"The Front Line is Everywhere". This is a line from 'Rage Against the Machine' song which is quite fitting in the context of this article. It is the plan of Empire for the "New America". for those who would boast of our pre-eminence in such a foreign Policy, recall your basic World History, at Scythis, Greece, Rome, Ottoman, Great Britain,etc.
My friend 'grugyn' (Steve McCutchan) who's web site was number 3 on the most hated list at time of his passing away, used to discuss the nature of Empire and the 'New World Order' in the most emphatic opf terms. He'd laugh aloud and point out, "It Must Fail, for all centralized power becomes top heavy, designed to go but one direction, down. Like all Empires before it, as long as the nature of Empire is to centralize command and control, it must inevitably fall." His words are true and his insight based upon study of the past. My fellow-Americans, we must wake up to the fact we are an Empire and we are not now, nor were we ever,by definition, a Country.
This paper is, as all posts, subject to the warning, 'Caveat Lector'. feel free to comment, or e-mail: wahkonta@graffiti.net
P.S. - I'll be putting up a great deal on the 'M.O.G.' (Media Operations Group) in near future. You won't want to miss how our new government Office of Propoganda got its start under this Administration, what they've done to deceive and what they plan to do. So stay tuned to this Blog for the REAL news on Conspiracy and History. Blog On.
ARTICLE EXCERPT BEGINS
-Caveat Lector-

Emerging U.S. plans for a "new American way of war"


FOX News war analyst and U.S. Department of Defense military advisor
Col. Bob Maginnis (ret.) delivered a powerfully disconcerting message
to some 400 predominantly European people in attendance at the MZE
conference in Feldkirch, Austria last Sept. 6. Maginnis, a West Point
graduate (class of 66) opened his presentation by describing his
credentials and his "insider" relationship with Defense Secretary
Donald Rumsfeld and his assistant Paul Wolfowitz. He then described
what the Bush administration prefers the world understand as the
intent of U.S. military activities worldwide. Quoting primarily from
what he cited as the "Emerging American Way of War" by Arthur
Cebrowski and Thomas Barnett (Proceedings, January 1, 2003),
Maginnis, to the shocked horror of his audience, outlined the global
U.S. military mission for the foreseeable future. This reality
is "...no longer science fiction. The U.S. is prepared for any acts
of war and is exhaustive in its contingency planning," Maginnis
stated.

Compare what you are about to read to the economic realities
described by F. William Engdahl (also posted to The IO site this
month). What you will see, aside from what the Bush administration
tells you and regardless who the next president will be, is the
blueprint for the world as drafted by globalists who are using the
U.S. military to enforce their corporate interests at the expense of
peace, justice and human dignity. The new American way of war is to
overwhelm any real or perceived threat with superior technology,
personnel and firepower.

Compiled by Don Harkins

In Feb., 2003, Drs. Thomas Barnett and Henry Gaffney, Jr., published
a report entitled, "The Top 100 Rules of the New American Way of
War." The report was drafted by two U.S. military strategy insiders
in cooperation with the Office of Force Transformation (see story
below) and the Office of the Secretary of Defense.

"The United States wages war on states or nonstate actors that attack
U.S. military forces or other instruments of government; because the
United States is the de facto global cop, any such attack is
perceived as an attack on global stability itself" (Rule 5).

Mut zur Ethik organizer Matthias Erne of Switzerland observed
that, "...the U.S. is the world's only superpower....we must live
under the influence of its military policies."

Based upon that foundation of universally presumed U.S. military and
political supremacy, the report proceeds as if the U.S. has the
authority to conduct any type of military operation it deems
necessary to protect itself and its economic interests. The U.S. also
believes it can justify the use of force to persuade foreign nations
to adopt "democratic" forms of government.

Where the U.S. will fight wars

Beginning at Rule 4, the report lists all the regions of the world
where its war machine may be sent. The U.S. will protect NATO
countries and Europe, Israel and other Gulf states, Taiwan, South
Korea, Australia, any country in the western hemisphere and southwest
Asia. "Beyond these cases, the United States is ready to go anywhere
to combat terrorist groups that are part of a global organization and
plot."

"If all other measures fail, the United States reserves the right to
bring war preemptively to states or nonstate actors that actively
seek to acquire weapons of mass destruction for use against the
United States or any of its allies" (Rule 6).

Rule 17 admits that, "The United States pursues covert operations as
part of the global war on terrorism in accordance with presidential
findings."

U.S. goals in war

Barnett and Gaffney claim that the purpose of U.S. aggression is
to "preserve or restore national security," sustain "global norms
against the aggressive use of force" and that, "U.S. actions are
limited to those states or actors that transgress these rule sets."

They further claim the U.S. wages war to insure the rule of law, and
protect the global economy and free trade. The U.S. hopes to minimize
casualties and collateral destruction "so as not to damage the
American public's support" for the war and long term-commitment to
nation rebuilding and "to limit foreign resentment concerning the use
of U.S. military force."

>From whom the U.S. seeks help in times of war

The U.S. seeks the help, cooperation and approval of the
international community for any conflict to which it responds or
initiates. It also seeks the approval of the UN and NATO, "...but
reserves the right to act unilaterally..." (Rule 24).

In the absence of UN or NATO support, the U.S. also reserves the
right to organize a "coalition of the willing" -- like it did for
Gulf War II.

What the U.S. brings to a war

The section of the report discussing U.S. military assets begins with
Rule 32. "Any war the United States wages involves all elements of
national power, meaning the United States works to defeat its enemy
in every way possible."

The U.S. brings enough airplanes to command the skies, enough ships
to command the seas, uses its global and space-based communications
assets to secure information dominance before hostilities begin. The
U.S. also uses its intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance
capabilities to bring as much on-the-ground firepower to bear on the
enemy with as much precision as is technologically and humanly
possible. "To preserve personnel, the United States mobilizes the
world's preeminent combat medical system" ( Rule 36).

"The U.S. seeks to overwhelm the opponent with joint firepower" (Rule
43).

How the U.S. gets to war

Since the U.S. is the only nation to have a navy with bases all over
the world, most U.S. war forces, equipment and supplies can go safely
by sea. However, if speed is necessary, the U.S. has prepositioned
supplies in strategic locations throughout the world and can conduct
rapid deployment of personnel by airplane. It has even established
military bases "in remote areas of hostile territories" (Rule 40).

How the U.S. fights

Rule 47 states that the U.S. prefers to fight "away games" -- a
sports term that means "over there" and not at home.

The U.S. first gains air superiority by bombing enemy airfields and
its airplanes. It then bombs command and control centers to disrupt
enemy communications then directs air strikes against enemy ground
forces and artillery.

Ground forces are deployed rapidly "to avoid static 'front lines'
turning each engagement into an ambush across a 'noncontiguous'
battlefield" (Rule 51).

The U.S. anticipates an enemy resorting to chemical or biological
attack. It prepares for such tactics and, "...reserves the right to
engage in preemptive strikes against that capability (Rule 53).

U.S. military postwar stabilization strategies

Rule 60 states, "The United States conducts 'psychological
operations' to try to win the hearts and minds of the local
population toward the goals of its intervention."

Under U.S. occupation, its operatives seek the "capture, processing
and confinement" of "suspected war criminals" and "billigerents." It
also works with local social and political leaders to "resurrect
basic elements of government ane infrastructure" to help "some
semblance of normality" return to the people. This may include the
U.S. distribution of"humanitarian aid" (Rules 60-63).

When the U.S. leaves

"The United States does not leave until the capital city is under
firm control of friendly forces and government" (Rul 64).

Under the new way of war, the U.S. will continue its military
occupation of a country until the countryside is no longer "roiling
in conflict" and U.S.-supported local authorities have political and
police control of the region. The U.S. will also stay until the major
players agree to terms and any humanitarian crisis has been turned
over to the international community (Rules 64-67).

Left behind

The U.S. may leave Special (and other) forces behind to help train
and rebuild military to combat rebels; it may prepostion materials in
case it must return to in combat, or; it may enter into signed
agreement "for long-term military cooperation or government-financed
arms sales to help the country get its military back on its feet"
(Rule 70).

Rules 84-97 describe how the U.S. uses its air, sea, ground,
unconventional and reserve forces.

Air superiority is the number one objective, as stated earlier and as
we have seen, in both campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"Because the United States 'owns' the world's oceans, it focuses its
naval force combat activities to onto the land -- including strategic
targets deep inland -- as part of joint combat operations" (Rule 78).

Marines generally prepare the area for occupation of larger,
overwhelming an infantry forces and firepower. The army liberates and
occupies a territory until the transition into local civilian rule
has been achieved (Rule 89).

Special Forces can be used at any time for covert infiltration and
other unconventional operations. The "...United States employs
Special Forces with a level of impugnity far beyond previous use U.S.
military power in a peacetime environment" (Rule 94).

The reserves are described as providing logistical support for combat
units and "...are the backbone of an American hedge force and
homeland security" (Rule 95).

Rule 100 states, "Facing no peer competitor and enjoying the lion's
share of the earth's surface and space as its operating domain, the
United States exploits the exterior position to employ all five
services in a network-centric approach that yields their maximum
combined combat power."

***

Dr. Barnett is a Naval War College Professor currently serving as
assistant for strategic futures, Office of Force Transition (under
Vice Admiral Arthur Cebrowski), Office of the Secretary of Defense.
Dr. Gaffney is a research manager at the CNA Corporation serving at
the Center for Strategic Studies.

***

Transformation trends in the U.S. military

Within the Department of Defense is an Office of Force Transition
directed by Vice Admiral Arthur Cebrowski. The purpose of the office
is to assess global social, political and economic trends and adjust
U.S. military spending and strategy accordingly. Cebrowski identified
the origin of the vision of force transformation as coming from
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's Quadrennial Defense Review
released in Sept., 2001.

"While my title is director of force transformation, the real
directors of transformation are the president and the secretary of
defense. It is appropriate that they are the directors of
transformation because they have elevated transformation to the level
of national strategy, national military strategy, corporate strategy
and risk management strategy," commented Cebrowski to attendees of
the Network Centric Warfare 2003 conference January 22, 2003.

In his speech, Cebrowski noted the military has been focused on state
v. state wars for the last 50 years. However, in a changing world,
(i.e. the industrial age to the information age) political power is
moving upward to the level of international bodies "...while violence
is moving downwards to the individual level," Cebrowski observed.

The highest levels of U.S. leadership in the White House and the
Pentagon are currently transforming the military to confront the
social and political changes in world order. The military is not only
focusing its intelligence apparatus on "rogue" states, it is also
beginning to target "rogue" individuals. "When we put this all
together we see that a new American way of war is emerging,"
Cebrowski said.

***

Note: There is a department within the armed forces called the "Media
Operations Group (MOG)." It was candidly explained by a MOG insider
how stories are planted to be picked up in the major print media,
then covered as hard news on network TV. The insider explained how
story threads are sewn into the fabric of TV war coverage to
accomplish several objectives: 1. To make people feel small and
powerless; to make them feel that the world is out of control and
there is nothing they can do about it. 2. To compel people to watch
so they can feel "connected" to the rapidly unfolding world as
reported to them through their TV. 3. To demonstrate marketshare as a
pretense to justify charging more for advertising. The first two
objectives involve MOG's psychoneurolinguistics to mold people's
understanding and behavior (mind control). The third objective is
pathetic: Network news promotes and sells the human misery of war to
a storyline-addicted viewing public to increase advertising revenues.


http://proliberty.com/observer/20031002.htm
END EXCERPT go to link for copy verify
feel free to post a comment or e-mail:wahkonta@graffiti.net