[I’ve been talking about World War III since 9/11. The Israelis have taken the official stance since then too that World War III has started. It should be ever more obvious to people that the world is slowly sliding into World War III. These are just the opening skirmishes… the real fighting hasn’t even begun yet! Americans may yet find themselves fighting all across planet earth as the “skirmishes” get more serious – but we’re still quite a way away from fully blown conventional/nuclear conflict – but that’s coming too.

I haven’t had a chance to write more about how guerilla wars can be won, but I will. People may think I’m crazy… but what I’m saying is based on sound analysis. The answer is not pretty though.

If you want to get hold of the most important single book to ever be written about VIETNAM, then buy “The War of Numbers”, by Sam Adams – a CIA agent who died under very mysterious circumstances while writing this book. He had written enough however, for the book to eventually be published in 1994 – several years after his death! My copy just arrived.

The book mentions how the US Military, especially the CIA lied about the enemy strength during Vietnam. But what is interesting for me, was how Adams’ definition of a terrorist is pretty much the same as mine. He argued that the military ignored the “support troops” of the Vietcong – which almost doubled the actual number of enemy the USA was facing. The US Army was often not hitting the real enemy it should have been hitting.

I spot a few daily news items about Baghdad on TV news here, and I shake my head. I am stunned at how lawless Baghdad, the capital of Iraq is. That the USA can’t even control such a small town… shocks me!! It shocks me. Controlling a single city isn’t a big mission… especially not if it is the main city…

Let me tell you people, that the South African army had to control several townships during the 1980’s, which had far bigger populations than Baghdad… and they kept things pretty quiet by comparison. Johannesburg and its surrounds has over 10 million people! That would be about 1/2 the population of Iraq! The South African military kept control of a country far larger than Iraq, with more then double the population while also fighting pitched battles in Angola and fighting terrorists coming in across the long Namibian border! Angola, by the way, is 1/2 the size of EUROPE! We probably had fiercer fighting here in Southern Africa in the 1980’s than you Americans now have in Iraq. Yet I think the South African army had a better grip on the situation than the US Army now has.

I am firmly convinced that terrorist wars can be won. I’ve lived through them, and I’ve heard all the theories. Beating terrorists is not that difficult once you approach it the right way. It just requires a firm resolve. But one thing is apparent to me, that the senior leadership of the USA haven’t got the faintest flipping clue how to beat terrorists! Oh they’re keeping them at bay – for now. All the analyses of how to win a terrorist war, born from the lessons and strategies of the British in Malaya, are now floundering. I have said that I don’t think that is the real way to win. We used it here in Africa, and it was used in Vietnam too, and it is a waste of time. But there are easier ways of winning.

Maybe American leaders will only listen to reason when problems are much worse in the years to come. And I have no doubt in my mind that things WILL GET WORSE. World War III is here… enjoy the fun. Jan]

It’s WWIII, and U.S. is out of ideas

Last week’s headlines prove the point: North Korea fires missiles, Iran talks of nukes again, Iraq carnage continues, Israel invades Gaza, England observes one-year anniversary of subway bombing. And, oh, yes, the feds stop a plot to blow up tunnels under the Hudson River.
World War III has begun.

It’s not perfectly clear when it started. Perhaps it was after the Berlin Wall fell and the Cold War ended. Perhaps it was the first bombing of the World Trade Center, in 1993.

What is clear is that this war has a long fuse and, while we are not in the full-scale combat phase that marked World Wars I and II, we seem to be heading there. The expanding hostilities mean it’s time to give this conflict a name, one that focuses the mind and clarifies the big picture.

The war on terror, or the war of terror, has tentacles that reach much of the globe. It is a world war.

While it is often a war of loose or no affiliation, and sometimes just amateur copycats, the similar goals of destruction add up to a threat against modern society. Even the hapless wanna-bes busted in Miami ordered guns and military equipment from a man they thought was from Al Qaeda. Islamic fascists are the driving force, but anti-American hatred is a global membership card for any and all who have a grievance and a gun.

The feeling that the wheels are coming off the world has only one recent comparison, the time when America’s head-butt with communism sprouted hot spots from Cuba to Vietnam. Yet ultimately the policy of mutual assured destruction worked because American and Soviet leaders didn’t want their countries hit by nuclear bombs.

Such rational thinking is quaint next to the ravings of North Korean nut Kim Jong Il and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. They both seem to be dying to die – and set the world on fire.

And don’t forget Osama Bin Laden’s declaration that it is the duty of every Muslim to acquire a “Muslim bomb.” Is there any doubt he would use it if he had it?

I sound pessimistic because I am. Even worse than the problems is the fact that our political system is failing us. Democratic Party leaders want to pretend we can declare peace and everything will be fine, while President Bush is out of ideas. Witness Bush now counseling patience and diplomacy on North Korea. This from a man who scorned both for five years.

But what choice does he have now that the pillars of his post-9/11 foreign policy are crumbling? As Harvard Prof. Joseph Nye argues in Foreign Affairs magazine, Bush’s strategy of “reducing Washington’s reliance on permanent alliances and international institutions, expanding the traditional right of preemption into a new doctrine of preventive war and advocating coercive democratization as a solution to Middle Eastern terrorism” amounted to a bid for a “legacy of transformation.”

The first two ideas have been repealed. The third brought Hamas into power and has so far failed to take root in Iraq or anywhere else.

I believed Iraq was the key, that if we prevailed there, momentum would shift in our favor. Now I’m not sure. We still must prevail there, but Iraq could mean nothing if Iran or Bin Laden get the bomb or North Korea uses one.

Meanwhile, I’m definitely not using any tunnels.

Source: New York Daily News
URL: http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/433715…/p>