About Me

Name:Boris Tiraspolsky
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

Confusion of the Nation’s leadership

"The failure to recognize the ideological nature of “cause celebre” for jihadists creates great confusion in minds of the American people and U.S. political and military establishment." - Boris Tiraspolsky
Ideological immaturity of the Nation
 

Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
 _________________________

Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said: "The U.S. military must remain apolitical at all times. It is and must always be a neutral instrument of the state, no matter which party holds sway. As the nation prepares to elect a new president," Mullen wrote, "we would all do well to remember the promises we made: to obey civilian authority, to support and defend the Constitution and to do our duty at all times.

Keeping our politics private is a good first step. The only things we should be wearing on our sleeves are our military insignia.

I am not suggesting that military professionals abandon all personal opinions about modern social or political issues. What I am suggesting - indeed, what the nation expects - is that military personnel will, in the execution of the mission assigned to them, put aside their partisan leanings. Political opinions have no place in c-ockpit or camp or conference room. Part of the deal we made when we joined up was to willingly subordinate our individual interests to the greater good of protecting vital national interests.

If it's followed, great. If it's not, we only have two choices: obey the orders we have been given, carrying them out with the professionalism and loyalty they deserve, or vote with our feet. That's it. We don't get to debate those orders after the fact. We don't get to say, 'Well, it's not how I would have done it,' or, 'If they had only listened to me.' Too late at that point - and too cowardly."

Comment by Boris Tiraspolsky:

A call for “political neutrality” of the U.S. Military in the current “crisis of human affairs” is an understandable concern of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Although, it fully reflects a lack of awareness of the U.S. Military leadership in a true nature of “ideological struggle of the 21st century”.
 
U.S. Military is an integral part of the American society and consequently reflects all society’s bad and good. The bad of the society is the ideological immaturity of the American people going alone with ideological ambiguity of the Nation’s leadership.
 
The American society in general is torn apart between either “wrong ideologies” or “ideology of no ideology”. Enhanced by widely accepted "political correctness", they dominate minds of the American people. No wonder the Military leadership is calling for “political neutrality” or rather "political correctness" of the U.S. Military.
 
First of all the very term “political neutrality” contradicts a nature of a human being. Already Aristotle (384-322 BC) defended in Politics I.2, that human beings are by nature "political animals”. If Aristotle lived nowadays, he could have most likely added that men are also “ideological animals”.
 
Secondly, there is no “neutrality” - political, economic, social, cultural - at a time of ideologically charged battle with U.S. irreconcilable ideological enemy - Islamic Jihadists. No one can be “neutral” facing the enemy intending to destroy our way of life and replace the Constitution of the United States with Islamic Law as the Supreme Law of the Land.
 
Therefore, a categorical refusal to be “neutral” is an initial call for Ideological Mobilization of the Nation and positive step for developing U.S. Ideology of Anti-Terrorism: principles of moral conduct and ability to distinguish beauty from ugliness in battle with Terror. On the contrary, any request for “neutrality” is in fact a call for ideological collaboration with the enemy.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Why are oil and gas prices soaring?

"Remember all those Democrats in 2006 who promised lower gasoline prices if they got elected? Well, they got elected. And what did we get? Much higher oil and gas prices."

The U.S. Energy Catastrophe
Brought to you by those brilliant politicians in Washington.
By Thomas E. Nugent

I suffered a minor heart attack when I saw the price of my latest fill up: $90. Gas is just under $4 a gallon here in South Carolina, and like many Americans I could be in for a major coronary when the pump price soars past $4.50 or even $5 this summer. Continued...
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

America must harden itself in cyberspace

While the U.S. can have a plan to control each of the “horribles” in the parade, it is less certain that adversaries will." 

 
The routes on the Internet
__________________________________

Carpet bombing in cyberspace
Why America needs a military botnet
BY COL. CHARLES W. WILLIAMSON III

The time for fortresses on the Internet also has passed, even though America has not recognized it. Now, the only consequence for an adversary who intrudes into or attacks our networks is to get kicked out — if we can find him and if he has not installed a hidden back door. That is not enough. America must have a powerful, flexible deterrent that can reach far outside our fortresses and strike the enemy while he is still on the move. Continued...
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Lexicons that can't defeat jihadist message

"What is to be learned from this audio tape, other than the repetitive calls to the combat Jihadists to fight wherever they can, is that we are facing off with two types of threats. One is the smallest in size, openly aggressive, and fully engaged in direct action against his enemies. The other is the largest movement, which emanates from the same ideology and aim at the same far goal, but follow a more deceptive path, at the pinnacle of which is its assertion that Jihadism should not be seen as a threat, obviously, until it is too late."



Usama's Message: Good Jihadists v. Bad Jihadists
By Walid Phares

In his latest audio released by as-sahab (media arm of al Qaeda), the organization’s Zaeem (supreme chief) elaborates on the difference between the pure Jihadists and those Islamists who lost their way and determination to continue the fight in the path of the founding fathers, which he calls the "Salaf of Islam." This complex speech (by Jihadist standards) can be only understood -- and thus explained to decision-makers and the public if the listener-analyst is able to grasp the multi-layered world of Jihadism. Continued...
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Superman Obama vs. Super Powerful Woman Clinton

"All of us have ideological role models, the only difference is that some follow role models representing "wrong ideologies", some follow role models representing "ideology of no ideology" and very few follow role models of the Founding Fathers of the Nation representing absolute Ethics and perfect Esthetics of the Ideology of the Constitution of the United States." - Boris Tiraspolsky 


Two "super" Senators
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

A nuclear attack by terrorists

"The current House version of the fiscal 2009 Defense Authorization bill contains a provision that would require the Pentagon to report annually on the threat posed by tactical nuclear weapons. The $601 billion bill contains language stating that numerous "nonstrategic" nuclear weapons are deployed by various countries and "their prevalence and portability make them attractive targets for theft and for use by terrorist organizations." "The United States should identify, track, and monitor these weapons as a matter of national security," the bill states, noting that a report should assess the risks of these arms being obtained by rogue states, terrorists and non-state entities. The measure appears aimed at countering tactical nuclear arms, including so-called "suitcase" nuclear weapons that actually are steamer trunk-sized bombs, developed during the Cold War by both the United States and Soviet Union. According to Russian officials in the 1990s, not all of Moscow's portable nuclear weapons have been accounted for since the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union." - Bill Gertz    

osama22 

America in Ashes? 
By Christopher S. Carson

The latest audio message from al-Qaeda, reportedly from Osama bin Laden himself, is only the most recent confirmation that the jihadist threat to the West remains real and deadly serious. But the fact that it could take the form of nuclear terrorism should be most worrying to citizens and policy makers alike. Continued...
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Another era is about to be born

"It is interesting how little we know regarding the future price of oil, the future development of alternative energy sources, and the ultimate economic and political impact of both. Oil production may be approaching an irreversible decline. On the other hand, Russia and OPEC may have mustered the necessary discipline to limit the supply. How can we determine the operative cause in this instance? One has only to consider human nature and the history of OPEC to sniff out the truth."
 

 
The Oil Problem
by J. R. Nyquist

The price of oil has risen to over $130 per barrel. What is the cause of this rise? In the latest forecasting survey of the Wall Street Journal, we read that a majority of economists attribute rising food and oil prices to “fundamental market conditions.” It’s not an investment bubble. It would seem that demand is rising faster than the supply. Question: Is the Organization of Petroleum Exporting countries (OPEC) effectively limiting production? If this is true, then anger over U.S. policy in Iraq has far ranging consequences. When President Bush recently visited Saudi Arabia the Saudis refused to expand their oil production. Were they unhappy with the American president? Were they attempting to persuade him, or dissuade him, on a particular issue? Continued...
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Objectives of the War on Terrorism

"There is no doubt, that the War on Terrorism is very different from all known battles in the history of the mankind. But what are exact objectives of the War on Terrorism, courageously conducted by the United States?"



Uncertainties in characterizations of enemy in the War on Terror
 by Boris Tiraspolsky
Founding Member of
 
Islamic terrorists waged a war against the United States. It is the war to exhaust the Nation’s human and economic resources and to brake the Nation’s will to resist Terror. The United States is forced to take a part in the total war in which terrorists employ as a weaponry ideology, economics, conventional, and non-conventional arms in order to obliterate the United States. 
 
In spite of that, there is still no clear understanding of what Terrorism is, who terrorists are, and what goals they pursue. Appearance on the historical stage of a so-called Islamic Terrorism made that understanding even more difficult. Consequently, there are no unmistakably defined realistic objectives, and there is no developed effective strategy in the Global War on Terror.
  
Some say the War on Terrorism is a conflict between States supporting Terrorism and fighting Terrorism. For instance, Afghanistan in 2002 standing behind terrorists on one side, and the International Coalition led by the United States fighting on the other one. This assumption is not necessarily true!
  
Bloody terrorist acts and anti-terrorist operations in Ireland, Chechnya, Philippines, Indonesia, and some other troubled countries are in fact variations of Civil Wars between different parts of the same nations. Quite the opposite, terrorists operating all over Europe come from different countries, but they all united with the same ideology of Islamic fundamentalism.

In contrast, the terrorist attack using a biological weapon that occurred in 1984 in the United States, for instance, was committed by members of the Rajneesh cult, and their philosophy blends Western and Eastern traditions, with special emphasis on Zen Buddhism.
 
Sarin nerve agent in the Tokyo subway was released in 1995 by members of Japanese cult called Aum Shinrikyo. Let’s not to forget that the second worse terrorist act in the history of the United States in Oklahoma City in 1995 was not conducted by people of Islamic believes either.

There is a widely spread “politically correct” notion that Terrorism is just a radical form of rebellion that derives out of a lack of “democracy“ and “prosperity“. In other words, inhuman terrorist acts are means to get “human rights“ and establish “democratic” States. Thus terrorists appear as some sort of “freedom fighters”. 

Mass murders committed by terrorists and justified with both ideological and social motives closely and unmistakably remind of Bolsheviks and Nazis. Both terrorist organizations had established own States and threatened with a total obliteration the rest of the World throughout the 20th century. 

It is obvious that Terrorism historically had, and Islamic Terrorism is not an exception, an infinite number of different faces and masks in order to cover up own evil nature, brutal goals, and bloody actions. There is no doubt, that the War on Terrorism is very different from all known battles in the history of the mankind. 

But what are exact objectives of the War on Terrorism, courageously conducted by the United States? Who is precisely the deceitful and sinister enemy ranged from Islamic jihadists attacked the Nation on the 9/11, 2001 to "homegrown terrorists" attacked the U.S. population the way it happened in Oklahoma-city in 1995? These most crucial questions are still not clear and remain to be answered. 

There are fundamental principles of  warfare that can be neither obsolete, nor ignored. An accurate definition of war objectives and clear characterizations of enemy are among axiomatic truths in conducting battle. They are essential for developing a coherent strategy and effective operational art for the War on Terror, or rather modern anti-terrorist warfare. (Read more...)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Democracy and anti-terrorist warfare

"Just those deserve both Liberty and Life,
Who're ready every day to fight for them and die." 
-
Johan Wolfgang Goethe


Militades (c.555-489)
 
Militades belonged to the old nobility, but he was loyal to Hippias' regime. In 520 he was sent to to the Hellespontine region, where he ruled as a tyrant in a small kingdom of his own. However, in 514, when his ally Hippias had been expelled, he switched his loyalty to the Persian king Darius I the Great, who conquered the region on his way to Thrace and Scythia. When the Greeks in the Persian empire unsuccessfully revolted, his position became untenable, and he returned to Athens, where he became one of the war leaders when the Persians wanted to reinstate Hippias in Athens. At Marathon, Miltiades defeated the Persians and secured the continued existence of Athens as an independent power and a democracy.
 _____________________

Debate in ongoing battle with Terror

There is no doubt that free democratic debate is a vital and integral part of any civil society with established Democratic Institutions. Debate in America, for instance, is a manifestation of “freedom of speech“ sacredly honored by the First Amendments to the Constitution of the Unites States - the Supreme Law of the Land. 
 
However, “democratic debate” and “life or death” battle against aggressor are not compatible by a given. Moreover, when “democratic debate” takes over, victory is in jeopardy. The most known realization of this simple and universal truth happened about 2500 thousand years ago in ancient Greece at a time of Battle of Marathon 490 BC. 

At that time Attica and central Greece were in great danger of attack by Persians. According to Herodotus, “there was a delay of some days before the battle actually began“. Ten Athenian generals passionately debated whether the battle should be joined at all. Many generals were opposed the battle.

It had become self-evident for Miltiades that the endless “democratic debate” all the generals were ardently involved in became a danger for the existence of Athens. The paradox was that the “democratic debate” turned into an obstacle for a survival of a democracy facing invasion of totally foreign to democracy aggressor. 

Militades finally “titled the balance in favor of battle“. Most importantly, he managed to convince all other generals to submit their military units under a command of the single Commander-in-Chief. 

There will be no mistake to say that the victory in most famous in history Battle of Marathon was actually achieved by two totally “anti-democratic” measures. First one was dumping “democratic debate” at a time of a danger for democracy. Second one was imposing on a majority of free citizenry orders of ONE Commander. 

Among many revelations coming with a slow pace unfolding modern terrorist warfare is that the War declared against the Nation by Islamic jihadists and “democratic debate” occurred in a middle of ongoing battle under no circ-umstances can coexist, either. Otherwise “democratic debate” turns into moral paralysis of the Nation and ugly ideological collaboration with aggressor. (Read more...)
 
“Democracy” in America is currently consumed by predominant majority of the American people as all sorts of “people’s rights”, unalienable and granted by the Amendments to the Constitution of the United States. In contrast, total War waged by Islamic jihadists against the Nation calls for an unprecedented responsibility of the People of the United States to “preserve, protect and defend” spiritual, cultural, and material values, including the Constitution of the United States itself. 
 
For the first time in the History of the Nation the Constitution of the United States is under direct ideological attack by the aggressor intended to establish the Islamic Law, as the Supreme Law of the Land. Therefore, there is nothing to “debate” at a time of Battle with Terror! The free and sovereign Nation must follow the original order of the Constitution to “secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity”, or it will perish, otherwise.
  
The Constitutional Responsibility of the People to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States” ought to irreversibly replace any and all “democratic debates” at a time of global battle with Terror. It is the first and right step in forming U.S. Ideology of Anti-Terrorism “being necessary for a security of free State”, regardless of where battle with Terror occurs - on the American soil, or on battlefields far abroad.

Boris Tiraspolsky
Founding Member of
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Prediction of doom and gloom gas price

“The prices that we’re paying at the pump today are, I think, going to be ‘the good old days,’ because others who watch this very closely forecast that we’re going to be hitting $12 and $15 per gallon. And then, after that, when oil – world oil production goes into decline, we’re going to talk about rationing. In other words, not only are we going to be paying high prices and have considerable economic problems, but in addition to that, we’re not going to be able to get the fuel when we want it.” - Robert Hirsch, Management Information Services Senior Energy Advisor



Get motivated and outraged
By Boris Tiraspolsky
Founding Member of American Ideological Society
 
Among a number of publications dedicated to the War on Terror and recently appeared on the Internet there were many articles criticizing all sorts of tactical mistakes made by the U.S. Government. Some of the criticism of war was unjust, some fair. However, there were very few works that hit the heart of the problem. These few writers pointed out three major strategic mistakes the U.S. Government and the current Administration in particular has made:
 
1. lacking precise definition of battle with Terror and presenting ambiguous identity of enemy the United States face;
 
2. turning the War on Terror into an exclusive business of the U.S. Government, although anti-terrorist warfare is a united effort of the entire Nation;
 
3. ignoring developing anti-terrorist Instruments and Forces - economic and ideological - necessary in battle with enemy widely utilizing tactical and strategic Ideological and Economic Instruments of Terror.
 
One does not need to be an expert in combating Terrorism to understand how strategic Economic Instruments of Terror work.
 
Modern terrorist warfare is the total war for exhaustion human and economic resources of enemy. So, ask yourself a simple question what is able to exhaust U.S. economic prosperity and consequently, the strength of the Nation to resist Terror? The answer is obvious:
 
THE PROBLEM IS U.S. DEPENDENCY ON A SUPPLY OF BASIC ECONOMIC NECESSITIES THAT ARE A MUST FOR SUSTAINING THE U.S. NATIONAL ECONOMY AT A TIME OF WAR, AND FIRST AND FOREMOST THE PROBLEM OF DEPENDENCY ON A SUPPLY OF BASIC ECONOMIC NECESSITIES IMPORTED FROM U.S. IDEOLOGICAL ENEMIES USING U.S. DEPENDENCY AS ECONOMIC WEAPONRY AGAINST THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.
 
Therefore, next time when you go to fill up a gas tank of your car and see "doom and gloom" gas price do not be surprised, and most importantly do not get irritated and angry at oil companies, regardless of how much profit they make. Get motivated and outraged that currently due to the mentioned above strategic mistakes made by the U.S. Government the Nation is still armless facing enemy's Economic Weaponry  and enemy's Ideological Weaponry.

Needless to stress how urgently the United States must develop own superior anti-terrorist Ideological and anti-terrorist  Economic Instruments necessary for retuning the U.S. National Economy at a time of War. The latter requires every American to realize that all of us with no exception have the Constitutional Responsibility to combating Terrorism on battlefields of the Economic and Ideological Theatres of War. (Read more...) 
 
The current unprecedented crude oil price surge has nothing to do with the "Invisible Hand" of the Market Place - the economic law of "supply and demand". It  is in fact strategic Economic Weaponry using by U.S. ideological enemies against the Nation. This Economic Weaponry is Instrument of Terror aimed to exhaust economic and human resources of the American people, to collapse the National Economy, and destroy the civilian society of the United States.  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Rebellion to Tyrants is Obedience to God

"We fight not to enslave, but to set a country free, and to make room upon the earth for honest men to live in." - Thomas Paine, Common Sense (1776)



The committee appointed to design Ameica's first Great Seal -- Franklin, Jefferson, and Adams -- seem to have shared that way of thinking. They proposed that the seal should bear the motto: "Rebellion to Tyrants is Obedience to God."
_____________________________

America's War on Tyrants
Terror's puppet slaves
By Richard Parker Robison

The man slipped in next to me and shut the car door. He said nothing as I pulled away from the curb into a sultry Persian Gulf night. We headed west into the desert, the occasional car passing close on the narrow two lane road. What the Arab agent would offer to tell us we did not know, though we knew he was well connected. Continued...
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

What will it take to wake the U.S. government up?

"With an unresolved strategy towards an enemy that the U.S. political leadership refuses to define as other than "extremists", it is little surprise that "strategic operational planning" would leave something to be desired. But as some suggest Bin Laden's messages are sleep-worthy, key parts of the U.S. government are clearly asleep at the wheel in fighting Bin Laden's message and ideology."


Unresolved U.S. Strategy on Jihad and the War of Ideas
By Jeffrey Imm
 
An unresolved question remains who in the U.S. Government is accountable for the wartime "war of ideas" against Jihadists. Last fall, Senator Joe Lieberman questioned the FBI, the DHS, the Director of National Intelligence, and the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) about their organizations' role in the "war on ideas" against jihadists. The answer was a giant shrugging of shoulders. Continued...
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

U.S. greatest strategic vulnerability

"... the impact of oil dependence on terrorism extends beyond the financial windfall it entails for terrorist groups and the ideology that drives them: terrorists also understand that our oil dependence is our greatest strategic vulnerability."



The High Cost of Oil Dependence
By Daveed Gartenstein-Ross

With the price of oil over $125 a barrel and U.S. gasoline prices hovering around $4 a gallon, our nation’s energy dependence has been a top news headline. Although the economic effect of these surging prices has been most prominent, the high cost of oil dependence extends far beyond that. As former CIA director R. James Woolsey and Institute for the Analysis of Global Security co-director Anne Korin have noted, our oil dependence means that we are essentially “paying for both sides in the War on Terror.” The vulnerability of our energy supply to a terrorist attack also creates an obvious Achilles’ heel. And other visible problems that the world is currently confronting, such as rising food prices, are intimately linked to the skyrocketing price of oil. Continued...
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Crippled by political correctness

"We find ourselves crippled by political correctness and incapable of having honest conversations about meeting the threats around the world."

______________________

Threats to America
By Bill Gertz
 
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich warned in a major speech yesterday that the United States is facing the danger of defeat today similar to Britain in the early days of World War II. Continued...
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Doctrinal aspects of Quranic warfare

"I think the significant strategic shortcoming or failing in the war on terror is that we have not gone through the strategic, doctrinal analysis of the enemy, we haven’t distilled and elaborated his threat doctrine. Because we haven’t done that, we do not have a fully articulated global threat model for the war on terror. We do not have a common analytic paradigm that all our government agencies can access, use and understand, to explain how potential threats, like to homeland security, will manifest themselves from that paradigm."



Jihad: According to Quran and Sunnah
(click here)
____________________________

Army Colonel Says U.S. Needs Better Focus in the War on Terror
By Matt Korade, CQ Staff

To better understand the Quranic basis of jihad as practiced by extremists without sifting through a library of interpretations, you should read one book above all others, says Lt. Col. Joseph Myers. “The Quranic Concept of War,” by Pakistani Brig. Gen. S.K. Malik in the late 1970s, isn’t much studied in the West. But it should be, Myers said, if America, and more specifically, the U.S. military, wants to gain a better understanding of the enemy in the war on terrorism. Continued...
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive