-Caveat Lector- ------- Forwarded message follows ------- Organization: St. Crispin's Press From: "Michael E. Fanning" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date sent: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 22:21:30 -0700 "Until our successful slaughter of Serbs -- and others -- by interdicting them with a thousand cruise missiles and 40,000 tons of aerial high explosives, the use of air power to compel subjugation of an enemy had a sordid history of miserable failure. One only has to look back to our aerial assault of North Vietnam during the Johnson & Nixon administrations, where we dropped more military ordnance than previously used in the history of aerial warfare. The results are well known: ignominious and utter defeat of the world's greatest power, the United States of America. What the military learned was that air strikes, uncoupled from a general war-making strategy, do no convince an adversary of our firm resolve, but reflect a fatal weakness of our overall policy. In fact, military leaders warned President Clinton prior to the Kosovo campaign that such action would create more problems than it solved. They urged the president to use continued diplomacy; however, with such foreign policy lightweights as Madeleine Albright and Richard Holbrooke leading the diplomatic effort, such a course was doomed from the start. One high-level Pentagon source said, "This campaign is a White House operation, not a military action. We are following the orders of our commander-in-chief; that doesn't mean we agree with him." The disagreement between the military and the White House grew so heated just prior to the beginning of the air strikes in late March 1999 that Secretary of Defense William Cohen warned the Joint Chiefs to "keep your troops in line on this one." So, we were caught in another effort to bomb a sovereign nation back to the stone age through the use of air power alone, this one covered by the transparent fig leaf of a combined NATO effort -- with no overall plan or strategy, except to convince the American people that our valiant efforts at peacekeeping were noble and moral, to quote our draft-dodging commander in chief, Bill Clinton. "The tension here is incredible," one military source told reporter Doug Thompson of the Capitol Hill Blue web site. "We have high-level officers talking privately of defying orders, but no one is willing to risk their career to stand up to the president of the United States." In a revealing article carried in Chronicles magazine (July 1998), William J. Corliss, an associate of Boston University Center for Defense Journalism, stressed that the onslaught of political correctness has resulted in the lowest military morale in history. "Outside of religious orders, there is no institution that demands so much in the way of obedience and conformity as the military. Precisely because the imperatives of political correctness are so frequently contrary to human nature, the effects on a comparatively closed society like the military are devastating." Corliss fingers the major problem within the rank and file of our fighting forces -- that is, the feminization of our fighting forces and the social experimentation which flies in the face of good order, morale and discipline. It has "finally matured into a criminal neglect of the concrete exigencies of war-fighting." Who is to blame? Corliss points out that: ".....there exists a thin crust of officers at the very top who are there because they have shown themselves willing to carry out the directives of the civilian culture warriors. Serving below them is a vast sea of disgust, complemented by highly trained professionals who have retired in droves citing morale, a changed culture, and lowered standards of every sort." In an interview with former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Thomas H. Moorer, that "thin crust" is revealed by the name regrettably, they have gone over to the enemy. In the New American magazine (2 August 1999), Publisher John F. McManus points out that: " The CFR Annual Report lists the organization's members. Currently appearing on the list are the names of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Henry Hugh Shelton; the Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Jay Johnson; the Commandant of the Marine Corps, General Charles Krulak; the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, General Michael Ryan; the NATO Commander, General Wesley Clark, and other high-ranking military officers." Forget the hype and rhetoric of ethnic cleansing and atrocities being peddled by a beseiged White House. The fact is that both sides of this latest Balkan set-to have been doing this to each other for at least 500 years. If the think-tank strategists and academic gurus, whose flawed reasoning has sucked us once more into a bottomless quagmire, believe that we can stop those ethnic upsurges in Yugoslavia -- or anywhere else in the troubled world -- by bombing alone, they are badly and criminally mistaken. The only way we can win -- if indeed that is out intent -- is to send in a massive force of ground troops with fixed bayonets to take and hold the high ground of the rugged terrain of Yugoslavia in its entirety. As Clauswitz saw clearly, the only purpose of invading an enemy's territory is to destroy his ability tow age war primarily by rendering its armed forces inoperable. This noble endeavor would pit our young men (and women) -- untried, unseasoned -- against combat veterans who would be defending their homeland. This is the territorial imperative; its end result is the slaughter en masse of the invading force, who may or may not emerge victorious. Recall the sieges of Leningrad and Stalingrad during World War II. Now, our esteemed president and commander-in-chief wants to warm the tender bodies of our kids to feed the insatiable appetite of the god of war. he is insanely creeping us up on the idea of accepting the use of American forces under United Nations command so we can enter the new millennium under a despotic global government. Weep, mothers. Charley Reese, who writes incisively, stressed (20 April 1999) that: "In the fog of war propaganda, let us remember the facts. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization is in the wrong. NATO is in violation of the United Nations charter, which forbids military aggression against a sovereign state at peace with its neighbors. Yugoslavia was at peace with its neighbors. NATO is in violation of its own charter because it was supposed to be a defensive alliance only. No attack was launched against any NATO country. The United States, which has orchestrated this war against Yugoslavia, has no legitimate, vital, strategic or even marginal interests in the Balkans." Reese pointedly indicates that in an age of lies, it is always better to look at actions rather than words: "By expanding the alliance and immediately launching an offensive war against a sovereign nation, NATO has shown that its purpose is to be a weapon to enforce US domination of Eastern Europe." It is close to high noon. The real enemy is not only inside the gates, but hs taken over the presidency and its subservient minions on Capitol Hill." End of quotation from: "Barbarians Inside the Gates -- The Black Book of Bolshevism" by Colonel Donn de Grand Pre ISBN 0-945001-79-7 & available for sale from: P. O. Box 35046 Fayetteville, NC 28303 Comment: It is now late August 2001, thus far there has been no known/effective military mutiny against the interlopers within civilian government. But has the sentiment towards their political bosses softened and grown more understanding? Has the World become less dangerous, thus justifying a general attitude of cooperating? I think not, nor does any reader of this message. So then, what did happen strategically to the United States Armed Forces as a result of Kosovo & what are the prospects of war nowadays, say in Israel, Taiwan, Columbia to mention but a few? Contemporaneous with the Kosovo bombing missions an article appeared in the CFR publication Foreign Affairs stating in rather bold terms that it was true the operation then currently underway was in violation of Nato and UN charters. But the article stressed the need for the sake of greater UN ability to globaly govern that it was necessary for it to stand by and do nothing while one or more of its member countries broke the charter, so that international law could have a precedent upon which to be rewritten. Before the bombs ever dropped, it was a done deal that an air war only would accomplish the political objective between conspiring nations, at the mere incidental cost of destroying a significant amount of the infrastructure of a sovereign country and eventually so destabilizing Serbia's Milosovic that he would eventually topple from his own lack of popularity; & aided no doubt with a series of demonstrations in public squares throughout the country -- well seasoned with CIA and KGB operatives leading the choir in all the appropriate cheers. Next the campaign established the imposition of a UN managed NATO operated partition of areas and acquiring direct control from the Black Sea of the Danube River waterway to the Adriatic. Ground personnel were intentionally held back so they precisely wouldn't be slaughtered in a conventional prosecution of hostilities -- so that -- manpower on the ground could in one more UN theater of never-ending operations be able to continue to deploy American forces indefinitely -- thus accomplishing a bonus objective of dispersing even more American military personnel away from home soil. Eventually U. S. military personnel, who now approximately total 66% , deployed outside the United States proper, will come back to haunt those troops when a time comes when they wish they could be home to protect their Mother land, their country, their families -- rather they will know the ugly reality that foreign troops will be given the task to CONTROL the American soil -- and for what purposes good? None! Absolutely none. Respectfully Submitted, Michael E. Fanning LAPD Sergeant, retired ------- End of forwarded message ------- -- Best wishes I do believe that when there is only a choice between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence. - Gandhi <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
