Pivoting From Afghanistan To A Defence Of The West

The 1842 Kabul Retreat remains as one Britain’s worst military disasters. At the time Britain was well into her “imperial century” and was unchallenged at sea, much like her successor the United States is today.

But that massacre at the hands of the Afghans was the first stark lesson for Western armies on the perils of meddling in a country whose people are fiercely independent and hostile to outside interference when they’re not busy fighting amounts themselves.

It should also have been a lesson the US learned after the CIA covertly supported the Mujahideen in their successful war against the Soviet Union, but apparently not.

Admittedly, the US’s intervention can hardly be compared in terms of negative consequences to those two conflicts, but after nearly sixteen years of continuing casualties it’s time the decision is made to withdraw all troops and leave the Afghans to their own incomprehensible devices – it appears that they no longer want to endure Western freedom.

Thus unfortunately it’s no surprise to see reports of coalition troops – in the latest case US – continuing to be treacherously killed despite an end to major combat operations in 2014. As reported by AP:

An Afghan soldier opened fire on American soldiers on Saturday, injuring at least seven, the U.S. military said. It was the second such insider attack by an Afghan soldier in the past week.

Abdul Qahar Araam, spokesman for the 209th Army corps, confirmed that an insider attack took place at a camp in Mazar-e Sharif. Araam said the soldiers returned fire and killed the attacker.

Gen. Dawlat Waziri, spokesman for the Afghan Defense Ministry, also confirmed the attack.

The Resolute Support mission announced on its Twitter feed that seven U.S. service members were wounded but said there were no U.S. fatalities. It said one Afghan soldier was killed and one wounded.

Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid praised the attack in a statement sent to the media. But he did not claim Taliban responsibility.

Last week three U.S. soldiers were killed by an Afghan soldier in eastern Nangarhar province. In that case Mujahid claimed that the shooter was a Taliban loyalist who infiltrated the army specifically to seek out opportunities to attack foreign soldiers.

Since the US and UK intervened in 2001 to oust the Taliban and deny al-Qaeda a safe base of operations – in other words blow up a few caves and tunnels, destroy some monkey bars and other invaluable jihadi training facilities with multimillion Dollar weaponry – and were subsequently joined by NATO forces in 2003, a total of 94 coalition soldiers have been killed in so called “green on blue” attacks, out of a total of 3535 fatalities.

Fortunately none of the seven “insider attacks” described above were fatal this time, but the fact that they continue, and the Taliban concurrently praise them, is a sign that not all is well in poppyland. So are coalition forces still in Afghanistan to safeguard and oversee the production of heroin as concluded by some or are there other reasons?

The answer to that question is yes, and it most likely has to do with a variation of “The Great Game” which saw world powers pit their forces against each other for control of central and Southern Asia in the nineteenth century.

It’s time for the US to scale back her empire and put her troops and resources to better use – namely Making America Great Again. The same goes for the UK and the rest of the Western coalition forces in a region which has been the nexus of an exodus of “refugees” that have invaded Europe under the auspices of NATO’s erstwhile partner Turkey.

It seems unlikely that this “refugee” crisis comprised of military aged men, with a penchant for violence and European women, would have materialised if those coalition troops had been patrolling the Aegean Sea, and stationed along the Greek border with the country whose leader has called for Turkish couples in the EU to have five children each. We ignore his veiled threat at our peril.

Our troops should be defending our nations, not Afghanistan – or for that matter Iraq. It’s time to pivot to a defence of the West.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

Islam, Its Safe Spaces, And Censorship For All

Predictably there has been another terrorist attack in the UK, this time London falling prey again to three knife wielding attackers, who were shot to death by police after a murderous eight minute rampage that left seven people murdered.

With over three million Muslims living in the UK, many of them undoubtably having a below average IQ due in part to their inbreeding – important to highlight because this would make them more susceptible to manipulative arguments to commit senseless violence – this is going to continue until decisive steps are taken to eliminate extremism and its causes in their communities.

So, to get to the crux of the matter, what’s been the response of the British Prime Minister Theresa May to this bloodbath? According to the Independent:

New international agreements should be introduced to regulate the internet in the light of the London Bridge terror attack, Theresa May has said.

The Prime Minister said introducing new rules for cyberspace would “deprive the extremists of their safe spaces online” and that technology firms were not currently doing enough.

Safe spaces? Does she think she’s dealing with a group of SJWs worried about microaggressions from straight white men, or a horde of horny muslim perverts turned extremists seeking martyrdom so they can cure their urgent case of blue balls with 72 buxom virgins?

To be honest it doesn’t seem right to make light of the situation, but sometimes laughter is the best medicine, and no doubt we’ll have plenty more time for anger as the situation worsens.

Of course they have safe spaces in their mosques, where they’re indoctrinated with this radical ideology – and as pointed out by Tommy Robinson – in the prison system, where there’s little being done to isolate the radical preachers who recruit many to their cause under pain of severe beatings.

However it’s clear that this is nothing else than an underhanded way of curtailing free speech and freedom on the internet, all in the name of combatting “the single evil ideology of Islamic extremism.” It’s surprising she actually came out and said it, but we shouldn’t get our hopes up, the end game is complete regulation of the internet until it’s firmly under control, like television and radio.

Ms May’s speech is thought to be the first time she has publicly called for international cooperation in bringing forward more red tape to cyberspace, however.

The intervention comes after the introduction of the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 – dubbed the “Snooper’s Charter” – which expands the powers of spying agencies and the Government over the internet.

The Act, championed by Ms May, requires internet service providers to maintain a list of visited websites for all internet users for a year and gives intelligence agencies more powers to intercept online communications. Police can access the stored browsing history without any warrant or court order.

Police, and certainly the intelligence agencies, can and do intercept online communications without any warrant or court order, this is simply a way to make it lawful despite the best efforts of civil liberties advocates. Edward Snowden already revealed the extent of NSA surveillance in the US, and the UK as a signatory nation of ECHELON – one of the programs we actually know about – is no different.

“Never let a good crisis go to waste” is a quote attributed by some on the internet to Winston Churchill. Whether he said it or not is irrelevant, what matters is that another British Prime Minister is taking that advice and implementing it in the most deceptive way possible – it’s up to us to use the remaining free speech we have on the internet to denounce her for it, and the scum that murder innocents on our streets.

Thoughts On The Manchester Arena Terrorist Attack

Coinciding with the first day of President Donald Trumps first visit to Israel, a British national identified by CBS News as Salman Abedi, reportedly decided to blow himself apart with what police described as an Improvised Explosive Device, taking the lives of 22 others as he did so.

That there were children among his victims we can only assume that this child of Libyan refugees, who moved to the UK to flee Muammar Gaddafi’s regime, was unconcerned about.

We can only assume because dead men make poor witnesses. We have to take the authorities word for the events surrounding what has become an all too familiar series of attacks by muslims living in Europe, or as the left would prefer us to believe, European muslims. Post 9/11 this is hard to do.

That’s not meant to cast doubt on the fact that Western Civilisation – not for the first time it should be added – faces an existential threat from Islam and the fifth column firmly embedded and exponentially procreating amongst us. That the term “Improvised Explosive Device” has now entered civilian police parlance is a wake up call to those more familiar with the targeted “bombing” campaigns of traditional European political extremist organisations.

As alluded to above though, the timing of this seems a little too coincidental. As reported by Fox news, on Saturday President Trump signed a $110 billion arms deal to help Saudi Arabia boost its military “defence” system – we should ask the people of Yemen what they think of Saudi defence since their destructive intervention in that countries internal affairs.

After this first official trip as US President – involving a bizarre ceremony with the laying of his hands on an illuminated orb together with the Saudi King and the President of Egypt – he travelled on to Israel, who as we are regularly reminded by the legacy media in the US is its biggest democratic ally in the region, where he followed in the tradition of previous US politicians, and continued with the laying of his hands this time on the Wailing Wall, his perfectly combed hair crowned with a Kippah.

With regards to both Saudi Arabia and Israel, two countries that openly condemn the savagery committed by ISIS and it’s affiliates in Iraq and Syria, while obscuring the fact that it was they who facilitated the rise of ISIS in the region as a proxy war against Irans allies such as Syria’s Bashar al-Assad, we should ask ourselves how much they stand to gain by this and other such attacks throughout Europe and America.

In the case of Israel it’s a no-brainer. With the rise of “Islamophobia” there has been a continued post WW2 drop in antisemitism – at least by ethnic “infidel” europeans – and a general rise in the belief, including European populist “far-right” movements and political parties, that Zionist Israel is an ally in the 21st Century war against radical Islam.

Considering this, it’s unlikely that Israel will ever find herself in a situation similar to the Yom Kippur War, at least in the sense that Europe is unlikely to stand by indifferently if she is attacked again by her Muslim neighbours, especially after strategic terror attacks such as Manchester, and the latent resentment caused by the unassimilated muslim population and resultant societal problems, have had their effect.

With regards to Sunni Saudi Arabia, their biggest rival in terms of regional, and certainly religious hegemony, is Shiite Iran. Their implicit alliance with Israel is one of convenience rather than a natural one, especially considering the derogatory view of Jews expressed in parts of the Koran, and the resultant negative opinion of the muslim world against the Jewish state.

We should wait to see if forces within the UK government, rather than concentrating on the Brexit will of the people, will seize on the opportunity to follow the EU in its official appeasement of Islam and muslims in the old continent, while sanctimoniously voicing their determination to fight ISIS and other extremists in the middle-east who they preach threaten our democracies and freedoms, democracies which have been made a mockery of by the bureaucrats in Brussels, and freedoms which they will eventually extinguish themselves because of the threat of radical Islam and the ethnic European backlash which they themselves created and engineered.

There’s a way out of this madness, but paradoxically it seems that democracy will not facilitate it, at least certainly not if the legacy media in the West has its way, and continues to control the narrative which condemns moderate common sense nationalists such as Geerd Wilders, Marine Le Pen, and others closely aligned to their political ideology, as “fascists.”

It seems inevitable that if European nations cannot reclaim their future in fair elections – and yes, the implication is that elections are not only unfair, but even subject to criminal manipulation – then we’ll descend into an authoritarianism of some sort in the not so distant future.

Europeans need to decide if the authoritarianism is a “progressive” SJW revamp of the type already seen in the Soviet Union, and written about in books such as Orwell’s 1984, or a nationalist uprising resulting in a populist government which takes the necessary unilateral steps to save our civilisation and the lives of our innocents.

First of all we need – to paraphrase Republican candidate Trump – a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the West until we can figure out what the hell is going on, and the immediate repatriation of all non-citizen men of military age that have migrated here since the appearance of ISIS in 2013.

Secondly there should be a freeze on the construction of new mosques, and all Imams and muslim community leaders known to or suspected of voicing support for terrorists or terrorist acts should be immediately arrested under existing anti-terrorism laws, which should in any case be expanded to focus specifically on muslim extremism and provide the police and judiciary the powers they need to silence them.

Thirdly we should disentangle ourselves from the quagmire of the Middle East. Any intervention to fight extremists should be similar to Russias current engagement in Syria, where under the invitation of the official government they’re assisting the Syrian Army in bombing campaigns against ISIS positions.

Israel has nuclear weapons and is able to look after herself. If she can reach a peaceful two state settlement with the Palestinians, so much the better for peace and stability in the region, but if the illegal settlements continue to be built in the West Bank then all economic ties should be severed. Support for Israel can no longer be unconditional as this is the key to peace in the region, and with the muslim world as a whole.

Judging by the establishment opposition Donald Trump has faced in the US regarding his “muslim ban”, it seems unlikely that any of this can be implemented save a catastrophic event, such as a nuclear bomb exploding in one of our capital cities and extinguishing the lives of millions. Certainly a pessimistic prediction, but a terrifyingly real threat nonetheless – Hollywood has already primed us for this with films such as True Lies, and Unthinkable.

But it’s imperative we try, we owe it to the majority of decent people who want to raise their children in peace and safety, and who dream and strive for more than a retrograde existence. Platitudes will no longer do, the time to tell the truth and act accordingly – no matter how politically incorrect – has arrived, in order to avoid a complete catastrophe which leaves us with no way back from the brink of the clash of civilisations and dystopia.