Not Another War in Iraq

“In a society under the forms of which the stronger faction can readily unite and oppress the weaker, anarchy may as truly be said to reign as in a state of nature.” — James Madison, Federalist No. 52 — 1788

Today a watched a show on Fox News called “The Five.” It’s an hour long talk and opinion show featuring five Fox personalities. Today’s show featured Dana Perino a former G.W. Bush press secretary, Kimberly Guilfoyle a former San Francisco prosecutor, Eric Bolling a former oil trader and business analyst, Bob Beckel a Democrat operative and campaign manager for Walter Mondale, Andrea Tantaros former vice president at a public affairs firm in Manhattan where she advised Fortune 500 corporations on crisis management and media strategy, and a guest, Jesse Watters a Bill O’Reilly producer.

The Five is a show where topics of current interest are covered in 5 to 7 minutes segments called “blocks.” It is also a show where people tend to talk over one another and really do not listen well to what the other person is saying.

Yesterday (June 16^th) there was a very heated debate on what to do in Iraq. Each of the co-hosts and Watters had strong opinions ranging from doing nothing to military intervention to assist the Maliki government. Also each on them had at least one point that I could agree with. However, one of the things that irritated me was Beckel’s lack of accurate knowledge of the history of the region and his constant pension for blaming George W. Bush for the mess Iraq is in today.

Yes, it was during the Bush administration that we invaded Iraq to find alleged weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Of course on the other side there were those blaming Obama for the problems in Syria and Iraq caused by the rise of the Islamic State of Syria and Iraq/Levant (ISIS). The blame game is totally counterproductive in find a solution as to what U.S policy should be and the immediate actions the United States must take, if any. In other words there was plenty of heat, but a small amount of light.

To mediate a conflict being it a business deal, civil suit or a war the parties involved cannot spend their time and efforts reliving the past. If they serious they must try to find a solution that will work and leave the blame game to the historians. It is much too early to write a history of involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan while he major players are still alive. Any history will be tainted by the agenda of the participants be they pro or con.

Of course to make a wise and workable plan you need to take into consideration the history and culture of the region. In essence you need to back to the death of the prophet Muhammad in 632 — some 1,382 years ago and the conflict over his successor. This is when Islam broke into two warring factions — the Sunnis supported the succession of Abu Bakr, the prophet’s friend and he Shiite Muslims who felt the rightful successor was the prophet’s son-in-law and cousin, Ali bin Abu Talib. This conflict lies at the heart of the problem.

The latest Iraq war is between Iraq’s pro-Iranian Shiite government and pro-Al Qaeda Sunni rebels. It boils down to Iran vs. Al Qaeda, radical Shiites versus radical Sunnis. The first rule of foreign policy is if your enemies are killing each other, don’t step in to stop them.

What we’ve seen in Syria, and now in Iraq, is the early phase of a 30-year civil war between Shiites and Sunnis, which will go from region to region, country to country, tribe to tribe. Fighters will become increasingly radical and brutal, and they will be fueled by Arab oil money. For them, it is a fight about religion, power, geography and resources. And it could well be a fight to the finish.

America has a choice: We can be caught in the middle of this generational war, propping up this side or that, sometimes switching sides. Or we can figure out what our underlying strategic interests in the region are and find a way to achieve them that doesn’t involve U.S. forces or military assistance.

Sadly, our leaders are spending their efforts blaming each other for what went wrong rather than finding a way out of the mess. It’s like listening to your kids arguing, “It’s not my fault, he started it”. “No, it wasn’t me, she’s the one who started it!”

Iraq is descending once again into a brutal civil war, and what’s Washington doing? Wringing its hands and blaming the other guy! Bush supporters say it’s all Obama’s fault for failing to leave a residual force and negotiating a Status of Forces agreement in Iraq after we won the war. Obama supporters say the original sin was Bush’s flawed decision to invade Iraq over a decade ago.

Enough already! Let’s just agree it’s everybody’s fault. Bush shouldn’t have gone into Iraq and Obama shouldn’t have gotten out. There is plenty of blame to go around for past mistakes, but we are where we are and the question now is, what do we do?

An important but often forgotten test for American foreign policy decisions is what is in our country’s national interest. It’s not about what is best for Iraq or Afghanistan or anyone else. The question is what’s best for America. We have three sustaining vital strategic interests in the Middle East: oil, terrorists and Israel. We want their oil, we don’t want their terrorists and we want Israel to survive in an increasingly dangerous neighborhood.

Oil

As the region descends into generational civil war, Shiites and Sunnis will target each other’s oil fields and refineries. Unless we’re prepared to occupy the entire region for decades, we should face the fact we, America plus the world, are not going to get our oil from a war zone. Arab oil will no longer be cheap, abundant or secure, and it is unlikely to be so ever be again.

At a minimum, America needs to be energy independent. We should work with our Canadian and Mexican allies to create a North American energy corridor. In the last several years American technology, perseverance and ingenuity have developed ways to find, extract and bring to market our own oil and natural gas. American shale energy is so plentiful it will satisfy our own needs and soon be enough to make us the energy supplier to the world. American oil and natural gas can replace Arab oil and gas, but only if we have the political will to take the shackles off the American energy industry. There is violence today in Iraq, and experts are talking about a new floor of $5-per-gallon gasoline. We can no longer hold our economy hostage to warring tribes in the Middle East.

Fracking and horizontal drilling can be done safely and environmentally responsibly if we require the best industry practices. The same goes for drilling in Alaska and off our shores. Approving the Keystone XL pipeline, immediately, would show the world that America has set out on a different course and is committed to developing an alternative to Middle East oil. Of course this will not help Europe, but their problem, not ours.

Terrorists

Some say we must re-engage in Iraq to prevent Al Qaeda from seizing control and using it as a launching pad for attacks against Americans. That’s the same argument the same people used to justify our decade-long, unsuccessful, nation-building efforts in Afghanistan. Al Qaeda has established a presence in dozens of countries throughout North Africa, the Middle East, the Levant, the Arabian Peninsula, all the way to South Asia. Al Qaeda can use countries from Libya to Syria to Pakistan to threaten Americans; an American military presence in all of them is unrealistic.

To keep terrorists from our shores, we must commit to securing our borders and focus our intelligence-gathering on possible terrorists rather than the broad American public. Our airline security system gives Granny from Grand Rapids, who is taking the grandkids to Disney World, the same level of scrutiny it gives a young man who has traveled multiple times to the tribal regions of Pakistan. We gather intelligence on hundreds of millions, rather than zeroing in on those with terrorist profiles. By focusing on everyone, we’re focusing on no one. Our current system wastes time and resources. We need to fix it.

Israel

We may not have a formal defense treaty with Israel, but we do have moral and strategic interests in helping it survive in a dangerous neighborhood that is about to get even more dangerous. We should do everything possible to give Israel the tools it needs to defend itself. Period.

Some say we’ve paid too high a price in Iraq to lose it now. Nearly 4,500 Americans lost their lives and tens of thousands were injured in the Iraq War. They and their families will bear the mental and physical scars of battle for their lifetimes. We’ve spent well over a trillion dollars in American treasure in oil-rich Iraq. All of that is true, and it’s tragic. But it is also in the past. There is nothing we can do to erase that, and very little we can do to “save” Iraq.

The brutal truth is we wanted Iraq to be a democratic and free nation more than the Iraqis did. There are 65,000 American-trained and equipped soldiers in the Iraqi Army running away from 2,000 Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) insurgents. The sight of Iraqi soldiers taking off their uniforms and throwing aside their weapons in hopes of blending into the crowd as Al Qaeda/ISIS advances says it all. The Iraqi military and government are not failing for lack of numbers, funds, training or equipment. They’re failing for lack of will. We handed them democracy on a silver platter, and they didn’t want it so they will not fight for it. Democracy needs cultural and historic ties to liberal thinkers. Our republic had its roots in England’s Age of Enlightenment and the Renaissance. Once these ideas are embedded in the hearts and minds of the people they will willing fight to carry them forward and build a society based on them.

Our main concern in Iraq today is the 20,000 American civilians who are still there. They are vulnerable, and we should do everything possible to bring them home quickly and safely. No one wants to see the YouTube video of black-masked, machete-wielding Al Qaeda terrorists ready to strike at blindfolded, kneeling Americans.

What we have failed to understand throughout our wars of intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan is that we see war and peace through a different lens than our enemies do. Americans see peace as the normal state of affairs, with war occurring when peace breaks down. When war does break out, we believe it is temporary and that peace will be restored when it is over. We believe in wars that have winners and losers and, perhaps most importantly, that every war eventually ends.

The people we have been fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq do not see war and peace the same way. For them, war is never over. Peace is merely a pause while both sides regroup to fight again.

Some of our brave men and women who bore the brunt of battle in Iraq are now questioning whether their sacrifices were in vain. What they must remember is they weren’t fighting for Iraq, or for its various tribes. Our soldiers and sailors and marines and pilots fought for America. They fought nobly, and bravely. If there is any failure, it is not with America’s military, but with our political leaders.

America made many of the same mistakes in Iraq and Afghanistan that it did in Vietnam. Americans are once again war-weary, and once again determined not to send our troops to fight for dictators who don’t like us in countries that don’t matter. Hopefully the lesson sticks this time. We must adhere to the advice of our first president — George Washington when he said:

“My ardent desire is, and my aim has been to comply strictly with all our engagements foreign and domestic; but to keep the U States free from political connections with every other Country. To see that they may be independent of all, and under the influence of none. In a word, I want an American character, that the powers of Europe may be convinced we act for ourselves and not for others; this, in my judgment, is the only way to be respected abroad and happy at home.”

Just because there is no U.S. military solution for Iraq isn’t a get-out-of-jail-free card for President Obama to do nothing. All too often he sets up the straw man argument: We don’t want to go to war, so therefore we do nothing.

The United States has vital strategic interests in the region — oil, terrorists and Israel — that will not be met if the president uses the excuse of no boots on the ground to do nothing. Lobbing a few missiles into Iraq or bombing a few areas may look like “action,” but neither will do anything to change the battle’s outcome. America’s national security does not always mean sending in the Marines, but it does mean taking concrete steps to guarantee our vital interests.

If the president fails to do so, he cannot hide behind the excuse that Iraq was Bush’s war, and losing it was Bush’s failure. If he fails to take the steps available to him to develop American energy resources, to protect Americans from terrorist attacks and to offer full support to our ally Israel, it will be on his watch, and on his head.

Will Bowe Bergdahl Draw A Pass?

“Any fool can tell the truth, but it requires a man of some sense to know how to lie well.” — Samuel Butler

I just watched a portion of President Obama’s press conference in Poland. When queried about his action of releasing five top Taliban commanders from Gitmo in exchange for an American soldier of suspicious character is answer was lame at best. He responded that since George Washington the United States has had a policy of leaving no man on the battlefield. The problem with his response is that Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl was not on the battlefield — he deserted his post and his unit and willing walked into the hands of the Taliban where he remained for five years doing what is to be determined.

According to a report by James Rosen of Fox News:

“A senior official confirms to Fox News that the conduct of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl -- both in his final stretch of active duty in Afghanistan and then, too, during his time when he lived among the Taliban -- has been thoroughly investigated by the U.S. intelligence community and is the subject of "a major classified file."

In conveying as much, the Defense Department source confirmed to Fox News that many within the intelligence community harbor serious outstanding concerns not only that Bergdahl may have been a deserter but that he may have been an active collaborator with the enemy.

The Pentagon official added pointedly that no relevant congressional committee has sought access to the classified file, but that if such a request were made, key committee chairs would, under previous precedent, likely be granted access to it. Separately, the Pentagon confirmed Monday that it is looking into claims Americans died during the search for Bergdahl.

The administration announced over the weekend that Bergdahl's release had been secured, in exchange for five Taliban prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. President Obama was joined by the soldier's parents in making a public statement on the release Saturday evening from the Rose Garden.

Sources told Fox News that many officials in the Executive Branch are "quite baffled" by the White House's decision to allow the president to stand alongside Bergdahl's father this past weekend, given the father's history of controversial statements, emails and online posts.

Asked Monday about reports that Bergdahl's father was communicating on Twitter with a man described as a Taliban spokesman, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney declined to comment on those reports but defended the administration's handling of the release.

"The fact is they are the parents of Sergeant Bergdahl. Their son was held in captivity for five years," he said. "And it was absolutely the right thing to do, for the commander in chief, for this administration to take action to secure his release, the last prisoner of war from the Afghanistan and Iraq wars."

Asked whether Obama stands by National Security Adviser Susan Rice's claim Sunday that Bergdahl served with "distinction," Carney said the president "stands by actions that he took as commander in chief" to secure his release.

Another administration official, whose duties are focused on counterterrorism, told Fox News when asked about the status of any investigations into Bergdahl's initial disappearance and his conduct over the last five years: "Everybody's looking at this. He's not going to get a free pass" in the interrogations that Bergdahl will face during his repatriation process. "He's going to have a lot of questions to answer -- a lot. Is he a hero? No." (This is in direct contradiction to professional liar Susan Rice’s comments on the Sunday talk shows.)

Although this source had not seen the classified file described by the Pentagon source, the counterterrorism official agreed that given the high priority attached to the Bergdahl case over the last five years, the need for clarity about Bergdahl's actions before and during his time with the Taliban "would have been a high priority for intelligence tasking."

Asked if the process of repatriation would include questioning of Bergdahl geared towards determining whether he engaged in any forms of collaboration with the enemy, the counterterrorism official replied: "Of course. ... It's there. This is extremely untidy."

As this story continues to unfold more of the facts are emerging about Bergdahl’s capture by the Taliban and Obama’s action in making the trade of five hardened Taliban commanders from Gitmo.

Two American soldiers who served in a platoon alongside Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl told Fox News’ Megyn Kelly Monday night they believe Bergdahl deliberately walked off base, with one saying he does not want to see his former comrade “hailed as a hero.”

Gerald Sutton and Cody Full were serving in Afghanistan with Bergdahl when he vanished and was subsequently captured by the Taliban. The White House announced Saturday that Bergdahl was released after five years in captivity. The U.S. traded five Taliban Guantanamo prisoners to secure Bergdahl’s freedom.

Full told Kelly on “The Kelly File” that there is no doubt in his mind that Bergdahl deserted.

Full said there were “telltale signs” that Bergdahl deserted before he was captured, including that he mailed his possessions home, expressed disillusionment with the war in emails to his family and talking extensively about the surrounding terrain.

“(Bergdahl was) talking extensively to the Afghan national police in a way that was not about hearts and minds, there was an agenda there when he spoke to them,” he said.

Sutton told Kelly that he also believes Bergdahl’s disappearance was “premeditated.”

“His true motives and everything, I really don’t know he never spoke about them,” Sutton said.

Full said he does not think Bergdahl served the U.S. with honor, saying he violated his oath to his country and put his fellow soldiers at risk “when he deserted us.”

“I just don’t want to see him hailed as a hero, and I just want him face the consequences of his own actions and possibly face a court martial for desertion,” Sutton added.

The story surrounding the return of Bowe Bergdahl to U.S. custody is still developing but the more we learn the more it seems like Bergdahl willfully deserted his post and comrades and sought some type of refuge among the Haqqani Network in Afghanistan. All the major media are leading with the story line of Bergdahl as a potential deserter rather than a freed prisoner (CNN || WaPo || CBS || The Hill || Time || etc., etc.) Adding to the suspicion that the desertion story is the truth is an administration official saying that releasing Bergdahl would bring political benefits:

Sending the hapless Susan Rice out to ritually lie to the Sunday Morning show audiences, a la Benghazi, is also a “tell.” When this is coupled with the devastating series of Twitter messages (you have to read them) from Bergdahl’s former bunkmate at the OP from which he disappeared (the “disappeared while on patrol” story never made any sense to me and now has been made, as a former administration used to say, inoperative) there is at least enough doubt that Bergdahl should be required to answer the questions under oath. According to the Army Bergdahl is refusing to speak English while being treated in Germany.

Just as with the Benghazi attack, Barack Obama’s national-security adviser went out on a Sunday to discuss a burgeoning controversy, and perhaps without a full set of the facts in front of her. When questioned by George Stephanopoulos on ABC’s This Week, Rice tried to parry the question about Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl’s initial disappearance, which some of his fellow soldiers believed to be an act of desertion that cost more American lives. Rice insisted that Bergdahl had served with “honor and distinction,” a claim that will be tested in the coming days and weeks. Rice stated:

“Certainly anybody who’s been held in those conditions, in captivity for five years, has paid an extraordinary price. But that is really not the point. The point is that he’s back. He is going to be safely reunited with his family. He served the United States with honor and distinction. And we’ll have the opportunity eventually to learn what has transpired in the past years, but what’s most important now is his health and well-being, that he have the opportunity to recover in peace and security and be reunited with his family. Which is why this is such a joyous day.”

The Daily Beast’s Christopher Dickey later wrote:

Rice also claimed in this segment that ”Sergeant Bergdahl wasn’t simply a hostage; he was an American prisoner of war captured on the battlefield.” That depends on a very broad definition of battlefield. Fellow soldiers from his unit claim Bergdahl deserted and was captured well away from any military action, and they’re far from joyous over the deal that freed him. One of them, Nathan Bradley Bethea, wrote a damning piece today for The Daily Beast expressing outrage over the swap of Bergdahl for five high-value Taliban targets:

“Whether Bergdahl…just walked away from his base or was lagging behind on a patrol at the time of his capture remains an open and fiercely debated question.” Not to me and the members of my unit. Make no mistake: Bergdahl did not “lag behind on a patrol,” as was cited in news reports at the time. There was no patrol that night. Bergdahl was relieved from guard duty, and instead of going to sleep, he fled the outpost on foot. He deserted. I’ve talked to members of Bergdahl’s platoon—including the last Americans to see him before his capture. I’ve reviewed the relevant documents. That’s what happened.

Our deployment was hectic and intense in the initial months, but no one could have predicted that a soldier would simply wander off. Looking back on those first 12 weeks, our slice of the war in the vicinity of Sharana resembles a perfectly still snow-globe—a diorama in miniature of all the dust-coated outposts, treeless brown mountains and adobe castles in Paktika province—and between June 25 and June 30, all the forces of nature conspired to turn it over and shake it. On June 25, we suffered our battalion’s first fatality, a platoon leader named First Lieutenant Brian Bradshaw. Five days later, Bergdahl walked away. …

On July 4, 2009, a human wave of insurgents attacked the joint U.S./Afghan outpost at Zerok. It was in east Paktika province, the domain of our sister infantry battalion (3rd Battalion, 509th Infantry). Two Americans died and many more received wounds. Hundreds of insurgents attacked and were only repelled by teams of Apache helicopters. Zerok was very close to the Pakistan border, which put it into the same category as outposts now infamous—places like COP Keating or Wanat, places where insurgents could mass on the Pakistani side and then try to overwhelm the outnumbered defenders.

One of my close friends was the company executive officer for the unit at Zerok. He is a mild-mannered and generous guy, not the kind of person prone to fits of pique or rage. But, in his opinion, the attack would not have happened had his company received its normal complement of intelligence aircraft: drones, planes, and the like. Instead, every intelligence aircraft available in theater had received new instructions: find Bergdahl. My friend blames Bergdahl for his soldiers’ deaths. I know that he is not alone, and that this was not the only instance of it. His soldiers’ names were Private First Class Aaron Fairbairn and Private First Class Justin Casillas.

Though the 2009 Afghan presidential election slowed the search for Bergdahl, it did not stop it. Our battalion suffered six fatalities in a three-week period. On August 18, an IED killed Private First Class Morris Walker and Staff Sergeant Clayton Bowen during a reconnaissance mission. On August 26, while conducting a search for a Taliban shadow sub-governor supposedly affiliated with Bergdahl’s captors, Staff Sergeant Kurt Curtiss was shot in the face and killed. On September 4, during a patrol to a village near the area in which Bergdahl vanished, an insurgent ambush killed Second Lieutenant Darryn Andrews and gravely wounded Private First Class Matthew Martinek, who died of his wounds a week later. On September 5, while conducting a foot movement toward a village also thought affiliated with Bergdahl’s captors, Staff Sergeant Michael Murphrey stepped on an improvised land mine. He died the next day.

It is important to name all these names. For the veterans of the units that lost these men, Bergdahl’s capture and the subsequent hunt for him will forever tie to their memories, and to a time in their lives that will define them as people. He has finally returned. Those men will never have the opportunity.”

Parents of fallen soldier Second Lieutenant Darryn Andrews state; “Our son died looking for Bergdahl and the military lied to us about it.” If the accusation is true, it wouldn’t be the first time higher-ups tweaked the narrative about how an American soldier died to make it less problematic for the military as was the case of the death Pat Tillman and the subsequent cover-up.

At the time, Andrews’ family states they were told that his men were hunting a Taliban commander and that the truck at the front of their group ended in a hole after being hit by an Improvised Explosive Device. As the men got out to try and move the truck, a Taliban fighter with a rocket propelled grenade emerged and fired at them. Lt Andrews was the only one to see it and tackled three of his men to prevent them being hit. He took a direct hit and died.

Speaking to MailOnline from his home in Cameron, Texas, Mr. Andrews said: ‘When my son was killed there was no mention of searching for this guy (Bergdahl) but once all this has come out we got several emails and calls from soldiers who were with him in Afghanistan.

The Pentagon said Monday it is reviewing claims that U.S. soldiers were killed in the course of the years-long search for Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, who was released over the weekend by his Taliban captors.

The sense of celebration surrounding the announcement Saturday of Bergdahl's release quickly has given way to controversy — including questions surrounding his initial disappearance from his eastern Afghanistan post five years ago and the lengths to which U.S. forces went to find him.

The names and faces of six soldiers, who died allegedly during the search for Bergdahl, began to emerge within hours of the soldier's release.

Asked about the claims, Pentagon spokesman Col. Steve Warren said it's "impossible" to confirm right now whether anybody's death was directly linked to the hunt for Bergdahl. But the Pentagon will look further into the circumstances of the deaths being associated with the search, he said.

For five years, soldiers have been forced to stay silent about the disappearance and search for Bergdahl," wrote Bethea in his Daily Beast article, who said he participated in the searches. "Now we can tell our story."

But Bergdahl's conduct, and his writings before his capture, have also raised questions.

According to a 2012 Rolling Stone article, he sent an email to his parents shortly before his capture saying: "I am ashamed to be an American. And the title of US soldier is just the lie of fools."

There are also reports that Bergdahl's father was communicating on Twitter with a man described as a Taliban spokesman.

Sue Martin, who described herself as the Bergdahl family spokesperson, did not respond directly to questions about the criticism of Bowe Bergdahl's conduct.

She said despite the controversy surrounding the prisoner swap and the latest allegations, his town of Hailey, Idaho, stands united behind him.

Though some accounts say Bergdahl fell behind on a patrol or wandered off drunk, the accounts by Bethea and others say Bergdahl left his outpost, OP Mest, in the Paktika Province of Afghanistan under the cover of night.

They also give essentially the same account that Bergdahl left behind his rifle, helmet and body armor, taking only his compass and perhaps a knife and water.

"The place was an Afghan graveyard," wrote one person who identified himself in an online forum as Jeff Howard and suggested he also was part of the unit. "Bergdahl had been acting a little strange, telling people he wanted to 'walk the earth' . We lost good men trying to find him."

Warren acknowledged the Defense Department has conducted "preliminary" investigations into Bergdahl's disappearance but said the agency has never confirmed whether he is a deserter.

"We've never publicly said anything primarily because we haven't had a chance to speak to Sgt. Bergdahl himself," he said.

Howard lists the same six soldiers and, like others, suggested even more were either indirectly wounded or injured because vital resources — including drones and air support — were diverted to the Bergdahl search and troops became easy targets for the Taliban because members knew about their well-known recovery missions.

George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley said Monday that he doesn’t believe there’s much debate over whether the White House broke the law by releasing five high-ranking Taliban prisoners from Guantanamo Bay without congressional notification — noting that not even the White House is seriously arguing that it is not violating federal law.

Turley spoke with CNN anchor Carol Costello on Monday about the weekend prisoner swap, which saw Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl released from Taliban custody in exchange for five top-ranking Taliban officials held at Gitmo. Republicans in Congress have already accused the White House of ignoring a law requiring a 30-day notification before any prisoners are transferred from the high-security Caribbean prison, and have promised to hold hearings on the issue.

“Did the White House violate federal law?” Costello asked Turley.

“They did,” the professor replied matter-of-factly. “I don’t think that the White House is seriously arguing that they’re not violating federal law. And to make matters worse, this is a long series of violations of federal law that the president’s been accused of. This is going to add to that pile. I don’t think there’s much debate that they’re in violation of the law.”

Turley explained that President Obama “is essentially arguing the very same principle as George Bush, that when it comes to Gitmo, he has almost absolute power, that it’s his prerogative, his inherent authority, to be able to make these decisions as he sees fit.”

“Well, does it matter?” Costello asked. “Because the administration says that the Department of Defense consulted with the Justice Department, and that was enough. Does that matter?”

“Well, unfortunately the Justice Department has been involved in many of these controversies, and they tend to support federal power,” Turley replied. “The federal law seems quite clear.”

“And the fact that you have negotiations that have gone on for years really undermines the argument that this was a matter where time was of the essence,” he added, attacking the White House line that Bergdahl’s health was at stake. “Clearly you have committees with classified proceedings, people who have been cleared for this information that could have been consulted. And this really is the reason they enacted the law.”

The more damning the accusations against Bergdahl, the less the prisoner swap adds up

A senior official confirms to Fox News that the conduct of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl — both in his final stretch of active duty in Afghanistan and then, too, during his time when he lived among the Taliban — has been thoroughly investigated by the U.S. intelligence community and is the subject of “a major classified file.”

In conveying as much, the Defense Department source confirmed to Fox News that many within the intelligence community harbor serious outstanding concerns not only that Bergdahl may have been a deserter but that he may have been an active collaborator with the enemy. Sources told Fox News that many officials in the Executive Branch are “quite baffled” by the White House’s decision to allow the president to stand alongside Bergdahl’s father this past weekend, given the father’s history of controversial statements, emails and online posts.

But if all that’s true why was Bergdahl promoted in absentia to sergeant in 2011? Why would he be in line for another promotion, to staff sergeant, this month? And why would the White House let itself get within a thousand miles of the Bergdahl family with suspicions like these ready to bubble over?

It’s one thing to do a deal to get an American back; it’s another to give away the terrorist farm as part of it; and it’s another still to give away the farm for a guy whom your own investigators think may be a Taliban sympathizer. Remember, the ostensible point of the prisoner exchange is to set a precedent so that Obama can release other detainees at Gitmo later this year and finally close the prison.

The last thing you’d want to do in that case is trade five especially dangerous detainees for someone whose loyalty to the U.S. is in serious question even within the administration’s own ranks. It’s a political tornado in the making; if Bergdahl does end up being proved a deserter or worse, Democrats will run screaming from future Gitmo prisoner releases. Just doesn’t make sense. Maybe the White House has reason to believe that Bergdahl’s getting a bum rap and really was taken against his will — but in that case, why isn’t Carney or anyone else pushing back hard with that information? What’s going on here?

Hero or Something Else

“He wasn’t simply a hostage. He was a prisoner of war.” — National Security Adviser Susan Rice

In writing this post I am not accusing recently released Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl of anything, but I believe that many questions need to be answered.

Top Obama administration officials on Sunday praised the diplomatic and military efforts to recover Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, a prisoner of war in Afghanistan, saying it was an “extraordinary” and “life-saving” mission while disagreeing with the arguments that officials negotiated with terrorists and failed to inform Congress.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and National Security Adviser Susan Rice made their comments roughly 24 hours after Americans learned that Bergdahl was recovered in exchange for the release of five Taliban detainees at the U.S. prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

On May 31, 2014, U.S. officials from the White House and Pentagon announced that Bergdahl had been released by his captors and recovered by U.S. special operations forces in eastern Afghanistan. The release was brokered by the American, Qatar and Afghanistan governments with the Taliban, in exchange for five Guantanamo Bay detainees transferred to Qatari custody for at least one year. On 10:30 a.m. (EDST) May 31, 2014, Bergdahl was handed over by 18 Taliban members to a U.S. Navy Seal team in eastern Afghanistan, near Khost on the Pakistani border, in what was described as a "peaceful handover.

On June 1 Bergdahl arrived at Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany, a facility that treats serious war injuries from the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts, a U.S. Defense official said. His “reintegration process” will include “time for him to tell his story, decompress, and to reconnect with his family through telephone calls and video conferences,” a senior Defense official said.

When Bergdahl is ready to leave Landstuhl he will be transported to Brooke Medical Center in San Antonio.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said on Sunday that the United States saw “an opening” and acted quickly to rescue Sgt. Bergdahl.

“We believed that the information we had, the intelligence we had, was such that Sgt. Bergdahl safety and health were both in jeopardy and in particular his health deteriorating,” Hagel said. “It was our judgment that if we could find an opening and move very quickly with that opening, that we needed to get him out of there essentially to save his life. I know President Obama feels very strongly about that, I do as well.”

According to U.S. government officials, Sgt. Bergdahl was the only remaining American soldier captured in recent conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. His release was part of a negotiation that includes the release of five Afghan detainees who are held in the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay. The BCC reports that the detainees have already been freed, and on Saturday Obama said that they would be transported to Qatar.

The U.S. has released five Taliban prisoners kept at Guantanamo Bay — all of them either senior Taliban figures or Taliban officials with connections to Taliban leaders, and all labeled by the Pentagon as highly dangerous to the security of the U.S. and its allies if released. They are:

Mohammad Fazl, the former Taliban defense minister during the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan, chief of staff of the Taliban army, and commander of its 22nd Division. According to a U.S. Department of Defense document obtained by Wikileaks, Fazl is believed to be an associate of Supreme Taliban Commander Mullah Omar and was “wanted by the UN for possible war crimes including the murder of thousands of Shiites,” surrendered to the Northern Alliance commander Gen. Dostum in November 2001.

“Detainee is assessed to be a HIGH risk, as he is likely to pose a threat to the US, its interests, and allies,” his Guantanamo detainee file reads. “If released, detainee would likely rejoin the Taliban and establish ties with ACM [anti-coalition militia] elements participating in hostilities against US and Coalition forces in Afghanistan.”

Mullah Norullah Noori, a former Taliban military commander and Taliban governor of two Afghan provinces, who led Taliban forces against U.S. and coalition troops and was also “wanted by the United Nations (UN) for possible war crimes including the murder of thousands of Shiite Muslims” as Fazl was, according to Noori’s Guantanamo prisoner file as obtained and posted by Wikileaks. He is also believed to be associated with Supreme Taliban Commander Mullah Omar.

Noori commanded the Taliban in the northern city of Mazar e-Sharif. Like Fazl, he surrendered to Gen. Dostum in 2001.

Rated a “HIGH” threat to U.S. security interests if released, Noori is or was associated with members of al Qaeda, the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, and Hezb-e-Islami Gulbuddin.

Mohammed Nabi, another senior Taliban official with ties to al Qaeda, the Haqqani Network, Hezb-e-Islami Gulbuddin, and other anti-U.S., Taliban-allied groups, according to his Guantanamo Bay file as posted by Wikileaks.

Also rated as a “HIGH” security threat if released, Nabi fought with the Mujahideen against the Soviets. After that, he told the Americans who captured and detained him, he was an off-and-on Taliban member in the early 2000s, worked for the chief of the Taliban’s Border Department, which controlled smuggling. In early spring of 2002, he left the Taliban to sell used cars in a small village near Khost and became a CIA informant.

According to his Defense Dept. file, Nabi was involved in attacks against U.S. and coalition forces and facilitated smuggling routes for the Taliban and al Qaeda.

Khairullah Khairkhwa, a direct associate of Osama bin Laden according to his Defense Dept. detainee file obtained by Wikileaks, and a senior Taliban military commander who also served as the Taliban’s minister of Interior and the governor of Herat.

He represented the Taliban at meetings with Iranian officials seeking to support actions against U.S. and coalition forces after the Sept. 11 attacks, according to the document. He attended a meeting at the direction of bin Laden, reportedly accompanied by members of Hamas, the document says, and is believed to have been one of the major opium lords of western Afghanistan.

In 2002, he sought to negotiate an integration into the new government through Wali Karzai, the brother of Afghan President Hamid Karzai who has been accused of corruption and drug smuggling, but was arrested by Pakistani border patrol and released by Pakistan into U.S. custody.

He is also deemed a “HIGH” threat if released.

Abdul Haq Wasiq, the Taliban’s former deputy minister of intelligence, had direct connections to Taliban leadership and was “central to the Taliban’s efforts to form alliances with other Islamic fundamentalist groups” to fight against U.S. and coalition forces, according to his Defense Dept. file obtained by Wikileaks.

He also used his position to support al Qaeda, assist Taliban personnel in eluding capture, and arranged for al Qaeda members to train Taliban intelligence staff, according to the file.

He seems to have later turned informant, as his file notes that Wasiq was arrested after a meeting with two Americans and a translator, in which he was supposed to deliver information leading to the capture of Mullah Omar. Shortly after the meeting, U.S. forces arrested him.

“Trading five senior Taliban leaders from detention in Guantanamo Bay for Berghdal’s release may have consequences for the rest of our forces and all Americans. Our terrorist adversaries now have a strong incentive to capture Americans. That incentive will put our forces in Afghanistan and around the world at even greater risk,” said House Armed Services Chairman Howard P. “Buck” McKeon, R-Calif., and Senate Armed Services Ranking Member James Inhofe, R-Okla., in a joint statement.

“In executing this transfer, the President also clearly violated laws which require him to notify Congress thirty days before any transfer of terrorists from Guantanamo Bay and to explain how the threat posed by such terrorists has been substantially mitigated. Our joy at Sergeant Berghdal’s release is tempered by the fact that President Obama chose to ignore the law, not to mention sound policy, to achieve it,” they said in the joint statement.

A senior administration official responded: “Due to a near-term opportunity to save Sergeant Bergdahl’s life, we moved as quickly as possible. The administration determined that given these unique and exigent circumstances, such a transfer should go forward notwithstanding the notice requirement” of the National Defense Authorization Act, the law in which Congress levied the Guantanamo-transfer restrictions.

The detainees left Guantanamo in the afternoon of May 31^st for Qatar, which will take them into custody. After that, it’s not clear exactly what their status will be.

Of course there is great jubilation in Bergdahl’s home town of Hailey, Idaho. Understandably his parents and friends have expressed great joy at his release. This is to be expected. His father has even studied Pashto, the language of the Taliban, so he could communicate with his son who according to reports has trouble speaking English after his five years in captivity.

A recent article by CBS News asked the Question; Is Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl a hero or a deserter?

“While tattered yellow ribbons still adorn utility poles in his native Hailey, Idaho, others are expressing conflicting thoughts about Bergdahl's plight as the war winds down, with President Barack Obama threatening to withdraw all U.S. troops by year's end unless the Afghan government signs a crucial security agreement.

They are convinced that on June 30, 2009, just a few months after he arrived in Afghanistan, Bergdahl willingly walked away from his unit, which was deployed in Paktika province in eastern Afghanistan, adjacent to the border with Pakistan. While they do want Bergdahl home, they think he should have to answer allegations that he deserted his unit.”

…

“Rolling Stone magazine quoted emails Bergdahl is said to have sent to his parents that suggest he was disillusioned with America's mission in Afghanistan, had lost faith in the U.S. Army's mission there and was considering desertion.

Bergdahl told his parents he was "ashamed to even be American." Bergdahl, who mailed home boxes containing his uniform and books, also wrote: "The future is too good to waste on lies. And life is way too short to care for the damnation of others, as well as to spend it helping fools with their ideas that are wrong."

The Associated Press could not independently authenticate the emails published by the magazine in 2012. Bergdahl's family has not commented on the allegations of desertion, according to Col. Tim Marsano, a spokesman for the Idaho National Guard. Marsano is in regular contact with Bergdahl's mother, Jani, and father, Bob, who has grown a long, thick beard and has worked to learn Pashto, the language spoken by his son's captors.

A senior Defense Department official said that if Bergdahl is released, it could be determined that he has more than paid for leaving his unit - if that's what really happened - "and there's every indicator that he did."

Still, it's a conundrum for commanders under the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the equal application of the law, according to the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to publicly discuss the Bergdahl case.

Eugene R. Fidell, who teaches military justice at Yale Law School, said if there is evidence that Bergdahl left his unit without permission, he could be charged with being absent without leave (AWOL) or desertion.”

Bowe was reportedly “disillusioned” when he went missing. In an interview with Rolling Stone in 2012, Bowe’s family shared the sergeant’s final email­ to his parents:

“I am ashamed to be an American. And the title of US soldier is just the lie of fools. The US army is the biggest joke the world has to laugh at. It is the army of liars, backstabbers, fools, and bullies. The few good SGTs are getting out as soon as they can, and they are telling us privates to do the same. These people need help, yet what they get is the most conceited country in the world telling them that they are nothing and that they are stupid, that they have no idea how to live.”

Bergdahl’s parents also spoke Saturday at the White House and expressed gratitude for their son’s pending return. His father, Robert, said Bergdahl is having trouble speaking English after the trauma he endured.

Robert Bergdahl, Bowe’s dad, who enjoys passing along pro-Taliban anti-American “invader” tweets for Taliban spokesperson Abdulqahar Balkhi and whose Twitter feed is an odd mix of anti-American and anti-war sentiments, Bible verses, strange quotes, and hippie-dippy tree-hugging weirdness, took it upon himself to celebrate his son’s release by sending a Tweet to the spokesman for his son’s captors.

The Tweet read: “@ABalkhi I am still working to free all Guantanamo prisoners. God will repay for the death of every Afghan child, Ameen [sic].” The Tweet was quickly deleted, but not before being captured on the Twitchy feed.

Bergdahl the elder’s correspondence with the Taliban’s spokesperson certainly coincides with Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl’s alleged sentiments prior to his ‘capture.’ According to emails quoted in Rolling Stone magazine, Bowe told his parents he was “ashamed to even be American,” and that he was disgusted with the U.S. mission in Afghanistan and with the Army.

According to a report in the Christian Science Monitor:

“In his final message, Bergdahl refers to having mailed home boxes with his uniforms and books.

“Feel free to open them, and use them,” he wrote.

Later that night, Bowe Bergdahl’s father Bob Bergdahl, a UPS truck driver, sent his son an email from their home in Hailey, Idaho, with the subject line: OBEY YOUR CONSCIENCE!

"Dear Bowe," he wrote. "In matters of life and death, and especially at war, it is never safe to ignore ones' conscience. Ethics demands obedience to our conscience. It is best to also have a systematic oral defense of what our conscience demands. Stand with like-minded men when possible. dad."

…

“In the early-morning hours of June 30th, according to soldiers in the unit, Bowe approached his team leader not long after he got off guard duty and asked his superior a simple question: If I were to leave the base, would it cause problems if I took my sensitive equipment?

“Yes, his team leader responded – if you took your rifle and night-vision goggles, that would cause problems.

“Bowe returned to his barracks, a roughly built bunker of plywood and sandbags. He gathered up water, a knife, his digital camera and his diary. Then he slipped off the outpost.”

When his absence was discovered, Bergdahl was listed as “DUSTWUN” – Duty Status: Whereabouts Unknown.”

A Report by NBC News states:

“Two years ago, Bergdahl was handed over to members of the Quetta Shura, or council — the decision-making body of the militants — for his scheduled release in exchange for five Taliban commanders being held by the U.S. at Guantanamo Bay, said a senior Taliban commander affiliated with the Haqqani network, a major militant faction of the Afghan Taliban.

"The talks at that time failed, and he was again handed over to his captors, and that's why he didn't trust when [he] was told about his likely release," the Taliban commander told NBC News on the phone from Afghanistan.

But this time, “our talks finally proved successful for [a] prisoners' swap. We returned our valued guest to his countrymen and they released our people.” said the Taliban commander.

"The talks at that time failed, and he was again handed over to his captors, and that's why he didn't trust when [he] was told about his likely release," the Taliban commander told NBC News on the phone from Afghanistan.

But this time, “our talks finally proved successful for [a] prisoners' swap. We returned our valued guest to his countrymen and they released our people.” said the Taliban commander.”

Russ Vaughn writing in American Thinker states:

“Obama got his pig, and I make no apology for that description of PFC Bergdahl (he was promoted to sergeant while being held captive) for this is where this discussion turns deadly serious. As a former non-commissioned officer who served in combat with another airborne unit, my first reaction upon hearing of Bergdahl’s desertion many years ago was, get him back, give him a fair court-martial and put him in front of a firing squad. Good, honorable paratroopers lost their lives searching for this treasonous bastard. Various sources from Bergdahl’s unit, the 501st Airborne Infantry are reporting in around the Web with this information:

PFC Matthew Michael Martinek, Staff Sgt. Kurt Robert Curtiss, SSG Clayton Bowen, PFC Morris Walker, SSG Michael Murphrey, 2LT Darryn Andrews, were all KIA from our unit who died looking for Bergdahl. Many others from various units were wounded or killed while actively looking for Bergdahl.”

(You can read more and see the photos by clicking here)

“Those deaths, every single one, are on Bergdahl’s head. For the squeamish among you who find my opinion too harsh, here’s Article 85 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the statutory regulation dealing with desertion:

(c) Any person found guilty of desertion or attempt to desert shall be punished, if the offense is committed in time of war, by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct, but if the desertion or attempt to desert occurs at any other time, by such punishment, other than death, as a court-martial may direct.

And there is damning evidence against PFC Bergdahl from those in his unit. He made no secret of his disillusionment with America, sending emails to his parents, one of which contained this statement, “The system is wrong. I am ashamed to be an american. And the title of US soldier is just the lie of fools. I am sorry for everything here”

Notice that non-capitalization of "American". A fellow trooper, Jason Fry, has reported that Bergdahl told him, "If this deployment is lame, I'm just going to walk off into the mountains of Pakistan."

So yes, we can court-martial this dishonorable deserter whose selfish views and actions caused all those unnecessary deaths and take his life or lock him away for the rest of it for the simple reason that the son of a bitch walked out on his band of brothers in an active combat zone in an act of betrayal that caused the deaths of his brothers in arms who willingly went in search of him, to save his sorry, weasel ass. Those events have immeasurable consequences on those both above and below his rank that he deserted. There is no greater crime that a combat infantryman can commit than desertion to the enemy on the battlefield. Were he to be judged by his fellow paratroopers, he’d be dead in the blink of an eye for the deaths that he caused. He willingly manipulated and violated the code of, “No man left behind,” for his own selfish sense of fulfillment that proved deadly to troopers in the 501st Infantry, and who knows how many more in special operations, who sent in patrols for years trying to find this weak-ass traitor.

As a viewer of the HBO series “Homeland” I cannot help but see the parallels between the fictional series and Sgt. Bergdahl’s story. In the series Nicholas Brody, a Marine Sgt. (played by Damian Lewis) was taken prisoner by al Qaeda and eventually converted to Islam. After five years he was released and returned to the United States as a sleeper terrorist with the mission of killing the Vice President who had authorized a drone attack on the headquarters of the al Qaeda commander killing his young son.

Like the HBO series, this real life story revolves around an American soldier who got taken as a Prisoner of War by terrorists while battling on foreign soil. Having spent five years in captivity (and having grown a large beard a la Damian Lewis' on-screen character), Bergdahl just got released and is now heading back to his homeland in Hailey, Idaho.

But the comparisons don't end there. In fact, this is only the beginning. After he was captured in Afghanistan by Haqqanigroup terrorists, his then-19-year-old lover Monica Lee actively participated in protests to get him freed. But as years went by, the efforts waned and she got on with her life. Bergdahl himself told her in one of the messages his captors let him sent out to not wait for him.

Having thought that Bergdahl may never return, she began dating someone new. But yesterday she was told that Bergdahl is not only alive but has been freed and will soon be heading back home.

While the news brought of joy and relief for her, she quickly realized how awkward a situation would become when she comes face to face with her returning ex who may not know that she is now with someone else. This is basically what happens in the critically acclaimed HBO series.

Something to watch out for- the Homeland protagonist was turned by al-Qaeda while in captivity. Although rumors of Bergdahl assisting his captors did make the rounds in 2010, let's hope that's not actually the case here.

I say the following fully respecting the fact that Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl and his family/loved ones might have an extremely understandably different opinion on the situation:

1. The people we exchanged for Sgt. Bergdahl will end up running terrorist operations in Afghanistan if we’re lucky, and Afghanistan and abroad if we are not. And they will likely be doing it considerably sooner than a year from now.
2. The Taliban will step up their kidnapping campaigns, because from their point of view said campaigns have been proven to work.
3. Democratic, liberal, and progressive partisans like Alan Combs will freak if you point out either #1 or #2 to them.

It’s a heck of a thing when your only hope is maybe they put a remote tracker in one guy’s gut or some other techno-thriller nonsense. Unfortunately, no, this is not a Tom Clancy novel and we do not have a Jack Ryan in office. And I’m sorry that I have to be the one that gets to tell people hard truths like rewarding kidnapping gets more people kidnapped. But apparently telling people the things that they don’t want to hear is part of the entire ‘Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy’ thing.

All of this while Marine Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi languishes in a Mexican prison chained to a bed. Tahmooressi was not a deserter. He is still in Marines as a reservist and has been said to be hero on the battlefield. What will his Commander-in-Chief do for this Marine?

Lawrence of Arabia

“The people of England have been led in Mesopotamia into a trap from which it will be hard to escape with dignity and honor.” — T. E. Lawrence

On this day in 1935 T.E. Lawrence, known to the world as Lawrence of Arabia, died as a retired Royal Air Force mechanic living under an assumed name. The legendary war hero, author, and archaeological scholar succumbed to injuries suffered in a motorcycle accident six days before.

Thomas Edward Lawrence was born in Tremadoc, Wales, in 1888. In 1896, his family moved to Oxford. Lawrence studied architecture and archaeology, for which he made a trip to Ottoman (Turkish)-controlled Syria and Palestine in 1909. In 1911, he won a fellowship to join an expedition excavating an ancient Hittite settlement on the Euphrates River. He worked there for three years and in his free time traveled and learned Arabic. In 1914, he explored the Sinai, near the frontier of Ottoman-controlled Arabia and British-controlled Egypt. The maps Lawrence and his associates made had immediate strategic value upon the outbreak of war between Britain and the Ottoman Empire in October 1914.

Lawrence enlisted in the war and because of his expertise in Arab affairs was assigned to Cairo as an intelligence officer. He spent more than a year in Egypt, processing intelligence information and in 1916 accompanied a British diplomat to Arabia, where Hussein ibn Ali, the emir of Mecca, had proclaimed a revolt against Turkish rule. Lawrence convinced his superiors to aid Hussein's rebellion, and he was sent to join the Arabian army of Hussein's son Faisal as a liaison officer.

Under Lawrence's guidance, the Arabians launched an effective guerrilla war against the Turkish lines. He proved a gifted military strategist and was greatly admired by the Bedouin people of Arabia. In July 1917, Arabian forces captured Aqaba near the Sinai and joined the British march on Jerusalem. Lawrence was promoted to the rank of lieutenant colonel. In November, he was captured by the Turks while reconnoitering behind enemy lines in Arab dress and was tortured and sexually abused before escaping. He rejoined his army, which slowly worked its way north to Damascus, which fell in October 1918.

Arabia was liberated, but Lawrence's hope that the peninsula would be united as a single nation was dashed when Arabian factionalism came to the fore after Damascus. Lawrence, exhausted and disillusioned, left for England. Feeling that Britain had exacerbated the rivalries between the Arabian groups, he appeared before King George V and politely refused the medals offered to him.

After the war, he lobbied hard for independence for Arab countries and appeared at the Paris peace conference in Arab robes. He became something of a legendary figure in his own lifetime, and in 1922 he gave up higher-paying appointments to enlist in the Royal Air Force (RAF) under an assumed name, John Hume Ross. He had just completed writing his monumental war memoir, The Seven Pillars of Wisdom, and he hoped to escape his fame and acquire material for a new book. Found out by the press, he was discharged, but in 1923 he managed to enlist as a private in the Royal Tanks Corps under another assumed name, T.E. Shaw, a reference to his friend, Irish writer George Bernard Shaw. In 1925, Lawrence rejoined the RAF and two years later legally changed his last name to Shaw.

In 1927, an abridged version of his memoir was published and generated tremendous publicity, but the press was unable to locate Lawrence (he was posted to a base in India). In 1929, he returned to England and spent the next six years writing and working as an RAF mechanic. In 1932, his English translation of Homer's Odyssey was published under the name of T.E. Shaw. The Mint, a fictionalized account of Royal Air Force recruit training, was not published until 1955 because of its explicitness.

In February 1935, Lawrence was discharged from the RAF and returned to his simple cottage at Clouds Hill, Dorset. On May 13, he was critically injured while driving his motorcycle through the Dorset countryside. He had swerved to avoid two boys on bicycles. On May 19, he died at the hospital of his former RAF camp. All of Britain mourned his passing.

On this day in 1935 T.E. Lawrence, known to the world as Lawrence of Arabia, died as a retired Royal Air Force mechanic living under an assumed name. The legendary war hero, author, and archaeological scholar succumbed to injuries suffered in a motorcycle accident six days before.

Thomas Edward Lawrence was born in Tremadoc, Wales, in 1888. In 1896, his family moved to Oxford. Lawrence studied architecture and archaeology, for which he made a trip to Ottoman (Turkish)-controlled Syria and Palestine in 1909. In 1911, he won a fellowship to join an expedition excavating an ancient Hittite settlement on the Euphrates River. He worked there for three years and in his free time traveled and learned Arabic. In 1914, he explored the Sinai, near the frontier of Ottoman-controlled Arabia and British-controlled Egypt. The maps Lawrence and his associates made had immediate strategic value upon the outbreak of war between Britain and the Ottoman Empire in October 1914.

Lawrence enlisted in the war and because of his expertise in Arab affairs was assigned to Cairo as an intelligence officer. He spent more than a year in Egypt, processing intelligence information and in 1916 accompanied a British diplomat to Arabia, where Hussein ibn Ali, the emir of Mecca, had proclaimed a revolt against Turkish rule. Lawrence convinced his superiors to aid Hussein's rebellion, and he was sent to join the Arabian army of Hussein's son Faisal as a liaison officer. Faisal would later become Faisal I of Iraq.

Under Lawrence's guidance, the Arabians launched an effective guerrilla war against the Turkish lines. He proved a gifted military strategist and was greatly admired by the Bedouin people of Arabia. In July 1917, Arabian forces captured Aqaba near the Sinai and joined the British march on Jerusalem. Lawrence was promoted to the rank of lieutenant colonel. In November, he was captured by the Turks while reconnoitering behind enemy lines in Arab dress and was tortured and sexually abused before escaping. He rejoined his army, which slowly worked its way north to Damascus, which fell in October 1918.

Arabia was liberated, but Lawrence's hope that the peninsula would be united as a single nation was dashed when Arabian factionalism came to the fore after Damascus. Lawrence, exhausted and disillusioned, left for England. Feeling that Britain had exacerbated the rivalries between the Arabian groups, he appeared before King George V and politely refused the medals offered to him.

After the war, he lobbied hard for independence for Arab countries and appeared at the Paris peace conference in Arab robes. He became something of a legendary figure in his own lifetime, and in 1922 he gave up higher-paying appointments to enlist in the Royal Air Force (RAF) under an assumed name, John Hume Ross. He had just completed writing his monumental war memoir, The Seven Pillars of Wisdom, and he hoped to escape his fame and acquire material for a new book. Found out by the press, he was discharged, but in 1923 he managed to enlist as a private in the Royal Tanks Corps under another assumed name, T.E. Shaw, a reference to his friend, Irish writer George Bernard Shaw. In 1925, Lawrence rejoined the RAF and two years later legally changed his last name to Shaw.

In 1927, an abridged version of his memoir was published and generated tremendous publicity, but the press was unable to locate Lawrence (he was posted to a base in India). In 1929, he returned to England and spent the next six years writing and working as an RAF mechanic. In 1932, his English translation of Homer's Odyssey was published under the name of T.E. Shaw. The Mint, a fictionalized account of Royal Air Force recruit training, was not published until 1955 because of its explicitness.

In February 1935, Lawrence was discharged from the RAF and returned to his simple cottage at Clouds Hill, Dorset. On May 13, he was critically injured while driving his motorcycle through the Dorset countryside. He had swerved to avoid two boys on bicycles. On May 19, he died at the hospital of his former RAF camp. All of Britain mourned his passing.

In 1962 the film Lawrence of Arabia was released. This Oscar winning film starring Peter O’Toole (as T.E Lawrence), Alec Guinness, Anthony Quinn, and Omar Sharif tells the story of the Arab Revolt against the Ottoman Empire during World War I. Directed by David McLean, who received the Oscar for best director, the film is noted for its award winning sound track and magnificent cinematography.

I have always said that the final scene of the film portrays all of today’s problems in the Middle East and it seems as Lawrence was a prophet when he authored the Seven Pillars of Wisdom.

In the final scene Lawrence’s men take Damascus ahead of Allenby's forces. The Arabs set up a council to administer the city, but they are desert tribesmen, ill-suited for such a task. The various tribes argue among themselves and in spite of Lawrence's insistence, cannot unite against the English, who in the end take the city back under their bureaucracy. Unable to maintain the utilities and bickering constantly with each other, they soon abandon most of the city to the British. Promoted to colonel and immediately ordered home, his usefulness at an end to both Faisal and the British diplomats, a dejected Lawrence is driven away in a staff car.

Watching this scene in the film will give you a basic understanding of the problems facing us in the Middle East today. Most of the countries are tribal in nature. In Iraq it’s Sunni, Shi'ites, and Kurdish Muslims. As U.S. forces withdraw from Iraq the violence is increasing. Sunnis are being supported by al-Qaeda as they attack Shi'ite and Kurdish mosques and gatherings.

In Syria there is a civil war where the Ba'athist Party of Bashar al-Assad is accused of killing for 50,000 to 100,000 al-Qaeda supported rebels. Assad has emphatically stated he will not step down and the war continues to escalate. There are over 100,000 Syrian refuges gathered on the 540 mile border with Turkey as Prime Minister

Patrick Buchanan writes in Townhall.com:

“Consider Syria, where the neocons and liberal interventionists are clamoring for U.S. military action, but "no boots on the ground."

Is there really any vital U.S. interest at risk in whether the 40-year-old Assad dictatorship stands or falls?

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who has been calling for Assad's ouster for two years and transships weapons to the rebels, has now seen his country stung by a terrorist attack.

But though he has a 400,000-man NATO-equipped army, three times Syria's population, and a 550-mile border to attack across, Erdogan wants us, the "international community," to bring Assad down.

But why is Assad our problem -- and not Erdogan's problem?”

Libya where the United States led the coalition to oust strong man Muammar Muhammad Gaddafi and recently our Ambassador was murdered in a planned attack by the Al-Qaida franchise, Ansar al-Sharia. Once again Libya has always been a tribal country with competing tribes between Benghazi and Tripoli. Gaddafi, like Tito in Yugoslavia, was able to contain these tribal factions by brute force.

Egypt, once controlled by Hosni Mubarak, another strong-man dictator and Anwar Sadat before him, is another example of these tribal factions. The so-called “Arab Spring” was hailed by the western press as a great step forward to a self-governing democratic state. It did not turn out this way as I predicted. Today Egypt if ruled by the Muslim Brotherhood and Sharia Law under the leadership of Mohamed Morsi who was educated as an electrical engineer at the University of Southern California.

Would we be willing to send another army of 170,000 to stop a Sunni-Shia war that might tear Iraq apart? Would the American people support sending 100,000 troops, again, to fight to keep Afghanistan from the clutches of the Taliban?

When most of the Middle East was under the domination of the Ottoman Empire there was a semblance of a rule of law. Tribal factions were contained by force if necessary. Mercantile interests were protected and contract honored. There was profitable trade with the west and the Orient. In essence there was stability, not factional terrorism.

With the collapse of the Turkish dominated Ottoman Empire after World War I and the factional breakup of the region into tribal dominated states the Middle East became a hot bed of tribal wars and competitions. The British attempted to rule the region and failed. The Soviet Union tried to rule Afghanistan and failed. The French attempted to rule Syria and failed. And the United States tried to bring western style democracy to Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya and is falling. These tribal dominated states are incapable of democratic self–government. They have no relationship to the philosophies and teachings Plato, Locke, Montesquieu, Smith, or Bastiat no matter how many of their leaders were or are educated at Harvard, Columbia, Oxford, Cambridge, or the London School of Economics. Their philosophical and ideological roots lay in Islam and only Islam.

I close with a quote from T.E. Lawrence when talking about the Middle East and its tribal nature:

“Men have looked upon the desert as barren land, the free holding of whoever chose; but in fact each hill and valley in it had a man who was its acknowledged owner and would quickly assert the right of his family or clan to it, against aggression.”