The Telegraph has learned disturbing information that terrorists with links to Iran “were caught stockpiling tons of explosive materials on the outskirts of London in a secret British bomb factory.” The plot was uncovered by M15 and police in London in 2015. Now, the Washington Examiner notes, “Despite the gravity of the discovery, the public and lawmakers were kept in the dark about the matter for years as the U.K. continued to support the nuclear deal.”
This discovery was “so significant that then-Prime Minister David Cameron and then Home Secretary Theresa May were briefed on the details personally.”
Sources said, “the discovery of the explosives was not an aberration but was part of an international plot by Iran-backed Hezbollah to lay the groundwork for future attacks.” Why then, did the U.K. continue to debate whether or not to label the entirety of Hezbollah, which has support and funding from Iran, as a terrorist group?
The Examiner reports that “The U.S. branded all of Hezbollah as a terrorist group in the 1990s, but in the U.K. only the armed wing of the group was designated as such until this year.” Now we know the ridiculous hesitation to label the group if they had this information since 2015.
The terrorists stashed “thousands of disposable ice packs containing ammonium nitrate” according to the Telegraph; a common ingredient in homemade bombs, the same explosive used in the Oklahoma City Bombing in 1995.
There are many things today’s military commanders do that leave me puzzled and searching for reason. However, when a military commander in the Middle East says our arch enemies are planning an imminent attack, I cannot find any reason why our Department of Defense (DOD) senior officials are taking the time to discuss these issues with the media.
An imminent situation equals a serious issue that requires our military’s immediate proactive actions, with the keyword “proactive” being the most important part of that equation.
If there is actually an imminent attack looming, why is defensive posturing General McKenzie’s primary concern instead of proactive action? While we cannot speculate precisely on the General’s own individual decision-making process, we can reflect on how our national security and warfighting policies became so politicized along with its cause and effect.
Looking at the totality of our warfighting posture over the past 72 years, it’s clear to see our DOD’s warfighting mentality has been too closely aligned with the Department of State’s liberal and globalist policies that do little to ensure our national security.
In 1947, the Secretary of Defense was created, and along with it the emergence of reactive global diplomacy and its dominant role in our nation’s defensive policies and actions. Since then, the U.S. has never been victorious in any war we have been involved in. This is evidence that shows clearly what happens when war is politicized.
General McKenzie’s statements with regards to an imminent Iranian attack is yet another disappointing example of the DOD’s continued politicization of warfighting; primarily made up of predictive, submissive policies influenced by the Department of State instead of effective warfighting planning.
Since the beginning of his presidential campaign in 2016, President Trump has continually stated that his national security policies are primarily focused on what is best for the safety and security of the United States. In stark contrast to this, the DOD along with the Department of State seems to be continuing their long-standing globalist focus on diplomacy based on what is best for the world over our own national protection.
President Trump would be wise to closely examine the DOD’s warfighting history and dissociate its long-standing subordinate relationship with the Department of State. Along with this shift back to warfighting and national security, the Secretary of Defense’s job should be regulated to function as an interpreter between the DOD’s senior officers and the president. Lastly, the generals and admirals should be punished, not rewarded, for making decisions based on politics, and their relationship with the media should be terminated.
When you look at the eagle on the Great Seal of The United States, you see his eyes turned toward his right talon, which holds olive branches, depicting diplomacy and peace. But if you look at the left talon, you see arrows that represent force and strength. The complete seal represents an equal balance of offensive military might and diplomatic hope for peace. On the global stage, effective diplomacy relies on a known threat of overwhelming military action which our nation holds in reserve. At one time, the eagle on the Presidential Seal faced the arrows, projecting authority on the global stage, but it was eventually changed to reflect the nation’s seal with diplomacy as the primary objective in global affairs.
Perhaps it is time for the president to reflect on that image of force before diplomacy as it pertains to Iran and its imminent threats. Anything less than this will only ensure the continuation of our nation’s failed warfighting capabilities, and our inability to be proactive in a world where diplomacy has succumbed to rhetoric and political correctness.
Former Sheriff’s Deputy has just been arrested for his part in the horrific Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting in Parkland, Florida that left 17 dead a year ago. The former deputy, who according to sources did not confront or attempt to stop the Parkland high school shooter was charged today with “child neglect and negligence.”
According to the Washington Post “Scot Peterson, 56, was arrested and charged with 11 counts including seven counts of child neglect, three counts of culpable negligence and one count of perjury authorities said.”
Immediately following the February 14th, 2018 shooting, Peterson’s name was circulated in the media as the deputy who remained outside the school walls while knowing a massacre was occurring inside. The flurry of anger surrounding Mr. Peterson came about after videotape of him standing outside the building was released.
Peterson had defended himself over the last year by saying he was unaware of where the gunshots were originating from. An answer that was not accepted by the court of public opinion because Peterson was the ONLY ARMED officer on campus and in a position to respond immediately.
Certainly, the arrest will spark controversy around the already heated debate of arming teachers or professionals in schools. This adds a new element to the discussion if severe repercussions including arrest if those who are armed are found to not have taken the appropriate action in the court of law are an option. Broward State Attorney and prosecutor handling the death penalty case against the school shooter said that “Peterson was arrested after an expansive investigation by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.”
I say justice has been served. Now let’s go after those responsible for rewriting school disciplinary policies (based on Obama policy) to make it nearly impossible to suspend, expel, or arrest students for behavioral problems including criminal actions.