Clark Griswold

I assume you meant billion and not trillion. But if you think border fences in the right place can't solve illegal immigration / illegal border crossings tell that to Israel and San Diego. San Diego Fence Provides Lessons in Border Control From the article: Before the fence was built, all that separated that stretch of Mexico from California was a single strand of cable that demarcated the international border. ... Today, Henry is assistant chief of the Border Patrol's San Diego sector. He says apprehensions here are down 95 percent, from 100,000 a year to 5,000 a year, largely because the single strand of cable marking the border was replaced by double — and in some places, triple — fencing. Does the fence stop all illegal crossings? No but it dramatically curtails it and forces illegal crossings out into difficult terrain where it would be easier to catch or deter them, that area would be heavily patrolled by a new CBP / NG mission. Another little gem about border fences: Does a Border Fence Work? Check Out the Dramatic Change After Israel Put One Up For $377 million (probably the true cost of one F-35) they put up a 143 mile security system (fences, cameras, lights, patrol roads) and cut illegal crossings by +99%. I am not advocating for a 2000 mile fence system across the entire border, that is unnecessary. But what is needed is strategic fencing in adjoining urban areas, along major highways leaving from the border between international and internal checkpoints, manpower to secure those areas and the resources to patrol the wilderness areas. Are we ever going to stop all illegal immigration? No, of course not but if we reduce it to a trickle then you could have a much better debate and then action / reform on the nexus of border security, immigration policy, policy on illegal immigrants in the USA and work visas for foreign workers / illegal employment of illegal aliens. The debate never moves forward because one side (correctly with the historical evidence of inaction following the 1986 amnesty of President Reagan) knows that if they concede anything the other side will NEVER secure the border or enforce immigration laws, they will allow in more illegal aliens, try to legalize them and get them to vote thus ensuring the other side's political demise.

20 lbs. brains are working on it... GPS Not Working? Try Using Lightning to Find Your Way Pentagon looks for alternatives to GPS

Illegal Aliens Storm the Beach in San Diego, Second Attempt Thwarted

CNN Exclusive: A 13-year-old witness to ISIS' beheadings, crucifixion in Syria Next generation of Jihadis in training. Truly sad.

The society itself gets to decide. Not just one individual in it but the society itself. Freedom, tolerance and enlightenment do not demand self-destructive passive inaction when confronted by those who run counter to the principles of the Modern West, by those who choose to immigrate to the West and then proceed to live and be supported by it while still arguing and supporting subversion of it. A great example of the person(s) the West should not hesitate nor feel guilty about expelling and resisting: Radical Imam Encourages Pulling Welfare Benefits for Jihad Societies do change but the core principles do not. It is not bigoted nor racist to argue that those who are unlikely to be successful, to assimilate and likely become a burden to society thru cultural practices or present condition are restricted from joining. It is just common sense. Good article written by an immigrant to Sweden on the problem of mass immigration without assimilation. Link below on title to FP website. Posted first two paragraphs as they smartly summarize the problem the West faces, not a problem of racial demographic shift but of a problematic cultural shift. How does this relate to the original topic(s) of this thread? As Westerners (Americans, Europeans, etc..) return from the Iraq-Syria conflict fighting for ISIS or any other Islamic insurgency, if there is sufficient evidence they should be expelled from said countries losing their citizenship. This would be a good tactic in the strategy to defeat the currently greatest Islamic fascist movement, ISIS. Stockholm Syndrome How Immigrants Are Changing Sweden's Welfare State Tino Sanandaji is among the last people one would expect to argue that immigrants pose a threat to Sweden’s way of life. An economist at Stockholm’s renowned free-market think tank Research Institute of Industrial Economics, Sanandaji is a member of a Swedish elite that has long defended open borders. And his own life offers a clear example of an immigrant success story: Sanandaji arrived in Sweden from Iran in 1989, with his mother and younger brother, when he was nine years old. With financial assistance from the Swedish government, Sanandaji was able to attend the elite Stockholm School of Economics. From there he moved to the United States, where he earned a Ph.D. in public policy from the University of Chicago. And yet Sanandaji now argues that Sweden should stop taking in people who share his background. “Immigration has meant that Sweden has imported a bunch of social and economic problems that to a degree didn’t exist before,” he tells me, sitting in a modern conference room at his office in the upscale Östermalm neighborhood of Stockholm. “For a number of reasons -- a long period of peace, a homogenous population -- Sweden has had a unique combination of welfare, growth, and equality. That idyll is to a certain degree over.”...

Yep - the West has a problem mainly caused by liberal left wing political / cultural activists that eschew and discourage assimilation. Nor do they let the simple question of "Are these people compatible with our society ?" be asked. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Understood, I did not participate in OD / OUP so I've only got outside knowledge on the whole op. I saw on the forums and open source about NATO's cluster f's and low supply of PGMs. NATO runs short on some munitions in Libya The only way to get in shape is to exercise or play in the game, if we want NATO to be a credible force/construct then we've got to use it when we can or should. Most of the other members are not resourcing their forces as they should, members are required to spend 2% of their GDP on defense and only a handful actually do and what they do spend is geared towards either their direct territorial defense or own defense industry. Decent article on NATO's need for an overhaul here. This will take a long time, a lot of politics, and money but getting the Euros to start to help police this area of the world when needed (North Africa & Middle East) thru NATO can relieve some of the pressure on the US. I agree, it is unlikely but possible. Like you, what I could see really making a next major powers conflict possible is a "black swan" type of event causing one or more of the major military powers to do something rash.

I agree with your assessment that Russia / China are figuring out we are in a somewhat isolationist mood or a limited intervention mood now but a good take down of IS will help the West in several ways: - demonstrate NATO (best organizational construct to use) can get its act together when necessary and act decisively - defeat the major Jihad organization in the world (currently) thus inflict a loss on the larger action against the Islamist / Jihad movement - is relatively low risk to NATO forces to be involved (operation would be pretty much Odyssey Dawn part 2) and thus likely to be successful if the Kurds / Iraqis / Syrians can handle the ground combat. With a strong air campaign giving them CAS, AI, persistent ISR and Information Dominance - they should be able to win (eventually). The risk of blow-back is real and it does give them a recruiting cause but letting them secure a nation-base and HUGE resources to fund their stated goal of aggressive expansion thus gaining more resources and funding more aggression just lets the fire get bigger before we will have to put it out. Like it or not, the West is probably going to be putting down Islamic insurgencies for sometime to come, better to nip it in the bud as Deputy Fife would say... now, if these nations start to break down into smaller nations that make more sense ethnically, religiously, etc... and what comes about is not a threat to the US, Europe, its neighbors, etc... then maybe we should just sit back and let them come about but I see IS as a cancer to be cut out vice Kurdistan which is something to be quietly supported... Back to the idea of 2014 being like 1914 with a wider war not far away, this made me pause for a minute: In Eastern Ukraine, Rebel Mockery Amid Independence Celebration Something going even more wrong with this than what it already is is just the type of incident that leads to escalating retaliations.

True - the economic hit could be huge for them and unless their victory over whatever coalition they would be fighting was utterly complete and the US was completely pushed out of the Far East, they would be very isolated. I think the idea of the author was to imagine a war started by miscalculation of reaction, not intentionally poking the US / Japan in the eye with full expectation of WWIII to follow. Reading the article and specifically those scenarios ,I thought it would be more plausible that an ally of the US / Europeans does something crazy and that is a possibility for a trigger event, i.e. accidental shoot-down of a Chinese aircraft by Japanese forces, Ukrainian forces massacring ethnic Russians in retaliation for an atrocity, Philippines Navy getting into a skirmish with the PLAAN, etc... I think something like that, actions by forces not directly under our control but whom we are linked by treaty or association to defend is a fuse that could be easily lit. But all this armchair speculation hopefully will be moot, the Cuban Missile Crisis ended well and that was about as close to Armageddon as humanity has come.

Good point - should have said Eastern or all of Ukraine Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Valid critique - I could still see the whole mess starting in the East China Sea or Russia in Eastern Ukraine to "stabilize" a humanitarian crisis I think the only thing holding back the next big one is whether or not they think the world will accept whatever it is they do - I.e. Russia takes part or all of Ukraine, China takes the Senkako islands and or Taiwan - if the West demonstrated it still has a pair by defeating ISIS, not being cowed by Russia, supporting Israel, deterring North Korea, etc... They may consider it not worth the cost... Aggression happens when someone thinks they can win or that you won't do anything about it A good operation by NATO in Syria / Iraq would give them pause Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Read a good article in the Atlantic and wanted to see what the opinion of others was on the idea that we are actually close to another major conflict between the new Great Powers via alliances and waxing / waning influence. Yes, It Could Happen Again Instability in Ukraine, chaos in Syria, conflict in the East China Sea—the trigger points for World War III are in place.

Nice girl. British Woman Vows To Become First Female Jihadist To Kill American Or British Captive

Pretty good article, like the fact the author calls out the elephant in the room: the Saudis are funding source for the Sunni trans-national Islamic insurgency primarily and that it is a movement not an organization that we (the West and some Arabic governments) are fighting. Letting go of some of these governments and hence the nations that the Sykes-Picot Agreement created may be a better long term strategy but the transition to something else may be long and hard to swallow (sts). Already there is some buyer's remorse on the part of Syrian rebels. To Syria’s Revolutionaries, Assad Isn’t Looking So Bad After All 2 Nixon went to China, we can change course too.

Yep - pick a side and then go all in. The FSA and various other Syrian rebel groups are just not plausible replacements for the government of Al-Asad, we all know that and the West just has to admit that now. Condition the recognition and support on a few realistic points and then turn all the guns on ISIS. - Amnesty for the FSA and other "reasonable" rebel factions, Jihadists movements are excluded. - International Stabilization Forces in areas are retaken by the Syrian Military. Probably a 5 year mission - Long term human rights monitoring following cessation of hostilities, long term aid conditioned on basic human rights respected but no interference with Syrian politics post-conflict. Probably about a 10 year mission. - Truth commission following cessation of hostilities. You end the Syrian Civil War, you totally defeat the most currently powerful Jihadist movement i the world and you probably open the door to dealing more effectively with rogue states. A 180 on Syria by the West will prove that we are not so hard headed that we can't make a deal when the facts change on the ground to something we did not want. Like it or not, we have to deal with these countries and doing business with them is a helluva lot easier than just saying if you are not with me then you are my enemy. Absolute positions (usually) are for idiots.

West poised to join forces with President Assad in face of Islamic State "The US has already covertly assisted the Assad government by passing on intelligence about the exact location of jihadi leaders through the BND, the German intelligence service, a source has told The Independent. This may explain why Syrian aircraft and artillery have been able on occasion to target accurately rebel commanders and headquarters" More help for Asad is a good thing for a bad situation. Not the defacto recognition of his government as the legitimate (albeit evil) government of Syria that I think would be the least bad option but maybe the Euros can go first and then we follow, with the eventual rout of ISIS thru airstrikes and support to allies on the ground. I am sure that a liberal Jeffersonian democracy will immediately flourish there after that but ANYTHING is better than ISIS.

Not for letting IS survive but maybe, just letting Sykes-Picot dissolve is a better long term strategy, if we have one in the ME... Imagining a Remapped Middle East Letting go of Sykes-Picot An enclave strategy for Iraq I am sure this would all happen in an orderly, bloodless fashion with no conflicts over land, natural resources or former national assets but instead of keeping nations drawn up 100 years ago by two former colonial powers, letting the ethnic / religious sects self-organize would make the region only smolder as opposed to the usual raging inferno.

Just watched - per usual with Vice it was excellent. Watching the video and seeing the emphasis on inculcating the youth, the IS reminded me of the Nazis during the 30's on their ascent to power and transformation of Germany. I think it was Shirer in "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" that said at some point WWII was unavoidable as a generation of Germans had been raised to believe that it was their right and destiny to dominate the world. Seeing the effort to indoctrinate the youth of their captured territory reminded me of that thought. Past some point, and it may already be passed as Islamic supremacy has already been pushed by the Saudis thru the Wahhabist movement, Frontline report on this here, that a greater conflict will have to be fought as a generation of young men, who have just enough education to fight and have been taught that God wants them to fight the infidels wherever they are but especially in the ME, are turned loose against the world. What exactly that conflict looks like is anyone's guess but what I think it would require no civilian leader today would ever order.

Pilot's false arm falls off as he lands passenger plane

The Bear is awake. Russia Brings Together Some of the World’s Best Fighter Pilots

As LBJ said: "He may be a son of a bitch but he's our son of a bitch" Assad was not exactly our guy but we could do business with him: John and Teresa enjoying dinner with the Assads in 2009. Keeping a lid on Islamic Fascism is job 1 and somewhere down the list is encouraging democracy / human rights in the Middle East. I don't want those people to have to live under dictatorships but what is bubbling under the surface is worse.

You got me - fixed.

Left frets over Iraq mission creep Sweet Jesus, these people are scared of their own shadows. There's only been a couple of kinetic strikes and humanitarian aid drops to desperate people dying on a mountain top and already the trite line of "mission creep" is hauled out. Need to add this to my COA: 6. Revocation of citizenship and permanent expulsion for any citizen or legal resident found to have participated in hostile military action with terrorist organizations in Syria / Iraq / Afghanistan etc... or to have aided any person engaged in such activities. Made an explicit priority with aggressive coordinated international police & intelligence action. Western-born jihadists rally to ISIS's fight in Iraq and Syria The West faces a choice: fight its enemies or slowly commit suicide by inaction and implicit surrender of its culture.

Yeah, it is a bridge quite far but the Free Syrian Army & associated anti-regime groups fighting Al-Assad have either joined the IS or are no longer operational or viable. The West could adopt a neutral stance, let the Russians & Iranians continue their diplomatic relations and support, We help the Iraqis & Kurds defeat the IS and at the conclusion of hostilities very quietly accept Al-Assad's government.

Probably. Like Libya, once the Iraqi Army & Kurdish Peshmerga have CAS, AI, & ISR the tide can turn. Just a hope but a good ass-whoopin' from the US & Allies on the IS from the air would probably give them a shot in the arm. Possible COA: 1. Isolate the IS with saturated ISR and AI over Western Iraq to cut off their resupply. All of Western Irag is a no-fly or no-drive zone. 2. Lean hard on the Saudis and Qataris to cut the funding to them. No money equals no capabilities. 3. Provide CAS, AI & ISR to give the Iraqi Army & Kurds the confidence to take the fight to them. Cut off any comms via social media, cellular, LMRs; use our EA assets to make it hard as hell for them to coordinate ops. 4. Support Al-Asad in Syria. Like it or not, he is an enemy of IS and my enemy's enemy is my friend. Recognize his government as the legitimate gov. of Syria, sucks but he is infinitely better than IS. 5. Look the other way when our allies do things we would find distasteful. Not a Machiavellian but this is not a situation to worry about whether or not they (allied Arab states) follow to the letter the Geneva Convention.