April 23, 2026

Essays

Incident Command – What You Need To Know

Incident Command – What You Need To Know

Michael Cessna February 9, 2024 0

 

 

 

 

 

 

Everyone has seen some form of disaster. Whether that disaster was a war, civil unrest or rioting, an earthquake, volcanic eruption, or some sort of sudden climatic disaster like a flood, almost everyone with an internet connection has experienced a disaster, even if they do so vicariously. But, unless the viewer is physically present in the disaster area, few people have any idea how “the authorities” are able to handle the disaster of the day, at any level of competence.

The answer, since 1968, has been the Incident Command System, or ICS.

Originally developed at a meeting of fire chiefs in Southern California, the ICS idea began as a development of command processes from the United States Navy. It was not, however, a smooth process. The failures in response management during the massive Laguna Fire of 1970 showed that methods of coordination and control were near-completely divorced from reality, and that a great deal of more work was required to develop a coherent and standardized response to emergencies. Beginning in 1973, with the creation of the FIRESCOPE program, what would evolve into the modern form of ICS began with the Tactical Field Control Operations section of FIRESCOPE, ICS quickly matured as Federal, State and local agencies adopted the idea as a standard system.

Seeing the utility of the idea, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) eventually created a 20-hour long standard training course that would allow the creation of emergency management teams in any area that could assemble the requisite personnel and assets. Coupled to a much more basic training program for civilians to act in disaster operations, this combination has significantly helped bring order out of chaos in many real-world disaster situations.

In doing so, it is a shining example of what government can do when it gets something right.

However, lurking in the background was ICS’s genesis as a military-based command structure. In the US military of the 21st century, this is known as either “Battle Tracking” or “Command Post Operations”.

Because the situation in combat can completely change in a matter of minutes – or less – the idea of having a detailed, yet flexible, set of command protocols has been a very important feature of military operations for decades…And yet, the vast majority of civilians know little or nothing about the process of emergency management.

This is not really surprising, because despite their frequency, natural disasters and wars are very rare occurrences in the lives of most people. But, those dangers can present themselves at any time…and knowing at least something of the process – even if the reader never signs up for a course – will prove helpful should you ever find yourself in a disaster situation, by at least helping to understand at some level what is happening.

 

FEMA Incident Command organizational chart. 2008. By FEMA. Public Domain.

 

The above image depicts the standard notional organization of an Incident Command organization. It is a rather bland, “vanilla” organization, because it is intended to scale to any region, from a small town to the nation as a whole. It outlines the basic departments that would have to function in most emergencies. At the same time, it allows for expansion by adding specialist groups, should the situation call for it. This also allows for “on the spot” recruiting of survivors and volunteers to fill in holes.

A good overview of the process comes from the West Virginia Department of Education, which shows how a specific organization might use the basic ICS format to create its own specialized structure, based on what it deems are its unique needs.

But…How does this apply in any real depth to the individual – in a word, why should you actually care about this process?

To echo the beginning of this article, there are any numbers of dangers, natural and man-made, that can happen suddenly and without warning. There is a greater that 0% chance that you, the Reader, may find yourself in a sudden disaster situation – and help may not be on the immediate horizon. It may come down to you, to start getting things organized.

This is no encouragement to “Walter Mitty” fantasies. The fact that you may have never found yourself in such a desperate situation does not mean that you never will…and with the apparent trajectory of the world, as described by the news every day, the chances that you, personally, may have to either apply the ideas outlined above or step up to take part, is becoming a rapidly increasing possibility.

An article such as this is far too brief to do more than touch on the idea as a general concept. There are videos available that can give you a basic run-down, and the S2 Underground is a great place to start. But, while your author is usually loathe to recommend any government website for any practical purpose, in this case, the Reader should refer to the FEMA links provided above. Most counties in the United States offer some form of emergency management and response classes. Take at least a basic CERT course, to understand the tasks and challenges in responding to disasters – of whatever type – and to become better prepared for whatever might roll in your direction.

The world can be a scary place. But, it becomes significantly less scary if you understand the potential situations, and your options in those situations. You will not be able to learn these skills, nor establish connections with your friends, neighbors and fellow citizens through osmosis – you have to go out and acquire the necessary skills and contacts.

You and your family will appreciate it later.

 

 

The Freedomist — Keeping Watch, So You Don’t Have To
Tools of the Trade – If I Could Only Have One

Tools of the Trade – If I Could Only Have One

Michael Cessna February 2, 2024 0

 

 

 

 

 

 

As we head into February of 2024, the “wars and rumors of wars” have plateaued, for the moment: Israel’s campaign against the Hamas terror group is still grinding on; the Russian offensives against Ukraine continue to make progress, albeit slowly and painfully; the Chinese Communists are engaging in the time-honored Communist tradition of gutting their military leadership at the most inopportune times; United States and British naval forces continue to sporadically pound Houthi terrorist outposts in Yemen, although their effectiveness is somewhat in question, as the Indian Navy is engaging the occasional Somali pirate boat. Iranian mullahs continue to attempt to foment trouble around the world – no doubt helped by the $6 billion US Dollars sent to them by the Biden administration – even as the US flexes its bomber muscles in the region…And, speaking of that increasingly criminal organization, it seems to have blinked in its standoff with the US State of Texas over its criminal failure to execute the most basic of its duties under the United States Constitution – i.e., securing the US border against a literal invasion – even as it exposed itself, yet again, as holding the United States’ populace hostage to its desire to fund even more openly-criminal groups throughout the world.

In a word – things are on a low roar, at the moment. As a result, we’re going to take a look at something interesting and informative, as Freedomist/MIA doesn’t engage in the “fear-porn” popular in current media. When something develops in the arena of conflicts, we will cover it then, rather than keep terrifying you with spammy updates. That said…

 

Boomsticks

I usually make a conscious effort to avoid arguing for a “best rifle” (handguns are even more of a no-go in my recommendation department). Usually, I prefer to simply present you, the Reader, with a brief historical overview of a particular firearm that most people may not be familiar with, especially if the Reader might find themselves “going downrange”, in the modern vernacular.

In this case, however, I will make an exception. What follows, is strictly my own opinion – you can, of course, disagree with me…but you’ll still be wrong.

If I were forced to have only one, single “long gun” – either a rifle or a shotgun – what would that be? My answer, which has not changed in over twenty years, is the Simonov SKS rifle, and specifically, the Yugoslavian M59/66, made by Zavasta.

 

Yugoslavian M59/66 SKS variant, with folded bayonet and grenade launcher on the muzzle. CCA/4.0

 

…..‘Wut’?

The SKS rifle was designed in 1945 by Soviet weapons designer Sergei Gavrilovich Simonov. Chambered in the M43 cartridge designed in 1944, the SKS and its derivatives are semi-automatic rifles, firing from a fixed, ten-round magazine. The M43 cartridge – despite its similar appearance – has no ‘shared history’ with the German 7.92x33mm Kurz cartridge, used in the “first assault rifle”, the Sturmgewehr-44; the M43 is measurably more powerful than the German cartridge, being functionally equal, ballistically speaking, to the venerable .30-30 Winchester cartridge (pronounced “thirty-thirty”), which dates from 1895, and remains one of the most popular hunting cartridges in the world, often in the guise of the Winchester 1894 lever-action rifle. However, the M43 is much more space-efficient, being both shorter, overall, than the .30-30, but also in that it is a rimless cartridge, as opposed to the .30-30’s rimmed case, which makes loading into a vertical magazine not impossible, but it is problematic.

The SKS magazine usually feeds from a 10-round stripper clip, but – unlike the US-designed M1 Garand – stripper clips are not required to load the magazine; loading the magazine with loose rounds is certainly slower than with a strip-clip, but is far better than the M1’s en bloc system, since without an en bloc clip in place, the M1 rifle is simply a single shot rifle.

 

8-round en bloc clip for the M1 Garand rifle (left) and an SKS 10-round stripper clip. 2009. Public Domain.

 

An obvious question at this juncture would be the SKS’s relationship to the much better known AK-47 rifle. The answer is: not much. Aside from using the same cartridge, the two weapons are very different: the SKS uses a fixed (meaning, “non-detachable”) 10-shot magazine, while the AK uses detachable, 30-round box magazines. The only similarity is that the gas tubes look alike, although they function differently.

As a military weapon, originally, the SKS came with some features not usually found in civilian hunting weapons. In addition to its one-piece cleaning rod slotted under the barrel, the SKS was issued with a cleaning kit stored in its butt-stock. While this was a relatively common feature in military rifles, the SKS also featured an integral bayonet that folded around and under the barrel. While there has been a rash – yet again – of certain quarters declaring the bayonet to be dead (much like the tank), it is not, even though they are rare in the West; they are very likely more common in non-Western nations, but little in the way of technical details come out of those quarters.

 

SKS bayonet, folded (top) and unfolded. 2019. CCA/4.0

 

Another point in the SKS’s favor is that it has a greater range than the AK-47, with an effective range roughly 100 meters longer than Kalashnikov’s rifle, due to its longer barrel – in ballistics, size really does matter, up to a point.

Finally, the Yugoslavian M59/66 version incorporates a built-in launcher for the world-standard 22mm rifle grenades, which used to be a common feature on many of the world’s military rifles.

The SKS was adopted, in some military capacity, by at least seventy nations, and usually remained in service long after those nations had switched to other weapons, such as the AK47, the M-16 or something else. The SKS, in its many variants, can be found on battlefields around the world, to this day.

 

American soldier in a training session of rifle grenade launch. Blank grenade fitted in a M1 Garand rifle with the Rifle Grenade Launcher, M7. 1944. US Army photo.

 

So – after the above information, why would this be the rifle I would pick, if I could only have one rifle?

First, it checks the widest number of boxes: it is fully capable as a hunting rifle for virtually any game I would consider hunting; I have neither plans nor desires to go hunting for bears or moose…and were I to run into either – that’s why I have ten rounds.

Next, it is semi-automatic in operation. This is a real point, because as a semi-automatic, it automatically extracts, ejects and chambers a new cartridge on its own, until the magazine is empty. With other weapons, including lever-actions like the Winchester ’94, or bolt-actions like the Mauser, Enfield, Mosin-Nagant, Carcano, etc., manually working the action usually involves breaking the shooter’s grip on the rifle, forcing them to realigned their eyes to the sights. Semi-automatics like the SKS and M1 Garand eliminate this issue.

Next, is its cartridge. While any gaggle of shooters will argue endlessly over the merits of “this cartridge vs that”, no one can dispute the effectiveness of the M43 round, now over 75 years old, in both hunting and combat, and its ammunition is relatively common and “cheap-ish” for civilian buyers in the US to lay hands on (at least at the moment). While its range may not be the longest, 400 meters is perfectly sufficient for most uses. Then, there is its sheer simplicity: there are not that many parts to deal with when you need to take it apart, and none of those are particularly small, or easy to lose.

 

SKS rifle field stripped. 2009. Public Domain.

 

That pretty much sums up the civilian hunting – and “SHTF” (S*** Hits The Fan) – side of why this would be my go-to.

The other side, obviously, is whether it is still an effective weapon for “military-type” use. True, it is not selective-fire, as modern military rifles are. And, yes, it has “only” a ten-round magazine, versus the 30-round detachable magazines that modern military rifles use. And realistically, do you really need the extra weight of a bayonet, much less a grenade launcher?

So, let’s address the above questions.

First, selective fire rifles (i.e., rifles that can fire in the fully-automatic mode, similar to an actual machine gun) has long been understood to be virtually useless in individual combat rifles – outside of very narrow circumstances – because rifles are too lightweight to lay a predictable pattern of fire, which is what actual machine guns are designed for…“Fully Automatic Machine Gun Fun” is, well, fun, but that’s usually all it is.

Second, is the magazine. If the Reader were to buy, say, an AR-15 or a civilian-legal AK-47, each of those 30-round detachable magazines will run anywhere from (as of early 2024) $9 – $25, each, depending on what you’re buying…and you’re going to need at least three to five of them, because even just going to the range will get very annoying, very fast, if you only have one or two magazines. In contrast, the SKS’s 10-round stripper clips can be reloaded with commercial ammunition if you save the clips, and you can buy military surplus ammunition that comes in sealed “Spam-Cans”, with all of the rounds factory-loaded onto stripper clips.

There is also the relentless controversy over the dreaded “magazine spring ‘taking a set’” – the notion that leaving magazines stored fully loaded for too long will weaken their internal springs over time. Personally, I’ve never had this happen, but I can see the other side of the argument…all of which is irrelevant with the SKS: if its magazine spring is sticking or is weak – replace it.

Because of this, you can load whatever type of field rig you prefer with SKS stripper clips, and they will sit there happily and patiently, waiting for you to use them, until they are so old, they are corroding their cases.

As to the grenade launcher and bayonet? Well – I certainly hope that I never need to use either of those two features; if that has happened, world civilization has collapsed, and all bets will really be off…But, in the unlikely event that the world has been reduced to that state, I would far prefer to have those feature and not need them, than to need them and have them.

The SKS: You need Simonov’s simple rifle…just, please – don’t “Bubbify” it with Tapco gear.

Trust me, there.

 

Inevitable Consequences and Alamo Moments

Inevitable Consequences and Alamo Moments

Michael Cessna January 26, 2024 0

 

 

 

 

 

On January 24th 2024, Texas Governor Greg Abbott issued a statement, concerning the right of the State of Texas to defend itself from invasion, because – quoting from the statement – the Federal Government as a body and specifically, the administration of President Joe Biden, have broken the Compact between the Several States and the Federal Government (the foundational concept that underpins the notion of the “United States of America”) by not simply pointedly and openly declining to defend the nation from a literal “invasion” at the southern border, but in actively taking measures to prevent the State of Texas from defending itself.

Abbott specifically cited the Biden administration failing to fulfill its duties under Article IV § 4 of the Constitution, which has now required Abbott, as Governor, to invoke Article 1 § 10 Clause 3 of the Constitution requiring him to take measures to defend the state.

This statement was issued on the heels of a frankly stunning decision by the United States Supreme Court on January 22nd, which allowed the US Border Patrol to remove razor wire barricades emplaced by Texas National Guard troops assigned to defend Texas’ border with Mexico along the Rio Grande River. In effect, the Supreme Court sided with the Biden administration in suborning an invasion of the United States.

The massive influx of illegal aliens is a subject we have discussed here previously. The fairest “neutral” assessment of the impact of illegal immigration comes from, of all places, Wikipedia:

 

“The economic impact of illegal immigrants in the United States is challenging to measure, and politically contentious…”

 

 

However, given the reactions of “sanctuary cities” – most of them longtime strongholds of the Democrat Party – to having waves of “migrants” dumped (waves that are not even comparable to the numbers being dumped on Texas) on their doorsteps, not just by Republican-led states such as Texas and Florida, but by the Federal Government itself, it is clear that the staggering numbers are having an immediate, clear and disproportionate impact on the nation (leaving aside said migrants frequently complaining bitterly about the aid and shelter they are given, including appeals to citizens to house illegal aliens in churches and private homes).

In response to Governor Abbott’s January 24th statement, many politicians have begun to hysterically demand that President Biden federalize the Texas National Guard to halt the Texas program to stem the flow of illegal migrants, and to restrict them to using the legal crossing points, and to follow the established legal processes.

This situation (which has been building for well over a decade as of this writing), and the breathless demands to invoke the Insurrection Act to stop Texas’ actions, has brought the nation perilously close to an actual “civil war”, for the first time since 1860. This is because, as of this writing, some twenty-five state Governors have definitively stated their support of Governor Abbott and the state of Texas.

Actually federalizing a state’s National Guard against the wishes of their state’s governor has been done before, famously in 1957 in Arkansas in regards to the “Little Rock Nine”. A popular misconception is that a state’s National Guard cannot be federalized without that state’s governor consenting to the mobilization. As demonstrated in Arkansas, this is patently untrue.

The National Guard was created by the Militia Act of 1903, known popularly as the “Dick Act” after its sponsor, Ohio Congressman Charles Dick (R), in response to the severe manpower shortage in the US Army in the aftermath of the Spanish-American War (1898) and the subsequent campaigns against Filipino guerrillas in the Philippines Insurrection (1899-1902).

This latter campaign was hampered by American volunteers – who had been enlisted for a period of two years – insisting on being sent home after the conclusion of the war against Spain. As those who had volunteered specifically for the war against Spain were technically still a part of the Militia of the United States, they could not be required to serve longer than the conclusion of the war unless they specifically volunteered to do so.

This manpower issue came from Article 1, § 8, Clause 15 of the “Militia Clauses” (which includes Clause 16 of the same Article and Section) of the Constitution, which strictly limits the call-up and use of the Militia to executing “…the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions…” As a result, the United States quickly found itself significantly hampered in the Philippines by not having enough troops.

The “Dick Act” was written specifically to bypass the restrictions of the “Militia Clauses”, in order to create a new military entity in the form of the National Guard (and later, the Air National Guard). In effect, the “Dick Act” created a type of reserve formation for the US Army (before the creation of the actual “Army Reserve”), which (ultimately) would be equipped and trained by the US Army, but which be paid for by the states, who would also be allowed to use the military formations within the state, at the discretion of its governor. However, if the Federal government decided that they needed to mobilize the National Guard, they could do so at any time…whether a governor agrees with the Federal government or not, as was demonstrated in 1957, in Arkansas.

In the context of the hysterical demands of partisan political hacks, this would mean that President Biden would have to declare the State of Texas to be in rebellion against the United States – something that has only happened once in United States history – in order to force the Texas National Guard to disregard the orders of its state Commander in Chief in the face of an active invasion of their state.

Stop, and consider that implication.

If President Biden were to take such an ill-advised action, that would place the Texas National Guard in the position of obeying either the Federal Government – and allowing a massive invasion of their home state by massive numbers of “military-age males”  who certainly did not walk north from homes in Mexico, or Central or South America, because “economic asylum seekers” do not buy airplane tickets from Africa to Mexico, in order to walk north…

…Conversely, the Texas National Guard could refuse orders to federalize. This would constitute “Mutiny”, under Article 94 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ, the legal code of the US armed forces), at the very least. This would place the Federal government in the position of having to arrest up to 19,000 people en masse.

In like manner, there would then be the question of the reactions of the various states and governors who have expressed their solidarity with Governor Abbott’s actions…

This perilous situation is the ultimate outcome of decades of neglect, political pandering and the abject failure of successive Federal governments to execute the most basic of their duties, duties that the Several States voluntarily allowed the Federal Government to maintain authority for, as a condition of their joining the Federal Union in 1789. Leaving aside the obtuse legalities of this situation, the reality is that the American Left – led primarily by the Democrat Party – has driven the nation to a potential breakpoint, where the States may well declare the sitting Federal Government to no longer be a legitimate body. Such an action could go in several directions, none of them good, and all of them highly dangerous.

And while pundits and armchair-warrior-gamers may believe the nearly incoherent ramblings of President Biden, the reality is that the United States military and law enforcement establishments are not able to enforce any nationwide martial law order; in fact, it is questionable if they could enforce such an order over any large metropolitan area, given what happened the last time Federal troops were deployed under “Operation Garden Plot” was engaged.

…In the end, this writer has no solution to this problem, other than telling the Federal government to do its job in securing the borders of the United States, which it has consistently failed to do for over forty years.

The alternatives are not desired by any sane person.

 

 

 

The Freedomist — Keeping Watch, So You Don’t Have To
The Forgotten War

The Forgotten War

Michael Cessna January 19, 2024 0

 

 

 

 

 

There are wars, and rumors of wars, all over the world as 2024 dawns. Russia and Ukraine continue to bludgeon each other relentlessly. Israel’s war against Hamas grinds on, threatening to expand into the southern territory of Lebanon under the control of the Iranian-backed Hezbollah terror group. To the south and east, the Houthis in Yemen are waging a “pin-prick war” that has diverted some 12% of the world’s commercial shipping, forcing extensive delays and threatening to log-jam global trade on a scale that rivals the dislocations of the COVID pandemic, as their backers in Iran rattle their own sabers and threaten the oil export structure of the Persian Gulf.

Across the Red Sea from Yemen, wars rage in Sudan and Ethiopia, while Ethiopia’s own actions threaten wars with Eritrea and Somalia. To the north, Egypt and Jordan – for different reasons – are on the verge of internal collapse. Throughout the rest of Africa, nations struggle with internal, interminable and seemingly unsolvable issues, with many states facing continued attacks from radical jihadist militias. In Myanmar, the military government is clinging to power by its proverbial fingernails. In South America, Venezuela continues to threaten the annexation of Guyana, while Bolivia and Ecuador are the new battlegrounds in the war of the drug cartels.

Naturally, with all of these long-running – or suddenly appearing – conflicts, most of them remote, obscure and obtuse to outsiders, there are other conflicts that get lost in the shuffle…but those conflicts are no less important; in fact, many of them are not petty in any way, with the victims not simply being on the short end of the stick, but who were actively abandoned to the whims of ‘realpolitik’.

The war in Kurdistan is just that kind of conflict.

The wars and depredations inflicted on the Kurdish people for over one hundred years have largely been caused by the West, primarily Britain and France…but the United States hasn’t helped. And that war continues, not only against Syria and Turkey, but against Iran.

While the Kurdish nation has been noted as a separate and distinct people since the 11th Century, when the term “Kurdistan” was noted by the Seljuk Empire, it was only after World War 1, and the last, vile gasp of debased European imperialism – the Sykes-Picot Agreement – that the real agony began.

Neither Kurdistan nor its people were given more than lip service by Britain and France. Bolshevik (Communist) Russia repudiated any Russian claims associated with the agreement after the revolution that unseated the Tsar, as they had far more pressing problems. The signatories, channeling previous agreements covering African and Asia, cavalierly split what they, themselves, knew to be ethnically Kurdish areas between themselves to rule. While subsequent, limp-wristed treaties “graciously” allowed for the possibility of a Kurdish state (despite several Kurdish states being organized from 1918 to 1930), the European powers threw up their hands in 1923, and washed their hands of the Kurdish areas, for the most part, with the Treaty of Lausanne, which made no mention of the region at all, condemning the Kurdish people to be split between what is now Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran. The Kurd’s only ally of significance was Winston Churchill, who argued for a separate Kurdish state, but his political influence in the 1920’s was very limited, compared to what it would become in later decades.

 

Lt Col Francis R. Maunsell’s map, Pre-World War I British Ethnographical Map of eastern Turkey in Asia, Syria and western Persia, 1910. Kurdish regions are in yellow. Library of Congress.

 

The 1920 Treaty of Sèvres was a draft treaty between the Ottoman Empire and the Principal Allied Powers. It was ultimately shelved because of Turkish non-ratification and was replaced by the Treaty of Lausanne. Map by User:Zero0000 CCA/4.0

 

But the Kurds wouldn’t give up.

The Kurds sent a delegation to the San Francisco Peace Conference of 1945, which would form the United Nations, to argue for an independent state; they were, of course, refused. But, armed Kurdish groups continually waged low-level guerrilla wars against the states they had been relegated to; the wars’ ferocity depended on how intense the ruling government’s programs to suppress Kurdish culture were at the time.

However, this would occasionally swing into full-on war crime territory, as happened in the Halabja Massacre of 1988, when the Kurdish village was attacked with lethal “war agent” chemicals weapons, primarily mustard gas, but also with a mix of nerve and blood agents. It is generally assumed that Saddam Hussein’s government was responsible for the attack, although allegations have long been made against Iran.

When the 1991 Persian Gulf War ended, US President George H. W. Bush made casual, off-hand remarks, that left many in Iraq – including the Kurds – believing that if they rose up to overthrow Saddam Hussein, they would get at least some help from the United States. Unfortunately for them, the Kurds in the north and Shi’a Iraqis in the south read far too much into the first Bush’s words, and were left stunned (assuming they lived) then they rose up…and the United States barely lifted a finger, seemingly completely surprised that the subject peoples of a brutal dictatorship might actually have the gall to rise up in armed revolt against said brutal government.

The absolute cheek of little people.

Shamed into doing something, though, the Bush administration launched “Operation Provide Comfort” to protect Kurdish refugees fleeing the Iraqi Army units not destroyed fighting the United States and its allies in Kuwait.

Quite unintentionally, this would be the first real break for Kurdish autonomy since 1918. The strict limiting of Iraqi military abilities against the Kurds left the northern people able to organize in safety, and begin building a formal military organization, the Peshmerga, from scattered guerrilla forces. While remaining in “recognition limbo” – without formal recognition as a sovereign state – the Kurdish authorities could not legally purchase military weapons on the open world market, forcing them to develop a “cottage industry” for making weapons, alongside reusing weapons captured from Iraqi forces when the government in Baghdad drags its feet on providing any, buying weapons on the black market and the occasional under-the-table crumbs offered by a scattering of Western states.

With the overthrow of Saddam in 2003, and the resulting upheaval in the aftermath, this organization became much more formalized and professional, at least compared to where it had been. It still has serious internal issues, a reflection of thirty-odd years of disordered and fragmented political organization, leading to a fragmented command and operational structure.

Kurdistan deserves better, not least because they have carried the United States water in the region with little return for their money. Kurdistan, from 2003 onwards, made themselves into a safe area for the US and its allies, doing what it could against Al Qaeda-aligned jihadist groups, for very little return.

Kurdistan remains split between four nations, with no prospect of real help from anyone else. Syria, still embroiled in its decade-and-a-half long civil war, has no intention of allowing its Kurdish regions to leave the country; the autonomous region known as “Rojava” formalized in 2018 is nothing more than a convenience for Bashar al-Assad’s government in Damascus.

The United States is unlikely to attempt to rein in the extreme excesses of Turkey’s operations in its own Kurdish areas, nor the northern parts of Syria and Iraq. This is because Turkey, as a member of NATO, is vital to European security…even as the Turkish state keeps expanding its influence throughout the world.

Likewise, Iraq is not about to allow its own Kurdish areas to actually leave, as that would remove a large oil-producing area from the country, fundamentally weakening the shaky government in Baghdad.

And then – there is Iran.

The mullahs in control of Iran view its Kurdish population as a useful foil that allows them to accuse any number of nations of trying to undermine them, while occasionally killing people wholesale to intimidate all of its ethnic minorities.

Now, however, with wider wars exploding throughout the region, as well as the rest of the world, the faint glimmer exists that the Kurds may soon have a chance to finally establish themselves as an organized state. The chances are remote, and it will be neither easy nor bloodless, but the chance is there.

The question is: Can the Kurd’s leadership come together to capitalize on the opportunity?

If they can, the United States should help make it happen – that’s not “imperialism”. That’s helping your actual friends, who have sacrificed to help you in the past, with no prompting.

 

 

 

The Freedomist — Keeping Watch, So You Don’t Have To
Robbing Peter To Pay Paul

Robbing Peter To Pay Paul

Michael Cessna January 12, 2024 0

 

 

 

 

 

It would seem that 2024 is off with a bang, if the Reader will forgive the pun.

Beginning on October 7th of 2023, of course, Hamas launched its suicidal Don Quixote war with Israel, showing that the debased savagery of the Islamic State is alive and well. Shortly after, on October 13th, Ethiopian Prime Minister Abey Ahmed announced what can only be termed a policy of “lebensraum” for Ethiopia, demanding free access to the Red Sea. And, as if on cue, the Houthi rebels in Yemen began attacking any unarmed commercial vessels they could draw a bead on in the nautical chokepoint of the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait, controlling the southern access point to the Red Sea.

Now, as the second week of January 2024 closes, Iran has entered the fray, seizing the oil tanker St. Nikolas off the coast of Oman, in the Arabian Sea, significantly widening the security problem – and potential naval combat area. Iran’s explanation for the seizure is a flimsy claim to Iranian ownership, a claim even flimsier than the excuse of the Houthi’s for attacking ships in the Red Sea.

Obviously, as we reported last week, all of this military action has begun to significantly impact world commerce, as increasing numbers of shipping lines abandon the critical Red Sea route, opting for the much longer transit around the Cape of Good Hope.

The question for most Readers is, obviously, “Where is the US Navy in all of this?” Good question.

The United States Navy is, unquestionably, the most powerful navy the world has ever seen. Disputing that statement is, frankly, ludicrous. The United States currently operates more aircraft carriers for fixed-wing operations than the rest of the world, combined…and this is before the various US Marine Corps aviation squadrons are added to its figures. It operates some seventy-six Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, regarded as the most capable destroyer class ever designed. Likewise, the US Navy maintains amphibious and supply forces that no other nation can match, giving it a truly global reach. It is not an exaggeration to say that a US Navy carrier battle group can deploy more firepower to a region than can be mustered by most nations’ entire militaries.

So – handling the Houthi’s, or even Iran, should present no great trouble for the United States, right?

Well…it’s complicated.

While the United States does, indeed, have a vast and capable military, like the armed forces of Great Britain before it, it has a major problem. It is not really a question of how good your weapons are; the greatest warship ever designed is completely useless if it isn’t where you need it to be, when you need it to be there.

The US military, and specifically the US Navy, cannot be everywhere at once. Aside from the chronic, military-wide problems with both recruiting and retention of personnel, the political leadership of the United States has, for the preceding forty years or so, almost uniformly failed to make even reasonably good choices in economic, military, social and foreign policy decisions. These failed policies have led to critically short numbers of personnel in almost all of the armed services, which translates into too few forces being available to deal with multiple threats. Indeed, while the US Navy, as of 2019, had some four hundred and eighty ships in commission, it could only deploy about two hundred and ninety.

What does this mean in the modern day, of January 2024?

As US and Western industry still struggles to supply the war in Ukraine, that situation is now worse, as the limited supply of ammunition is further divided to support Israel in its war against Hamas. Added to this, is the double threat from Iran and it’s Houthi proxies, a threat that is already damaging world commerce.

And then – there is Communist China…more on that, later.

Many people fail to grasp the impact of world shipping. Like it or not, everything you rely on is tied into global commerce in some way. Even if nothing you directly interact with physically transits the Red Sea, the major delays created will affect the prices of the everyday item you pay for. Likewise, the rising interest and insurance rates caused by the fighting will impact the Reader in a very real way, as those industries have to spread out the damage.

And then – there is Communist China.

A week ago, Communist leader Xi Jinping launched a purge of the upper echelons of the Communist state’s military leadership. While a relatively common practice among Communist states, it remains to be seen if Xi will go to the extent of other Communist dictators.

The end result of actions like this, is universally bad for the capabilities of a nation’s military forces, overall, as it significantly hampers military initiative, in favor of rigid obedience to political dogma – translation: Scare your military enough, and they will be too busy avoiding being shot by your political officers to fight your actual enemies.

However, there are many forms of warfare, and Communist China has learned that throwing money at a problem can make that problem either go away, or at least not bother it…and undermining an enemy while doing so is icing on the cake.

The bottom line? The West is failing. It is failing partially from it’s own success, but mostly from too many decades of throwing pasta at walls to see what sticks. The desire for profit beyond the dreams of avarice has led to a simultaneous weakening of Western industry, and to “good enough” levels of technological and industrial capacity leaking out to nations and groups who hate the West.

In a word: they hate you. It’s not so much that they hate you, personally – but they hate the society you grew up in, and are more than happy – and capable – of burning the world to the ground to spite you.

As of this writing, there are two hundred and ninety-seven days to the 2024 election. One way or another, you need a plan for what happens when we get there.

Assuming, of course, that we get there.

 

 

 

The Freedomist — Keeping Watch, So You Don’t Have To
The Lion Stirs – The Murky War Upsetting World Commerce

The Lion Stirs – The Murky War Upsetting World Commerce

Michael Cessna January 5, 2024 0

 

 

 

 

 

In the week before Christmas of 2023, there are several large-scale wars going on, with several more potential wars in the making: Russia-Ukraine; Israel-Hamas/Hezbollah; the ongoing offensive of pro-democracy rebels closing in on the fascist junta in Myanmar/Burma; the never-ending battles across the African Sahel region, and the potential Venezuelan invasion of Guyana.

 

But, lurking in the background is another potential conflict, one that may be impacting and aiding the neo-con agenda: Ethiopia vs. Eritrea.

 

Ethiopia is unique in history, as the only African state that was never colonized by any European power. Although conquered and occupied by Italy in the years immediately preceding World War 2, that occupation was short-lived, as the country was fully liberated from Italian rule by 1943.

 

A truly ancient state, Ethiopia maintained its status as an imperial monarchy until 1974, with the Communist revolution that placed a brutal Marxist-Leninist government in charge of the country. This government would, in turn, be deposed in another revolution in 1989, as part of the wave of Communist states around the world that collapsed as the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact imploded, leaving Communist “economies” to wither on the vine.

 

In the aftermath of the Derg’s collapse, Ethiopia was left unable to stop a popular referendum in one of its most critical provinces – Eritrea – that resulted in that state becoming independent in 1993. While this may seem like a random “factoid”, it is actually of enormous significance.

 

Eritrea – long part of Ethiopia – occupies the coast of the Red Sea, and as such, was Ethiopia’s only access to world commerce…and after a series of wars in the 1990’s and early-2000’s, Eritrea has effectively blocked Ethiopia from using its Red Sea ports. With a population of over one hundred and seven million, Ethiopia ranks 13th in the top fifteen nations in the world by population – and is the only one of those states that is completely landlocked.

 

This translates to Ethiopia being forced to pay exorbitant, even “extortionate”, fees to export its goods to market through its only access to the Red Sea, via the Port of Djibouti, which handles an estimated 95% of Ethiopia’s foreign commerce.

 

Ethiopia’s Prime Minister, Abiy Ahmed, takes this issue seriously…seriously enough, that he made statements on the 13th of October of 2023, that explicitly underlined Ethiopia’s ‘right to access’ to the Red Sea. Understandably, this rattled every other nation in the “Horn of Africa”, all of whom are vastly outnumbered in both population and military capacity by Ethiopia.

 

These remarks came less than two weeks after the Hamas terror attacks on Israel that commenced on October 7th. As a result, the wider world – obviously – paid little the comments little attention. But then, the Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen chose to insert themselves into that conflict on the side of Hamas, on October 19th…clearly a coincidence, surely.

 

And then, on January 1st, Ahmed dropped another bombshell, announcing that Ethiopia had inked a deal with the breakaway Somali province of Somaliland to use their port of Berbera to access the Gulf of Aden – well outside the current shooting gallery – reputedly in exchange of recognition of the breakaway state. This has obviously infuriated Somalia, which has never relinquished its claim to the province, despite the region being de facto independent since 1991 and the region’s independence being ratified in a referendum in 2001.

 

Now, in the first week of 2024, the Houthi missile attacks and piracy have attracted the attention of major powers around the world, many of whom have joined “Operation Prosperity Guardian”, in an attempt to guarantee safe passage through the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait…albeit too late for world shipping giant Maersk, who announced on January 5th that they were ordering all of their vessels not already in the Red Sea to divert around southern Africa’s Cape of Good Hope, to avoid the fighting. While this, alone, will cause serious disruptions to global trade, many more cargo carrier lines are virtually certain to not take the risk and divert their vessels, for the same reason as Maersk. This could easily lead to a reprise of the shipping disruptions that happened at the height of the COVID pandemic.

 

As a result, there are increasingly serious calls within Washington circles to attack Iran directly, as they are the Houthi’s major source of money and weapons. This would be a Godsend to neo-con chickenhawks desperate to finally get the United States into their long-desired war with Iran…

 

…Which brings us back to Ethiopia’s moves on its future access to the Red Sea.

 

Ethiopia has three options: they can a) maintain the status quo, with limited access to world shipping solely through Djibouti’s port; b) conclude their deal to access breakaway Somaliland’s ports; or – c) invade at least part of Eritrea, to capture at least that nation’s port of Assab.

 

Obviously, the status quo is not working for Ethiopia; if it were, there would have been no need for the deal with Somaliland. Djibouti’s port is increasingly limited in capacity, and has little physical room to expand operations, which will soon severely stunt Ethiopia’s economic output…Conversely, the deal with Somaliland risks war with Somalia, as recognition of Somaliland’s independence would almost certainly gut Somalia’s hopes at stabilizing their nation, which was only reunified in 2012. Somalia would have to launch a military campaign to invade the territory to bring it to heel, presenting Ethiopia with the option of going to war with Somalia in support of a breakaway province, something Ethiopia would be loath to encourage, considering recent history.

 

As well, invading Eritrea to capture Assab carries significant risks on its own, because – all other things being equal in the absence of the current conflict in the Bab-el-Mandeb – Ethiopia could well face a UN-led coalition of military powers “riding to the rescue” of what has been described as the “North Korea of Africa”.

 

None of these seem like viable solutions, on their own…Unless the world is focused on a different series of conflicts that would combine to divert attention away from Ethiopia “readjusting” the local map, and allowing Addis Ababa to present the world with a fait accompli in the aftermath of the Houthi’s inevitable neutralization, as well as the likelihood of a massive US-Iran war…

 

…While the foregoing may sound like the implication of a dastardly plot on Ethiopia’s part, it is not…well, mostly “not.” But, the timeline of Ethiopia’s rhetoric regarding its right-to-access to the Red Sea is certainly suspicious, and indicates some level of foreknowledge of events beginning ion October of 2023, and having active plans and options ready to go.

 

There are plenty of players in this global chess tournament, and too many “leaders” in the West – and elsewhere – are arrogantly blind to the knives in the dark, thinking that “bit players” cannot harm them.

 

…Rather like Britain, France and the United States from the 1950’s to the 1980’s.

 

Word to the wise.

 

 

The Freedomist — Keeping Watch, So You Don’t Have To
Spies Like Us…?

Spies Like Us…?

Michael Cessna December 16, 2023 0

 

 

With all of the wild and crazy war and near-war news flying from all quarters in the last weeks of 2023, it’s hard to keep up…frustrating, in fact. So, this week, we will look at a historical “What if?” that might be real:

 

What if a uniquely American intelligence agency exists – an intelligence agency that has no public name, no financing from public funds, and does not report to Congress? An intelligence agency that has existed since the beginning of the United States as an independent nation, which has directly impacted the policies of the United States government?

 

Now, that sounds like a really cool idea for a modern spy thriller…but such a thing isn’t really possible, right?

 

Part 1 – A Hell of a Thing

 

Nations and nation-states need a wide variety of things in order to function; a lot of things. But one thing a state has always needed, down through history, is an intelligence service of some kind. A state planning on existing for any length of time has an absolute need to find out what the group in the next valley, or on the other side of the river are up to, lest they get paid an unexpected visit from said group[s]. It doesn’t matter whether said agency is an old police officer that is a crony of the local dictator, managing the Secret Police, or an agency with global reach, like the American Central Intelligence Agency – a state will deploy spies to at least try to stay ahead of the state’s enemies, real or imagined.

To paraphrase the words of others, I’m not saying it’s right, I’m just saying that’s the way things are.

At the same time, such agencies – regardless of time and technology – need resources beyond mere creativity in its personnel. Spy services need money – or the equivalent in disposable goods – in vast amounts. Over the last one thousand or so years, that usually means cash, initially in the form of gold and silver coins. The United States was no different when it gained its independence from Great Britain.

However, the government of the nascent United States had a fundamental problem: it had no money for something as expensive as a spy agency. Certainly, the rebel colonies used spies all through the Revolution, with some of them becoming very good, indeed. But, after the adoption of the current Constitution in 1789, the United States government could barely bring in enough money to keep it running, much less maintain a spy service. Because the only times the government could really borrow money was during wartime, the government was publicly forced to hire private detective agencies to perform basic intelligence and Executive protection duties, until the founding of the US Secret Service in 1865, following the assassination of President Lincoln. In fact, in the 30 years after 1870, there were years where the US government was unable to pay Army regiments deployed against Native American tribes west of the Mississippi River. This situation would not really change until the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 made large-scale government borrowing during peacetime possible.

But these facts did not remove the need for a foreign intelligence service. So – how did the United States survive against foreign threats without the funds to run a spy agency?

The answer, simply put is – it didn’t.

 

 

Part 2 – Wine Glass Diplomacy and the Black Hole Method

 

I want to be crystal clear about what follows: I have no “smoking gun” documents, and no “whistleblower” testimony. What follows is an exercise in critical thinking and deductive reasoning.

Also, because it needs to be said here in the 21st Century, I am in good health and am not depressed in any way.

There is a form of investigation known as the “Black Hole Method.” When you suspect that a thing is going on, but has been effectively concealed, how do you puzzle out what is going on? When looking for a black hole in space, one doesn’t look for the black hole itself, because it is indistinguishable from empty space, since not even light can escape from a black hole. Instead, one looks for the effects of the black hole on surrounding space.

When George Washington, the first President of the United States after the adoption of the Constitution, needed a spy agency, there was one person he would have fully trusted to create it: Benjamin Tallmadge. Tallmadge, who had started the Revolution as an officer in the Continental Army’s 2nd Continental Light Dragoons, had functioned as Washington’s main spymaster (as spy chiefs were referred to in those days), running the Culper Spy Ring operating against the British High Command in occupied New York City.

 

Colonel Benjamin Tallmadge. Portrait by Ralph Earl (1751-1801), circa 1790. Public Domain.

 

After the war, Tallmadge settled in Lichfield, Connecticut, and was appointed as the local postmaster (which was a far more prominent position, then) in 1792, and established himself in an importing business. He would later resign that post in 1801, to become a Representative in Connecticut’s “at-large” Congressional district. While serving in Congress, he would become the first President of the Phoenix Branch Bank, a position he held from 1814 to 1826.

While there is no evidence that the following speculation on events actually happened, given the nature of how things were done at the time, the United States’ government’s spy problem may well have been solved.

Sometime after Washington’s election as President (possibly very shortly after), Washington could have summoned Tallmadge to the temporary US capital in New York City, in a highly unofficial capacity. Over a quiet and private dinner, possibly attended by Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson and Secretary of War Henry Knox (both of whom were well-verse in spying), and possibly Vice President John Adams, Tallmadge would have been sounded out for recommendations on how to solve the spy problem.

Tallmadge, knowing full well of the contributions by wealthy businessmen such as Robert Morris, among several others, could have proposed an idea to have those men fund a spy agency, one which would be able to use US diplomatic and military resources when necessary. In trade, the businessmen who signed on to such a scheme would receive the intelligence collected and sent back to the government as soon as it could be copied; the information, obviously, would not be passed on to any other businessmen.

 

Financier Robert Morris. Painting by Charles Willson Pealecirca 1782. Public Domain.

 

If such a scheme were set up – a scheme that was created with neither public funds nor the knowledge of Congress – every person taking part would have had a vested interest in keeping such a thing quiet, because of the clear level of corruption and nepotism involved.

An important factor would have been that such an agency was not necessarily aimed at internal surveillance, within the United States; that really would not have offered much to the financiers, and would have easily led to infighting, and the exposure of the scheme, which would seriously damage American businesses overseas.

Assuming that something like this occurred, what would the effects have been, and can we find potential evidence of such?

 

Part 3 – Ghosts In The Machine

 

Aside from some notably high-quality research, very little “official” information has come to light…suspiciously little, in fact. However, there are hints at operations of such an agency. As record keeping became more efficient of the years, cracks in security appeared – and perhaps the most important crack was named William Donovan.

While not well known today, Major General William J. Donovan, born in Buffalo, NY in 1883, and eventually attended Columbia Law University, where he was classmate of future President Franklin D. Roosevelt. He would marry Ruth Rumsey (1891-1977) in 1914. By 1916, Donovan was an officer in a New York troop of cavalry, serving in the Pancho Villa Expedition in Mexico. But in World War 1, Donovan stood out as the commander of the legendary “Fighting 69th” Infantry, during which he would be awarded with the Medal of Honor…all of which are easily sourced data points.

 

Lt. Col. William J. Donovan , 165th Reg. Inf. (formerly 69th Regt. Inf. N.Y.N.G.), US Army 42nd Division, 1918. US Army photo. Public Domain.

 

However, an odd passage appears in Donovan’s autobiography, referring to him “abandoning” his wife in Asia, to ‘run off Siberia to play spy’ (pgs. 32-34), in the immediate aftermath of World War 1. Now, Russian Siberia at this time was a wild and brutal battlefield, one where people were frequently rounded up and executed on a whim by all of the warring factions. James Bond aside, no one “plays” at being a spy in the real world, at least not for very long. This begs the question: Why would this sort of information be revealed? Even long after Donovan’s death in 1959, this is not information that would be advisable to release to the public. The answer seems to lie in Donovan’s wife, Ruth. A member of New York high society, she was very unhappy at his intelligence work. It could have been feared that she might reveal Donovan’s intelligence work in a fit of pique, and “removing the problem” would have been very problematic…

…But, ‘problematic’ for whom?

Donovan would go on to head up the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) for his college classmate, the now-President Roosevelt, during World War 2, quickly building a large, capable and world-spanning intelligence agency. That, in and of itself, is a questionable situation: assistance from the British Special Operations Executive (SOE) aside, there are serious holes in this story, even allowing for wartime secrecy.

On the other hand, a hidden group – one that had spent well over a century, at that point, running operations – would certainly explain how a brand new secret intelligence branch could suddenly “spin up.”

 

Part 4 – Today

 

So, where does this leave us, in the 21st Century?

There has been a series of seemingly bizarre situations in the last few years that indicate that either the US intelligence community is flat-out lying to Congress, or that they simply do not have the answers that they should.

Among these are the recent hearings on the so-called “UFO/UAP” question, something the Freedomist has covered in the past. It is entirely possible that the reason behind Congress being unable to ‘shake loose’ any meaningful information from either the armed forces or the various intelligence agencies is simply because they do not possess the information…because another group, a group that Congress has no means of contacting, much less subpoenaing, is dealing with the subject, and has no interest in informing Congress or the American People of what is going on…

…But that is something for a whole other article.

 

 

The Freedomist — Keeping Watch, So You Don’t Have To
The Tyranny of Maps and Running Out of Other Peoples’ Money

The Tyranny of Maps and Running Out of Other Peoples’ Money

Michael Cessna December 9, 2023 1

 

 

 

Part 1 – What Does That Smudge Actually Say, Again?

 

Maps are funny things. As an old saying goes,

 

“When in doubt, look at a map – it will always tell you something. It may not be anything you don’t already know, but it will tell you something…”

 

As with most old sayings, though, this particular one is very nuanced in its meaning.

Maps, in a military or geopolitical sense, are usually a two-dimensional representation of a three-dimensional sphere. Modern computer systems can approximate an accurate 3-D picture of terrain, but those developments are relatively new. For thousands of years, the few maps that existed were very crude, verging into the abstract. Beginning only in the late 18th Century, did maps begin to add more accurate details and consistent distance scales.

Maps, then – as we understand the term – are a surprisingly recent phenomenon. But OH! The power and magic they convey! Depending on your point of view – and your immediate needs – maps can become works of holy writ, exuding an illusion of absolute truth. This is especially important when talking about borders, and where you intend to defend them. And, if you can find an old map whose details you can…“selectively interpret”…those maps can feed visions of military glory…

…Or offer desperate and failing governments a lifeline to motivate (they hope) a depressed and reactionary population.

This was the story in 1982, when the military junta of Argentina, led by General Leopoldo Galtieri, realized that national economies cannot be managed like a military budget, especially when their “security policy” was like some weird nightmare, left over from World War 2. What to do? Galtieri & Co. thought they found an answer in old maps.

There had been an old dispute with the United Kingdom over a group of islands two hundred odd miles east of Argentina, well into the Atlantic Ocean: the Falkland Islands.

The uninhabited, barren and windswept islands had been sort-of settled first by Spain…then England…then Spain again…the Argentina again, until the English returned and made their claim permanent by deporting the few Argentinean colonists back to the mainland, and establishing a colony devoted to sheep herding, maintaining a station for whaling ships, and later, a coaling station for the Royal Navy.

For about one hundred and fifty years, Argentina repeatedly tried to get England into talks to return the islands to them; England was never really interested in talking about anything of the kind, but were too polite to simply tell Argentina to go pound sand – the islands were England’s; English people had settled on the islands and actually developed them; and they had formed a part of England’s military strategies for decades. It just wasn’t going to happen.

But then…Britain’s colonial empire eroded into nothingness, replaced by a loose economic sphere of former colonies, that England didn’t really bother trying to control too closely. Empires, you see, are extremely expensive to create and maintain, and after the hellscapes of World Wars 1 and 2, the people of England more or less lost all interest in spending literal blood and treasure to maintain decisive control over colonies with unhappy and unruly populations, which produced – overall – very little to justify their expense. On top of this, eliminating the ability of people to elevate themselves into higher positions on the social standing tree meant that conquest was just another job that was hard, dangerous, and offered little to show for the effort.

To Galtieri and his junta, this seemed like a great time to “revisit the ownership” of the Falklands – after all, England’s main military and economic focuses were on Europe and the Mediterranean. Surely, they wouldn’t mind be relieved of the burden of paying for less than settlers at the literal opposite end of the earth.

This is the sort of “logic” that desperately unpopular and extremely unworldly people engage in, using the post-operative mantra, “Well, it seemed like a good idea at the time!”

Britain, it turned out, was done with giving away things. And, with the after-image of the Iranian Hostage Crisis in the very recent past, it was not about to give ‘hostile actors’ around the world the notion that the few remaining British territories were up for grabs.

The result – the Falklands War – was a dramatic reminder that even the remnants of empires can be extraordinarily dangerous to provoke. Now, if the Reader thinks that the Falklands War served as a teaching tool to petty dictators to not trust old maps, you would be sadly mistaken.

Cut to the last weeks of 2023.

 

Part 2 – Other People’s Money

The Communist dictator of Venezuela, Nicolás Maduro, has finally recognized that the policies begun by his predecessor, Hugo Chavez – policies that Maduro enthusiastically expanded on – have resulted – to borrow the immortal words of Margaret Thatcher, the British Prime Minister who determined that Britain would, indeed, fight for the Falklands – in Maduro “running out of other people’s money.”

Venezuela, which should be a ridiculously wealthy nation due to its vast oil reserves, has had its economy and business sectors so badly managed by the Chavez-Maduro regime, that the country is now one of the poorest nations on the planet. And this comes far ahead of any sanctions placed on the country by the United States or anyone else.

Because of the failing economy he is actively trying to destroy, Maduro has decided to revive an old map dispute on his eastern border. You see, Venezuela’s eastern neighbor – Guyana – is a former colony of Britain, about the size of Idaho, but with only half the population. In 1966, just prior to granting Guyana independence, Britain (speaking for Guyana) and Venezuela both agreed to arbitrate the border dispute in the International Court of Justice (ICA). Neither country really pulled out the stops to press negotiations, however, because there was no real need; like many such disputes, this one just laid around, gathering dust.

But now, the winds are blowing in different directions.

Maduro – like most totalitarian dictators – relies on the illusion of “the democratic process” to stay in power. In this case, no election since the ascension of Chavez has been “legitimate” – it’s an open secret, but as long as Maduro stayed within his own borders, no one outside of Venezuela – including successive Presidential administrations in the United States – really cared.

In 2015, however, oil was discovered off the coast of Guyana – in the area off the shore of the disputed region. And, in September of 2023, Guyana issued drilling licenses to various oil companies, including ExxonMobil (which had several oil facilities in Venezuela nationalized many years ago).

 

Map of Guyana Essequiba. The area lined in orange constitutes the area claimed by Venezuela. Credit: Karl Musser. CCA/3.0.

 

And in November of 2023, Maduro suddenly announced that his government would hold a referendum among the Venezuelan people, to see if they would mind their government annexing the disputed region, and telling the international courts to shove off. Surprising absolutely no one outside of the denizens of upscale café’s in Hollywood and New York – and, of course, Starbucks’ outlets – Venezuelans “voted overwhelmingly”, as in 95% of voters, that yes, their country should absolutely invade and dismember a neighbor that they have never fought a war with.

Now, it would wrong to assume that this situation is about oil, per se. Oil is a component in this situation, but it is actually not that far into Maduro’s wheelhouse. Maduro’s real problem is that he is up for reelection in 2024, and Venezuelans – like Argentineans before them – are getting fed up with the charade…and Maduro’s real fear is that Venezuelans may just “go all Romanian” on him.

That’s not a bingo card entry anyone wants.

Like Galtieri before him, Maduro is hoping that starting a war will make him popular enough at home to easily retain power – that’s known as “not changing horses in midstream.” The problem? Guyana, while it does not have a very large military, is not an island…Guyana and Venezuela share a border in the disputed region with a third nation: Brazil.

Brazil is a massive and powerful nation within the region. Even given the ludicrous and destructive policies of its current ruling party, the Brazilian economy is a powerhouse, regionally. As well, its armed forces are nothing to mess with; the Brazilian military – at all levels – seriously outclasses that of Venezuela. Maduro’s outlandishly comical “referendum” is so divorced from reality, not even a hardened Socialist leader like Lula da Silva can let such an idea go.

This is shaping into a potential three-way war, which could include a rarity, for the modern day: and actual naval battle. This is due to the geography of the region, with puts a large amount of the disputed region within range of naval forces’ fire support capabilities on the Caribbean coast, to say nothing of the extensive network of rivers that form the best highways in the interior.

In any shooting war, Venezuelan forces will be at a serious disadvantage if Brazil enters the fray.

This does, however, beg the question: What about the United States?

In the United States, the administration of Joe Biden is giving typically half-hearted and limp-wristed lip service to tell the kids in the south to calm down. The Swamp – or, if you prefer, “Sodom on the Potomac” – is far more concerned with events in Ukraine, Israel, and potentially in the Bab al-Mandeb, at the southern entrance to the Red Sea, to worry about a minor territorial squabble in South America. Functionally, refusing to take decisive action on its proverbial doorstep would be a foreign policy disaster on a scale with Jimmy Carter’s inability to deal with the Iranian hostage crisis.

…So – is there a “wild card” in this mess? Yes, there is: ExxonMobil.

Big Oil is not dead. Far from it. Venezuela long ago parted company with ExxonMobil and other foreign oil producers. And now, from ExxonMobil’s view, Maduro is trying to muscle in on their turf, yet again.

But ExxonMobil is “just a corporation,” right? What could they possibly do? Twenty years ago, that answer would have been simple: suck it up, count your losses, and find somewhere else…But that was twenty years ago, and a lot has happened since then.

There is absolutely nothing stopping ExxonMobil – especially in concert with other corporations – from fielding its own armed forces…including naval and air forces…to insert themselves into a potential Venezuela-Guyana war, if the potential returns are worth the risks. Guyana’s estimated 11 billion barrels (at the low end) is a pretty big incentive.

This last scenario would be no more than an interesting action-adventure story, if the players in Washington, DC, were not so incompetent and self-absorbed.

Happy voting.

 

The Freedomist — Keeping Watch, So You Don’t Have To
Tropic Thunder: Echoes of Past Wars

Tropic Thunder: Echoes of Past Wars

Michael Cessna December 1, 2023 0

 

 

 

 

Part 1 – In Your Face

 

In mid-November, the South American nation of Guyana appealed for help to both the United Nations and the International Court of Justice, which just handed down a sternly worded finding on 12/1/2023 on the matter. Guyana, which shares its western border with Venezuela, became justifiably alarmed after Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro’s government scheduled a public referendum for December 3, 2023, “asking” the Venezuelan people if they would be okay with annexing the Essequibo region from Guyana – which comprises some two-thirds of Guyana.

 

Map of Guyana Essequiba. The area lined in orange constitutes the area claimed by Venezuela. Credit: Karl Musser. CCA/3.0

 

So – what’s going on, and why should you care? In reverse order, the reasons you need to care about this are simple.

First, unlike the current wars in Ukraine and Israel, this is on the proverbial doorstep of the United States. Second, is that seemingly tired old problem: oil. Third, the very fact that this has even come up, is yet one more pointed demonstration of the abject and total failures of both the Biden administration, and the neo-con RINO’s desperately clinging to power inside the GOP, best described by GOP candidate Vivek Ramaswamy as “Dick Cheney in three inch heels”.

Venezuela and Guyana form part of the northern coast of South America. Any war in South America is of preeminent importance to the United States, because of the potential to spill onto the United States’ doorstep, in addition to all the other problems spilling over a border that the Biden administration apparently believes not to exist. A Venezuelan attempt to “flex” for imperialist territorial expansion would – and threatens to do so – lead to a much wider war, as Brazil’s territorial integrity is also threatened by Maduro’s actions.

The question is, why? The answer is simple: oil.

Venezuela has been tied into the global petroleum extraction network since the early 1900’s; indeed, the country was the world’s third largest producer of crude oil in 1940, and was the tenth largest producer in 2008. However, beginning in the mid-1970’s, a series of terrible decisions by successive governments nationalized the country’s oil industries. This resulted in the companies whose plants were confiscated politely refusing to continue to perform maintenance and upkeep on the systems…that should not have come as a surprise to anyone, but apparently did. And, as the oil infrastructure fell apart, Venezuela was unable to attract another other foreign companies to invest in their national oil fields, which – again – should have surprised no one.

As a result, the spiraling failures of Maduro’s increasingly socialism-driven economy and government has created a growing and increasingly desperate need to revive the country’s only remaining viable export industry, in his case, by bringing in Iranian technicians to try and get the nation’s oil industry back on its feet…If that sounds like a disturbing idea – Iranians flooding into a country within easy striking distance of the United States – that’s because it is.

So, how does this relate to Guyana?

In 2008, as Venezuela doubled down on excluding foreign companies from its oil industry, ExxonMobil (one of the companies forced out by Venezuela) began exploring the offshore region of Guyana, on the hunch that since the two countries were physical neighbors, there should have been a high likelihood that Guyana should possess exploitable reserves…and, in 2015, Esso (a subsidiary of ExxonMobil) hit paydirt, discovering the first of several rich offshore oil fields off Guyana’s Caribbean coastline. After a series of negotiations, on 19 September of 2023, Guyana authorized several oil companies – including ExxonMobil – to begin drilling in their offshore fields.

An increasingly desperate Maduro, seeing the continuing disaster of his party’s long-discredited Socialist policies, chose this moment to revive an old territorial dispute that Venezuela had chosen not to pursue, which laid a Venezuelan claim to some two-thirds of Guyanese territory…that part, or course, that contains most of the new oil fields.

For those readers of “a certain age”, if this sounds a little like 1981-1982 in the South Atlantic, you are not alone. Forty-odd years ago, another South American dictator sniffed rumors of oil in an area his country had long-claimed, and – with tensions mounting at home over disastrous economic policies and midnight death squads everywhere – Argentinean junta leader General Leopoldo Galtieri decided that the United Kingdom would not fight over the Falkland Islands, if not too much blood was spilled invading them. Turns out, he was very wrong.

Maduro’s “popular” referendum is a clear attempt to justify an invasion, one that is sickeningly lopsided, as the Guyanese military is barely 3% the size of Venezuela’s armed Forces…the ringer being, of course, being Brazil, whose armed forces outmatch Venezuela’s by at least double, if not triple…The possible consequences of a desperate Socialist country sparking a regional war that could disrupt not just oil production but commercial shipping in the Caribbean, in general, are something every American needs to be worried about.

But then, there is the last question: Why does Maduro think that he can get away with Saddam Hussein-levels of bad decisions? In a word – Joe Biden and the Democrat-Neo-Con alliance, which desires a weak United States, one that they think that they can rally to their side like FDR did in 1941.

That they cannot do so, because of the actions they have taken in public – not even bothering to hide it – have so soured their potential recruiting bases, that they cannot meet their manpower needs without reviving the Draft…which even their supporters in the deluded Left are stating a flat, hard-no to.

If this sounds pessimistic – it is. Expect shortages, if Maduro thinks his calculus is correct…which it might be, unlike Saddam’s.

 

Part 2 – Saying the Quiet Part Out Loud

 

But, on the other side of the world, another “Rumble in the Jungle” is brewing: Myanmar/Burma’s ruling military clique, the so-called “Tatmadaw”, is collapsing. In this, the only real question is if the radical Socialist junta will go down like the collapse of the Somoza regime of Nicaragua in 1979, and the following multi-sided civil war (encouraged, being fair to history, by the United States) or if it will go the way of Yugoslavia – violent and bloody, but mercifully short, in comparison.

Beginning in late October of 2023, a coalition of formerly rival ethnic/tribal groups in Myanmar united in a virtually unheard of alliance, to launch a massive, coordinated offensive across the country, swiftly overrunning several regime military bases along the Myanmar/Communist China border, and forcing the surrender of several military units in their entirety. This is causing a collapse in morale, both among troops and in their families, who are now being forced to pull security for their deployed husband’s military bases. In fact, the junta has begun mobilizing civil servants and local police as second-line military forces, to try and stem the tsunami of military defeat.

 

Map of Operation 1027, as of 7 November 2023. Credit: Clyde H. Mapping. CCA/4.0

 

Obviously, the Freedomist has been remarking on this situation for some time, mostly in the context of the 3-D printing revolution. The facts are that the world was content – again – to allow a brutal, dictatorial regime to make a mockery of civilized society, because the profit margin is so high.

For Communist China, however, Myanmar is far from a laughing matter. The ruling junta, the “Tatmadaw”, is a vital component in the CCP’s “Belt & Road Initiative”, and if their allies in the junta go the way of Somoza or Yugoslavia, their entire plan is in jeopardy. What Communist China chooses to do about this is anyone’s guess.

 

 

Part 3 – Where Do We Go From Here?

 

Functionally, the moves by Maduro’s Venezuela are far more important to the United States in the immediate short-term. The hopeful collapse of the Myanmar regime, while definitely of regional importance in the Indian Ocean region, is mostly of academic interest for the US. While that may sound harsh and uncaring, it is not. It is simply the recognition of global realities.

The United States – for good or ill – is committed to the support of both Israel and Ukraine. And, as it and its European allies have discovered, neo-con fever dreams mixed with deranged, far-Left utopian word-salad does not equate to valid battle calculus, even in the short term.

The world is racing towards a cliff, and the leaders of the nations most capable of preventing that from happening are too concerned with pet delusions to even start getting a handle on the problem.

2024 is looking pretty grim, at present.

You should take action to protect yourselves, and those you are responsible for, now.

Washington and London certainly aren’t.

 

 

 

The Freedomist — Keeping Watch, So You Don’t Have To
Weather War: From Banned Witchery To Military Operations

Weather War: From Banned Witchery To Military Operations

Michael Cessna November 17, 2023 0

 

 

 

 

War is hard. That is an oft-repeated phrase, but it is nonetheless true. People are trying to do violence to you, and to those around you…and frequently, it doesn’t matter if you are wearing a uniform or carrying a weapon or not. There are loud and scary noises, a lot of dirt, mud and bugs (among other unpleasant things), and people screaming in fear. And then, it starts raining…or hailing…or snowing. These things combine to make your life infinitely more miserable and terrifying than it already is.

But – the above are personal things. What about the wider context?

Last week, we discussed the effects of volcanic eruptions on logistics, the field of supplying armed forces. Here, we will look at the wider effects of weather on military operations.

Wars and the battles they are composed of are directly impacted by the weather. Armies, air forces and navies are all at the mercy of the weather. While unexpected “snow days” for civilians may mean an inconvenience in getting to work, and while a levee being breached by heavy rain can be a disaster that destroys towns and homes, for armed forces these events can be catastrophic when they happen unexpectedly. Weather forecasting is so vital to military forces, that multiple manuals are now devoted to it.

Militaries have known this for centuries. But, is in only in roughly the last two hundred years that militaries began to seriously monitor weather conditions across the wider “operational region” versus simply the local battlefield. Indeed, until 1950, meteorologists were not permitted to so much as say the word “tornado”, much less try to predict them before they formed, as this was essentially “career suicide”.

The US Army would not form a weather forecasting service until 1870, with the US Navy joining the program in 1873. The British were no better, not founding a meteorological office until 1854. This very late development was due to the belief dating from at least the Middle Ages that attempting to forecast the weather in any way was a form of witchcraft.

This frequently hamstrung military operations, sometimes in catastrophic ways; Napoleon and Hitler come to mind immediately.

In the context of combat operations, rain is bad, because most land operations are prosecuted off of prepared roads; “cross-country” is the word of the day. Heavy rains will turn normally solid fields into mud pits, quagmires that will swallow vehicles and troops. This is especially true when levees and dams are deliberately destroyed, aside from the sheer destruction inflicted on civilians, and the infrastructure to support them, in the combat area. This us, in fact, the accusation leveled at Russia in June of 2023, when the Kakhovka Dam in the Kherson Oblast of Ukraine was breached and flooded the area.

 

Settlements on the left bank of Dnieper River are underwater after the Kakhovka Dam was breached on 6th June, 2023. CCA/4.0 International. Photo credit: Ukrainian Ministry of Defense. 

 

For air forces, severe weather simply grounds flights. But, those force’s airfields are not immune from damage. Clark Air Base, long a center of US military operations in the Far East, was functionally destroyed by the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo in 1991.

 

Remains of Clark Air Force Base, Luzon, Republic of the Philippines, January 1991, following the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo. The U.S. National Archives. Public Domain.

 

And neither are naval forces immune. The US Navy maintains a policy of sortieing its ships and aircraft away from port areas threatened by large storms, lest they be wrecked by the storm’s surge and wind effects. And with good reason – although dangerous, getting ships out of port as quickly as possible is usually the safest option…but not always.

In 1944, during WW2 combat operations in the Pacific, the US Navy’s Task Force 38 was struck by a massive typhoon that nudged the scale as a Force Five hurricane on the modern scale, similar to Hurricanes Katrina and Andrew. The storm actually sank three destroyers, damaged nine more warships and killed nearly eight hundred sailors.

 

The U.S. Navy light aircraft carrier USS Langley (CVL-27) rolling heavily during Typhoon Cobra, 18 December 1944. US Navy photo. Public Domain.

 

And, as both Napoleon and Hitler discovered, snow is a terrible force, occasionally freezing troops to death on vast scales. Snow is like rain, but worse. Some forces can thrive in snowy and icy environments, but most people – and troops – cannot.

 

An injured soldier from the Princess Patricia’s Canadian Light Infantry in central Alaska during Exercise Timberline, 1963. Photo Credit: US Army photo by Sp4 Kenneth Puckett. Public Domain.

 

And weather is not limited to hurricanes, ice, or rain. In 2003, as US and Coalition forces advanced north towards Baghdad, they were struck by a massive sandstorm that forced the advancing columns to halt, because visibility was reduced to zero.

 

A convoy of U.S. Marine Corps (USMC) High-Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles (HMMWV) in Northern Iraq, during a sandstorm during Operation IRAQI FREEDOM. Photo Credit: LCpl Andrew P. Roufs, USMC. Public Domain.

 

Planning military operations on a board game is easy. Doing it in real life is seriously hard work. It is only “witchcraft” to the mentally dense.

To quote the great Chinese general, Sun Tzu:

 

“Before doing battle, one calculates in the temple and will win, because many calculations were made; before doing battle, one calculates in the temple but will lose, because few calculations were made.”

 

 

 

The Freedomist — Keeping Watch, So You Don’t Have To

You may have missed

The SMAW – A Tools of the Trade Joint

The SMAW – A Tools of the Trade Joint

Michael Cessna April 17, 2026 0
The Goose Is Loose – A Tools of the Trade Joint

The Goose Is Loose – A Tools of the Trade Joint

Michael Cessna April 10, 2026 0
The RPG-7: The Titan of the Man-Portable Anti-Tank World – Tools of the Trade

The RPG-7: The Titan of the Man-Portable Anti-Tank World – Tools of the Trade

Michael Cessna April 3, 2026 0
The Old Dog Learns A New Trick – Tools of the Trade

The Old Dog Learns A New Trick – Tools of the Trade

Michael Cessna March 27, 2026 0
Main

Back FREEDOM for only $4.95/month and help the Freedomist to fight the ongoing war on liberty and defeat the establishment's SHILL press!!

Are you enjoying our content? Help support our mission to reach every American with a message of freedom through virtue, liberty, and independence! Support our team of dedicated freedom builders for as little as $4.95/month! Back the Freedomist now! Click here