did not surrender
        to the Nazi Germans during the Battle  of Leningrad,  VIII} the Nazi Germans
        did not surrender to the allied troops at Monte Cassino, IX} Japanese forces did  
        not surrender to the Americans during the Battle of Guadalcanal,  X} the 101st
        Airborne Division did not surrender at Bastogne, XI} and the Americans did 
        not surrender to the Viet Cong during the Battle of Khe Sanh.  Concerning the
        Battle of Khe Sanh, General Westmoreland stated:

               Our entire philosophy [is] to allow the enemy to surround us closely, 
               to mass about us, to reveal his troop and logistic routes, to establish 
               his dumps and assembly areas, and to prepare his siege works as ener-
               getically as he desires.  The result [will be] an enormous quantity of
               targets ... ideal for heavy bombers.

http://books.google.com/books?id=G35yog6wKv0C&pg=PA105&lpg=PA105&dq=westmoreland+khe+sanh+b-52+to+reveal+his+troop+and+logistic+routes&source=bl&ots=fUw5iF5TwK&sig=UEKQWwprrxBR2W5q0rre6dzkgF4&hl=en&sa=X&ei=H2veUaLUCsHkygH2o4Eg&ved=0CFQQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=westmoreland%20khe%20sanh%20b-52%20to%20reveal%20his%20troop%20and%20logistic%20routes&f=false

12a] General Sun Tzu was the author of the time-tested treatise the Art of War.
        In it he stated, "the psychology of soldiers is to resist when surrounded."
        He then went on to state, "Confront them with annihilation, and they 
        will then survive.  Plunge them into a deadly situation, and they will 
        then live.  When people fall into danger, they are then able to strive 
        for victory."

        Concerning an enemy, he stated,"Do not press a desperate enemy."
        He also stated, "A surrounded army must be given a way out."

        This means that being surrounded is not automatic defeat, while surrounding
        an enemy can backfire.  Actually, when your enemy surrounds you, it's thin-
        ning out its lines.  Pick an arc in that thinned-out circle and fire away, while
        closing your gaps.  If you can break a circle, you just broke the enemy.  You
        then proceed with a flanking maneuver if you are not faster than the enemy,
        and retreat if you are faster and outnumbered ...  if and only if you aren't be-
        ing visited with tactical air strikes against you.

12b] Disconnecting the enemy from its supply lines is partially similar to placing
        him under siege.  Whenever he is separated from his supply lines, the enemy
        is confronted with the choice of surrendering or scattering.  In both instances,
        you win, if you don't surround your enemy.  When you surround your enemy,
        expect him to become relentless and uncontrollable in one arc of the circle
        you have around your enemy.

         Whenever you can do so, manipulate your enemy into thinning out his line,
         always and in every way.  Now, if you are playing Feigning Retreat and are
        draw-
         ing the enemy into a trap, you are initially doing the opposite of thinning out
         enemy lines.   However, if you give your enemy the incentive to gain ground
         fast, he will be thinning out his line in the overly zealous pursuit of you.

12c] In the same mind set, when you break through an enemy's line, expect tactical
        air fire to rain down upon you.  This means that the only viable alternative for
        you is to outflank the enemy and get so close to him that you are literally in en-
        emy fox holes, inviting a lot of friendly fire casualties.  In order to get out of a
        tactical air strike (after breaking out of an encirclement), you will literally have
        to take some of your enemy soldiers prisoner, so as to provoke a temporary
        truce.  However, if you have already gained air superiority, you will have no
        problem breaking out.  Thus, the reason why the Battle of the Bulge was
        an American success was because the allies already had air superiority
        over the Germans.

13a] When it comes to breaking an enemy's circle, a relatively comparable situation
        occurred during the American Civil War.  Union batteries would first target a
        confederate artillery unit or a single canon and fire away.  When the single can-
        on or artillery unit would get put out of action, the Union battery would go to its
        next target.  It was the systematic decimation of artillery units.

13b] Alexander the Great did something similar in battle.  He took a chariot unit and
         traveled along the face of an enemy phalanx.  As soon as he saw an opening, he
         attacked and broke the opened wedge even wider.  You can break a circle in a
         similar fashion, when you are surrounded.  If you get defeated while surrounded,
         it was only because you faced superior numbers that were layered.  It wasn't be-
         cause of being surrounded, per se.  Being surrounded, in itself, is not guaranteed
         defeat.  Bastogne confirmed this.  However, during a breakout, look up at the
         sky and respond accordingly.

 13c] Incidentally, Alexander the Great was the ultimate military genius.

 13d] Surrounding the enemy involves placing the enemy under siege, and in today's
         technological societies, sieges are not advisable.  This is due to the existence of
         air drops, air support, and air cavalry forces.  Thus, it is even less expected for
         military forces to surrender when surrounded in the modern era.

13e] If a child runs up to your unit and pleads for you to quickly go to his town, to
        defuse a bomb in the middle of the street, expect to be ambushed.  This literal-
        ly happened in Afghanistan.  The general rule is that, if the local citizens aren't
        bearing gifts, they are bearing trouble.  Even at that, don't readily eat food that
        is offered to you by a native of the land you invaded.  The other rule is that, if
        the official mayor doesn't approach you with an official request, then expect to
        be set up for the kill.

13f] However, if the townsfolk, in a collective effort, offer your soldiers something
        such as bed sheets during winter, then chances are that they are your friends.
        This literally happened during the Battle of the Bulge.  American soldiers were
        clad in white bed sheets, compliments of the nearby villagers; of camouflaging
        sheets the color of the snow that surrounded them.

14a] Don't be foolish enough to drive through a ravine.  The general rule is that, if
        you can see Terra Firma above you, something will be hurled down upon you
        by the enemy.  Taking the high ground is a general rule. Taking the low ground
        is asinine, unless you are placing the enemy under siege and are trying to get
        him to thirst to death.  As was previously stated, in this era of air cavalry, air
        drops, and air support, performing a seize is very very very limited in its abil-
        ity to be effective.

14b] As a general rule, the air force is to be regarded as soldiers on high ground.

15a] Always approach battle in wolf pack formations.  If you thin out your lines,
        you lose.  This happened to Czechoslovakia in WWII.  Think phalanx forma-
        tion or wolf pack formation.  If you don't have the numbers, then your war
        will be an attack on the enemy's supply installations behind the lines, in raid
        after raid.  Needless to say, if you approach battle in wolf pack form, you will
        still have to cover your flank, as was the case with Patton and Montgomery in
        Sicily.  He who gets outflanked loses the battle.  This happened to a thorough-
        ly incompetent military commander named George Washington during the
        Battle of Brooklyn Heights.

15b] It is of the utmost importance for you to know that a Wolf Pack Formation is
        NOT a Sardine Formation or a Bowling Pin Formation.  If soldier are too tight-
        ly packed, one hand grenade could put them out of action.

15c] If you're en route to the main front and pass a solitary house containing enemy
        troops, bypass it, lest you lose a lot of ordinance and soldiers in attempting to
        take it.  Henry Knox learned this the hard way during the American Revolution.


16a] If you are in a foreign nation, fighting an army foreign to the land where you
        find yourself, the people there are likely to befriend you.  If you're in a foreign
        nation, fighting the army native to that nation, expect the people there to regard
        you as the enemy and not as the liberator, even if you're liberating them from a
        dictator.  This is because their relatives are in the army you are attacking.

        For example, the Belgians were friendly to the Americans who were fighting the
        German army on land where the German military did not belong.  In contrast, the
        Iraqi people were not friendly to the American GI's who came to fight the Iraqi
        army who was native to Iraq.

16b] The George Walker Bush administration mistakenly assumed that the invasion
         in Iraq in 2003 was going to be equivalent to invading France and then Holland
         in 1944.  The administration assumed that the Iraqi people would welcome the
         American and British forces the same way that the French and Dutch welcomed
         allied forces during World War II.  The difference is that, in WWII, American
         troops fought an army foreign to France and Holland.  In Iraq, American and
         British ground forces fought an army native to Iraq.  Years of sabotage were
         guaranteed to occur in Iraq against the occupying American and British forces.

16c] Concerning what was erroneously presumed to have been the end of the Second
         Iraq War, in 2003:

                         If soldiers exit their tanks and proceed to walk away, 
                                the solders only do so, to fight another day.
                         There is a difference between retreat and surrender.

         The lesson is that, if your enemy doesn't physically perform an outward act of
         surrender in front of you, it didn't surrender.  He will continue to fight you, in
         the shadows, via sabotage.  The war didn't end until eight years after Bush II
         claimed that the "mission was accomplished." 

17a] During the Cold War, the Soviet Union high command didn't think in terms of
        Shock and Awe.  It's military policy was literally Brute Force.  Such a thing re-
        sults in a lot of casualties on your side and on the enemy side.  Therefore, if the
        United States and the Soviet Union would have gone to war with each other in
        the 1980's, NATO's high command would have drawn Soviet land forces into
        an array of killing field scenarios, thereby making the B-52 bomber heavily in
        demand and heavily in peril.  The Soviet high command would have respond-
        ed by firing missiles at the U.S. air base in Spain (Diego Garcia.)

17b] No matter how Ronald Reaganish and Rush Limbaughish you are, do not be
        deceived:  War between the United States and the Soviet Union would have
        been guaranteed mutual destruction, resulting in Madd Maxx types of societies.
        And remember, both Mitt Romney and Rush Limbaugh were cowardly chicken
        hawks who hid from combat service during war time.  They  were the opposite
        of experts.  In addition, even drugs conquered Limbaugh.  None the less, World
        War IV would have been fought with sticks and stones, after a Soviet/American
        World War III.

17c] The NATO forces in Europe were originally designed to survive for six weeks.
        Then, in the 1980s, the life expectancy of a NATO unit, in the event of war, was
        22 to 32 minutes.

17d] Plus, the mark of a dictatorship is that it's battle plan is to lose its first wave of
         soldiers.  This is a plan of mutual attrition.  In a dictatorship, even the citizens
         are expendable. 

18a] More important than hitting the enemy front line is the assignment of destroy-
        ing or even commandeering enemy supplies.  Charles Martel did this in France.
        So too did the 8th Army Air Force do this in the European Theater of Operation.
        In fact, before the arrival of D-Day, there were numerous air raids upon Nazi
        railroad yards.  This was done, so that the Nazis wouldn't be able to quickly
        send reinforcements to Normandy's coastline.  The objective in attacking rail-
        road yards was not to disrupt train tracks.  The objective was to destroy the
        ordnance, vehicles, and even soldiers in the boxcars, on the flats, and in the
        cabins.        

18b] The bombing of the Hamm marshaling yards, done shortly after the cessation of
         Operation Market Garden, was done so that the Nazis couldn't readily send re-
         inforcements into Holland.  Bombing truck assembly plants, armament factories,
         and fuel supply depots is what wins wars.  Uprooting landing strips is equally as
         important.  Targeting civilian neighborhoods is a waste of time and ordnance.

18c] It was repeatedly stated that, if Hitler immediately sent all available Panzer units
        to Normandy Beach on D-Day, the Nazis would have pushed the allied forces
        back into the English Channel.  This is a complete lie.  If all of the available Pan-
        zer units roared toward Normandy Beach on D-Day, they all would have been
        decimated by the 8th and 9th Army Air Forces the same way in which the Pan-
        zer Lehr Division was decimated at St. Lo, France, on July 25, 1944.  The war
        would have ended much sooner.

18d] Concerning the St. Lo Air Raid, Lieutenant-General Fritz Bayerlein, recounted
        the event, as was witnessed from his German position.   Concerning this account,
        his mention of heavy bombs was a reference to that fact that the numerous small
        bombs which assailed the troops and tanks that day were dropped out of heavy
        bombers: 

     "The entrenched infantry was either smashed by the heavy bombs while
       in their foxholes and dugouts or else they were killed and buried by the
       blast.  Infantry and artillery positions were blown up.   The bombed area
      was entirely transformed into a field covered with craters, where no hu-
      man was left alive.   Tanks and guns were destroyed  and overturned,
      unable to be recovered, because all roads and passages were blocked."   

     "The shock effect was nearly as strong the physical effect"  ...  "Some of
       the men got crazy and were unable to carry out anything.  I was person-
       ally in the center of the bombardment and could experience the tremen-
       dous effect.   For me, one who, during this war, was at every theater of
       operation, and who had been assigned to the places of the main efforts,
       this was the worst thing I ever saw."


       Bayerlein summarized the aftermath in the following way: 

      "My front lines looked like the face of the moon, and at least 70% of my
        troops were out of action - dead, wounded, crazed, or numb."
 

18e] Now, it's important to note that the shock effect came from the fact that the Nazi
         panzer unit originally underestimated the 8th and 9th Army Air Forces.  You see,
         the day before was the original date of the air raid, but it was canceled when most 
         of the bomb groups were in mid-flight.  Such a cancellation was known as a RTB 
         Order; a Return to Base Order.  This meant that very few bombs dropped on the
         Panzer division on July 24.  

         As a result, the panzer troops assumed that the 8th & 9th Army Air Forces
         offered little challenge.  Then, when the two U.S. air  forces came back the 
         following day and converged upon the Nazis in full force, the vast majority 
         of the panzer troops couldn't handle it.  They were unprepared for what was 
         to come.   Therefore, Sun Tzu was completely correct in having stated, 

        "Even though you are competent, appear to be incompetent.  Though ef-
          fective, appear to be ineffective."  On the day it was decimated, the Panzer
         Lehr Division thought that the U.S. tactical &strategic air forces would be
        ineffective.

 18f] Famed war correspondent and eventual war casualty, Ernie Pyle, witnessed
         the July 25th air raid from the American encampment: 

      "And then a new sound gradually droned into our ears.   The sound 
        was deep and all encompassing, with no notes in it --- just a gigantic 
        faraway surge of doom-like sound.   It was the heavies." ...

      "I've never known a storm or a machine or any resolve of man that 
        had about it the aura of such ghastly relentlessness." ...

" ...  and then the bombs came.  They began ahead of us as a crackle of
        popcorn and almost instantly swelled into a monstrous fury of noise
        that seemed surely to destroy all the world ahead of us.  From then
        on,  for an hour and a half that had in it the agonies of the centuries,
        the bombs came down." ...

      "By now everything was an indescribable cauldron of sound.  Individual
        noises did not exist.  The thundering of motors in the sky and the roar
        of the bombs ahead filled all the space (spatial capacity) for noise on
        earth.   Our own artillery was crashing all around us, yet we could
        hardly hear it."

        The bottom line is that, if all available Panzer units stormed toward the Nor-
         mandy Coastline on June 6, 1944, the July 25th St. Lo news report would
         have been the June 7th and 8th report coming from the Normandy Coastline.

18g] The July 25th air raid was known as Operation Cobra, and the greatest lesson
         that it taught was the many smaller bombs are far more devastating than a few
         large bombs of the same total tonnage.  Some of the Eighth Army Air Force
         bombers only carried 20 lb. fragmentation bombs @ 240 bombs per bomber,
         while other ones went to St. Lo with a load of 260 lb fragmentation bombs
         @ 20 bombs per bombers.  Yet other ones carried 100 lb demolition bombs
         @ 38 bombs per bomber.  Neither 500 lb bombs, nor 1,000 pounders, nor
          2,000 lb bombs were used that day.

19a] Concerning WWII, it was George Patton's doctrine to never never never dig
         in.  It was Charles DeGaulle's doctrine also.   Think outflank, outflank, out-
         flank, or think deplete the enemy's supply.   If you dig in, you will not deplete
         the enemy's supply.  The enemy's supply of ammunition will deplete your dug
         in troops.

19b] The bottom line is this 

          When you destroy the enemy's war-making machine, the war is over.

20]  The Nazis were the first ones to place a jet-propelled fighters into the air.  The
        first jet fighter in history was the ME262.  Yes, it was much faster than a P-51,
        but all of the WWII jet fighters were shot down.  This is because, in order for
        them to return to base, they had to coast downward.   They were only jet pro-
        pelled while going up.

21a]  Do not target any civilian area of any kind.  If you strike a civilian target on
         purpose, you will awaken a lion of vengeance.  The city of Hamburg only
         burned because of the bombing of  London.  Therefore, always always al-
         ways accommodate your enemy with a civilized incentive for ceasing
         hostilities.  You do this by giving him a civilian sanctuary to where he
         can return.

21b] In addition, a bombed-out civilian area can become a fortress of rubble for the
        enemy, enabling for a roster of future Sniper Hall-of-Fame inductees.  For ex-
        ample, the Bombing of civilian sectors in Leningrad and Monte Casino result-
        ed in a lot of casualties after the bombings thereof.

21c]  In order to prevent a shooting war, keep talking at the negotiating table, especi-
         ally if you and your enemy do little more than yell at each other.  Keep in mind
         the observation made centuries ago by Sun TzuIn modern terms, those who
         saber rattle are poised to cower, while those who speak humbly are poised to
         attack.

21d] The first sign of eminent war is silence.  After all,  George Bush II refused to
         talk to the Saddam Hussein who actually didn't have the weaponry that the
         Bush administration claimed him to possess.   Should the negotiators at the
         conference table act like a dysfunctional family during the holidays, let them
         keep talking and you will prevent the occurrence of something known as a
         daily body count.

22a] Treat every enemy prisoner of war as either a captured king or a cast member
         in a Shakespearean tragedy.  A man or a woman whom you treat kindly will
         not be inclined to hang you from a noose after the war.  Do NOT water board
         your enemy.  Let your enemy know that there are nice guys on the other side
         who will treat him or her humanely should he/she think of surrendering.  Your
         goal is to get the enemy to stop firing at you.  Such an enemy, after the war,
         might even become your ally.

22b]  Chapter II of  the Art of War prescribes that captured prisoners be treated
          well and respectfully.  This is contrary to the failed and fatally expensive wat-
          er boarding Bush II war years which cost trillions of dollars in term of lives,
          the physical health of many vets, and the psychological health of military per-
          sonnel, as well as the cost to the Iraqi's in their land being arrayed with a de-
          pleted uranium. 

22c]  One more thing:   Make it appear that you are impressed that your captured
          enemy was man enough to face you, if he were captured in battle.  If your en-
          emy looked for you, act as if he is a wearied pilgrim looking for sanity in the
          world.  You don't want your captured enemy to be intimidated by you.  You
          want him to feel sorry for you, as if you have too many burdens in life.  Your
          want the Stockholm Syndrome to take effect.  If your captured enemies is
          made to fear you, it will be equivalent to surrounding your enemy, and you
          never ever should do that in warfare.  At the end of every war is the peace
          treaty.  Begin the motion to peace during the war.

22d]  In order to make escape difficult for your prisoners of war, you need to make
         the perimeter of your P.O.W. camp a deep trench of sand.  Prisoners can dig
         tunnels from earth effectively.  However, making a tunnel in a sand pit takes
         engineering skills and added materials.  In addition, make life in the prison
         camp so nice that the prisoners won't want to leave it.

 23] Require all of your officers to eat exactly what the troops in the theaters of
        battle are eating.  In this way, high command, local command, and field com-
        mand will know how much physical strength and alertness the soldiers have.
        Do NOT be a miser when it comes to your soldiers' cuisine.  Rather, think in
        terms of perish able food vs. non-perishable items.

        Let it be repeated:  No gourmet treats for your officers during military opera-
        tions, and NEVER while in a theater of war, unless your front line troops, sail-
        ors, and airmen get the exact same thing.

  24] The most audacious military maneuver in history was when Napoleon ordered
         his cavalry to enter the Austrian trenches.  In second place would be Alexander
         the Great's attack on Tyre.  In third place would be the scaling of the Cliffs of
         Omaha Beach.  That act placed D-Day in the "You gotta be nuts" Department.
         All that the American forces had to do was change course and land on Sword
         Beach.  The British liberated it quickly.  The Americans could have liberated
         Omaha Beach from behind.

  25] One of  the reasons why Napoleon lost at Waterloo was because it rained the
         night before the battle.  His artillery used something known as canister shot.
         It didn't explode until it hit the ground.  This meant that the mud was buffer-
         ing the explosions of anti-personnel ball bearings and pellets.  It were as if
         Napoleon had no artillery on that day.

         Plus, Napoleon attack later than usual.  He wanted to attack the British as
         soon as possible, because the Prussians were on their way.  Napoleon's army
         was on the verge of breaking the line of the army of Arthur Wellesley, the
         first duke of Wellington.  Wellesley then ordered his remaining troops to
         lie down, slightly beyond the ridge of the hill where the fight was soon to
         be decisive.  This place was known as the Hougoumont farm.  The French
         were then ambushed when they went over the crest of the hill there.  The
         area had pine trees that were tapped regularly for their gum and turpentine.
         Napoleon sent 14,000 troops to the Hougoumont farm, while Wellesley
         kept 12,000 British troops in the area, to defend it.
        
         In addition, the cavalry performed a flanking maneuver that was misunder-
         stood by the infantry.  The infantry thought that the cavalry was retreating.
         The French infantry then fled in retreat.  Napoleon's greatest error was leav-
         ing the battlefield and not calling the play by play orders.  His greatest mis-
        fortune was that the Prussians arrived at 4:30 in the afternoon, requiring the
        French to fight one battle on two fronts.  Their arrival was inevitable.

  26] Napoleon's navy lost the Battle of Alexandria (the Battle of the Nile), because
        the British were smart enough to park close to the coast, thereby making one
        side of each ship unable to be attacked by the French navy.

27a] George Washington was an incompetent military commander, dating back to
         the French & "Indian" War.  One of the few reasons why the Americans out-
         lasted the British was because the Comte de Rochambeau was in America,
         convincing Washington to not be so foolish as to fight the British in New
         York. Yorktown was to be the place of destiny, but not until the French fleet
         came north during the Caribbean hurricane season.

27b] Even though Daniel Morgan's victory at Cowpens helped greatly, if it weren't
          for the French navy, the Comte de Rochambeau, and the money provided by
          King Louis XVI, there would have been no United States of America.  Amer-
          ica owes everything to the French, in that department of history.

27c] During the Battle of Yorktown, American troops repeatedly shouted "Rush on
        Boys"  as their battle cry.  It was a play on words, concerning Rochambeau.

27d] The Comte de Rochambeau was Jean Baptiste Donatien de Vimeur.  He was
         the youngest son of his family.  King David was the youngest son of his family,
         too, as was the Joseph of Egyptian fame.  Simon V of Montfort, victor of the
         Battle of Lewes & originator of the parliamentary concept, was also the young-
         est son, as was Andrew Jackson, victor of the Battle of New Orleans and her-
         alded capturer of Pensacola.  General Robert E. Lee was the youngest son of
         major-general Henry Lee.  Even Alfred the Great, along with Peter the Great,
         were youngest sons.  Going one step further, General Norman Schwarzkopf
         was the youngest of three children.

27e] In light of this pattern, there is an instinct possessed by the youngest male of a
        family that the other males don't possess.  This makes the youngest the ultimate
        military strategist.  The youngest male knows what it is to be the little one.  He
        has the survival instinct, as well as an instantaneous defensive mechanism.  In
       fact, there is also the matter of having observed the family who came before him
       and learning from its influence.  The eldest in a family might be able to give ef-
       fective financial advice, but it's the youngest male who will prevail in the most
       brutal of wars ... according to the pattern found in history.

        However, this does not apply to the youngest brothers of men who already were
        in military power.  The prime example would be Napoleon Bonaparte's young-
        est brother, Jérôme, who misinterpreted his orders at Waterloo, and the lacked
        the needed reinforcements to defend Westphalia, in another military conflict.
        None the less, he had a prestigious political career.

        Concerning Napoleon Bonaparte, he was the fourth of eleven children, and
        he entered military schooling at the age of ten.  Dwight Eisenhower was a
        middle child.  Polk, the American/Mexican War president, was the eldest.
        Harry Truman was the eldest also, and he was a WWI artillery officer dur-
        ing the end of the war.  In addition, Paul Gilbert, the Marquis of La Fayette,
        was an only child who become a wealthy orphan relatively early in life.  So,
         the youngest child tendency is only a very broad generality which did have
         in its ranks notable military figures.

        As a point of interest, a grandson of Napoleon Bonaparte's youngest brother
        was Secretary of the United States Navy and United States Attorney General.
        In 1908, he founded the prototype of the FBI.  Charles Joseph Bonaparte was
        his name.

28a] The greatest outnumbered military victory in history was logically the Battle
        of Watling Street, in 61 C.E., when governor Gaius Suetonius Paulinus' army
        of 8,000 to 12,000 Romans completely decimated Queen Boudicca's army of
        60,000 to 80,000 or more in southern England.  Roman pila (javelins) were de-
        signed to bend as soon as they hit enemy shields, thereby taking away from the
        enemy its ability to defend itself from Roman short-swords, aka gladioli.  The
        Romans hurled two volleys at Boudicca's advancing army.  The Romans kept
        repelling each attack and then counterattacked.  It turned out to be a massacre
        upon the attacking British.

28b] The lesson learned is that, if your initial military game plan fails, stop attempt-
         ing it.  No one in Britain took on the Roman legions until the early 400s.  The
         ancient Rome Empire did not fall until September 4, 476 C.E.

  29] The fatal error of the Confederate forces at Gettysburg was attacking Little Big
        Top and then sending in Pickett's soldiers from the right, in an advertised attack.
        The Southern forces simply needed to start marching east toward Washington
        DC, in order to bring the Union forces out of their protective embankments.

 30] Never disband a conquered army.  This was Bush's fatal error in Iraq.  Make it
        as if your enemy combatants just became your new allies.  In this way, you will
        keep track of men who would otherwise become terrorists, firing at you from
        the shadows.  Keep in mind that you went to war against a government whose
        officials held its military personnel on puppet strings.  When the enemy govern-
        ment or targeted dictator is no longer in power, you need let surviving military
        units know that they have been released from the puppet strings.  Conquered
        troops still need to be called to roll call.

 31] Any society who understands the following is in possession of great wisdom:
       War is a punishment from God for mankind's sins. 

       Sincerely,

       Patrick Pontillo,  youngest son of an authentic liberator of France
      _____________________________________________________________

March 19, 2017

Like Fine Crystal in the Book-burning Moonlight

Dwight Eisenhower, on the Subject of Military Spending

It is important to once again take to heart what was spoken by President Dwight
D. Eisenhower, the man most experienced in war and its tragic aftermath, stated
in 1953, fifty years before Bush II began his course of taking the US to the brink
of its own economic destruction:

Every gun that is made, every warship launched, and every rocket fired signi-
fies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed;  those 
who are cold and are not clothed.  This world in arms is not spending money,
solely.  It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, and
the hopes of its children.

The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this:  A modern brick school in more 

than 30 cities.  It's two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000
in population.  It's two fine, fully equipped hospitals.  It's some fifty miles of 
concrete highway.  We pay for a single fighter with a half million bushels of 
wheat.  We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed 
more than 8,000 people.

This, I repeat, is the best way of life to be found on the road the world has 
been taking.  This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense.  Under the 
cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.

Take note that Ike's 1953 Iron Cross speech isn't his famous January 1961 Military
Industrial Complex speech.  He knew the devastation of war.  He was aware that
exorbitant military spending is assault and battery on the nation doing the spend-
ing.  American military spending of the 1950s was proportionally higher than it is
today, in as far as concerns spending as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product.
 However, in the 1950s, America was a manufacturing nation that was erasing its
post war debt, on account of the many well paid taxpayers.  Furthermore, 's out-
rage of the $695+ billion per year military budget consists in that the U.S. has
spent, in one recent year, as much as the next 23 highest spending nations com-
bined.  Plus, there is the matter of environmental red flags in this era of deplet-
ed uranium ordnance.  This means that even conventional warfare is no longer
conventional.

Of course, it is true that the American military budget is merely a jobs programs.
Circumstantial evidence consists in the fact that there was the congressional push
to place more tanks in the U.S. arsenal, despite the fact that the Pentagon already
stated that it needs no more cavalry tanks.  Thus, there would be the maintenance
cost of something viewed as a burden on the military.

Years ago, in a political science class, the professor informed us that Southern con-
gressmen, as a matter of course, use the military budget to get taxpayer dollars into
their low income constituencies.  Therefore, this disingenuous habit of Southerns
was recognized decades ago.  All in all, the military budget was a way to get money
into the economically backward South.  This budget has little to do with "patriotism."

As a qualifying statement for the right winged paranoid, a $480 to $520 billion milit-
ary budget or so would be rational, if the United States congress would put a stop to
the runaway Trade Balance Deficit that empowered a ruthless Maoist China via the
by slave labor profiteering of the Walton clan of Arkansas and numerous other self-
seekers.  It's when the budget exceeds $550, $600, and $650 billion that such spend-
ing becomes a future count in a future Nuremberg-type trial.  Such spending literally
becomes criminal, especially depending on the medical verdict of depleted uranium
upon health and the environment.

The fatal error of Southern politicians is that they think that they will be immune for
the privation they have caused America.  This includes the Obstructionist 112th Con-
gress which was the most do-nothing congress in U.S. history.  Republicans need to
study history, as in the Cromwell Regicide trials, Andersonville, Nuremberg, Tokyo,
and even the recent trial of African war criminal Charles Taylor.  So, think.  Reading
Ayn Rand is not the answer.  Reading on how Atlanta was burnt by northerners who
were be undercut economically by the South's no-wage workforce would help too.
If the Republicans insist on remaining functionally illiterate, they who relive history,
as opposed to make history.  Even as the DowJones rises, one can't but help to notice
further diversionary tactics on the part of the Republicans on air and in congress.
Overspending results in too much rust. 
Republicans display chicken hawk contempt toward youths who don't help increase
the United States' run-away national debt which is augmented via exorbitant military
spending.  The irony today is that the newly enlisted youths who take the oath to de-
fend this nation are helping to destroy it with the amount of military spending that
a heavily indebted and non-manufacturing-based United States is forced to accrue,
on account of the stereotypical Republican Gun-toting TEA Party supporter.

It's predictable to see chicken hawks such as Limbaugh, Boehner, O'Reilley, Gingrich,
Beck, Cantor, Hannity, and Dr. "I'm Banned in England" (who never spent a minute
in boot camp) get on the megaphone and then badger America's youth to do what the
chicken hawks avoided doing.  Those youths are merely pawns in a money making
scheme.  This brings us back to Ike's fatherly warning to America, as in the warning
about the Military Industrial Complex.  Ironically, he was a Republican.  Yet, the Re-
publicans of today ignore him.  Of course, they only ignore him because they are
Southern Democrats at heart.

The oxymoron is that, when enlisting to protect the United States, an American youth
ends up financially pounding the final nail in America's coffin.  Due to George WMD
Bush and his Republican cohorts, America can no longer afford GI Joe.  The Republi-
cans weakened a nation by acting tough with the blood of others for consecutive years
at a time.  Soldiers of the National Guard were being forced into foreign tours of duty,
a couple of continental plates away.  However, the National Guard is designed to al-
ways stay home and be the last line of defense for a nation.  It shouldn't be traveling
over an ocean.  In fact, the National Guard is that well formed militia mentioned in
the 2nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, so designed to prevent the government
from becoming a tyranny.  It didn't work.  The tyrant George Bush sent the National
Guard packing to a desert far far away.

In addition, American soldiers of the regular armed forces were forced into two and
three tours of duty thousands of miles from home.  This was ruthless, and as a result,
Corporate Bailout Bush drained and weakened the United States by playing the role
of Mr. Bring-it-on.  Eight and ten years of wasted time were spent on two theaters
of war, along with $1.6 trillion spent.  Yet, there was not a single tank battle or naval
encounter throughout that entire time.  There wasn't even a single aerial dog fight.  In
fact, the Aussies and Americans ended up finding Iraqi aircraft in poor condition, on
the ground and even under the ground, buried.  So, why was all the money spent?

Despite this fact, those two wars accounted for one quarter of the national debt that
has accumulated since 2001 ... according to the Christian Science Monitor.  Iraq has
accounted for 4,487 American deaths, while Afghanistan accounted for 1,863.

Then comes wounded military personnel.  Even in December of 2011, casualties in Af-
ghanistan were mounting.  In the Year 2010, while America was watching TV house-
wives and certain celebrities of no particular talent, 700 United States soldiers died in
Afghanistan.  Americans act as if they don't even care.  Maybe it's because they don't.

In the same time span and at the same theater of war, 5,000 U.S. troops were wound-
ed.  Young men of America, listen:  Don't die for ungrateful people who obsess them-
selves with Botox Barbies.  And don't die for the sake of someone's war profiteers. 

The Enduring Cost of a Freedom that Didn't Endure

Then there is the cost of the aftermath of war, for years to come.  The same Christian
Science Monitor stated that $600 to $900 billion in long-term medical care and disa-
bility compensation is already owed by the United States to the veterans of both pro-
longed wars.  In 2008, U.S. Medicine reported that 600,000 Americans were treat-
ed at Veteran hospitals.

In the failure of the George Bush War years, one needs to be reminded that he and his
staff violated every premise of Sun Tzu's Art of  War.  Sun Tzu would never have wat-
er boarded anyone, in the first place.  Secondly, the terrorists were criminals and NOT
soldiers.  This is because, if they were soldiers, then they violated the Rules of Engage-
ment and became criminals in the process.  They let civilians be targeted.  Stated for
the record, you're not permitted to target civilians, including those in New York sky-
scrapers.

There was another costly after-effect of the Reagan Close-down-industry Complex.
Reagan manipulated the economy in such a way that the only way in which a number
of young Americans could get a job was to join the military.  This now translates in-
to highest of all government price tags ... the pension ... both government and military.
the bills which sent America's manufacturing base to Sweatshopville were the United
States' suicide notes.  American manufacturing employees paid much more tax and
spent more on multiplier-effect enhancing products than do coffee shop barristers
absorbed in college loan debt.

Why was so much taxpayer money wasted on the military industrial mind set?  The
Bible which used to be read in America stated, "Blessed are the peace makers;" not
the war makers.  Yet, Reagan had the audacity to call a nuclear missile a peace mak-
er.  Well, it didn't make peace.  It merely delayed a more concentrated and devastat-
ing series of wars in the future.  Meanwhile, Chicken Hawk Reagan let many neglect-
ed things eventually blow up in the face of society.  He left behind a land mine of so-
cial ills.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2011/0908/US-response-to-9-11-contributed-to-causes-of-current-debt-crisis

At present, the United States is in need of research engineers and environmental ex-
perts who can benefit health and daily civilian life, in the States and American terri-
tories.  If there's no appreciable life for millions of indebted civilians, then what is
there left to defend?  It's the 1% who destroyed the American Dream.  Giving your
military service toward those greed-stricken people would translate into a nightmare
for you.  Ask the three-tour Iraq/Afghan vets.

When military expert Wesley Clark said "re-deploy" to a place outside of Iraq, pushy
Chicken Hawks of gutless wonder called him a sissy.  You need to be reminded that
General Clark was the commander of the NATO alliance, and unlike chicken hawks,
he did attend boot camp.  He knows what thousands of chicken hawks don't know.
However, he was ever so coincidentally a democrat.  Thus, he was bashed, despite
the fact that he had the money-saving and life-saving answer at the moment of chaos.

America needed to save its ordnance and dollars for a real war.  The Bush II years
were the ones that were slowly making the United States defenseless, in the name
of Patriotism and "free market" economics.  The Bush version of  "free market eco-
nomics" resulted in a lot of people losing their freedom in foreign labor camps.  In
the process, he elevated military spending via two wars, all the while lowering the
tax rate for those rich made their money through the ultimate form of parasitic con-
duct ... namely, of off sweatshop laborers cheated of the rightfully due wages.  Thus,
Bush did what it took for America to be unable to pay for war against an enemy
that had zero navies, zero air forces, zero armored divisions, zero paratroopers,
etc.

You need to know that Iraqi Christianity was NOT the Ann Coulter-type thereof.  For
those of you who don't care ... or who are clueless ... Iraqi Christianity is known as the
Chaldeon Rite of Catholicisim.

All that the Republicans accomplished by invading Iraq was to have true Christians
on this earth persecuted to literal car-bombing death.  Incidentally, the authenticity
of Iraq's Chaldean Christianity comes from the fact that it can be traced to the origi-
nal apostles who were NOT money-grabbing TV evangelists whose ancestors saw
many a black man left hanging deader than death on tree branches located near lead
infested moonshine stills of brain damaging fame.

The Similarities Between
the Territory-grabbing Nazi Party and Money-grabbing Republican Party

There are further parallels between the Nazi Germans and the American Republicans.
Whereas the Nazi Germans sought to take the infirm to concentration camps, the Re-
publicans seek to take them off Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.   Whereas
the Nazi Germans sought to dumb-down its citizens by book burning, the Republicans
seek to do so by cutting education and even by deleting the Department of Education
itself.  This is typical for a party whose candidates include those who were unable to
name one Supreme Court case, who could not remember the cabinet positions desig-
nated for axing, and who could not refrain from cutting a State fire fighting budget dur-
ing a drought of Biblical proportions which torched a landmass larger than the entire
State of Connecticut.

Finally, whereas the Nazi Germans used the radio to spread its lying propaganda, the
Republican Party uses the radio to spread its one-line slogans and multiple diatribes.
In sequence, whereas the Nazi Germans sought to eliminate all opposing radio voices,
the American Republicans cut off National Public Radio from government funding.
The only thing that has kept the Republicans from entirely destroying this nation is a
few remaining checks and balances in the U.S. Constitution. Even at that, there is the
Florida case where a person testing the voting machines found that his votes for dem-
ocratic candidates registered as votes for Republicans.

As far as goes the socialist element, it was the Republicans under Bush II who gave
$700 billion to the corporate cronies known for donating money to Republican poli-
ticians.  In fact, the Republicans were actually bailing themselves out.  Now, as far
as goes the word Socialist in Nazi German title, there is nothing social about taking
the disabled to gas chambers.  Nazi Germany wasn't very socialist.

The Napoleon Maneuver

The Nazi Germans were draining their nation's economy through military spending.
The game plan was to steal the wealth of the nations that its troops would conquer.
This included the oil fields of Ploesti Romania and the art of Europe.  In as much,
the road that Republican America has been traveling is the same one that Nazi Ger-
many traveled.  The United States was on the brink of bankruptcy during the years
of Bring-it-on Bush, when two wars were being waged and when unneeded tax cuts
were enforced for the very greedy who caused an elevation in the chronic trade bal-
ance deficit that continues to drain American money into a Communist dictatorship.
This ensured that there would not be the revenue needed to pay for two wars which
endured twice as long as the Second World War.  When an army's congress stops
delivering it paychecks, what does that army do?  Throughout history, pillage and
plunder was the modus operandi of armies.  Napoleon was infamous for it.

When the marching band music begins to echo off the buildings of Main Street, and
when the majorettes start to twirl their batons, you can rest assured that in very close
proximity will be a Republican politician equipped with warmongering diatribes that
we in America can recite in our sleep.   You can also rest assured that lobbyists will
be equally near the Republican politician, waving his flag on Main Street for him.  So,
if the Fuhrer's black boot fits and if his propaganda minister's monocle shines like fine
crystal in the book-burning moonlight ... 

______________________________________________________________________

March 17, 2017

CIA Report: Reagan was complicit in Iraq's chemical attacks against Iran.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/08/25/secret_cia_files_prove_america_helped_saddam_as_he_gassed_iran
Plus, he saw no evil during the Kurdish genocide campaign.  Add the Argentine Dirty War, Pinochet's Chile, & S. African Apartheid.  Quit praising him as God.  He was
a mere C student and only had the prowess of a 1930s book-keeper.

A ranking  member of the United States Congress went on a FoxNews broadcast and
boldly proclaimed that Ronald Reagan would have never tolerated the Assad regime
gassing its own people.  She made it sound as if Reagan would have pounded his gold-
en fist on a table and magically sent forth a myriad of heavily armed John Waynes, to
avenge the citizens of Syria.

Bill O'Reilly did the same thing and then proceeded to belittle the rapidly graying
President Obama.  O'Reilly made it look as if  Reagan were a superhero walking
onto a battlefield, crushing chemical warfare canisters with his hands.  Well, the
truth is that Ronald Reagan tolerated Saddam Hussein's gassing of Iranians and
Kurds, as a matter of course ... habitually so.  Thus, if Reagan were here today,
he would be looking the other way, ignoring the entire scenario.

The ranking congressional member, incidentally, was Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, chairwoman
of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Middle East.  This is an example of
American taxpayer dollars in action.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2013/08/new-docs-show-us-involvement-saddams-nerve-gas-attacks/68698/

http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/09/05/odonnell-reagan-let-saddam-buy-and-use-chemical-weapons/

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/08/25/secret_cia_files_prove_america_helped_saddam_as_he_gassed_iran

In addition, weapon's grade anthrax was sent to Iraq during the Reagan years, via the
U.S. Dept of Commerce ... under the Reagan-appointed supervision of none other than
Donald Rumsfeld.  In fact, Iraq purchased eight strands of anthrax from the U.S.A, dur-
ing Reagan years, specifically during the time when the Iran/Contra pea & shell game
was transpiring.

Let us not forget that the Argentine Dirty War transpired during the Reagan years, with
Reagan doing nothing about the genocide committed against the Argentinian people.
Thus, Reagan's track record shows that he would have looked the other way, as soon
as Assad unleashed his chemical ordnance upon his own people.

http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-202_162-534798.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-153210/Rumsfeld-helped-Iraq-chemical-weapons.html

http://hnn.us/article/1283

The Reagan administration provided Hussein with intelligence disclosures, as to the
Iranians' battlefield locations, during the long Iran/Iraq War.  In the process, Reagan
served the function hypocrite, in having his personnel condemn Hussein publicly, all
the while accommodating him privately with the gassing of Iranian positions.

http://rt.com/news/chemical-weapons-iran-iraq-980/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2402174/CIA-helped-Saddam-Hussein-make-chemical-weapons-attack-Iran-1988-Ronald-Reagan.html

http://theweek.com/article/index/248745/how-the-us-helped-saddam-hussein-use-chemical-weapons-against-iran

The United States and the nation of Iraq were signatories of the 1925 Geneva Protocol.
This is a treaty which banned the use of asphyxiating chemicals in warfare.  So, Ronald
Reagan, liar that he was, hid the fact that, without the technology of the United States,
Saddam Hussein wouldn't have been successful at gassing the Iranians.  This assistance
constituted Reagan bieng an accomplice in violating the Geneva Protocol.

Now, when a nation signs a treaty, it becomes law.  The signing nation is bound to the
treaty, by law.  So, Reagan violated United States law in the case of Saddam Hussein.

In addition, the Republicans made Reagan look like a mighty lion who would not re-
treat from anywhere or back down to anyone.  Well, Reagan pulled the U.S. marines
out of Lebanon, after having put them there to serve the function of scarecrows.  The
problem is that they were sitting ducks, 241 of whom died at the hands of merely one
terrorist act.  In as much, Reagan's track record shows that he would NOT have stood
up to Assad in any capacity.  After all, the Syrians weren't white enough for Reagan's
concern, in the first place.

Proof that the previous statement was true, and not merely sarcastic snideness, Ronald
'Racist' Reagan vetoed the Comprehensive Apartheid Act.  In addition, while campaign-
ing for the governorship of California, he defended 'the right' of white home owners to
refuse to sell their homes to African-American buyers.  In the 1960's, there were places
called "Restricted Neighborhoods."  It meant "White Only."  Reagan defended racism
in the 1960s.

Back to Reagan's complicity in the violation of the 1925 Geneva Protocol:

http://www.pensitoreview.com/2013/09/06/wrong-again-republican-claims-reagan-would-not-ignore-chemical-weapons-attack-but-he-did/

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/08/cia-files-us-aided-iraq-with-iran-gas-attacks.html

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/09/05/house-republican-claims-reagan-would-never-do-exactly-what-he-did-on-chemical-weapons/

The tactics of Iran's notorious Ayatollah Khomeini were not foreseen by the authors
of the Geneva Protocol, because no one would have expected the rise of a ruthless
dictator who would have the youth of his nation walk unarmed into land mines and
enemy machine gun fire.  This tactic was referred to as the Human Wave Tactic.

Yes, thousands of Iranian citizens would literally be recruited to be sacrificial lambs
and walk into Iraqi machine gun fire, as well as in mine fields.  The tactic would re-
suIt in Iraqi machine guns overheating, buckling, and locking.  Therefore, the only
way to stop a human wave, concluded the Iraqis, was by chemical ordnance.  Of
course, a B-52 air raid could have decimated the wave, but that tactic was for the
world powers who could afford strategic bombing techniques.

Keep in mind that the human wave of Iranians constituted a threat to the lives and
safety of Iraqi soldiers.  They became belligerent soldiers, themselves.  Thus, it was
permitted to fire upon them.  It's just that the 1925 Geneva Protocol did NOT antici-
pate someone as lawless as the Iranian dictator who, in the name of religion, sent
unarmed civilians to certain death.  HOWEVER, Hussein dedicated himself to the
annihilation of the Kurds in the north of Iraq.   This is where the line was drawn,
ethically speaking.  This policy cannot be defended in any court of public opinion.

This extermination campaign against the Kurds endured from 1986 to 1989.  It con-
sisted in sending Kurdish males to "detention camps," such as the one in Kirkuk.  It
was very intense times that didn't get detailed press in the West.  None the less, the
Iranian ayatollah of the 1980s manipulated the assassination of Egyptian president,
Anwar Sadat.  He targeted Sadat for assassination, simply because Sadat called him
a mad man on commercial television ... CBS newsman Mike Wallace who ended up
being treated for severe depression, allegedly because Vietnam chief of staff, Gen-
eral Westmoreland sued Mike for liable.  However, Mike Wallace triggered the
words which got Sadat killed.

During Ronald Reagan's final year as president, on the eve of Saint Patrick's Day,
the Iraqis committed chemical genocide upon a region that fell out of the hands
of the Iraqi government two days prior.  It started on March, 16, 1988, in Halabja,
northern Iraq.  There were 10,000 to 15,000 casualties, 3,000 to 5,0000 of whom
were fatalities.  Lingering illness resulted.  Even ten years after the attack, there
were about 700 people who remained ill.

The United Kingdom expressly stated that punitive actions against Iraq would have
a detrimental effect.  The policy was to continue to have dialogue and interaction
with Hussein.  Of course, the United States previously helped England during the
Falkland Island War.  So, no one was going to expect England to have a policy con-
trary to Reagan's policy.  Of course, Margaret Thatcher, the British prime minister
infamous for siding with dictators was in power at the time.

Documents dating as far back as 1983 show that the United States government was
well aware that Hussein was using chemical weaponry.  In fact, the genocide cam-
paign against the Kurds began two calendar years before the Halabja chemical at-
tack.  Yet, Reagan didn't intervene.  He basically gave Hussein a proverbial blank
check ... a get out of jail free card.  Thus, if Reagan would have put his first down,
concerning Saddan Hussein, we would never have been the two Iraq wars.  This
is because Hussein was emboldened by Reagan's negligence and complicity.

Reagan most certainly set up the world for the first Iraq War, but only in combina-
tion with the fact that George Bush I told the Hussein regime that its dispute with
Kuwait was not the Americans' concern.  Hussein took that message to be a green
light for invasion.  After all, Hussein used chemical weaponry repeatedly, with no
objection from the United States government.  Thus, Reagan's complicity with
Hussein is what created a middle eastern Frankenstein ... a pit bull unleashed
again Iran. 

As Argentina goes, so goes the world ... spoken in the early 20th Century

Let us not forget that the Argentinian Dirty War transpired during the Reagan years,
with Reagan doing nothing about it ... about the genocide committed against the Ar-
gentinian people.  Thus, Reagan's track record shows that he would have looked the
other way, as soon as Assad unleashed his chemical ordnance upon his own people.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-dirty-war-and-argentinas-military-dictators-women-killers-and-baby-thieves/5326828

http://globalresearch.ca/reagan-backed-ex-dictator-jorge-videla-and-argentinas-dirty-war/5335781

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2011/020611.html 

Reagan's support of the Pinochet dictatorship, in obstructing 
any justice to be administrated upon the Chilean tyrant.

During Reagan's first year in office, he abrogated ... rescinded ... made null and void
the sanctions that the Carter administration imposed upon Pinochet's Chile.  Reagan's
excuse for supporting dictators who committed crimes against humanity was that he
was fighting the injustices of Soviet Russian expansionism.  Thus, in the name of
justice, Reagan allowed criminal injustices.

http://articles.latimes.com/1987-01-02/local/me-1475_1_human-rights

http://books.google.com/books?id=VYOfGRZAWCwC&pg=PA416&lpg=PA416&dq=reagan++pinochet&source=bl&ots=I4wLcnLnjr&sig=NZp2K9T4A6_dB2ydE5p099pBsBo&hl=en&sa=X&ei=UeAsUr_kLI-p4AOH4oDYCQ&ved=0CDsQ6AEwAzgU#v=onepage&q=reagan%20%20pinochet&f=false
_____________________

http://books.google.com/books?id=bJxQIK4WHMkC&pg=PA163&lpg=PA163&dq=reagan++pinochet&source=bl&ots=2m1Rl1SFwL&sig=HI6FHfMGN5HvP3nb21zAh8OZgNw&hl=en&sa=X&ei=-d0sUryuDYTl4APC_YC4CQ&ved=0CGkQ6AEwCw#v=onepage&q=reagan%20%20pinochet&f=false

Reagan became another George Wallace, Strom Thurmond, and Jefferson Davis in
vetoing the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act of 1986.  In fact, he became the
trio of racism a month earlier, in a vehement speech condemning the congression-
al act.  The act officially included the US Congress calling for the release of polit-
ical prisoner, Nelson Mandela.  Thus, Reagan had no problem with the idea of
Nelson Mandela being a prisoner perpetually.

http://www.policymic.com/articles/52029/the-surprising-republican-civil-war-that-erupted-over-nelson-mandela-and-apartheid

America, you need to stop worshiping the buffoon and coward, Ronald Reagan, be-
cause collective psychosis turns nations into mutations of Nazi Germany.

In conclusion, FoxNews once again aired a person who lied about Reagan, making
that pathetically remedial actor look like the Messiah of humanity.  Reagan did on-
ly a few good things ... most of which were done at the prompting of Tip O'Neill.

None the less, by his actions one could tell that Reagan despised equality.  He did
did what it took to bring back a robber baron class to the States, solely out of his
apparent disrespect for the working man ... including the workers who built air
ports, docks, bridges, and skyscrapers ... who farmed the fields and maintained
the orchards ... who kept automobiles from being death traps ... who delivered
material to stores, hospitals, and construction sites ... who kept society from
turning into a mass of chaos.  All that Reagan did was create a rust belt.