Anti-Subjugator

I found another great link describing the 2001 liberation of Afghanistan. I especially liked the way that Karzai managed to get a collection of 35 well-wishers that was able to hold back the Taliban attackers once US air power and special forces were added to the equation, and how he eventually grew his 35 cheerleaders into a mob of 800 armed goons that were effectively able to win the war.

I think the "armed goons" backed by US air power is a serious doctrine that needs to be considered. Yes, of course armed goons by themselves are no match for the Iranian military. But they're not going to be by themselves. They're going to have US air power behind them. So long as the moronic air force can get its act into gear anyway. Why do I call them moronic? Firstly because of the way, prior to 2003 anyway, they used to fat-finger JDAM coordinates in, without even having the basic intelligence to go and triple-check the coordinates with the guy who called them in before they started blowing up random friendly/neutral/non-existent targets. And these are the same numbnuts that managed to hit the Red Cross in Kabul twice in one week. The same numbnuts who were taking potshots at friendlies in Albania when they were supposed to be attack Serbs in Kosovo. The numbnuts that blew up the Chinese embassy in Belgrade because they had an old tourist map that showed it was some government building. The numbnuts that during Desert Storm launched missiles into Iran. And if you read that link above, after doing so well in the rest of Afghanistan, in simultaneous operations, when it came to Operation Anaconda, when they should have been able to concentrate on one area, they were apparently too drunk to operate heavy equipment. What the hell do you have to do to get busted for deriliction of duty in this army?

Anyway, there wasn't a lot of this happening by 2003. The pricks realised that they had a problem with friendly fire so started quadruple-checking coordinates. They still managed to wipe out some British vehicles with orange markings, and they still managed to wipe out some Kurds, but by and large, they seem to have adopted the makings of a professional force, ie one that concentrates on killing the enemy instead of any old target so long as they get to blow something up. BTW, it's attitudes like that that make me think the US air force pilots should be replaced by commercial airline pilots. We don't need testosterone jocks unless there's an enemy that actually has planes that can get into the air for more than 10 seconds. When the enemy is grounded, we need professionals who use their brains instead of their balls and double-check things in case they made a mistake.

So I was talking to someone yesterday who used to be in the Australian reserves (and would have joined the regulars if the stupid government hadn't taken more than 6 months to process the paperwork - someone should be jailed for that - turning away already-trained volunteers). And I was discussing the particulars of how the existing Australian army, alone, would be able to liberate Iran if US air cover was available. Actually I posed the question a different way. Here is the question.

If you were an Iranian dissident who wanted to be free, and was willing to fight, but knew that fighting the Ayatollah's military was suicide, so you needed to ask for foreign assistance, what is the minimum required? Bear in mind that if you ask for too much, the foreigners are going to say "nup, too difficult, we're not going to help at all". So you really need to figure out the minimum you can possibly get away with. If the foreigners provide more than that, well and good, and that can be considered "foreign aid". Also bear in mind that it is your country, and the onus is on you to play the lead role in fighting for your own freedom.

Also, the objective is very specific. To get to the point where the dissidents have more heavy weaponry than the Ayatollah's forces. In other words, the battlefield defeat. I'm not talking about any following insurgency like Colombia has experienced for decades. India too. It is the dissidents problem to deal with that over the following decades, once they have the balance of weaponry and access to state resources.

In addition, the war should be fought taking into view the fact that there are probably lots of Iranian base commanders and soldiers who wish to defect. If you were one of those defectors, how would you defect? You need to be very careful in case you get shot by the pro-Ayatollah forces. So we don't want to kill these allies-to-be unnecessarily. In Afghanistan we saw a lot of people changing sides. In Iraq we saw most people desert rather than defect (but some defected), but then many of those deserters formed long queues to join the new Iraqi army. We need to play around with all these factors.


Here was what the Australian soldier said he needed and my reply:

Holding facilities for POWs - you don't need them to win. they are an optional extra. You can just tell anyone wanting to surrender to go home. Don't accept them as prisoners.

Transport - you have that already - use your own car. We'll provide money for you to buy more things if you want.

Tanks - we'll give you some of those on the Iraqi border (this assumes that Iraq can be used as a staging post). Not that I think tanks are necessary. Karzai managed fine without tanks.

Ammo and arms - no problem - dropped to anywhere in Iran you want.

Medical facilities - take over a hospital on your own. There's probably no defence of Iranian hospitals at the moment.

Communications and equipment - no problem, dropped anywhere in Iran.

Air support - no problem, provided anywhere in Iran.

Trainers in warfare - you don't have time for that. And regardless, you've already been trained in warfare as an Iranian conscript. Since Iranians have conscription, most men have military training already, even though most are not in the army at the moment.


Another thing to bear in mind is military coups in general. Military coups occur without having the luxury of foreign air cover. So do civil wars. The Ba'ath party in Iraq came to power in exactly that manner. So why shouldn't it happen in Iran too, with foreign air cover making it that much easier?

Anyway, that's just providing air cover to indigenous forces. I asked him what would happen if you added 20k Australian soldiers to that mix. He reckoned the Ayatollah's forces would head to the hills. You mean they would hand over on a platter all the things you previously said you needed - secure bases, heavy equipment? Yep. He wasn't particularly happy about me calling it a walk in the park, but when I pointed out that the Northern Alliance LITERALLY walked into Kabul, he admitted that it would be won with low allied losses.

I'm hoping he will write up some of the nitty gritty. Come up with a plan that is politically palatable. The plan also needs to take into account that possibly as much as 50% of the country will be disgruntled as they were in Iraq. And make it clear that only defeating the fielded forces is on offer, allowing the dissidents to construct a new military using whichever conscripts and ex-conscripts are willing to take up their former roles, this time as volunteers. Not built to US standards. But simply to slot in to their former structure under the Ayatollah, this time reporting to new civilian leaders.

I wish I could contact ableiter too (John Samford from Memphis, CSA (Confederated States of America)). I'm after some war plans that involve the most likely scenario rather than the worst case scenario that generals always like to trot out (that invariably requires 357 million troops all armed with nuclear weapons, just in case, knowing full well that that means the civilians will baulk at the plan, meaning that nothing is done, meaning the country is endangered by the very pricks who are meant to be figuring out ways of protecting it instead of leaving it to some guy in Australia to sort out the mess they created).

UPDATE: I just did a search, and I see ableiter had this to say:

History shows us that Guerrillas seldom win.
It wasn't the extra troops that defeated the Jihadists, but the change in tactics. The extra troops added speed to the process. Without the change in tactics, they would have just increased the boy counts.
As far as why not in '04, '05 or '06, you can blame the previous command structure. Both Franks and Garner wanted the 'ink blot' tactics that are being used today from the beginning. They were 'out politiced' by the JCS and State in the Summer of '03. So both generals are now enjoying their retirement.
The internet played a critical part also. It was due to the internet that the MSM was unable to hand victory to AQ, as they did to the Viet Cong in'75.
The biggest share of the credit goes to the Iraqi's themselves. They refused to lose, so they didn't. Quiters never win, winners never quit.
As far as the local politics, Iraq will NEVER look like the USA, or the UK. That is the best part of the whole deal.

john Samford, Memphis, CSA

I totally disagree with the change of tactics though. What matters is the fact that the Iraqi military continued to strengthen, as it was always going to do, no matter who was in charge, combined with the Sunnis switching sides. These things just take time. It's a bit like claiming that Clinton turned the US economy around, a common claim, taking credit for the sun rising. I agree with the internet though. The MSM no longer has a monopoly and can't replace the truth with their fantasy. I did my part in that internet phenomenon, as much as I could providing a face behind the polls that showed half of Australia supported ending institutionalized rape in Iraq.

Batman asked some questions in the previous comments section that I'm not going to quote in full, but simply use as an illustration.

"Paul, do you know any Iranians to whom you could pose the following questions?"

I know two Iranian exiles, both with polar opposite opinions. Regardless, I wouldn't want to use exiles as a benchmark regardless. Expats have a tendency to glorify their old country and want to preserve it and hold it up as superior to wherever they currently are. The one thing they won't do of course is actually return to live in their superior civilization. But let's leave the racism and hypocrisy aside for a moment. The real problem is simply that they're unrepresentative even if they all say exactly the same thing without racism and hypocrisy. You really need to get the ones who actually live there.

Next problem is the same problem that the Polish communists experienced. Pre-election polls showed that the commies would romp home and they were actually worried that the West would see the polls as legitimate for that reason. They were flabbergasted by the result. If I were similarly polled in Poland, or Iraq, or Iran, I'd be the biggest supporter of dictatorship this side of the Iron Curtain. Freedom and democracy? Bah. A plot by devious westerners to enslave me. I don't even really trust the polls even in a free environment shortly after liberation (e.g. Iraq in 2003). Until I have seen some evidence of a secret ballot verifying those results, it is tentative at best. The pro-war Iraqi bloggers insisted that they weren't alone. In actual fact they were as clueless as the rest of the world. They'd never seen the results of a secret ballot either. Ali Fadhil told me directly that he didn't find out until 2005 what Iraqis really wanted, when he saw the poll results. He had been mistaken assuming that others were like him. Sarmad also told me that he had told his friend that there would be no religious violence in Iraq - that Iraqis were tolerant of religion. And that he had to admit to his friend that he was wrong.

I saw some video of a supply convoy that had taken a wrong turn a couple of years ago and ended up in Sunni territory and suddenly found itself under attack. This sort of spontaneous attack shows that the problem is widespread. It's not just a few ratbags. It's an entire mindset. The sort of mindset that requires genocide to correct. Although admittedly they managed to pull of de-Nazifying Germany. But that's no guarantee that it can be replicated in the Middle East.

All this shows the fact that no-one can tell you definitive answers, even if they live there. Sarmad ended up being totally wrong. And I was totally wrong about Australia. I had always assumed that the majority of Australians supported thumping dictators and liberating people. I thought it was part of our national psyche. It was supported by the polls showing 90% supported Desert Storm. I had no idea that that would turn to a shocking 50% for OIF. I was wondering what I was missing and had to go and ask them why they didn't care even about women being raped. I wanted to know why they were so sure that we shouldn't be doing anything to help innocent women. It took me some time to realise the simple truth - these people were downright sociopaths. Massive numbers of sociopaths. Looking like ordinary nice people but secretly sociopathic and racist and believing the commies on TV more than hard logic.

So, even when people ask me about Australia, which they often do, I have to explain to them that everyone in Australia is an individual and you can't make blanket statements. If you think Australians are beer-guzzling, sports-loving party-goers, there's probably a lot of truth in that. But it means that I'm not an Australian and you shouldn't be asking me anyway. And then you see shocking reports about Australians working the longest hours out of all OECD countries. Putting a lie to the perpetual party we're supposed to be in. And my Japanese ex-student said that she came to Australia expecting to be surrounded by whites, but found herself in Asia. She is staying in an area that is predominantly Chinese/Lebanese. She's right near a huge mosque. I didn't even know it was there (I'd heard of the Lakemba mosque, but didn't know there was one in Auburn). I can't remember seeing any churches that big anywhere in Australia. And after dropping her off in Auburn, I went to an Indian store there to buy some spicy peas. I tried to speak Hindi to the shopkeeper and he didn't know it. He was probably born in Australia (I didn't ask) and had never bothered to learn Hindi other than what he picked up by watching Hindi movies.

So if you want to know about Australia, I would suggest going to the CIA website. And also check out some opinion polls, which in turn can be verified by election results and simply chatting with random Australians. There's no doubt that Australians are free to speak their mind. Although most Australians are apparently afraid to go up against the very noisy and vicious left-wing scum in the media/university etc. Rare to see much opposition to them, although that in turn could simply be because they don't have the ability to get media attention or organize. But honestly, where do you go to see a pro-Bush or anti-Rudd demonstration? But then again, who would go to one of them when the media even covers up that exact thing happening in Iraq in December 2003? But again, ordinary people will rarely go to a demo. They just vote and answer opinion polls.

Anyway, back to Iran. The information is inherently unavailable and won't remotely be available until after secret ballots. I saw a poll recently saying that a majority of Iranians backed getting invaded. It may or may not be true. However, let's move on.

"First, considering that the Clergy is losing power to military rule"

The clergy IS the military. One Clergyman in particular - the Supreme Ayatollah. There is no evidence that his rule is under threat. That would in effect take a military coup. And that is actually what you should be hoping for. More chance of that ushering in a decent ruler than "peeling off the clergy".

Sistani is irrelevant. He has no military capable of defeating the Iranian military. This all comes down to guns. It always comes down to guns. All of your questions belie the fact that you haven't bothered to do the simple military calculus. The same one that you mentioned yourself a couple of weeks ago - about the US doing conventional warfare still. And that the battles were always lopsided, but still there. What you said then was *exactly* correct. And it's the exact opposite of Bruce and his 2nd Amendment fantasy. I'm surprised that Bruce didn't learn about combined arms warfare while he was in the military, but the short story is that goons with guns lose. Every. Time. Unless you can provide a way for the Iranian military to change sides, fairly safely, you aren't going anywhere.

"Will the people of Iran support open military rule"

The people of Iran don't matter a damn. They are easily defeated by men with guns. As they were in 1999. As they always will be. It's sad. But that's reality.

"I assume Iranians living in Iraq are free to organize and oppose the Khamenei's rule"

There's plenty of exiles with their pathetic organizations. Only one guy has an army, and it's a massive army.

"If it does and oil prices take a dramatic plunge, would it cause the Iranian and Venezuelan regimes to implode on the Soviet Union model, or would Khamenei cling to power by brute military force more like North Korea and Cuba?"

This is the silly thing. As you can see in North Korea, a properly organized dictator can ensure that the people will starve to death without rebelling. The Soviet Union collapsed because a nice guy (Gorbachev) managed to hide his true ideology until he reached the top of the dictatorship. Actually, that nearly happened in Iran too. The guy set to replace Khomenei showed his hand just a little too early and ended up in jail instead of being a Supreme Ayatollah who would usher in democracy.

"I could easily draft an extremely simple, seemingly uncontroversial amendment to the Iranian Constitution to make it MUCH more democratic"

I can't even get a referendum in Australia to get a Bill of Rights guaranteeing freedom of speech. The Ayatollah is not the least bit interested in your opinion. He doesn't even care if women are raped. Why the hell should he care about democratic changes from a - wait for it - American?

If you care about the Iranian people - which you clearly do, as I do - don't bother trying to rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic. There may be a spontaneous uprising one day. Romania got one of those. But you won't be able to predict it or usher it in. It's also not very likely. Romania is the only one that actually worked. All the others were more like the British leaving India, or Gorbachev granting freedom. Or Bremer passing control to the Iraqis. If you've got nice people in charge, you can get "independence" or whatever it is you think you want. But if you've got nice people in charge already, you don't really have much of a problem anyway. And when you've got someone nasty in charge, as is the case in Iran, you need someone with bigger guns to take him out.

This is not unique to Iran. When the Nazis took over Europe, and when the Soviets took over, the people actually living there had no chance whatsoever. Even though 99% of France objected to a FOREIGN enemy having taken over their country, it didn't matter a damn. Their opinion was worthless. Their opinion only becomes relevant if they're given control over their armed forces via democracy (which is the case now). The Iranians are in a similar position. Their opinion doesn't matter a damn. That could all change in less than 24 hours after US planes appear in Iranian skies though. No-one knows. US planes dramatically change the military equation. The impossible becomes probable. The Northern Alliance LITERALLY walked into Kabul. Please don't give the Iranian people false hope - the eternal carrot at the end of the stick - or delude yourself. Just get those damn planes in the sky! Before the good people of America lose access to them as the decent Australians already have.

And Canada - you have planes too. With fully trained pilots. I can point Iran out to you on the map if you like. Can't miss it. It's between the place you turned up to already and the place you failed to turn up to. Don't wait for American approval to send your planes over Iran. Show some balls and do it with or without their help. Stop being some tag-along and show some leadership. Call in some favours from UK and France if you need extra firepower. Hey, maybe that bilingual thing you have going may actually be of some use after all. Maybe millions of people learning the world's dumbest language for decades wasn't the incongruous waste of resources I previously thought it was?

BTW buh - learn to difference between "Anglophone" and "Anglophile". I'm the former, not the latter. Not that I'm anti-British - far from it. It's just that I don't have any particular loyalty to England. Or even Australia for that matter. I am only loyal to a certain ideology, and anyone can have that ideology, regardless of whether it is the protestors of June 4th 1989 or the Romanians in December 1989. They are my family. My blood. My life.

This is exactly what I say that no matter how nice the Americans are, and they normally are very wonderful, generous people, we always need to retain the ability to re-ally against them if they turn bad. Because one day we may be faced with people like "bruce" from the comments section. First of all, the idiot somehow got the impression that the left-wing scum in the comments were Australian, when none of them are. He's also obviously never read this, or if he as, he sees it as some sort of surrendering to American greatness. Hah. Bruce, it's YOU who knows nothing about the Anglophone spirit. You're nothing more than an armed bully who just coincidentally happens to be fighting for the right side. You would have been equally well at home as a member of the SS.

Let's see what "bruce" had to say...

"as an american i don't give a rats ass if other countries hate us ,that's their problem,just as long as they fear us.just as long as you know that we can destroy you with a push of a button."

While your grandfather was hiding under his bed while the Germans were bombing England to the ground, my forefathers were protecting the free world. Surrendering or abandoning a member of the free world was never on the cards. What you can learn from this is how true Anglophones react to someone who has your attitude of wanting others to live in fear. We become wary, that's for sure. And then we sit down, use our brains, and figure out how to get out of this mess. Figuring out which dictators we can ally with, which one is the most dangerous at the moment, and then striking. Been going on for centuries. Surrendering to thus like you and Hitler was never ever on the cards. Live free or die.

"to all you sissy boys and commie lovers you should do your home work before you mouth off about america."

Which homework didn't I do? First of all, I'm not sure which particular bit of mouthing off I was doing. I was in fact complaining about the anti-Americanism in Japan in the message you responded to, and figuring out how to eliminate that. But let's assume I said something offensive. Let's assume that you're some sort of brainless moron who thinks that America can do no wrong, and if America wants to recognize Kosovo, then eat shit and die rest of the world, you'll nuke us if we have a different opinion. Fine, prick. I'll ally with Russia before I ever surrender to the likes of petty tyrants like you.

"surppose we told you aussies your on your own,who do you think would be parked on your door step?"

No-one at all in fact. And that's the tragedy. We have spent an enormous amount of money building up forces that are able to sink any invading fleet. There is actually no-one in the world who can invade us except for America. They have no ability to cross our moat. We have the technology to sink whatever they choose to send our way. And even beyond that, we have a long list of allies to call on for help besides America, although we don't have any formal treaty with them. And actually that's tragic. We have wasted money on providing independent territorial defence when we should have restructured our forces to be totally projection and just relied on the above alliances (mainly America) to ensure no-one ever tries to cross our moat and actually do something useful overseas where the bottleneck is ground troops.

"i am sure buh would be on the beach greeting his new chicom pals."

buh is American. I don't know how many Australians you know. It sounds like none at all. But I don't know of any who would allow the Chicoms to invade us.

"i fought a war against our enemies and if you did what i did you would wet your pants and cry for mommy."

If you did what I did, you would be God.

"i have been to jihad land and seen mosloms for the racist scum that they are."

Religious bigots actually. The racists are the majority of the Arabs. It's all covered by message 666 if you wish to end the war early and save some of your comrade's lives. I don't expect you to care though.

"that's right they hate you because you are not a muzzie. they don't care what you do or do not do they will always hate non mosloms."

That's right. They've been brainwashed to divide the world into Muslims and non-Muslims instead of religious bigots, non-religious bigots and anti-religious bigots. The solution is not that complicated, and like so many things, it's so obvious after it's been written down. But it actually took decades to isolate and even after being explained it's beyond most people's intellectual ability.

"i have been to many countries and found all of them lack real freedom"

You wouldn't recognize real freedom if it bit you on the arse.

"even down under you lack liberty,no first or second amendment protections, and that makes you serfs to your govt."

Have you ever met any Australians and explained your "serf" theory to them? Like so many Americans, you have been brainwashed into believing that the only free country is America, and America is the best at everything. If you actually explain your whacky theory to an Australian, any Australian, he will (correctly) tell you that if the Australian people were concerned about the imaginary issue you raised, that they would simply vote for a party who wanted to adopt the American constitution. He would also correctly point out that in Australia with preferential voting, we can easily start 3rd parties without forcing people to waste their votes, unlike in the US.

As for the various "amendments", perhaps you can point out where in the constitution the protection from being burnt as a witch, hung by the KKK, having to breathe other people's cigarette smoke, right to have an abortion, watch uncensored TV, hire or be a prostitute, right to have sex with whoever you choose, male or female, regardless of your own sex, take drugs, have sex toys, eat vegemite? Given that most of these things are in fact violations of human rights, while the "right" to create a dangerous society isn't.

"if you are not willing to fight for what is yours some one will take it away from you."

We were fighting for freedom in WWI and WWII while you were hiding under your beds.

"you are all a bunch of free riders depending on some one else to protect your sorry asses."

We're not free riders. We pay a lot of money for our military. Not as much as America, that is true.

"any of you whinners from down under ever knew.an other thing you should check your own crime statistics as well as englands since you gave up your fire arm to the state."

Actually, you should go and get that silly site you got your information from, and do a google search for some text from that, and add "urban legend" to the end of it, and see how silly you look.

BTW, since you are or were in the military, you are probably smart enough to know that goons with guns are no match for a professional military with air cover. And that goons with guns are just target practice. You might also note that the American government doesn't give civilians the right to own RPGs, tanks, warplanes or nuclear bombs. You going to fight for your "right" to have USEFUL weapons? Or are you content knowing that goons with peashooters are cannon fodder for your thuggery and you're happy to sell them the lie that they can overthrow their government any time they want?

"where do you think Australia would be with out america?"

We'd hopefully be protecting the free world with or without America, as we did in WWI and WWII when you scumbag cowards were hiding under your beds. BTW, where would you be without Saudi oil?

"what about you please tell me any aussie of note?"

Yeah, the ones with the courage to send our forces (and those who volunteered) into WWI and WWII and Vietnam and Korea and Iraq and Afghanistan, when America, America, Canada & UK, no-one, Canada & New Zealand, no-one (respectively) were hiding under their beds. The fact that you aren't taught about these men at school says more about your narrow, biassed education system than anything else.

"like i said before you,canada,england and europe are just a bunch of free riders.you should quit your bithing and count your blessings"

Like I'm saying now, you are a thug and a bully and an ungrateful arsewipe who needs to be kept away from important weapons, and when you get home we'll probably end up jailing you when you subsequently break the law, but we'll let you go and kill some even worse thugs in Iraq before then. When you get out you can star in "Dirty Dozen 4" or whatever they're up to. You should count your blessings that there were better men than you defending freedom for reasons other than their very narrow "national interests". People like you will never know the spirit of the Digger. You'll only ever know the spirit of a tyrannical thug getting off at being able to harm those weaker than himself.

People sometimes say you should wait a while to cool off. But I actually got madder after waiting a while. Sir, you are my enemy. I will never live in fear of thugs like you. I will do my best to make sure you are countered and defeated. Just like the scumbag racists and religious bigots you fought in Iraq. You are all my enemy. You may or may not have the drop on me at the moment. It will be difficult for you to deploy nukes against me as it means that places like Russia will start providing other countries nukes to contain the American menace. You could potentially invade conventionally too, but once again, that would trigger off an international alliance against you. You lose all your bases and have to fight for every bit of territory. You lose your oil supplies too. You're going to be in a world of hurt. True Anglophones have spent centuries plotting against thugs like you. We know how to contain menaces, and we will contain you. It's only that the American people are not like you, and do not support thugs like you, and will eventually jail thugs like you, that you haven't seen such an international alliance spring up yet. Brainless thugs like you have their uses, but in the end, science will defeat you. You are outnumbered and outgunned by the decent people of the free world. And there are bigger and better and more numerous and better armed thugs than you who will ensure that you are locked up in jail when your thuggish tendencies get the better of you. Using one set of thugs against another set of thugs to make the world a better place? Priceless.

BTW, if thugs like you are actually the majority of America, and the American people are just doing a BLOODY good job of keeping a huge conspiracy going, then, moron, you've just shown your hand too early. Just like stupid Osama did. Osama wasn't in a position to do any real damage to America. He should have waited for a Pakistani nuke. And likewise, America is not in a position to enslave the world YET. We are able to protect against what I guess are now ex-Anglophones, since you don't have the Anglophone spirit of universal freedom. Thank God the Anglophones are not a single nation so that we can protect against those that go feral. Hopefully there will always be at least one good Anglophone nation that can explain reality to the rest of the world and protect freedom and human rights. And actually, at the moment that is America, and reality is that you simply don't represent America. You represent the ridiculously high prison population of America. You just haven't been caught yet. Right at the moment, Australia and New Zealand are the countries that have gone feral. UK and Canada are quivering a bit, but hopefully they will fall on the right side.

For the decent Americans out there - which I believe is a slight majority - thanks for hanging in there in Iraq when the cowardly treacherous pinko Australian government abandoned our Iraqi allies with its tail between its legs, disgracing our servicemen who have a very very long history of fighting for freedom in the world.

And for the Canadians out there - it is your turn to replace Australia as the independent reference for the confused Americans who aren't quite sure whether exporting freedom by force of arms is right or wrong. Be strong. Be Canadian. Speak English (not that Froggy crap I sometimes here from over there - what the hell is that about?!). I bless you. I love you to bits. You will be forgiven for your treachery in Vietnam and Iraq if you guide America into Iran. But hurry up about it please. The clock is ticking.

Open letter to Vojislav Kostunica, Prime Minister of Serbia.

Dear Sir, I saw with my own eyes the horror of the US supporting the annexation of your territory, in direct violation of UN Security Council Resolution 1244, which it is a signatory to and that your government is now split over how to respond.

First of all, let me tell you that I was 100% in favour of NATO military action in 1999 and my biggest disappointment was that Australia wasn't allowed to join in the bombing of Milosevic's dictatorship. I'm directly opposed to dictatorships who abuse human rights, and when an opportunity arises to do something about it, I will seize it with both hands. However, Serbia has totally changed since then, and now has a wonderful liberal democracy. As such, I wish to be allied with Serbia. Kosovo meanwhile is a province full of racist religious bigots which needs a lot of work in order to reach the rest of Serbia's standards.

As per UN SC 1244, Kosovo was meant to remain part of Serbia and Serbian forces were meant to be deployed:

"Confirms that after the withdrawal an agreed number of Yugoslav and
Serb military and police personnel will be permitted to return to Kosovo to
perform the functions in accordance with annex 2;"

"6. After withdrawal, an agreed number of Yugoslav and Serbian personnel
will be permitted to return to perform the following functions:
- Liaison with the international civil mission and the international
security presence;
- Marking/clearing minefields;
- Maintaining a presence at Serb patrimonial sites;
- Maintaining a presence at key border crossings."

Ok, you are now faced with the challenge of securing your territorial rights in the presence of a malicious and untrustworthy USA. If you stay outside of Kosovo you will lose part of your territory. You must reenter your territory as you are well within your rights to do.

You now face a tough question as to whether to send tanks down or just soldiers with rifles or unarmed soldiers. To be perfectly honest with you, I'm not sure which option is best. What I do know is that you have zero chance at all of beating the NATO forces militarily, but the goal is not to fight them directly, but merely to embarass them into standing aside. It's a bit like Turkey's recent invasion of Iraq. The US is NOT going to go to war with Turkey in order to protect a few Kurdish terrorists.

Do you remember when the US forces were confronted in Najaf with some very irate UNARMED civilians? What did they do? They RETREATED. The US military wants to avoid killing unarmed civilians as much as possible. You need to find something along those lines, where the US people and military will simply refuse to fight against what is not much more than a peaceful political protest. If you shoot at them, you will immediately lose. But simply walking along smiling and waving will completely destroy the US, as they will be seen to be the aggressors and that is one thing they don't want to be (despite any propaganda you may have heard or generated to the contrary).

So what you need is to invite the international media to watch your troops, probably unarmed but in uniform, cross the border into the Kosovo province and get greeted by various people (ie ethnic Serbs since you can't expect much from racist ethnic Albanians). You can bring a selection of Serb refugees with you, and they can tell their stories about how the racist Albanians kicked them out and the religiously-bigotted Muslims burned down their churches etc and that they want the Serbian military to protect them so that they can return.

The trouble with your soldiers being unarmed is that they become targets for Kosovar terrorists. However, that will only be a problem if you move outside the Serb-majority areas. In addition, the ethnic Serb civilians (in Kosovo) probably have arms of their own, and will probably be willing to walk alongside your soldiers to protect them from that. Yes, I know civilians protecting soldiers sounds strange, but the goal is to create a media circus to embarass America, not to actually fight. You can hopefully avoid the logistics problem by getting food from the ethnic Serbs. It'll be a long walk, as the Americans will block off the roads, but your soldiers should eventually make it to the border posts that they are meant to be guarding, and to the sites that they are meant to be protecting.

I cannot guarantee this will work, but at least you can say YOU TRIED. Some of your soldiers may be killed, but more likely some will be arrested by the US military. You need to be prepared for this, but make it clear at all times that peaceful Serb soldiers attempting to fulfill their duties under UNSC 1244 on their own damn territory are being arrested by "mean" Americans. Some of your soldiers being killed will also increase the media attention, which is the thing you actually need.

We live in a different world, and you need a different sort of war. I am part of the Anglophone culture so I more-or-less understand which buttons to press. You need to invoke the introspection inherenent in our culture, even if it seems alien to you. Ask questions like "how would you feel about China annexing California?". Make them answer these questions. Ask them why they feel the need to violate UN Security Council 1244 which they are in fact a signatory to. Ask them if it is fair that Serb forces withdrew from Kosovo without forcing the US into a ground war, purely because they trusted America to fulfill its obligations under UNSCR 1244 and that the last thing you expected was America to violate its own treaties. Even though there was historical precedent with the betrayal of the Indians (native Americans). But you genuinely thought that America had moved beyond that. (Hell, so did I - I really didn't expect America to violate that resolution - which is why I can't guarantee anything - America is not behaving as I would expect a rational moral actor to behave).

For more information about the American mindset, read this. You need to tap into that genuine desire to do good and extreme introspection. It's called "PC Paradigm" on the "Second Draft" website. That's what you need to spend time exploiting. Explain how you took the first step by withdrawing from Kosovo based on a promise from America, and you were hoping that America would reciprocate. And how sad you felt when America failed to reciprocate as expected. That you tried so hard to be nice, but America didn't respond. It'll kill them. Truly kill them.

If your soldiers get shot by Kosovar terrorists, while deep inside Kosovo, you should be able to reinforce by helicopter and may well be able to drive tanks down. It's unclear how it will unfold. But at least you're in with a chance. Please don't let the arsehole Americans steal your territory to give to a bunch of religiously-bigotted Muslims. Even though I am a Muslim myself, I am in the Mu'tazilah sect and would rather be surrounded by non-religious-bigotted Christians (as I am in Australia) than religious-bigotted Muslims. Any Muslim who is a religious bigot and thinks that non-Muslims are inferior and don't go to Heaven etc etc are my mortal enemy and I wish to be your ally.

Good luck sir. Please take action. It's your country, and you have a responsibility to protect your citizens who are not asking for anything more than a government that is more interested in protecting minority human rights than it is in creating yet another religiously-bigotted ("Islamic") state. I'm also happy to volunteer to be an "international human shield" if you require one to protect your troops from Kosovar terrorists. It would be an honour to protect a beautiful liberal democracy like Serbia. By the way, welcome to the free world, and thanks so much for making the dream of a free Serbia a reality!