Special Disbursement Operations - How special forces are at work to surrender America’s future to the world. (Right Truth Exclusive)

Special Disbursement Operations

How special forces are at work to surrender America’s future to the world.

By R.J. Godlewski

John Wayne must be rolling in his grave. In a world where our enemies are far more brutal and clandestine than what was displayed within The Green Berets and global appeasers much more pronounced than the ‘George Beckworths’ of his era, our future is rapidly being subjugated to academic study and theorems of mass destruction. When we find ourselves, for example, in a situation where our own Special Operations Forces (SOF) are expanding to record levels, my chosen alma mater – if such a term can applied before the final result is bestowed – American Military University, has phased out its Special Operations/Low-Intensity Conflict concentration of its intelligence studies program. In other words, understanding international law and prisoner treatment now seems more palatable than training people about paramilitary operations, guerrilla warfare, and the like. Of what do we gain by sacrificing our John Waynes for George Clooneys or Alec Baldwins?

Anyone who’s paid a fair amount of attention to the greater world today – and you’re a very rare breed indeed! – cannot dismiss the subjugation of American interests for the sake of ‘peace’ and ‘tranquility’ within the world. In other words, many people seem to believe that if the Islamic terrorists were given free reign to do as they please then somehow they would eventually “see the light” and become reputable members of society. Hogwash; so is the notion that by taming our academic programs we become more respectable in the long run. This has become America’s Achilles’ heel – diluting our educational system to the point where decades’ of classroom knowledge amounts to very little practical benefit. Consider that some of my physician friends in Eastern Europe were bona fide medical doctors by twenty-two years of age. How? Because there one enters directly into medical school whereas American students must first endure four years of indoctrination – sorry, I meant undergraduate – training before they are permitted to enter their chosen field. European schools simply treat their universities more as apprenticeships than as character conditioning programs. Is there any wonder then why we consistently fall behind in nearly every arena?

This fascination with making ‘better citizens’ instead of better doctors, lawyers or, yes, warriors begins well back in our public primary school systems. My high school courses regarding the Civil War and World War II were instrumental in my understanding of the world and subsequently my career; the same, however cannot be said of the Mythology class that I was required to take. I might act like Thor sometimes, but the class was largely a waste. So is our insistence upon resolving everything through negotiation and debate.

As a culture, we need to turn off Star Trek, set down the Kool-Aid®, and progress towards a more realistic future – one based upon personal responsibility and effort and not communistic utopia. The modern “Age of Terrorism” grew from its equally modern “Age of Revolution” and herein we have been our own worst enemies. Ignoring all ongoing conflicts, we have failed in every single war since 1945 despite the fact that we’ve had sixty years in which to adjust our capabilities. I attribute this blame squarely upon academia which holds its share of responsibility with the media for educating the public-at-large.

Our last significant war – Vietnam – had failed largely because of three things:

1. The direct control of communications research by the U.S. Government had ended by 1960;

2. Our reliance upon a conscripted army could no longer dodge a resentful university system now freed to indoctrinate at will; and

3. We possessed a general population unaccustomed to dealing with global events scheduled via the evening news.

This combination of a freed media orchestrated by resentful academics, a military foreign to conducting operations under less than patriotic support, and a populace forced to make choices “on the fly” sabotaged our perfect record in war. We are no better today.

To adjust our operations to match the expectations of asymmetrical warfare requires the development and modernization of several key attributes:

• We must utilize ‘disciplined fear’ to engage indigenous populations that may have been reared exclusively on being taught what to believe and how to think. Irrespective of the fact that most Third World dictatorships actually exercise less control over their constituents than does the government of the United States over its own citizenry, we must acknowledge that “grab ‘em by the balls and yank” works sometimes better than simply appealing to their “hearts and minds.”

• Our Intelligence Community must shy away from its ageless reliance upon “documented facts” and fully engage the “tropical pastel” world of indigenous beliefs. Our analysts must not fear retribution for making informed analyzes based exclusively upon the tidbits of data that often mark Third World intelligence. Intuition is far more valuable than official documentation because it is often more timely and less “fabricated” then the types of data requested by policy-makers. We must develop and maintain the ability to sniff through conflicting rumors, troubling broadcasts, and downright lies to achieve what’s required by our most adaptive forces. Politicians and legislators with a flair for leaking things to the media or each other can wait until the broader threat is eliminated.

• Academic study must be considered a fundamental part of our overall intelligence process; therefore all institutions and researchers who benefit from taxpayer-funding must be given strong guidelines as to what is and is not permissible under the national security umbrella. Saying that our government is “screwy” is one thing; telling people where our forces are operating, what procedures they are using, and attributing ‘citizen rights’ to apprehended terrorists has no basis in academia. We elect our leaders and not our schools or newspapers to decide what happens. If they fail us they go – professors and journalists are held accountable only to their own expectations of duty.

Another significant problem when dealing with Third World environments is that they, as in the case of the Muslim lands, are quite unaccustomed to our version of democracy. They wholeheartedly believe in the redistribution of wealth for all; that the haves must not only share with the have-nots but with the ‘think they haves’ as well. This leads to apathy as those who lack ambition can merely blame those with more initiative.

This is why the vast majority of Muslims supported Saddam Hussein during his invasion of Kuwait – he ‘promised’ to spread the wealth “horded” by the ruling Kuwaitis. It also explains why the Arabs are steadfast in their hatred of Israel – they see a powerful, rich neighbor and want a piece of the action. To appease these Muslims, American (and Western) diplomats had decided to distribute the wealth of Iraq, not amongst Iraqi businessmen who might be able to better invest within their local economy, but amongst the total population thereby breeding another generation who receives ‘something’ for little or no effort.

We treat our military much the same way – as, historically, we’ve always done; we shed our blood so that others may live in peace and harmony. There is nothing inherently wrong in this as it reflects who we are as a people. Unfortunately, however, we do not engage liberated people with the same level of responsibility as we had done in the past. No marching citizens through concentration camps to learn firsthand what their leaders had done, for example. Our precision weaponry has given us an excuse to shield these people from responsibility for their own governments and our liberation policies have shielded them from responsibility for their own future. Can you think of a better recipe for disaster?

Military forces cannot engage exclusively within post-event humanitarian operations. We simply do not have enough resolve or support to continually show our “good face.” This is best left to diplomatic forces and, because of this, to academia as well. Our combat forces must be geared towards winning the war first; winning “hearts and minds” will come when we have enough time to play ‘patty cake’ with people who otherwise have no ambition of their own. To foster this, we must return to an era when academia, defense, and national leadership shared the same goals:

1. Our universities and colleges must begin to turn out leaders and innovators worthy of our nation. As in war, we must remain the undisputed leader. To turn out anything other than the most dynamic innovators or the most adaptable leaders – in any field – is detrimental to our national survival and security. Any and all agenda-based platforms must be extinguished promptly; any institution that does not acknowledge the preeminent role our military plays in life should not benefit from the collective treasure;

2. Because our military has to endure two constantly evolving missions – to protect against large-scale national adversaries and highly adaptive non-state threats – it must likewise evolve into two distinct units. Let’s dispense with the traditional Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines and create a singular force to provide impenetrable, spherical protection around U.S. territories. Secondly, let’s fashion a Special Operations community that works with a singular capability and not multiple units with their varying layers of “standards.” Special Ops forces need to be constructed around key personalities best suited to particular regions and/or missions and not broad, archaic physical standards.

3. National leadership must succumb to the will of the American people. Energy, border control, and effective immigration enforcement are not matters for debate. We need to become self-reliant in energy, possess impenetrable borders, and apprehend quickly those who violate our sovereignty if we are to protect ourselves against outside influence.

Our future remains brightest when we corral our educational institutions for then we are able to adequately elect proper and patriotic leaders. Once we have local, state, and national leaders that answer to our needs first and the world’s second, then we can have a powerful and dominant military. Once we have a dominant and powerful military, then we can have the peace and security that all but our worst enemies desire. A little knowledge thus goes a long way…

* * * *

This article is posted at Real Clear Politics, your votes are appreciated.

Trackposted to third world county, nuke gingrich, McCain Blogs, Woman Honor Thyself, The World According to Carl, Pirate's Cove, , The Pink Flamingo, Cao's Blog, Big Dog's Weblog, Leaning Straight Up, Wolf Pangloss, and Democrat=Socialist, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Comments

[Stormwarning]

Ron, my original premise was wrong, I am told by my "friends" that AMU is a good place to get a degree. Congrats.

However, "we" disagree with your premise that covert operations and intelligence is being de-emphasized in the general scheme. I have that on VERY good authority.

[Debbie]

A lot of Saudi money goes into Universities. Also Saudi money is not being invested in US hospitals. The thought behind these investments is ... the eventual spreading of sharia law.

I don't have the exact quote in front of me, but the Muslim thinking is to invest in institutions, gradually insisting on more Muslim/sharia requirements (footbaths, headscarves for nurses, etc). They don't believe they can actually get sharia into the US openly, so they are working covertly.

[Stormwarning]

Whoa! Mystically speaking, what universities are controlled by the Muslims?

I seriously doubt that the university referenced by the author is controlled by the Muslims...for a number of reasons.

[Mystical Time Traveler]

The really scary part is that the Universities are controlled by the Muslim. They are bought and paid for by them.

[Stormwarning]

Yes sir, that is the way it is.

[frasypoo]

Hi Debbie
Its a scary thought that people think that terrorists will be good if you treat them right !Seriously?