Showing posts with label Gary Brecher. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gary Brecher. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 26, 2014

War Nerd: Praise Gen. Sherman for burning Atlanta!

For personal reasons I've been remiss not to post this sooner. Without further ado, here is Gary Brecher, aka the War Nerd, at his best. I admit it, I love his sentiments [emphasis mine]:

Sherman was trying, in everything he did, to wake these idiots from their delusion. That’s why they hate Sherman so much, 150 years after his campaign ended in total success: Because he interrupted their silly and sadistic dreams, humiliated them in the most vulnerable part of their weird anatomy, their sense of valorous superiority. Sherman didn’t wipe out the white South, though he could easily have done so; he was, in fact, very mild toward a treasonous population that regularly sniped at and ambushed his troops. But what he did was demonstrate the impotence of the South’s Planter males.


And here's what Sherman said of himself at the time in his "Letter to Atlanta," quoted by Gary:


“You cannot qualify war in harsher terms than I will. War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it; and those who brought war into our country deserve all the curses and maledictions a people can pour out. I know I had no hand in making this war, and I know I will make more sacrifices to-day than any of you to secure peace. But you cannot have peace and a division of our country…

The only way the people of Atlanta can hope once more to live in peace and quiet at home, is to stop the war, which can only be done by admitting that it began in error and is perpetuated in pride.

“You have heretofore read public sentiment in your newspapers, that live by falsehood and excitement; and the quicker you seek for truth in other quarters, the better. I repeat then that, by the original compact of government, the United States had certain rights in Georgia, which have never been relinquished and never will be; that the South began the war by seizing forts, arsenals, mints, custom-houses, etc., etc., long before Mr. Lincoln was installed, and before the South had one jot or tittle of provocation. I myself have seen in Missouri, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Mississippi, hundreds and thousands of women and children fleeing from your armies and desperadoes, hungry and with bleeding feet…But these comparisons are idle. I want peace, and believe it can only be reached through union and war, and I will ever conduct war with a view to perfect an early success.”


And then there's this golden nugget of truth from Gary, still apropos today, (I'm thinking of Ferguson, MO and many, many other places...):


Of course, this is all lost on the Phil Leighs of the world, who—for reasons that cut deep into the ideology of the American right wing—always take burnt houses too seriously, and dead people far too lightly. To them, burning a house is a crime, while shooting a Yankee soldier in the eye is just part of war’s rich tapestry. 

Unlike most other "Northerners" today who don't give the Civil War a thought, I am so, so glad that we beat the Confederacy and preserved the Union, aka the United States of America, and sent those pompous Foghorn Leghorns home in caskets or with their traitorous tails between their legs. I tip my hat to Sherman, Grant, et al and the 300,000 truest American patriots who ever lived and kept the USA the USA by facing down and defeating the greatest existential threat we ever faced: our meaner, more prideful selves.


By Gary Brecher
November 20, 2014 | Pando Daily

Sunday, September 28, 2014

War Nerd: ISIS threat is still overblown

The War Nerd maintains that Islamic State is indeed the JV team, albeit with good PR and a penchant for child rape, yet certainly not an existential threat to the U.S. or indeed Iraq or even the Kurds.

Check it out!


By Gary Brecher
September 28, 2014 | Pando Daily 

Friday, June 27, 2014

War Nerd: ISIS conquering empty desert; and bless the Kurds

You gotta love Gary for writing stuff that only he would write, such as this:

Actually, topography has everything to do with what’s gone well or badly for I.S.I.S. in this latest push. If you know the ethnic makeup of the turf they’ve taken, their “shocking gains” don’t seem so shocking, or impressive. After all, we’re talking about a mobile force–mounted on the beloved Toyota Hilux pickup truck, favorite vehicle of every male in the Middle East—advancing over totally flat, dry ground in pursuit of a totally demoralized opponent. In that situation, any force could take a lot of country very quickly. It’s just a matter of putting your foot on the accelerator, moving unopposed on the long stretches of flat desert, then dismounting at the next crossroads town for a small, quick firefight against a few defenders who didn’t get the memo to flee. Once they’re dead, you floor it again until the next little desert town.

So this isn’t the second coming of Erwin Rommel by any means. Everything has conspired to push the Sunni advance, from the lousy opponent they’re up against to the terrain, which is a light mechanized commander’s dream.

Gary has a long-time soft spot for the Kurds, the strongest fighting force in Iraq and a soon-to-be state (one of three) formed from the crucible of Old Iraq:

Something wonderful came out of the horrors of 20th century Iraq, among the Kurds of the Northern hills. They became the only non-sectarian population in Iraq, and perhaps the only such group between Lebanon and India.

[...] Of all the hill tribes, the Sunni Kurds are doing best in this chaos. It’s allowed them to take Kirkuk, which they always needed and wanted, and it also just so happens to put the one and only “supergiant” oilfield in the North (5 billion gallons) totally inside Kurdish territory.

I’m happy as Hell for the Kurds. I love them anyway, and miss Suli a lot—but more than that, it’s simple justice that they get a break for once. The Kurds have paid their dues. Saddam’s murderers in uniform killed nearly 200,000 Kurds, and the man from Tikrit was supposedly very disappointed he hadn’t been able to wipe them out completely.

At the moment, I.S.I.S isn’t even trying to pick a fight with the Pesh Merga—a fight they would lose very quickly if it ever did happen. But then Sunni jihadis have always liked softer targets, the softer the better.

Upshot: Gary's little article should serve to calm some of those Nervous Nellies in Congress, the White House and the U.S. foreign policy establishment about "ISIS overrunning Iraq."  Yeah, they might overrun fellow Sunni areas of Iraq, but that's about it.  The Kurds and Iran (Shiites) will step in and stop them cold elsewhere... but wait, that's what a lot of U.S. fear is really about: letting Iran get even more influence in Iraq, and solving this ISIS problem without our help, making them look strong and us, well, the opposite of strong.  

Beyond that, I still think the real enemy is the Saudis, who prop up all these jihadists all over the world with money, crazy clerics, weapons and asylum. Yet the House of Saud plays nice with Texas oil billionaires and Israel, so we Americans for some reason can't love 'em enough!....

UPDATE (22.07.2014): Here's a continuation at Pando of Gary's coverage of the lame ISIS "invasion" of Iraq: "I.S.I.S. and the Western media: Groping each other in public like a Kardashian Thanksgiving." 


By Gary Brecher
June 23, 2014 | Pando Daily

Friday, June 6, 2014

War Nerd: Eastern Ukraine is Putin's ploy to distract the West

Besides Gary Brecher's throwaway insults at Ukraine's interim government, (he obviously takes his cue from friend, russophile journalist Mark Ames), this article is worth reading.

Basically, Gary's thesis is that Putin's support for the uprisings in Eastern Ukraine is meant to distract Kyiv and the West from Putin's annexation of Crimea [emphasis mine]:

The new leader of Ukraine, Petro Poroshenko, understands what’s happening in Donetsk perfectly well: "Russia’s goal was, and is, to keep Ukraine so unstable that we accept everything that the Russians want," Poroshenko said in theinterview"I have no doubt that Putin could, with his direct influence, end the fighting."

Sure, Putin could end the fighting, but that would be a waste of combustible human material—and it’s a rule of Great Power politics that you never burn your straw dogs wastefully. Like Poroshenko says, Russia’s goal here is not to annex Eastern Ukraine—not at the moment, anyway. In the long run, perhaps. But it’s too soon to send tanks over the border with the Russian flag flying. Much better to stir this new Kashmir, let it simmer, use its misery.

"Crimea; that was worth keeping. Donetsk isn't." So Gary sums up Putin's reasoning.

The "brave" pro-Russian separatists, true believers in Great Mother Russia in Gary's narrative, are Laoist "straw dogs" that Putin is using now, but will let Ukrainian President Poroshenko burn. Putin will keep just enough of these straw dogs alive, supplied, hopeful, so that he can re-ignite the insurgency whenever it suits him.  

Gary for whatever reason insists that Russian spies and Spetznaz (special forces) are not involved in Ukraine, as if this is crucial. Personally I think they are; and nobody knows what is happening on Russia's side of the border. At a minimum, there is a massive coordination campaign.

More importantly, it has been proven that Russia is arming, supplying and paying these mercenaries, er, volunteers from Russian hinterlands like South Ossetia, Chechnya and Ingushetia, as well as Ukraine's near neighbor Rostov-on-Don (Vostok Battalion).  (Hello! Ordinary Russian "volunteers" don't possess convoys of Kamaz trucks, mortars, RPGs, the Russian military's latest automatic rifles, etc.)

It has been proven that Russia was making bank transfers and shipping cash on trains over the border; but Ukraine's government has mostly put a stop to it. Russia's risible proposal to the UN Security Council to create "humanitarian corridors" in Eastern Ukraine was an attempt to give Russia's supply lines to Eastern Ukraine an official UN mandate.  The rest of the Security Council, not to be fooled so easily, shot down Russia's proposal. (Gee, ya think maybe Russia had no credibility because it opposed humanitarian corridors in Syria, where Russia supports embattled dictator Assad against the rebels?)

Recent rebel attacks on border guard stations are likewise their attempt to keep open Russia's supply lines of matériel and fighters to Eastern Ukraine.

As a commenter on a news site remarked: "Cut the Russian terrorist pipeline. Blow up every bridge. Plow up every airport. Hunt the bandits down one by one. Post them on facebook, since they enjoy using this as a vehicle for terror."

I'm inclined to agree. Putin is not accepting the Ukrainian contingent of these murderous rebels (many of them criminals) into Russia's bosom; and they refuse to leave their home, Donbas. They can't be negotiated with; things have gone too far, they've killed too many. All that can be done is seal off the border, hunt them down, and hope the rest will stay in hiding.  

My guess is that, eventually, somebody from the Party of Regions, or another credible Eastern politician, will be tasked with negotiating a ceasefire.  Meanwhile, the Kyiv government will pass protections for the Russian language and start a process to give more autonomy to Ukraine's oblasts, thereby taking away the rebels's only political grievances.  Then the majority of Eastern Ukrainians' desire to return to "normal life," (naturally, as part of Ukraine), will overwhelm all other considerations.


By Gary Brecher
May 30, 2014 | Pando Daily

Thursday, January 2, 2014

War Nerd: Saudis use jihad as a release valve

Saudi jihadist motto: What happens outside Saudi Arabia stays outside Saudi Arabia.

I hope soon more Americans will realize that America's two greatest "allies" in the Mideast, Israel and Saudi Arabia, are doing the most of any country to get Americans killed by terrorists.

And I'm glad to see the War Nerd is back at it, edumacating us about blood, guts, war and politics.


By Gary Brecher 
December 19, 2013 | Pando Daily

Wednesday, September 12, 2012

War Nerd: Obama's a better C-in-C than W but a terrible cheerleader

Classic War Nerd.  Glad to see he's back.  

Did you know that the U.S. had no troops killed in action in Iraq in 2011? Zero.  None.  That's f-ing amazing.  As Gary put it: "Once the big US forces left, the Iraqis stopped attacking us. I mean completely."  

Kinda makes all those folks like, um, (cough-cough!), myself look pretty damn smart for saying the Iraqis didn't hate us for who we were or our freedom, they hated the open-ended U.S. occupation.  And it makes all those people who said they were just crazy Muslims look kind of dumb, doesn't it?  I mean, you can't be crazy violent Muslim one year and sane democrat the next.

Still, 'Bama can't get any love from W's erstwhile GWOT-lovers and troop-honorers. He's just too eerily calm and collected about his blood & guts.  And he never spikes the ball in the endzone, even when he nailed the biggest bearded baddy of them all.  He lets others do his bragging for him, like Crazy Old Joe repeating in semi-senile fashion, "GM is alive and bin Laden is dead."  Obama's steady nerves, quiet modesty and self-restraint may be admirable traits in a Clint Eastwood-type film hero, but these are terrible traits in a U.S. president.  

Concludes Gary:

War isn’t about “winning” wars, so much — the 2004 election proved that once and for all. It’s about having something to woof on behalf of, like the NFL squared. Bush was the worst warrior since George Villiers, but he was a pro at cheerleading and we reelected him. Obama’s been a big surprise as a C-in-C, a damn good, cool-headed master of assassins, which is what you need for counterinsurgency … but he’s worse than nothing as a cheerleader.




By Gary Brecher
September 11, 2012 | NSFW Corp


Wednesday, April 27, 2011

War Nerd: Where's Al Qaeda?

Gary's analysis will sound like blasphemy to many people, and even he admits he was afraid to say it loud and clear before, but now it looks like there's no denying it: al Qaeda was way overrated.

My question is, why didn't we (meaning, our intel and military services) know this sooner... Or did they know it all along, and "The War on Terra" was just a grand excuse to ratchet military spending back up to pre-Clinton levels? I'm not a conspiracy theorist, and that's good because this version of events doesn't require a conspiracy, just a lot of self-aggrandizing defense and intel bureaucrats, opportunistic contractors, and think-tank chicken-hawks nerds individually depositing our collective fear in their respective bank accounts for the past decade.


By Gary Brecher
April 26, 2011 | The eXiled

There are times when you look back and wish you'd had the courage to say what you were thinking. With me it's a spotty record: Sometimes I do, but more often I wimp out. I wish now I'd said the first thing that came into my head when I started hearing about Al Qaeda, which was, "No, it can't be. Violates every rule of guerrilla organization."

People are starting to see that now, starting to doubt whether there is such a thing—but that's only because Al Qaeda has been no-showing like the Second Coming. Libya was the latest place it was supposed to show up. Egypt before that. Remember Glenn Beck talking about the Caliphate? For that matter, remember Glenn Beck? God, there's another freak who you'd think couldn't exist. But he did, running on fumes, just like Al Qaeda. Beck is in the Second-Coming business himself, but his Jesus is Osama and he made his money predicting Squidward-with-a-beard

would show up in Encino any day. The Egyptian revolution was just Al Qaeda in disguise as a few million yuppies. Libya was the same Osama-of-a-thousand-faces, this time as a mixed crowd of bored kids and their dads. Wherever it was, Cairo or Benghazi, it was Osama by another name.

It never made sense. That's what I wish I'd said sooner and louder and more often. The whole concept of Al Qaeda is wrong. The name means "The Base" in Arabic, and the idea is that it's a central clearinghouse for dozens of different guerrilla groups, sharing an Islamic ideology but representing different countries and tribes and languages. They get together and share intelligence and personnel and materiel, because they're all good Muslims working for a common cause. It's the old kiddie dream of a vast umbrella group of baddies, S.P.E.C.T.R.E from Man from Uncle, KAOS in Get Smart, the ridiculous villain and his volcano HQ in every lame Bond film.

It's just a terrible idea. The last thing any sane guerrilla group wants to do is to go to an international guerrilla jamboree like the Boy Scouts. Sure, you'll share ideas and prop up each others' morale—and in the meantime, the informers—because every decent-sized guerrilla group must assume it's been penetrated—will be taking careful notes, taking quiet candid pictures, and putting together organizational charts. By the time you go to your home country from the big Jihad Jamboree in Waziristan or Tora Bora, you can be sure that the informers have shared their info with their handlers. And although some intel agencies can be stingy, most of them share info very readily, so every informer has in effect given the breakdown of every local group to every intel agency in the world.

And that's death to a guerrilla, literally death, and not a quick or easy death either. Sharing info is good for intelligence agencies (most of the time; there are exceptions, like sharing the identity of some agents), but it's the worst thing in the world for guerrillas.

That's why guerrilla groups either start out with or switch to cell style organizations. Many times you'll see a guerrilla group starting out imitating military organization, with big units and uniforms and parades. That's asking to be wiped out. Sometimes they are wiped out; but if they survive, their second coming always involves switching to four-person cells, where three out of four members don't know anything except the identity of the other cell members. And even the fourth, the cell leader, only knows the identity of one contact in the larger organization.

By bringing Jihadis from around the world to get Osama's blessing, Al Qaeda was giving them a short-term boost in morale and finances but pretty much guaranteeing they'd be penetrated and destroyed within a few years. And that's what happened: a big splash on 9/11, a few aftershocks in East Africa, Bali, Madrid and London, and then nothing but cops breaking down doors all over the world to the soundtrack of Hellfire missiles from Predator drones vaporizing mud houses in Northern Pakistan.

What made Al Qaeda so scary was that they went all out, in an age where the military norm is to use a tiny little fraction of your actual power. To see that style in action, just look at Libya now: NATO has the largest common air force in the world and could make every Qaddafi-held town in Libya a column of black smoke in a few minutes, but what they actually do is hold a classic EU discussion before taking out a single tank.

Al Qaeda made its mark by using everything they had. Every contact in every country. Every dime of finance. Every pound of plastique. Every willing suicide bomber. They literally doubled up on their attacks, trying for at least two big targets every time: the WTC, Pentagon and White House on 9/11, multiple tube stations on 7/7, two Israeli vacation spots and a US Embassy in Kenya. That sort of splurging really shocked bureaucrats who've spent their lives hedging their bets. And it worked, short-term; it made Al Qaeda look much bigger and more important than it really was. For that matter, the only reason they lasted as long as they did is that Western intel didn't have any decent Arabic-speaking specialists. They weren't enthusiastic about real terrorists; too sweaty, too foreign. Up until 9/11 forced their hand, they wanted to focus on the real threat: "Eco-terrorists," a couple dozen hippies in the nice cool Oregon forests, where there are some pretty comfy hotels a fed can relax in, and the suspects speak English.

If we'd stepped back and looked coldly at the damage after 9/11, it wouldn't have made such an impression. Three thousand dead, from a population of 300 million. Two large buildings destroyed—about like two trees in the concrete forest of Manhattan. If you ask me, what really hurt us on that day was that the plane aimed at the White House didn't make it. That's the way to hurt America: Leave Bush in charge, with a big boost of patriotic gullibility, for six long years. That's how they really got us. If the preachers had focused on that angle I'd have bought it: "God is punishing America by turning away the plane that was heading for Pennsylvania Avenue! He could have removed the curse and chose not to! Woe unto us!"

There's a story on the BBC now asking "Where's Al Qaeda in Libya?" The answer comes down the page where these British agents say how amazed they are that so many young men who were screaming Jihadis last year are now pushing for cellphone revolutions, Cairo style.

"…jihadists…in Libya [are changing] the way they behave and talk in the past two months.

"The way they start to make statements or to understand the conflicts is unbelievable, beyond my imagination. The only explanation I can offer is because they have been affected – whether they like it or not – by the wave of democracy."

Now there are a couple of ways you can read that news. The one the BBC wants you to buy is that democracy is winning, yay yay yay. And in a way that's true, if by "democracy" you mean "riots in the streets of Cairo and open warfare in Libya." Those ways sure worked better than the Brotherhood's slow sneaky method, or Zawahiri's offshoot of the Brotherhood, Al Qaeda.

But look back with a good cold eye at what Al Qaeda was and you see they only recruited well in one demographic: Middle/Upper-Class, Not-That-Bright, Middle Eastern Surplus Young Men. There are a lot of those around, thanks to oil money and high birth rates, and they bounce. That's what they do: they bounce from prostitutes and cognac in Paris to cults in Denmark to one after another school, pretending to be "studying" to become whatever lame childish job takes their fancy and spends their stipends without asking too much. They're "going to become" lawyers or doctors or work for the UN or they've developed a perpetual motion machine or they're going to bring Islam to the spiritually starved masses of Warsaw—every dumb-ass project a bunch of pampered hicks can come up with. Just imagine an Islamic Jethro from Beverly Hillbillies going down the list with dad's money: "Ah'm gonna be a doctor, Grannie! …A preacher! …A Inventor!" And every time, it's slapstick failure. And the older and more annoyed he gets at the way the world won't let him play the hero, Jethro moves down the list to: "Ah'm gonna be a martyr, Granny!"

Why not? People go back to their roots. Here just as much as there. How many hippies mutated back to real-estate agents in California? How many cokeheads are fulltime Christians now? You warp back to your Granny's dreams when you've shot your own bolt.

And there you are: Mohammed Atta and his overpriced friends with one last chance to show how important they are.

That's a short-term demographic, those dudes. They got no discipline. FARC wouldn't have them on a bet. They're good for a big splash, which is all they ever wanted anyway, but when you look back, what you see is a cadre of Afghan vets, funded by western intel all the way, who carried a lot of momentum away from the war against the Soviets, made a lot of connections, and tried playing way above their weight for a little while. It scared the ordinary morons, and that suited the suits like it always does. But along the way they were spending everything they had like New Russians. They spent their best recruits, blew their connections on short-term show-off blasts, and in a few years they had nothing left, and the demographic they drew from—flighty young guys at loose ends in the big cities of the Middle East—had moved on to cellphones and "democracy."

It's a fast, lively story but with no military significance that I can see, except if you consider Al Qaeda the propaganda wing of the Republican Party. In that way, yeah, you could say they did a lot. For a patient, intelligent future guerrilla, the lesson is plain: draw from a more serious demographic, don't go to international jamborees, and spend your assets carefully.

Friday, February 11, 2011

War Nerd: Wanna see what Afghanistan's really like?

I admit it, I didn't have the heart to watch the video after reading Gary's description of it. Viewer discretion is advised.

Concluded the War Nerd: "I'm telling you: once you see how guerrilla warfare works, you have two reactions: you're downright awed by how simple and brilliant it is…and it makes you sick."

'Bama, get 'em the hell outta there!


The War Nerd On Af-Pak: Losing the Long War, One Man at A Time
By Gary Brecher
February 10, 2011 The Exiled

URL: http://exiledonline.com/the-war-nerd-on-af-pak-losing-the-long-war-one-man-at-a-time/

Saturday, January 1, 2011

War Nerd: The Pashtun's glorious Thug Life

Gary is back! -- with more unique insight:

"[The Pashtun have] got nothing coming from the whole Thomas Friedman world, and they'd be fools to think they do. They've got a better business plan: the Stay-Thug Plan. There's a lot of money in being dangerous these days."


The War Nerd: Market Lessons from the Pashtun
By Gary Brecher
December 30, 2010 The eXiled

URL: http://exiledonline.com/the-war-nerd-market-lessons-from-the-pashtun/