I Finally Watched "Zero Dark Thirty"

Link: Review of Zero Dark Thirty

It took some time before I decided I was ready to watch "Zero Dark Thirty", Kathryn Bigelow's expensive, haunting attempt at a non-fiction portrayal of the search for Osama bin Laden and the raid that ended his life.  As a rule, I do not watch films about espionage (except James Bond. . . "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" still the best), especially the cotton-candy Mission Impossible or the Jason Bourne stuff.  However, if you enjoy fictional espionage writing, my friend and former colleague Joe Goldberg has a book coming out soon: Secret Wars - An Espionage Story.  It's more in the form of historical fiction and it is

Soon to be released book by
 Joe Goldberg  Twitter @jgoldhawk1 

sensational.  I've just finished it and a further review will come later. All I can say for now is keep your eyes peeled for it when it is published.   As for Zero Dark Thirty, I was a bit hesitant to watch it because of the issue of "enhanced interrogation techniques".  The movie graphically illustrates at least one particularly high profile procedure.  It should come as no surprise to anyone who has been reading my blog that I wholly support enhanced interrogation techniques.  Yes, I have seen them used.  In fact, every time that I have been aware that "enhanced interrogation techniques" (why don't I just say "waterboarding"?) were used, information was obtained that led to the capture of murderers and the saving of lives.  Now I may be a lot of things (Conservative, Vegetarian, observant Catholic, animal rights activist, Dallas Cowboys fan), but one thing I am not is a liar.  These techniques work to save lives.  I was concerned that any portrayal on the big screen would come off badly.  Actually, Bigelow did a fairly accurate job.  Unfortunately, it was all for show.  Its my understanding that waterboarding played no role whatsoever in the discovery of bin Laden's Abbottabad summer house.  So why purposely include waterboarding in the film?  Your guess is as good as mine.

Let me get my complaints out of the way first.  The character, Maya, is a complete mystery

to me.  I realize that a number of Seals have gone on record as saying that she did exist.  Well, I worked with Seal Team Six about five years before Abbottabad (I have no idea what the turnover/replacement timetable is for Navy Seals), and I would never accuse any of these guys of lying.  I loved working with them, I loved hanging out with them; I loved them period.  Members of the Navy Seals and U.S. Army Special Forces have a special place in the psyche of most American men.  At one time or another, we all wanted to be a Green Beret, or a Seal.  Being with the Seals was like spending time with your favorite sports stars or most admired actors.  They were down to earth, kind and considerate.  And funny as hell.  True, they live in a world that is almost all testosterone, and the jokes and hi-jinx were usually a part of the show.  But if a female Agency officer was present, they were, without exception, total gentlemen. And when it comes to their job, you WILL NOT meet a more dedicated group of men.  They are patient, well-read, and do not skip over the boring parts.  Too watch them at work is a bit like watching a Ballet.  They move as different parts of the same creature, and I have no doubt that communication takes place without words or signs.  They know each other that well.  So if the Seals say that Maya existed, then she did.  But I will take exception to the environment in which Maya functioned.  I guarantee you she was NOT the only Agency person on hand at the airbase before the lift-off for the raid.  And she was not the only Agency representative to view the body and make a positive I.D.  The Agency is much more thorough than that.  No doubt she saw the body; I would want to see it as well, to dispel the demon nightmares I still have from September 11, 2001.  But the movie created a character that worked seemingly alone in her own little world. "This job is the only job I've ever had" at the CIA.  I have a problem with that statement as well.  The CIA would not let someone with no track record and no relationships with other offices handle this sensitive and high-profile a case.  For most of the movie, she seemed to be following her chief around, writing numbers on his office window.  Is Maya a DI Intelligence Analyst (most Intelligence Analysts work in the DI)?  If so, then she certainly would not have been walking around the DO, saying mother fucker to the DCI.  I'm hoping she was a CTC Analyst, because they are second to none in professionalism and knowledge.  To summarize, the character was, at times, a bit of a caricature.  Possibly she was a combination of more than one person.  But let's get one thing clear.  No one, NO ONE short of the DCI, gets a plane to themselves, with a pilot who asks, "Where do you want to go?"

Overall, I loved the film.  It was beautifully shot and exceptionally researched.  The acting was first-rate, especially Jessica Chastain, James Gandolfini as Leon Panetta, and the guys playing the Navy Seals.  It certainly had the look of reality.  The filming of the raid was so well done.  I did notice that the Seals on screen made a bit too much noise during the operation, but the taking of the compound, from the outer walls to the inner sanctum, had me sitting on the edge of my seat.  The scenes inside the main building were probably reconstructed as close as possible to the real deal.   The ending was totally in snyc with the speed and temperament of the entire film.  I loved this movie, although I don't think I will watch it again.  The events leading up to that particular day, and the death of Osama bin Laden, are large part of the historic diorama of my generation.  It was important to spend the resources and time to track down bin Laden and take his life: as part of the obligation we have to those who suffered and died, that we will never forget.  This movie reminds me of the huge debt of gratitude that I owe to the Navy Seals, Green Berets, Air Force Special Ops, CIA Ground Branch, and all the men and women of our Armed Forces and National Guard.  We can never repay them in kind for their sacrifice and dedication, but we can try.  When you see that person in uniform, at the H.E.B., or Target, or Walmart, picking up a few groceries before heading home, please take a few seconds to thank them for their service and their sacrifice.  Truly, it is the least that we can do.

Battle Of Baghdad.....The End Of the Beginning

Links:  A. Iraqi Army Struggles On In Anbar
            B. Suicide Attack In Baiji

I'm hoping to eventually stumble onto a blog that is exclusively devoted to disseminating articles about Iraqi military engagements.  I am fascinated with the Iraqi Defense Force and its attempt to combat the Islamic Front in Anbar Province.  The conflict in Syria is ugly, disorganized, and hidden most of the time.  But for us armchair generals, Iraq presents the opportunity to watch at least one army as it pursues strategic goals.  The Iraqi Army is attempting to engage and destroy elements of the Islamic State in The Levant (IS) in Anbar Province.  Over the past month we have taken a close look at the strategies of both parties as the Iraqis seek to defend greater Baghdad.  Since its initial military movements in northern Iraq, the IS has presented a difficult target.  I had fallen into the trap of expecting IS forces engaged in Iraq to resemble the IS elements that had been engaged in Syria since 2012.  I was taken by surprise with the IS and its use of heavy weaponry (artillery in particular).  I had grown accustomed to groups of men riding around in Toyota pick-ups that had been rigged with an anti-aircraft or large caliber machine-gun in the bed.  From the beginning, the IS has shown a military sophistication in Iraq that includes the ability to effectively use artillery, strategically move large numbers of fighters from one area to another, and to control extensive resupply lines.  Most importantly, the IS has demonstrated the ability to adapt.  The IS appears just as comfortable using guerilla tactics as they do utilizing heavy weaponry and fighting in larger units.

The IS rarely makes a public statement without barking something or other about the creation of an Islamic Fundamentalist Nation.  They seem to prefer the word, "Caliphate", but who gives a shit.  This beast, which rose like a phoenix from the ashes of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and Al-Qaeda in Iraq, has a true organizational structure.  If we were in a boardroom and I had a flip chart, I could probably draw a nice diagram (and one of the numerous people sleeping would fart in appreciation).  We have the political IS and the military IS; the talented folks in CTC at Langley have the complete political picture, no doubt.  At the moment we here at MB are solely concerned with the military wing of the IS.  Link A seems to be a carbon copy of a situational update that I read last week in the NY Times.  Who controls Fallujah, the IS or the Iraqi Army?  And Ramadi?  The truth is that the only time the Iraqi Army makes any headway in Anbar is when they participate in a U.S.- planned ground attack (with armor) coordinated with allied air attacks.  The current state of the Iraqi Air Force seems to be a complete mystery.  They were supposed to receive 18 F16s over a period of two years.  The pilots are currently training in the United States, but Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, in a typical show of Iraqi ingratitude, complained about the F16 and purchased five second-hand Sukhoi (Su) 25's to counter the IS threat.  (Entertaining side note: Iran generously "gave" Iraq a handful of Su-25's as well, as a show of solidarity against the IS.  And by the way, the majority of the Su-25's that arrived from Iran were ex-Iraqi Air Force planes that had fled Iraq at the start of the Gulf War, rather than face sure death in combat with U.S. Air Force F16s.)  So we know that the Iraqi Air Force has a few Migs and Su-25s, not to mention a handful of Russian Helicopters.  Does anyone know if the Iraqi Air Force is participating in the allied air campaign?

Link B is a reminder that the IS is very familiar with urban-warfare tactics.  The suicide car bombs were a specialty of Zarqawi and Al-Qaeda in Iraq, and the Iraqis are experiencing them all over again.  Even though the heavier elements of the IS forces are engaged with the Iraqi Army in Anbar (and with allied air attacks in Syria), the plan to seed the poorer Sunni neighborhoods of greater Baghdad is in full swing.  From today onward, You can be sure that any mortars launched toward government buildings, military targets, or foreign diplomatic property in Baghdad, will originate from the poor Sunni bedroom communities of Baghdad.  And the car bombs will be built in the same neighborhoods.  The IS is conducting this war in a very sophisticated manner, successfully engaging in what is a three-front war (In September Secretary of Defense Hagel was quoted as saying that the goal was to force the IS to fight a three-front war).  The current areas of conflict include Syria, Anbar Province in eastern Iraq, and Kurdistan/northern Iraq.  I am surprised at the IS's ability to function so effectively.  I had anticipated that IS fortunes would suffer somewhere, but it hasn't happened.  They are hanging tough in Kobani, staying on the offensive against regular Syrian forces, threatening again in northern Iraq, and giving the Iraqi Army fits in Anbar.  Just this morning I learned that the IS had restarted the "Great Yezidi Roundup of 2014".  Yee Ha.  You would think that after a while they would run out of Yezidis. 

I'm going out on a limb and predicting that as the days go by, the focus of this conflict will become less on Syria and more on Iraq.  The IS is determined to capture Baghdad.  It hasn't always been a target, but once it became apparent that Baghdad could be captured, the IS created a plan.  Seed the poorer neighborhoods with operatives, play-up the Sunni/Shia conflict, conduct daily car bombings and mortar attacks, and destabilize the city.  With no U.S. ground forces, the IS will have little trouble taking Baghdad one street at a time, the same MO presently in use in Ramadi and Fallujah.  I think we can call the last week of October 2014, the end of the beginning of The Battle of Baghdad.

Are We Focused Too Exclusively On The Islamic State?

Link: Who Is This Unknown Group That Has Experts Concerned?


Before the 1998 terrorist attacks on the U.S. embassies in Nairobi and Dar Es Salaam, very few Americans had ever heard of Al-Qaeda.  The terror group had been active for some years, recruiting and causing trouble in the Horn of Africa and Yemen.  In the four-year period between 1998 and 2002, Al-Qaeda (AQ) became a household name.  Hezbollah, Hamas, and the P.L.O. basically disappeared from the U.S. media target list.  Why not?  Those three groups were only focused on destroying Israel.  Al-Qaeda, now there was a group of young men with ambition.  After September 11, the United States justifiably declared war on AQ.  In true warrior fashion, President George Bush developed a strategy that would take the fight to the enemy.  Another important part of that strategy was the need to force AQ into a conventional war, which they were ill-prepared to win.  For one reason or another (enough blame to go around folks), we took our eye off the ball.  While its true we cut off the snake's head (bin-Laden), at least two more have grown back in its place.

I appreciate the concern expressed by the experts in the link provided, as it demonstrates that we have established a solid network of assets in the region.  But I continue to be concerned with the reluctance of the policymakers to accept the fact that these groups are basically part of the same monster.  Al-Qaeda in Magreb, Al-Qaeda in al-Sharm, Al-Qaeda in Yemen, Islamic State, Egyptian Islamic Jihad, and on and on.  These groups talk to one another and they support one another.  Any reporting that details a rift between respective groups had better be vetted well, because that is just the type of disinformation these assholes use.  I strongly support the approach taken by the CIA.  While the Agency has analysts taking apart each respective group, it falls under one inclusive umbrella known as the Counter Terrorism Center (CTC).  I don't know if anyone will ever be able to adequately detail how many lives have been saved because of the work of these folks.  Seeing these folks at work is truly amazing, and will make your pride swell.  Not only has CTC uncovered and disrupted countless plans to attack U.S. interests, they have also shared life-saving information with our international friends.  Its not that complicated, really.  CTC Case Officers travel to the hot spots, use their training to spot, assess, and recruit people in positions of access.  They must set up a safe, flexible commo plan so that the information can be shared on a "need-to-know" only basis.  Most important is to keep your contact/asset safe.  When I rummage through the archives of my own gray matter (enter at your peril), I cannot recall very many instances in which Agency contacts have been uncovered.  Many times the bad guys will feed false stories to the local media (hello, Russia) in order to demonstrate some success against the Agency.  I am proud to have once worked (three months!) in CTC, and proud as an American at their tremendous sacrifice and their spectacular successes, most of which you may never know.

Sorry for getting a bit off track.  My point is, that we would all be better off considering international terrorism to be one, nasty, dangerous conglomerate.  These people have money and they get around.  Language and culture issues do not stand in the way, as they are the experts at practicing "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".  The war in which we find ourselves is against TERRORISM.  It shouldn't necessarily include narco-traffickers but if a few get blown away in the process, all the better.  If we keep our focus on their focus (the destruction of western culture and civilization), it will be easier to attack this monster head-on.  Let the experts at Langley, Interpol, and other various allied intel agencies worry about the different names and personalities.  The linked article mentions the name of a lesser-known group in Syria calling itself "Khorasan".  From what limited information the media has been able to obtain, this group consists of a small number of Al-Qaeda veterans and prefers to recruit foreigners.  Its penchant for conducting bombing attacks probably has something to do with the focus of its recruitment.  At the end of the day, I'm sure this group is no less violent and cowardly as the next.  Instead of singling out Khorasan, they should be lumped into the pile of shit we already know as International Terrorism.

Sooner or later I believe our government is going to create an Agency to focus exclusively on the terrorist target.  As of today we have counter-terrorist elements within the CIA, Department of Defense, FBI, and NSA.  The problem has become such a threat that it would be in our best interest to collate all the intelligence in one repository.  I think a "pseudo-effort" to accomplish this was the creation of the Director of National Intelligence, but I can't help but fear that much is lost in the transfer from one office to another.  The events of September 11 went a long way to obliging the various agencies to share trace information (thank goodness).  I hope we look towards creating this singularly-focused Agency soon.  I'm also hoping that we don't replicate too much work by searching for hundreds of different groups with different names.  They all share one moniker," the enemy", and they should receive an equal amount of our fury. 

Somalian-based Terrorist Group Al-Shabaab Threat to U.S. Interests in Uganda

Link: Uganda Foils Imminent Al-Shabaab terror Plot


To understand the particular brand of compost that makes up the Somalian terrorist group Al-Shabaab (The Younger), Mookie Baby will have to take a quick trip through history.  Somalia, which occupies the eastern Horn of Africa, was an Italian colony until the end of World War II.  At one time it was home to a sizable Italian population, and would have made a strategic port for the Italian Navy. (Why does the new Italian Navy have glass bottom boats?  So they can look at the old Italian Navy.)  After the war it was administered as a protectorate by the Brits until Independence in 1960.  In 1991 Somalia descended into the nastiest kind of civil war.  In the ten years leading up the civil war, the economy had broken down, the capital Moqdishu was often without power, and the government had become more unpopular and repressive.  When the government finally fell, Somalia collapsed into many separate areas of authority.  A group of Islamic Courts was created to help the people work through conflicts (using Sharia Law, of course).  These Courts eventually started providing aid and healthcare and adopted the name "Islamic Courts Union" (ICU).  The ICU swallowed up weaker authorities and expanded quickly. 

In 1999 the Courts and various affiliated groups merged to create a militia, the ICUP.  At its greatest strength, ICU was in control of Moqdishu and all of south Somalia.  Interestingly enough, a government run by judges is called a "Krytocracy" (thank you, Wikipedia).  From 1999 to 2006, the ICU fought against a variety of different home-grown groups including a number of "Transitional Governments" supported by the Arab League and African Union.  In 2006, with the ICU apparently in control of all of Moqdishu and large parts of Somalia, Ethiopia invaded.  The Ethiopians had no trouble defeating the various militias aligned with the ICU.  A Transitional Federal Government (TFG), supported by Ethiopia, the African Union, and apparently the UN, forced the remaining elements of ICU into the rural areas (although certain sectors of Moqdishu remained in Al-Shabaab control until 2011).  The ICU splintered into a number of groups, including Al-Shabaab, which describes itself as carrying out a jihad against the enemies of Islam, the TRG, and the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM).  Al-Shabaab is known to butcher herds of elephants to raise money from their Ivory, and also collects ransoms from kidnappings.  Internationally, Eritrea (Eritrea's Intelligence Service in particular), has been accused of providing support to Al-Shabaab (Eritrea hates Ethiopia, Ethiopia is at war with Al-Shabaab, therefore Eritrea supports Al-Shabaab; just another verse in the famous tune "the enemy of my enemy is my friend").

After 2006, Al-Shabaab began to resemble a smaller, more tactile terrorist group.  Attacks were conducted against targets in Kenya, especially areas frequented by western tourists.  Starting in 2011, Al-Shabaab began conducting small scale attacks against defenseless targets in Nairobi and also in areas of northeast Kenya.  Hundreds of people were killed.  In December 2013, Al-Shabaab attacked an upscale shopping market in Nairobi (frequented by ex-pats, diplomats, and wealthy Kenyans) and thirty-nine people were killed.  In September 2014, a Drone strike killed Al-Shabaab leader Moktar Ali Zubayr.  Operations by Kenyan police and Special Forces, with assistance from western allies, conducted many successful raids against Al-Shabaab in 2013 and 2014.  It was believed by many that the death of Zubayr spelled the beginning of the end for Al-Shabaab.  It might have been wishful thinking, as the link provided above details Ugandan authorities working against a suspected Al-Shabaab operation in Entebbe, Uganda.  In 2012 Al-Shabaab announced a merger with a Somali-based Al-Qaeda group.  Intelligence has also confirmed that Al-Shabaab is in contact with Al-Qaeda In the Maghreb (AQIM) and Nigerian Islamic fundamentalist group Boko Haram (see previous post on Boko Haram).

It would be unwise to consider Al-Shabaab irrelevant.  In many instances, terrorist groups become more of a threat as they become smaller.  They are able to travel easier and don't require much in the way of resources (although everyone needs an AK-47, a beheading knife, and a bomb or two).  I can imagine the poor folks at CTC in Langley trying to make sense of all these various groups.  One of the reasons they splinter in this manner is to make it difficult for the good guys to stay on top of their game.  It would be much easier to follow and destroy three large terrorist networks, as opposed to the difficulty (and resources needed) to combat over one hundred different groups.  The key is not to get bogged down in the different names and titles.  These people all have the same basic goal, creating chaos and fear through murder and destruction.  They are best confronted as one monster: International Terrorism.