Sometimes your worst enemies aid you unintentionally–and in ways you could never help yourself. That’s what America’s Islamic enemies are now doing throughout the Middle East.
Contrary to the propaganda of Republican militarists and Democratic do-gooders, Americans should be thrilled at the mutual destruction of their most dedicated enemies.
In the first installment of this series, three reasons were given for why the United States should not intervene in the Syrian conflict. This will offer the remaining seven.
Fourth: Since 1979, Syria has been listed by the U.S. State Department as a sponsor of terrorism.
Among the terrorist groups it supports: Hizbollah and Hamas. For many years, Syria provided a safe-house in Damascus for Illich Ramirez Sanchez–the notorious international terrorist known as Carlos the Jackal.
Ilich Ramírez Sánchez–“Carlos the Jackal”
Fifth: The United States had no part in creating or supporting the decades-long dictatorship of the Assad regime–which has long been hostile to America.
After a long series of political maneuverings, Hafez al-Assad seized power in 1970 and was proclaimed “president” next year. With aid from the Soviet Union, he built up the Syrian army. Using arrest, torture and execution, he ruled Syria as a dictator until he died in 2000.
His son, Bashar, then took command of Syria. Like his father, he has supported Palestinian and Lebanese militant groups. And, like his father, he continues to receive financial and military support from the successor to the Soviet Union, the Russian Federation.
Thus, America has no moral obligation of any kind to Syria–or Syrians.
Sixth: Intervening in Syria could lead to Syrian attacks against Israel.
An American military strike on Syrian government forces could lead the country’s dictator, Bashar al-Assad, to attack Israel–perhaps even with chemical weapons. Assad could do this simply because he hates Jews–or to lure Israel into attacking Syria.
If that happened, the Islamic world–which lusts to destroy Israelis even more than “apostate” Muslims–would rally to Syria against the United States, Israel’s chief ally.
Seventh: Committing American ground forces to Syria or just continuing to bomb targets there could lead to Islamic terrorism against the United States–at home or abroad.
This has already happened with Russia, which, on September 30, 2015, began bombing airstrikes on forces trying to overthrow Assad.
On October 31, Airbus A321, a Russian airliner, broke up in mid-air, then crashed in Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula, killing all 224 people on board.
In Egypt, a militant group affiliated to the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) claimed it had brought down the plane “in response to Russian airstrikes that killed hundreds of Muslims on Syrian land.”
The same fate could well befall American civilians and/or soldiers.
Eighth: China and Russia are supporting the Assad dictatorship–and the brutalities it commits against its own citizens.
This reflects badly on them–not the United States. And any move by the United States to directly attack the Assad regime could ignite an all-out war with Russia and/or China.
What happens if Russian and American forces start trading salvos? Or if Russian President Vladimir Putin orders an attack on America’s ally, Israel, in return for America’s attack on Russia’s ally, Syria?
It was exactly that scenario–Great Powers going to war over conflicts between their small-state allies–that triggered World War I.
Ninth: The United States cannot defeat ISIS through air power alone–thus making commitment of ground troops inevitable.
President Barack Obama authorized airstrikes against ISIS in September, 2014. The United States Air Force has since dropped thousands of bombs on ISIS convoys.
This has not destroyed ISIS. And its failure to do so has only led to demands by hawkish Republicans and Democrats for “boots on the ground.”
Tenth–and most importantly: While Islamic nations like Syria, Iraq and Egypt wage war within their own borders, they will lack the resources–and incentive–to attack the United States.
Every dead Hizbollah and Al-Qaeda and ISIS member makes the United States that much safer. So does the death of every sympathizer of Hizbollah, Al-Qaeda and ISIS.
The peoples of the Middle East have long memories for those who commit brutalities against them. In their veins, the cult of the blood feud runs deep.
When Al-Qaeda blows up civilians in Beirut, their relatives will urge Hizbollah to take brutal revenge. And Hizbollah will do so. Similarly, when Hizbollah does, those who support Al-Qaeda will demand even more brutal reprisals against Hizbollah.
Al-Qaeda terrorists–now taking aim at Hezbollah terrorists
No American could instill such hatred in Al-Qaeda for Hizbollah–or vice versa. This is entirely a war of religious and sectarian hatred.
In fact, this conflict could easily become the Islamic equivalent of “the Hundred Years War” that raged from 1337 to 1453 between England and France.
When Adolf Hitler invaded the Soviet Union in 1941, then-Senator Harry S. Truman said: “I hope the Russians kill lots of Nazis–and vice versa.”
That should be America’s position whenever its sworn enemies start killing off each other. Americans should welcome such self-slaughters, not become entrapped in them.

ABC NEWS, CBS NEWS, CIA, CNN, DONALD TRUMP, FACEBOOK, FOX & FRIENDS, FOX NEWS, GREEN BERETS, HIZBOLLAH, HOSTAGE NEGOTIATION, ISLAMIC TERRORISM, KGB, KIDNAPPING, NBC NEWS, SOVIET UNION, SPECIAL WEAPONS AND TACTICS TEAMS (SWAT), THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER, U.S. NAVY SEALS, WILLIAM CASEY
DONALD TRUMP AND “THE KGB METHOD”
In Bureaucracy, History, Law Enforcement, Military, Politics, Social commentary, Uncategorized on December 3, 2015 at 12:05 amDonald Trump is a staunch anti-Communist. So it might seem surprising that he would favor a “hostage negotiation” method used by the KGB.
Yet that is what he proposed during a December 1 appearance on “Fox & Friends.”
There Trump offered his latest take on how to deal with the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).
Donald Trump
One of the hosts of the Fox News program asked him about minimizing civilian casualties. And Trump replied:
“I would do my best–absolute best. I mean, one of the problems that we have and one of the reasons we’re so ineffective is they’re using [civilians] as shields–it’s a horrible thing. They’re using them as shields. But we’re fighting a very politically correct war.
“And the other thing is with the terrorists, you have to take out their families. When you get these terrorists, you have to take out their families. They care about their lives, don’t kid yourself. But they say they don’t care about their lives. You have to take out their families.”
That was precisely the approach the KGB took in 1981 when “negotiating” with Islamic hostage-takers.
It’s in direct contrast to the methods used by American hostage-negotiators.
During the late 1960s and early 1970s, American law enforcement agencies began creating Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) teams. These units were armed with automatic weapons and trained to enter barricaded buildings. They were also given special training in hostage negotiation.
Their men came from the most physically and mentally fit officers of those departments. And the police departments whose SWAT teams were universally recognized as the best were the LAPD and NYPD.
The first commandment for American SWAT teams–local, state and Federal–is: Don’t try to enter a barricaded area unless (1) hostages’ lives are directly at risk; and (2) there is no other way to effect their rescue.
Even if hostages are murdered before a SWAT team arrives on the scene, officers will usually try to enter into negotiations with their captors. They will send in food and other comfort items in hopes of persuading the criminals to surrender peacefully.
These negotiations can last for hours or days–so long as police feel they have a chance of success.
But there is another way agencies can try to rescue hostages. It might be called, “The KGB Method.”
The KGB served as a combination secret police/paramilitary force throughout the 74-year life of the Soviet Union. Its name (“Commitee for State Security”) has changed several times since its birth in 1917: Cheka, NKVD, MGB and KGB.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 and the formation of the Russian Federation, its name was officially changed to the FSB (Federal Security Service).
By any name, this is an agency known for its brutality and ruthlessness. The numbers of its victims literally run into the millions.
On September 30 1985, four attaches from the Soviet Embassy in Beirut, Lebanon, were kidnapped by men linked to Hizbollah (“Party of God”), the Iranian-supported terrorist group.
The kidnappers sent photos of the four men to Western news agencies. Each captive was shown with an automatic pistol pressed to his head.
The militants demanded that Moscow pressure pro-Syrian militiamen to stop shelling the pro-Iranian militia in Lebanon’s northern port city of Tripoli.
And they threatened to execute the four Soviet captives, one by one, unless this demand was met.
The Soviet Union began negotiations with the kidnappers, but could not secure a halt to the shelling of Tripoli.
Only two days after the kidnappings, the body of Arkady Katov, a 30-year-old consular secretary, was found in a Beirut trash dump. He had been shot through the head.
That was when the KGB took over negotiations.
Insignia of the KGB
They kidnapped a man known to be a close relative of a prominent Hizbollah leader. Then they castrated him, stuffed his testicles in his mouth, shot him in the head, and sent the body back to Hizbollah.
With the body was a note: We know the names of other close relatives of yours, and the same will happen to them if our diplomats are not released immediately.
Soon afterward, the remaining three Soviet attaches were released only 150 yards from the Soviet Embassy.
Hizbollah telephoned a statement to news agencies claiming that the release was a gesture of “goodwill.”
In Washington, D.C., then-CIA Director William Casey decided that the Soviets knew the language of Hizbollah.
Click here: Hostages? No Problem Soviets Offer ‘How-to’ Lesson In Kidnapping – Philly.com
Both the United States and Israel–the two nations most commonly targeted for terrorist kidnappings–have elite Special Forces units.
Military hostage-rescue units operate differently from civilian ones. They don’t care about taking alive hostage-takers for later trials. The result is usually a pile of dead hostage-takers.
These Special Forces could be ordered to similarly kidnap the relatives of whichever Islamic terrorist leaders are responsible for the latest outrages.
Ordering such action would instantly send an unmistakable message to Islamic terrorist groups: Screw with us at your own immediate peril.
In the United States, such elite units as the U.S. Navy SEALS, Green Berets and Delta Force stand ready. They require only the orders.
Share this: