Tag Archives: ISIL

Paris attack ringleader gets it … see ya

November 19, 2015 kanelis2012

There won’t be a trial for the Belgian jihadist who organized the Paris terror attacks.

Awww …

The remains of Abdelhamid Abaaoud have been identified by French authorities after the daring commando raid in the town of St. Denis. The 27-year-old terrorist was among several murderers killed by French police, demonstrating that French President Francois Hollande meant what he said when he declared his intention to launch a “pitiless” response to the carnage that erupted in Paris late this past week.

Let the bad-guy body count mount.

Just as American commandos took out Osama bin Laden in May 2011 and other terrorist leaders have been eradicated systematically during the course of this international war, let’s not high-five each other too vigorously over this latest battlefield victory.

Abaaoud will be replaced by someone else. The Islamic State is full of reprehensible individuals willing to die for whatever perverted cause they seek to further.

It’s becoming clearer by the day that the Islamic State act in Paris has brought new energy to this world war — and that’s what we should call it. France is bringing its own significant military capability to bear as it has stepped up its air strike campaign against ISIL targets in Syria. Russia, too, has pledged to increase its aerial bombardment efforts against ISIL as payback for the bombing of the Russian jetliner recently, which killed all 224 people on board.

The U.S. effort? It, too, must continue … and I have heard President Barack Obama give every assurance that we’re going to keep stepping up our own efforts to eliminate terrorists wherever and whenever we find them.

But now at least we can say “good bye” to one more evil ringleader.

It’s time now to find the rest of them.

International news, religious news

Muslims are Target No. 1

November 16, 2015 kanelis2012

A little perspective might be in order as the world ponders how it should respond to the Islamic State’s most recent act of terror.

It is that the Islamic State has killed more Muslims than anyone else.

The Muslim death count far outnumbers those of Christians and Jews. Thus, it falls on Muslims to express their fear and hatred of the Islamic State … which is what we’re hearing in the wake of the Paris attacks.

It was barely a week before the Paris attacks that ISIL terrorists struck in Beirut, Lebanon; 43 people, mostly — if not entirely — Muslims, died in that carnage. Yet the world hardly took notice, at least compared to the way it has responded to the Paris massacre.

Muslims are condemning the attacks. Yet for reasons that no one can yet explain to my satisfaction, the media are giving those condemnations little attention. It’s being left, then, to many political observers — and that include those sitting way up yonder in the peanut gallery — to wonder aloud, “Why don’t Muslims speak out?”

Well, they are speaking out. They hate ISIL as much as, say, Christians and Jews do. And with good reason. ISIL is killing many more Muslims than any other religious group.

So, before some of us declare war on Islam and those who follow the Islamic faith, let’s lock arms with those who have the most to fear from the terror cabal … the Islamic State.

That would be the international Muslim community that wants to see the Islamic State eradicated as much as the rest of us.

International news, national news, political news, State news

Gov. Abbott slams door on Syrian refugees

November 16, 2015 kanelis2012

Honestly, I have a measure of sympathy for what Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has declared with regard to refugees from Syria.

He has informed President Obama that Texas won’t accept any refugees from the nation they are fleeing. Why? One individual who entered France as a “refugee” reportedly was part of the attack force that terrorized Paris this past week, killing 129 people and injuring hundreds more.

Abbott doesn’t want to take any chances by allowing Syrians into this state. He joins the governors of Alabama and Michigan in banning Syrian refugees.

On the other hand, I believe it is fair to ask: Is this what the United States of America stands for?

An Austin immigration lawyer told the Texas Tribune that Abbott’s order is legal, but questions whether it is right.

“Given the tragic attacks in Paris and the threats we have already seen, Texas cannot participate in any program that will result in Syrian refugees — any one of whom could be connected to terrorism — being resettled in Texas,” Abbott wrote to President Obama.

I get that. But aren’t there intense security measures a state such as Texas can take screen all applicants coming here from Syria to ensure that they do not have any ties to the Islamic State, al-Qaeda, Hezbollah … or any sinister terrorist organization?

Here’s more from the Tribune: “House Speaker Joe Straus on Monday took a more nuanced position, saying he agreed with Abbott’s ‘concern’ and that refugees needed “thorough background reviews” in order to be placed in Texas. ‘I share Gov. Abbott’s concern that relocating refugees to Texas without thorough background reviews compromises our security,’ Straus said in an emailed statement. ‘Our highest priority as a state has been and should continue to be the safety of all Texans.’”

Virtually all the refugees coming here are fleeing terror, murder, warfare, mayhem, bloodshed. You name it, they’re seeking to escape that misery. What is to become of them? Do we send them to other states? Do we — as Donald Trump suggests — send them back to the chaos they are fleeing?

We proclaim ourselves to live in the Land of Opportunity. We profess our nation to be a bastion for the dispossessed.

Of course no one wants to create a safe haven for terrorist monsters. What, though, does the world do with those who deserve protection from those who would kill them?

International news, military news, national news, political news

Here’s a novel idea: Ask Congress to declare war

November 15, 2015 kanelis2012

Former Florida governor — and Republican presidential candidate — Jeb Bush wants the United States to declare war on the Islamic State.

I am going to make a leap here and presume for a moment that he means the real thing. You know, actually make a formal declaration of war. It’s kind of an old-fashioned idea that hasn’t been carried out since, oh, Dec. 8, 1941. President Roosevelt stood before a joint session of Congress and asked lawmakers to make that declaration … which is how the U.S. Constitution prescribes it.

Well, why not do it the old-fashioned way?

I am increasingly of the opinion that war is what we’ve got on our hands. The Islamic State seems to want it. They committed an act of war Friday in France, bombing and shooting its way further into infamy, killing more than 100 innocent victims.

France has called it a wartime act. French President Francois Hollande has vowed zero mercy in seeking revenge for the killings. The Islamic State already has demonstrated unfathomable barbarism with its video-recorded beheadings of foreign captives, including Americans.

ISIL has killed tens of thousands of Muslims on its reign of terror — supposedly in the name of Islam. It is a murderous cult that must be wiped out.

This war, though, is being fought on terms with which the world is not yet familiar. There used to be a time when we defined war simply as nations taking up arms against each other. This war is vastly different.

It is an ideological war being fought with guns, knives and bombs.

Is it possible then to declare war the way this country used to declare war? I think it can be done.

The question now is this: Does the president have the will to ask for a declaration and does Congress have the courage to make that declaration?

Your thoughts? Is a war declaration possible?

International news, military news

Another ISIL leader bites the dust; more to follow

August 22, 2015 kanelis2012

A U.S. drone strike is believed to have killed the No. 2 goon in the Islamic State terror command.

His name was Haji Mutazz and he died on Aug. 18 when a drone launched a missile at his location.

Boom! He’s dead.

Let’s be clear about one terrible truth. It is that another goon likely will emerge to take his place. Does that mean we stop sending these missiles into places where the ISIL monsters are believed to be hiding? Not for a second.

Mutazz reportedly was riding in a car near Mosul when the drone took him out.

As one who strongly supports the use of these drones, I am glad to know they are capable of inflicting serious pain on this network of terrorist monsters.

Will there ever be an end to this ? My guess: Probably not, at least in the immediate term.

That’s all right. The more effective we are at launching these missiles either from unmanned platforms such as drone or by manned fighter jets, the better off the world is without these individuals slithering among us.

political news

TV shows provide Trump all he needs to know about ISIL

August 18, 2015 kanelis2012

I almost forgot this one.

Here goes …

“Meet the Press” moderator Chuck Todd asked Donald Trump this past weekend how he planned to fight the Islamic State. He said he’d wipe out the bad guys. Would he deploy American troops? He said “yes,” more or less.

Then came the question: Who gives you military advice?

Trump’s answer: He watches the news talk shows and that’s where he gets the information and expertise he needs to do battle with ISIL.

Interesting, yes?

I think so. Here’s why.

Because the military experts who show up on these news talk shows cannot possibly tell the TV audience all the details involved in launching military campaigns. They might or might not have access to privileged information. You know, the classified stuff that only they can know and must be kept out of the public domain.

But that doesn’t matter to Trump.

He watches TV news talk shows.

They tell him all he needs to know.

It’s reassuring, isn’t it?

International news, political news

ISIL’s rise: It’s Obama’s fault?

August 12, 2015 kanelis2012 2 Comments

Jeb Bush is trying a remarkable misdirection play as he seeks the Republican Party’s presidential nomination in 2016.

The former Florida governor sought in a speech at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library to blame former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and President Barack Obama on the rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and, I presume, in Syria as well.

Well now. Let’s look at the record for a moment.

The Iraq War began in March 2003 when President George W. Bush launched the invasion of that country, which at the time was governed by a Sunni Muslim tyrant, the late Saddam Hussein. (Hang with me for a moment; the Sunni reference is critical.)

Americans were told by those high up in the Bush chain of command that we’d defeat the Iraqis easily and we’d be welcomed as “liberators.”

Didn’t turn out that way.

Yes, we defeated the so-called “elite” Iraqi forces. We drove Saddam from power. We caught him later in that spider hole, pulled him, jailed him, put him on trial, convicted him and then hanged him.

All of this was done on Jeb’s brother’s presidential watch.

Then came the new government. Iraqis elected a Shiite leader, who formed a Shiite government.

Oh yes. The Sunnis hate the Shiites and vice versa. The Islamic State — aka ISIL — is a Sunni cult.

Thus, ISIL was born — on President Bush’s watch.

Now, though, the next Bush who wants to be president, says it’s Obama’s fault. It’s Clinton’s fault.

Why? We didn’t maintain a sufficient troop garrison in Iraq to keep ISIL in check. I ought to mention that the Bush administration set the deadline for full withdrawal from Iraq.

Jeb Bush now says he would send troops back into Iraq, in effect restarting a war that we shouldn’t have fought in the first place. Weapons of mass destruction? Hideous chemical weapons? The threat of a “mushroom cloud”? It was bogus.

I’m not yet ready to declare that the pretext for war was concocted deliberately by the Bush administration high command.

Let’s just say for now that “faulty intelligence” isn’t much of an excuse for sending thousands of American service personnel to their death in a war designed to overthrow a sovereign leader who we had kept in check through a series of tough economic sanctions.

Jeb Bush is treading on some squishy ground whenever he mentions the words “Iraq War.”

Uncategorized

Jihad John on the run … where does this man hide?

July 28, 2015 kanelis2012

Mohammad Emwazi — aka Jihadi John — is on the run.

But this guy is no ordinary fugitive. He’s the individual believed to be responsible for the beheadings of Islamic State captives. He reportedly has fallen out of favor with the monstrous terrorist organization.

Oh, my. Where does this individual go now?

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/jihadi-john-on-the-run-from-isis/ar-AAdvEy0?ocid=ansibt11

Emwazi has become arguably the world’s most hated man. He reportedly beheaded aid workers and journalists captured by ISIL. He’s a United Kingdom resident who was born in Kuwait but educated at the University of Westminster.

He’s now at the top of the list of the men being hunted by U.S. and other intelligence agencies for his dastardly deeds.

A former friend said this about Emwazi: “The jihadist had not been ‘a good Muslim’ and never wore the Islamic dress he has been seen wearing in the beheading videos. ‘He smoked drugs, drank and was violent towards other boys,’ said the friend, who was not named in the report. ‘The fact he portrays himself as a strict Muslim is laughable and shameful.’”

Actually, Emwazi and his former ISIL colleagues aren’t “strict Muslims.” They are Muslim perverts.

Whatever. Some analysts now believe Emwazi has become a target of ISIL and well could end up meeting the same kind of fate he delivered to so many of his victims.

Well, as the saying goes: Karma can be a bitch.

International news, military news

Welcome to the fight, Turkey … finally!

July 25, 2015 kanelis2012

We hear the term “game changer” from time to time.

It refer to events that might be decisive in determining the result of, say, a struggle.

I heard the term today in a National Public Radio interview about Turkey’s decision to (a) allow U.S. aircraft to fly into Syria and Iraq from Turkish air bases and (b) actually strike the Islamic State forces with its own combat aircraft.

Welcome to the fight, Turkey.

The Turks could become the most important ally the United States in this fight against the Islamic State.

It belongs to NATO. It is a military powerhouse with a sophisticated air and ground military force.

And as of a few days ago, it now has suffered grievously at the hands of ISIL forces. A suicide bomber detonated an explosive in a Turkish portion of Kurdistan, killing more than 30 victims. The Turks, therefore, now have skin in this game.

Turkey had been a reluctant ally up to this point, denying U.S. requests to use its bases to launch attacks against ISIL installations in nearby Syria and Iraq. The Turks’ agreeing to allow access to these bases gives our air power a distinct new advantage as it continues its bombing barrage against ISIL.

What’s more, the Turks have engaged ISIL themselves, sending jets on bombing sorties against ISIL strongholds.

OK, does this mean the end of ISIL is in sight, that the fight is nearly over?

No. It does mean, however, that we now have an important ally on our side willing — for the first time — to engage the enemy face to face.

Welcome aboard, Turkey. Let’s hope this development, indeed, is a game changer.

military news

Troop levels to drop; U.S. is still No. 1

July 11, 2015 kanelis2012

U.S. House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mac Thornberry is worried about reductions in the number of men and women serving in the U.S. Army.

The Pentagon plans to cut the troop strength to 450,000 by September 2017. Thornberry suggested recently that the reduction is part of an on-going strategy to slash defense spending that’s been enacted since the beginning of Barack Obama’s presidency.

He’s concerned about it. So, too, are some in the media, such as the Amarillo Globe-News, which opined on Friday that the troop reduction “is bad news.” It cited “ongoing issues related to Russia and Iran, to name but a couple.”

Then the paper decided to take a cheap shot by noting that “the federal government only spends more than $70 billion a year on food stamps.”

I think a broader question ought to be this: Are we still the world’s No. 1 military power? Yes … by a country mile.

Let us also ponder: Does a reduction in the troop levels make us less able to defend ourselves against terrorists? Given tremendous advances in technology, the use of drones (which this week killed another leading Islamic State officer), our immense intelligence capability and the tremendous skill that our troops employ in the field, we absolutely are able to defend ourselves.

Thornberry wrote: “I have consistently warned about the size and pace of reductions in both end strength and defense spending and the negative impact on our country’s national security.”

Does the presence of more men and women in uniform deter terrorists from striking at us? Do the Islamic State and al-Qaeda leaders really consider the United States defense establishment — taken in its entirety — to be less capable of defending the world’s strongest nation than it was, say, when the 9/11 attacks occurred more than a dozen years ago?

The United States remains by far the pre-eminent military power on the planet.

If we are going to seek some sort of fiscal responsibility, which Thornberry and others in Congress keep insisting we should, then we must look at all aspects of the federal budget.

The day we cannot strike hard at those who seek to do us harm is the day I’ll join the doomsday chorus that includes Chairman Thornberry. We aren’t at that point. Nor do I expect us to get there.

High Plains Blogger