YES!

Links of the Weekend

Had a great weekend zipping around the Adirondack mountains in my open-topped Jeep. I needed to do this, as a complete absence of snow--even from the tops of the Adirondack Mountains--is unheard of for early April. In fact, it's not uncommon for kids in the Fort Drum area to search for Easter eggs in the snow.

With that said, I'm just now catching up on a few of the great links that came up over the last few days. The high points range from articles about General Petraeus to blog entries about Lady Gaga. A brief rundown:

• Sayyid Qutb can take a ride on a disco stick.

Andrew Exum (Abu Muqawama), made a few interesting remarks in response to an article by Bret Stephens in the Wall Street Journal. Exum echoed Stephens' sentiments that the Islamic resentment towards the Western world--and the United States in particular--is not entirely motivated by American policies in areas such as Palestine. Rather, much of the anti-Western sentiment in the Muslim world, according to Exum, is a backlash against globalization and seemingly-omnipresent Western culture.

That means Lady Gaga and Her Royal Hotness Megan Fox.

Others remain skeptical. At Foreign Policy Online, Thomas Hegghammer noted that, while some anti-American attitudes in the Muslim world are a response to western "decadence", support for terrorist organizations is not linked to American culture. Rather, says Hegghammer, al-Qaeda's recruitment tends to swell during periods of perceived injustice in Palestine, as does violence directed against Americans. (Foreign Policy's Daniel Drezner also weighs in on the issue). Indeed, they attack us for our foreign policy, not for our disco sticks.

Of course, the real expert on this issue is none other than the Great Satan's Girlfriend, whose amusing combination of valley-girl talk, foreign policy, military analysis, and pictures of chicks has given her just as many web hits from the sexually frustrated denziens of Middle Eastern countries as they have from the staff at the Washington Post. (Yes, much like that song from the Cardigans, GSGF is a site that we all look at, yet never admit to.)

The GSGF responds to the Wall Street Journal:

"The American girl knows seductiveness lies in the round breasts, the full buttocks, and in the shapely thighs, sleek legs and she shows all this and does not hide it."

Direct Hit! Fire For Effect!

• General Petraeus in Vanity Fair.

The first I heard of Mark Bowden's (Black Hawk Down, Killing Pablo) Vanity Fair article on General Petraeus came in the form of several blog posts bashing the vignette (Attackerman, Ink Spots). Spencer Ackerman not only notes that much of Bowden's vignette seems ripped from Tom Ricks' The Gamble, but that Bowden fills much of the narrative with "sycophantic prose", crossing the line from journalism into legend-writing.

Granted, General Petraeus is quite an amazing person, and many of his exploits are the stuff of legend. He survived a bullet wound to the chest, only to leave the hospital a few days later, knocking out fifty push-ups on his way out the door. He also helped bring a wounded soldier out of a coma by shouting "Currahee", the cry of the 101st Airborne Division. Spencer Ackerman also readily admits to lauding his achievements. I'm certainly no better. In fact, I might have unintentionally contributed to the Petraeus mystique.

I've been getting quite a few visitors arriving from Mother Jones, specifically from an article by Nick Baumann. Baumann references a blog entry I wrote last summer, when General Petraeus was visiting my particular corner of the world: Contingency Operating Base Speicher, near Tikrit, Iraq. A few of us received word that the General's itinerary would take him through the dining facility (in typical military fashion, abbreviated "D-FAC"), and we positioned ourselves near the door to catch a glimpse of him. However, our informant seemed to not know the difference between a "D-FAC" and "D-Main" (the division headquarters, also at COB Speicher), where General Petraeus would actually be visiting. You can read the story in its entirety, but to make a long story short, we spent much of our time waiting for General Petraeus by re-wording all the Chuck Norris facts into General Petraeus facts.

Now it looks like someone actually did make a website of General Petraeus facts. Five hundred years ago, I'm certain students will think that Chuck Norris and General Petraeus single-handedly defended America from the ever-present zombie menace (Probably something like this).

To round-out the weekly update:

• Attackerman on Matt Gallagher's new war novel, "Kaboom". (A must-read for those frustrated with Army bureaucracy)
• Themistocles' Shade reminds us that the regular baseball season begins, linking to the best baseball movie of all time: The Naked Gun.
• And, finally, thanks to the US Naval Institute for allaying some of the hysteria surrounding "swarming" tactics (though I disagree), as well as giving us the following picture:

Move over, Megan Fox...

In this next "Womens' History Month" special (see here, here and here), I travel across the pond to sunny England for the story of a truly remarkable soldier in the British Army.

(ATTN: Kings of War--why have you not posted about this?!)

Look out, IDF girls, you've got competition. Meet Lance Corporal Katrina Hodge, an Adjutant-General in the Royal Anglican Regiment. Joining the British Army on a dare, she reported for basic training in high heels, fake eyelashes and a pink suitcase. Although jokingly called "Combat Barbie", she quickly distinguished herself in Basra, Iraq in 2005 after her vehicle was involved in an accident. Hodge and her crew came to after rolling her vehicle three times, only to find that an Iraqi male had snatched two rifles from her truck. She quickly wrestled the Iraqi to the ground, saving the lives of her comrades, and earning her a medal for valor and a promotion to lance corporal.

Hodge received the title of "Miss England" after competing in a beauty pageant in 2009, after being signed by the lingerie company La Senza. Recently, Lance Corporal Hodge has been working with British clothing chains in order to offer discounts to British Soldiers (La Senza already offers 15% off).

When asked about her plans to stay in the army, Lance Corporal Hodge appears enthusiastic, even suggesting that she might do a full 22-year hitch in the service. However, the most salient point of her interview with the London Times is this quote:

[T]he lads at work always see me at my best: hair gelled back, covered in mud, falling over during a training exercise. Not very attractive.” Besides, “there’s so many lovely pretty girls in the army, I kind of go unnoticed. All of my friends are girlie. Most people have a stereotype about girls in the army, but I don’t want to comment on that because I don’t want to sound bad.

Kings of War, seriously, you are holding out on us.

Anyway, let's add Lance Corporal Hodge to the growing number of women who who have shown skill and courage in combat.

Transformers II: Revenge of the COINtras

The US military's focus on counterinsurgency (COIN) operations has made many in the defense community uneasy, such as Col. Gian Gentile. According to these "COINtras", the US military's conventional combat capabilities are eroding, potentially putting us at a severe disadvantage should the US military ever face a conventional, near-peer opponent.

Certainly, many of us have looked around and wondered whether or not a neer-peer competitor was out there. Well, it looks like I have apparently found one. Ladies and Gentlemen, our focus on counterinsurgency leaves us woefully unprepared to wage a conventional war against the Revolutionary Republic of the Decepticons.

Seriously, the geo-political-military situation in this movie is too atrocious to ignore, particularly given the amount of assistance--both personnel and high-tech equipment--the military gave the makers of the movie. Let's examine the poor use of military and political tactics within this movie, shall we?

National Sovereignty Fail

In the beginning of the movie, we discover that a Decepticon is running rampant through the streets of Shanghai. The Autobots are called in to assist a strike group consisting of several UH-60 Black Hawk and AH-64 Apache helicopters as they zoom through the buildings of Shanghai, shooting everything in sight in an attempt to destroy the Decepticon. Somehow, the helicopters are not instantly shot down by the Chinese, who don't subsequently threaten to invade Taiwan or declare nuclear war on the US.

English-Speaking Jingoism Fail

The first live-action Transformers movie was accused of being far too jingoistic, in that the US military is world's last defense against the Decepticons. I order to recognize the value of our allies, Transformers II takes the "GI Joe" approach and introduces a multi-national anti-Decepticon task force, consisting of...Australia, Great Britain, and that's it. No other countries, in the Transformer universe, have special forces. Well, at least not special forces who are skilled in full-spectrum operations, ranging from counterinsurgency to anti-Decepticon action.

Soft Power Fail

While many in the military and foreign policy fields--such the current US Secretaries of State and Defense--advocate the use of "soft power", there are limits. Indeed, as President Barack Obama noted during his Nobel acceptance speech, soft power and diplomacy would not stop the Nazis, nor would it deter the hard-core fanatics within al Qaeda. Nevertheless, in Transformers II, President Obama is seen advocating diplomacy with a race of robots bent on genocide via the destruction of our sun.

Education Fail

In Transformers II, Shia Lebouf is seen leaving for college without taking Megan Fox along.

Seriously, what the fuck is he thinking? (And you thought I stopped posting Megan Fox pictures)

Homeland Security Fail

So in Transformers II, there's this little robot named "Wheels", who appears to be an analogy to the diminutive "Wheelie" robot from the original Transformers movie (from the 1980s). Except while the 1980s Wheelie is a childish, annoying Autobot who speaks in rhyme, his 2009 incarnation is a diminutive, malevolent Decepticon who eventually develops a crush on Megan Fox and humps her leg. I'm

not making that up, either, a little Tonka truck transforms into a tiny Decepticon and actually humps Megan Fox's leg. Well, then again, if I were a little Tonka truck Decepticon, I'd hump Megan Fox's leg, too. Fuck, I'd do that even if I weren't a Decepticon.

Anyway, Megan Fox disables Wheelie as he attempts to attack her, and she tortures him for information. And when I mean torture, I don't mean pouring motor oil into his robot mouth in a bizarre Decepticon waterboarding ritual, she flat-out takes a soldering iron and melts his fucking eye off. If that isn't enough, she decides that she needs to fly across the country to meet up with Shia LaBeouf, all the while holding Wheelie hostage. How does one get a Decepticon across the country in a hurry? Well, apparently, you can put a laser-wielding Decepticon in metal box with chains and take it through security at any airport. All the while, no one at TSA thinks that it's suspicious that she's checking a metal box through as her luggage and absolutely nothing else. I guess it's only suspicious when Nigerian terrorists fly with no luggage, not when Megan Fox flies with no luggage.

Transformers Plot Fail

So, wait, if Shia LaBeouf already has a piece of the Allspark, why doesn't he use that to revive Optimus Prime? Not that Optimus Prime's "death" is really that tragic--we all figure that he will be brought back to life by the end of the movie. Now, when he died in the 1980s cartoon movie--which was a blatant attempt to discontinue the old toy line and introduce new toys by killing off kids' beloved heroes--that was tragic.

Task 2048 (Perform Sling Load Operations) Fail

After Optimus Prime dies, we kind of accentuate the tragedy by having a helicopter sling-load his dead mechanical corpse back to the US military base and literally drop his dead body on the ground in front of the rest of the Autobots. Seriously, the aircrew training manual says that you wait until the load is on the ground and have slack in the sling before you release the cargo hook (after hovering laterally away from the load, so as not to damage it with the clevis). Nevertheless, I think they should add "unless you are attempting to create a dramatic effect, in which case, the pilot may drop the load from ten feet, but only if the cameras are filming in slow-motion, there's a layer of dust the corpse will kick up, and the onlookers have their hands over their open mouths, in shock."

Geography Fail

There's a lot happening during the final, big battle. The problem is, we really have no idea where it's taking place. Apparently, it's in the desert near the Jordanian/Egyptian/Israeli border where all of the following landmarks are within walking distance (in reality, they are all several hundred miles apart):

The city of Petra in Jordan

The Gulf of Aqaba

The Mediterranean Sea

The Pyramids (at Giza?)

Note that I say say the Jordanian/Egyptian/Israeli border, although the movie would have you believe that Jordan and Egypt actually share a border. Admittedly, they do come close, but in order to walk from one point of the battle in Jordan to another point of the battle in Egypt, you kind of have to, well, cross the Israeli border. Something tells me the Israelis don't take too kindly to tanks rolling across their border to transit from one battle to the next, even if they are American.

Sabot Rounds Fail

Remember in the first Transformers movie, we learned that only special rounds could pierce

the armour of the Decepticons? They couldn't be destroyed by air-to-ground missiles, nor by an A-10 Warthog's massive GAU-8 30mm cannon. Only very large rounds fired by an AC-130 Spectre Gunship could pierce Scorponok's skin. Nevertheless, the troops in Transformers II falls victim to the "Godzilla Effect", whereby they expend thousands of rounds into the Decepticons, to no effect, whereupon they just keep firing rounds into them anyway. Sense? This makes none.

Big-Budget Weapons Fail (B-1B, Zumwalt-class destroyer, Future Combat System, etc)

Hi, are you a senior-level defense official trying to develop a weapon which has little use in the counterinsurgency environment? If so, then why not convince the American public that your multi-billion dollar project is still viable by showing its applicability in Major Intergalactic War! During the final battle, when tanks roll ashore in...Petra, Jordan...or something...you half-expect one of the COINtras to jump up in the middle of the battle and say "When you're saluting your Decepticon overlords, you'll bet you hadn't cancelled the Future Combat System!"

The most laughable instance occurs near the end of the battle, when a bunch of robots combine together to make the super-Decepticon Devastator, who even comes equipped with a giant robot scrote-sack. Devastator is ripping apart the Pyramids of Giza, because they are actually built over a giant machine the Decepticons built thousands of years ago to destroy the Earth's sun.

Anyway, fortunately, there's a "battleship" in the Mediterranean that can help. Although it's not actually named, the fact that it's called a "battleship" and that it has a massive rail gun for the naval gunfire support role leads me to believe it's actually the billion-dollar DDG-1000 Zumwalt-class destroyer.

Although there is considerable disappointment over the destroyer--its lack of adequate air and ballistic missile defense systems, its size, cost, and so forth--let it be known that the movie showcases its capabilities. Its network-centric warfare C3I systems can receive communications from an ex-government employee running around the desert with a walkie-talkie radio. That's how good it is. It also has a rail gun for some reason, even though rail guns are several decades off, but that's okay. Anyway, if you need to shoot a massive robot on top of a Pyramid, the DDG-1000 and its non-existent rail gun are just the thing for you.

Combat Lifesaver Fail

Seriously, is this part of your CPR certification? During the climax of the movie, Shia LaBeouf falls unconcious and has a near-death experience. Not to worry, though, because Megan Fox knows CPR. Who needs to remember silly thing like the ratio of compressions to breaths, when you can just scream "Why?" "No!" and "I love you!" at the heavens in vain, with the camera capturing you from above. Cracked.com has the Megan Fox guide to CPR:

Theology Fail

Last but not least, Shia LeBoeuf's near-death experience raises a number of serious concerns. Chief among these is the fact that, in Transformers II, there are Autobots in heaven.

What. The. Fuck. Autobots have souls?

Conclusion

Does the military have a support group for COINdinistas who saw Transformers II? I might need that.

Stop the Press!

(H/T Zenpundit)

Ralph Peters posted something that isn’t 100% completely insane...

...I...

...I...

...I don’t know what to do. I had to read this thing twice just to believe it. It’s well-written, it flows well, and there are actually a few good arguments in here. There seems to be a little hyperbole, ill-conceived arguments, and some facts of dubious veracity, but by Ralph Peters standards, it’s not bad.

Even if we could persuade Afghan villagers that our values and behaviors are superior, if we could reduce state corruption to a manageable level, if we built thousands of miles of roads, eliminated opium growing, and persuaded Afghans that women are fully human, it would have no effect on al Qaeda.

The terrorists who attacked our homeland were not Afghans. Afghanistan was just a cheap motel that was not particular about asking for identification. Even a return to power of the Taliban-certainly undesirable in human-rights terms-does not mean that September 11, Part Two, then becomes inevitable.

The next terror attack on the West will not be launched from Afghanistan. Pause to consider how lockstep what passes for analysis in Washington has become. The Taliban's asymmetric strategy is not to defeat us militarily, but to make Afghanistan ungovernable. But what if our strategy, instead of seeking to transform the country into a model state, were simply to make it ungovernable for the Taliban? Our chances of success would soar while our costs would plummet. But such a commonsense approach is unthinkable. We think in terms of Westphalian states even where none exist.

In order to roll more Afghan rocks uphill, we are ignoring the essential requirement to secure supply lines adequate to the mission. Even if Afghanistan were worth an increased effort, the lack of reliable, redundant lines of communication to support our forces would argue against piling on. In the wake of 9/11, it was vital to send special operations forces and limited conventional elements to Afghanistan to punish al Qaeda and its hosts despite the risks. Indeed, we might usefully have sent more Soldiers in those early months. But instead of striking hard, shattering our enemies, then withdrawing-the one military approach that historically worked in Afghanistan-we put down roots, allowing ourselves to become reliant upon a tortuous 1,500-mile lifeline from the Pakistani port of Karachi northward through the Khyber Pass to various parts of Afghanistan. We have put ourselves at the mercy of a corrupt government of dubious stability with an agenda discordant with ours. Strategically, our troops are Pakistan's hostages.

And Islamabad already has taken advantage of our foolishness. While milking us for all the military and economic aid it can extract, Pakistan's security services recently demonstrated just how reliant we are on their good will. In the wake of the Mumbai bombings- sponsored by a terror organization tacitly supported by Pakistan's government- attacks on our convoys transiting the Khyber Pass, as well as raids on supply yards in Peshawar, swelled in number and soared in their success rate.

There are still a few items in the article which are baffling, and a number of facts which seem to be pulled out of nowhere. Most notably:

1. Peters’ continuous misconceptions about al Qaeda. In one paragraph, he acknowledges the fact that Iraq did not harbor al Qaeda, but then proceeds to mention the possibility that it could have had al Qaeda operatives. Yes, maybe Iraq could have had al Qaeda. But several other countries actually have had al Qaeda operatives within them (including the UK and the US).
2. Despite Peters’ acknowledgement of the claim that al Qaeda was not operating in Iraq, he notes that US efforts in Iraq have dealt a deadly blow to al Qaeda. Well, kind of. Once again, he mixes up al Qaeda and al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI). Granted, there is a loose relationship between the two organizations—but they are, in fact, two separate entities (Peters often oversimplifies and lumps them as one). AQI’s leader, Zarqawi, was trained by al Qaeda and pledged allegiance to al Qaeda, but like me with clingy women, al Qaeda doesn’t reciprocate AQI’s feelings. One could make the claim that the defeat of AQI struck a blow against violent extremists, which includes al Qaeda, but not necessarily al Qaeda itself.
3. Peters echoes the popular sentiment that Afghanistan is strategically irrelevant, noting that the Taliban are not so much the enemy as al Qaeda is. Okay, I dig that. Now take a look at his plan. He then advocates a program to counter the Taliban as necessary by collapsing the NATO footprint into one or two “super-FOBs”, and countering the Taliban as necessary. My question, of course, is how he intends to effectively stave off the pervasive Taliban presence by reducing the US profile in Afghanistan to one or two points on the ground. Failure to seize terrain (and, in particular, human terrain) will allow the Taliban to run amok through the mountains of Afghanistan as easily as Lawrence and the Arabs ran circles around the Turks at their super-base in Medina in 1916.

Overall, despite its obvious shortcomings, it’s a relatively well-written article, and this is the Peters we always kind of knew existed. It’s also welcome to see a sensibly-written Ralph Peters argument, because it means that hell actually did freeze over, and that means that Megan Fox is bound to spontaneously appear out of thin air in the middle of Iraq. (On the flip side, It also means that the Cubs are going to win the World Series).

ATTN: All you people looking for Megan Fox pics

Geeks are Sexy.net has just released a shocking statistic. Seems that someone has complied some alarming data about the correlation between computer viruses and Google searches for particular starlets' names.

A list of the top starlets whose Google searches link to sites with viruses reveals that seventh place is held by Megan Fox and Angelina Jolie.

(Does this mean that they were tied for seventh place, or does it mean that people wanted to see them together? I can't tell. Okay, I stole that joke from GaS.net, so sue me)

In unrelated news, my computer is running really really slow for some reason...

You bastards!

Apparently, a number of people have declared the 4^th of August to be “No Megan Fox Day”, during which mens’ news sites are not posting any stories about Her Royal Hotness ™ , lest she become over-exposed.

I think that this is a conspiracy on the part of all the world’s fat and ugly chicks.

In response, I am asking that we double our Megan Fox coverage to make up for this outrage. (Plus, I need some more hits for my counter).

The Megan Fox Bump Meets Its Match?

Looks like another blogger ("The Great Satan's Girlfriend") has discovered the sheer power of placing pictures of hot chicks in articles about defense policy and counterinsurgency. (H/T SWJ)

Clearly, Wings Over Iraq is above such infantile antics.

The post is well worth reading. It's a book review of Kimberly Kagan's "The Surge: A Military History", which I'm currently purchasing on Amazon (no Kindle edition..booo). "The Great Satan's Girlfriend" has a great mix of internet meme-style humor and military news, which I'm sure my readers will appreciate.

Can't hurt to ask...

Quote of the day, courtesy of Tasty Booze (link to Australian news site):

But it was an appearance by Megan Fox which had the geeks talking after one fan approached the star during a Q&A to promote her new supernatural western Jonah Hex.

"My question is for Megan," the man said. "I have a Sony HVR (video camera). It's not a true HD, but it gives a pretty good image.

Anyway, my question is: I just graduated film school and I'm trying to help my career. I was wondering if you'd be interested in some kind of, like, celebrity sex tape?"

With that, a couple of security guards grabbed the fella and took him to an undisclosed location.

"Dude, I can't wait to see what you look like in 30 minutes," Fox's co-star, Josh Brolin, quipped as the man was dragged away.

Okay, maybe, in this instance, it can hurt to ask...

Movie Reviews for Summer 2009

I've been able to keep up with the summer blockbusters while on R&R leave. Reviews below:

Bruno: Not as funny as Borat, but still worthwhile. In fact, it's worth watching just to see Sasha Baron Cohen, in his guise as the flamboyantly gay Austrian fashion reporter, Bruno, infiltrate Officer Candidate School. During his stint there, he makes some discrete modifications to the Army Combat Uniform, which includes a rigger belt from Dolce and Gabana.

You know, much has been written about the US military's treatment of homosexuals. Indeed, the entire film is a mockumentary about the treatment of gays in general in the United States. However, in the film, the US military is an equal opportunity paradise compared with some of the people that Bruno visits (to include a "gay counselor")

While at Officer Candidate School, Bruno is yelled at by his instructors and forced do do hundreds of push-ups...just like every other candidate. Indeed, in the the eyes of the instructors at OCS, all officer candidates, regardless of their orientation, are equally worthless.

As an added bonus, the military was one of the few organizations to catch on to Bruno's identity. You see, we're just hip like that.

Star Trek: A must-see. You don't have to be a hard-core fan of the series to like this movie (although it helps). This is easily the best Star Trek movie since Star Trek VI, almost 20 years ago. Every member of the original cast has their own little moment to shine and contribute to the success of the mission. Not to mention, since (minor spoiler) time travel is involved, the writers could take considerable liberties with the plot line.

The Hangover: Pretty autobiographical.

Finally, Transformers 2: You know what, I ought to begin by posting a review of the movie that I found on the Internet.

I can't shit on this movie because it did give me a career and open all these doors for me. But I don't want to blow smoke up people's ass. People are well aware that this is not a movie about acting.--Megan Fox

That's right, ladies and gentlemen. When the leading actress says that the acting sucks, then you really know that the acting sucks. I mean, it was great to see giant robots shooting one another and military hardware blowing things up, but that was about it. (Clearly, the reviews agree) There were plot holes in the movie that Grimlock could walk through--if Sam Witwicky had that one piece of the Allspark all along, why not use it to revive Optimus Prime from the get-go? Not to mention, time travel and teleportation? Seriously? Are you out of ideas? And why are all the Autobots in this movie incredibly lame? Mudflap and Skids are the worst characters since Jar Jar Binks, and there are two of them.

Again, just like I said about the first Transformers movie, this isn't just product placement for the failing line of General Motors. Indeed, if you're a big-name defense contractor who's upset that President Obama and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates are cancelling or curtailing your F-22 Raptors, Battleships with giant rail guns, and giant fire-breathing dragon tanks, this is the movie for you. For those of us in the counterinsurgency camp, on the other hand, will find the over-reliance on the F-22, B-1, and some sort of battleship thing exceedingly funny.

I'm just waiting for someone from the Col. Gian Gentile school of high-intensity conflict to claim that we need more M-1 Abrams tanks, since, in the Transformers universe, sabot rounds are the only weapon that can penetrate the armour of the Decepticons. ("When you're saluting your Decepticon overlords, you'll wish you hadn't cancelled the Crusader!")

Great article, except for one point

Adam Elkus, who writes for a number of prominent defense and foreign policy blogs (e.g., Red Team Journal), just wrote an article for the Huffington Post in which he examines many misconceptions regarding the latest round of protests in Iran.

One misconception that Elkus tackles is the belief that social networking sites (i.e., Twitter and Facebook) were responsible for organizing the protests. In fact, as Elkus points out, their role may not have been as great as we might have initially thought. Elkus does not go so far as to say that these sites were entirely inconsequential, however. Personally, I think that the effects of social networking sites on the Iranian election certainly merit further study, and I'm inclined to belive that they might have at least had some effect on organizing.

However, I do have a slight disagreement with Elkus' conclusion to his article. Take a look:

The narcissistic way that the pundit class thinks about Iran is eerily similar to the delusions fostered by reading an exclusive diet of celebrity gossip magazines and TMZ.com. Many people form a false intimacy with the celebrities whom they read about and make "Angelina" and "Megan" central characters in their own lives. The media's fixation on placing America at the center of Iran's domestic drama is the political equivalent of convincing yourself that you're on a first-name basis with Megan Fox just because you follow her Twitter feed.

But while trying to talk to Ms. Fox in person may result in you getting roughed up by a steroid-abusing Sunset Strip bouncer, acting on the belief that America can and should influence events on the ground in Iran will get a lot of people killed and gravely harm our regional interests.

Actually, Megan Fox admitted in an interview that she doesn't Twitter. All the Megan Foxes (thus far) on Twitter are fake Megan Foxes.

And with that, I just validated the other 90% of Adam Elkus' conclusion...

The Pervs are out in force...

With Transformers 2 coming out this past week, I've been getting several hits per minute from people looking for Megan Fox pics. If I didn't believe in my own artistic integrity as a blogger, I'd embed ads and get paid lots of cash.

(Everyone has his price, however...)

Foreign Affairs

In the interests of raising awareness of the culture of our NATO allies, I invite all of you to go to coedmagazine.com and participate in the ultimate poll--US supermodels vs. Italian Supermodels. Please, do it for NATO.

Your Megan Fox of the day...

Megan Fox went to Germany this week to promote the upcoming premiere of Transformers 2. By the looks of it, German summers must be kind of cold. Heh heh heh.

Population security, counter-insurgency, hybrid war. There, now this post has something to do with the Small Wars community.

The Megan Fox Bump

Ever since I installed my little sidebar tool on the bottom right corner of the screen, I've been treated to a detailed listing of where my viewers come from—not only geographically, but also what links they are clicking on to find this blog. It seems that a number of people are coming to this site after Google-searching "Megan Fox Star Wars T-Shirt".I figured that picture it would be a geek circle-jerk, but I never expected it to be that popular. I think the only thing that would be more popular would be in Star Wars T-shirt Megan Fox started making out with Natalie Portman with Princess Leia-style hair. (WTF goes on in my mind?)

One of the bloggers at Foreign Policy's Passport blog mentioned a phenomenon today known as the "Colbert Bump"—an increase in traffic which comes about by mentioning Stephen Colbert's name. Apparently, I've been experiencing something similar, as I've gotten plenty of hits from posting links to Jon Stewart and pictures of Megan Fox. What amazes me, however, is how many people from all over the world are coming to this site looking for Megan Fox pictures, and from countries you wouldn't expect. For example, let me say the following:

Ciao, mi amici a Italia!

Yes, I have been getting a number of hits from Italy recently. While it doesn't surprise me that guys in Italy might be eyeing the dark-haired/olive-skinned Megan Fox, I wonder why they need to do a Google search for pictures of Megan Fox in a Star Wars t-shirt? Italians get to watch soft-core porn on regular network television, and not the type where you have to fiddle with the antenna in order to discern a few blurry images and sounds (not that I know). Whereas we Americans get driven into a moral outrage over nipple shields, Italians grow up with nudity on TV, in Roman and Renaissance-era art, on the beaches, you name it. That's a far cry away from the time I tried nudity in Sackets Harbor, NY, and almost got arrested. And frostbite. Hey, it gets cold in Upstate NY.

What's funny is that the Megan Fox picture in question was embedded in a post involving combat force structure for counter-insurgency warfare—an issue which has since been tackled by Col. Pete Mansoor, former chief of staff for General Petraeus—and still got no replies a reply from Deus Ex. So maybe the Megan Fox bump isn't quite as powerful as I would like to think it is.

Focus: Those of you with blogs and IP trackers, post the most bizarre search strings people use to find your site. What bumps work better than "Stephen Colbert", "Megan Fox", and, according to the bloggers at Foreign Policy Online, "Susan Boyle sex photo"?

W00t!

Today is a day which shall live in, erm, the opposite of infamy. Indeed, today, I found out that Megan Fox likes chicks in addition to dudes.

So what else am I supposed to post, Megan Fox pictures? LOLcats?

Kings of War basically stole my act today. Looks like I'll have to stick with posting Megan Fox pictures now that he's figured out my entire world view:

The war on terror cannot be won by military means alone. The military is not in itself the solution. The war will not be decided on the battlefield. Military power is not the answer on its own. There is no magic military solution. Violence has limited utility. We have to use all the levers of national power. We need a comprehensive approach that combines all forms of power. Soft power matters as well as hard power, not to mention smart power and sexy power. Did we mention military solutions?

Is it just me, or is this becoming the most tediously restated, stale, boilerplate truism of our time?

OK, WE GET IT. WE GET IT. Instruments of power have their limits. Thanks. Thanks for pointing it out.

Now could pundits, analysts, prophets, critics, memoirists, politicians, policymakers, please please please recognise that this is widely understood. To the point now where it empties rooms. Lets move on.

So, um, yeah. Stay tuned for the next post.

"Compound War", "Hybrid War", whatever

So I've wondered what I'm going to publish in Small Wars Journal next. I figure that Boss Mongo gave me some good inspiration in suggesting that I write something about the "compound war" waged by T.E. Lawrence's guerrilla operation in Arabia in conjunction with General Edmund Allenby's proto-blitzkrieg war waged in what is now Jordan, Israel and Syria. The combination of conventional war, unconventional war and a host of other factors leads to that incredibly popular term, "hybrid war". (I swear, this term is more popular than Megan Fox. Speaking of which, time to add a picture...)

And thanks to you, my fans

According to Google Reader, this blog now has some 35 regular subscribers.

My goal is to get up to 300, as that was the number of people that regularly subscribed to the news feed for Stars and Stripes. I still think it's doable.

I mean, let's have a "Yes We Can" moment for the triumph of the New Media.

I promise more and more Megan Fox pictures (stolen from other websites, of course)

On Re-Enlistment (And your daily dose of Megan Fox)

I'm only five months or so into the fiscal year, and I have reached about 90% of the re-enlistment goals for my company, which is a great boon for any commander.  I'm sitting down with each Soldier in turn in order to talk with them about re-enlistment and I'm coming up some interesting responses (although they're not surprising to me).  Overall, I'm pleased that, in a time of war, so many Soldiers are deciding to re-enlist and even stay in Upstate NY.  Although the unit deploys so much that the good news is that they won't have to experience many Upstate NY winters.  Heh heh heh.  

I'll begin this segment by saying that every company commander likes to sit down in their meetings and see "green lights" next to their name in all sorts of areas:  "Green lights" in submitting awards and evaluations, "Green lights" in aircraft and vehicle maintenance, "Green lights" in property accountability, and so forth.  (In fact, one of the strange aspects of the alleged PowerPoint/Zero Defect military mentality that was pervasive in the 90s was the fact that work seemed to revolve around achieving "green lights" on Powerpoint slides)  

Re-enlistment is the same.  Of course, we all want to achieve a "Green light" when it comes to re-enlistment, but the fact of the matter is that you are dealing with a Soldier's future when you swear him in for another two to six years.  Soldiers who are barely 21 years old are on their second combat deployment and have never known a college lifestyle--and with a new Montgomery GI Bill, they can not only have their tuition paid for, but they can also have their living expenses paid for while they take some time off and achieve a college degree.  I do certainly believe in preserving our military force for the future by retaining the best Soldiers, especially in light of a disturbing trend of the best junior leaders leaving the Army  (for example, the Army only has, as of 2007, half of the post-command captains it needs). However, I also have to take into consideration that many Soldiers have bigger and better plans in life than the US Army, and in many ways, it would be selfish to hold them back just to get a "Green light" in an area.  

I sat down with a number of Soldiers, each with their own plans for the future--some staying, some leaving, some sitting on the fence.  Two in particular stuck out.

Soldier #1 has a wife who is also in the military and a daughter not even a year old.  He works in what the civilian community would call the Information Technology (IT) field.  With jobs at historic lows, the spectre of unemployment did little to change his mind about leaving the Army.  Why?  He was looking at getting a contractor job in Afghanistan.  Unfortunately, one of the bad side effects of the contractor culture is that a large number of Soldiers have seen contractors performing, in many cases, the same jobs that they do for a.) more money, b.) without being "stop-lossed", and c.) without having to shave, get a haircut, or wear bulky uniforms and body armour in 120F heat.  The money in particular is a sore subject, as Soldiers who are supporting families on $30,000 a year simply don't see the justice in staying in the military when contractors are making up to four times that for the same jobs.   There's also very little quality control when it comes to hiring as a contractor.  I think every aviatior knows of some crew chief who got kicked out of the Army (for obesity, drinking and driving, etc) and wound up getting hired for a contract maintenance service within a few weeks, working on the exact same aircraft, working fewer hours and being paid more money.  

While I tried to sway his mind by reminding him that contractor jobs would only be out there as long as there was a war going on--and with Iraq winding down and with Afghanistan being re-assessed with much more limited aims, that might not be that long--the prospect of a six-figure salary to tide him over until the economy got back on its feet was too promising to let go of.

Soldier #2 is another exceptionally bright Soldier who is roughly 22 years old.  He's one of the many who has heard of my tales of debauchery, many of which date from my college days.  Obviously influenced by my tales of close calls with the law, Slip and Slide Parties and whatnot, he wants to attain his college degree.  Well, for other good reasons, too, but I think ultimately because of what he's heard of the infamous Slip and Slide party.  He actually once asked me if college really was like Animal House, and I had to inform him that, yes, it was.

I asked him what his post-college plans were and he mentioned wanting to become a Foreign Service Officer with the State Department or even joining the Peace Corps.  I have to admit, I encouraged him to pursue these career fields.  As much as America is going to need more and more Soldiers, particularly with a planned increase in the Army's size, it is going to need those Soldiers in no small part because they're doing the jobs which once fell in the realm of the State Department.  At the end of the Cold War, America drastically cut the number of Foreign Service Officers, even as the total number of countries in the world increased.  America is going to have to hire far more Foreign Service Operatives in order to once again become viable in American foreign policy.  

And, since I'm bad at writing conclusions, here's your Megan Fox of the day: