Advisory: The editorial board of HNewsWire adopted the official policy to bypass many social media platforms. Some of these include: Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Parler, and YouTube. We believe these companies are responsible for many of the spiritual ills our world faces today. In some cases, however, we have allowed our guest contributors to include content from their YouTube channel while we search for alternatives.
Any War With Iran Will Not Be a Walk in the Park…
The United States and Iran are balancing on the edge of a fully-fledged open military conflict, with many claiming that President Donald Trump had to respond militarily to the Iranian retaliatory missile strike on US military bases in Iraq. However, they have forgotten that in 2002 the Pentagon already ran a colossal wargame designed to simulate a war with Iran – and the US lost heavily.
Millennium Challenge 2002 was a $235 million USD military exercise that involved elements of all the U.S. armed forces, with over 13,500 personnel engaging in the most realistic wargames held up until that time. Almost immediately following the invasion of Afghanistan and ahead of the 2003 launch of Operation Iraqi Freedom, the exercise was clearly meant to test the Pentagon’s new vision of waging war against a Middle Eastern enemy. The enemy that the OPFOR (opposition force) was modeled after was, in fact, the nation of Iran.
The commander picked to develop the strategy of the OPFOR, or “Red Team”, and lead them in battle was retired USMC Lt. General Paul Van Riper. General Van Riper is a decorated combat veteran of the Vietnam War, who held many important commands over his 41 years of military service. At the time of the Millennium Challenge, he was working with the Marine Corps Combat Development Command. He proceeded to do what everyone in the DOD command structure thought was impossible, defeat the U.S. military with a technologically inferior yet highly motivated and adaptive force.
Van Riper knew that perhaps the greatest advantage enjoyed by the U.S. forces, their high-tech advantage in command and control and surveillance, was also a potential weakness. The U.S. military’s overreliance on technology was exploited as its Achilles heel. The retired USMC general forbid his forces from communicating via radio communications, relying on motorcycle couriers and runners. He also conducted cyphered communication embedded in the Muslim call to prayer conducted throughout each day. The Blue Force had very little idea of what the Red Force was planning in the days leading up to the simulated amphibious assault.
The Bush Administration had just recently announced the pre-emptive strike doctrine that included the use of pre-emptive war against an immediate or perceived future threat to U.S. national security. Since then, Washington has been actively using these perceived future threats to justify its own actions all around the world. (The claim that the assassination of the Iranian national hero, General Qassem Suleimani, in Baghdad on January 3 was required to prevent a war is an example of such a justification.) Therefore, with full knowledge of the preemptive war doctrine, the Red Force commander knew that an attack was imminent.
As soon as the Blue Force deployed in range for a strike on simulated Iran, the Red team went on the offensive. Van Riper’s forces decimated the U.S. naval and amphibious assault within approximately fifteen minutes. Nineteen warships, including an aircraft carrier, and five amphibious ships, were sunk, and an estimated 20,000 sailors and marines were lost. The Red Force used barrages of hundreds of land-based missiles coupled with swarms of small, explosive-laden suicide boats to defeat a combined aircraft carrier strike group and amphibious ready group.
Those overseeing the exercise decided to ignore the opening failure of the Blue Team and reset the chessboard. Not only did they erase what should have been a monumental lesson to everyone involved, they decided to add several constraints upon Van Riper which did not give him full flexibility in conducting his defense. The Red Force was not allowed to respond to an airborne drop conducted by the 82nd Airborne by hitting the landing zone with chemical weapons, which it possessed under the exercise script. His forces were not allowed to keep their positions hidden. For example, the Red Force had to position its air defense assets out in the open where they became an easy target for the Blue Force. On top of that, the Blue forces were able to leverage technologies that were not actually in service at the time but were inserted into the exercise anyway. Even with the odds artificially stacked in the Blue team’s favor, the result was not what the Pentagon had hoped. Although in the end, the U.S. invasion resulted in the defeat of the opposition, it did not result in total capitulation, but a strong guerilla war.
Van Riper had obviously learned a great deal about warfare in his years of combat in Vietnam, and deployments to the Middle East as well. He knew that technological advantage can never overcome an enemy that is calculating, ruthless and has the will to fight above all else. Reliance on technology is as much weakness on the battlefield as a lack of logistical support or an unwillingness to embrace the freedom of action. As a result of the Millennium Challenge 2002, the U.S. military leadership should have learned this lesson as well. They did not.
Van Riper did his nation a great service by acting as a true soldier. He did what was needed to win and proved that his nation’s armed forces were not prepared for the war they aimed to fight. He was hamstrung, undermined and ignored. Van Riper would go on the record and speak out against the conduct of the exercise. He would later join a group of retired officers who called for the resignation of then acting Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.
Fast forward eighteen years. The United States has escalated tensions with Iran with the assassination of General Qassem Soleimani in Baghdad on January 3rd. With the prospects of open conflict between the U.S. and Iran increasingly probable, it would behoove President Trump and his national security advisors to revisit the lessons learned from Millennium Challenge 2002.
Military operations of the 2020s differ significantly from all possible contingency planning variants of the 2000s. The current US military doctrine assigns the prior employment of mobile interoperable forces, unmanned and robotized systems, as well as massive strikes with high precision weapons in conjunction with the maximum usage of electronic warfare and information warfare. Therefore, the scenario of a possible conflict will differ from those simulated in the Millennium Challenge 2002. Large-scale lending operations are unlikely. Apparently, the US military strike’s main targets will be infrastructure objects and the objects of political and military command centers of Iran.
Despite this, any war with Iran will not be a walk in the park. Iran will respond asymmetrically, and in ways that the U.S. military establishment may not be able to predict. The lesson taught by General Van Riper may end up being learned the hard way.
“The coming of Imam Zaman [another name for the Mahdi] is the definite promise by Allah,” he declared in 2014. “The caravan of humanity from the Day of Creation has been moving . . . to the time of The Coming of Imam Mahdi. The awaiting for The Coming is a hopeful and powerful wait, providing the biggest opening for the Islamic society…”
To misunderstand the nature and threat of evil is to risk being blindsided by it.
Fourteen years ago — on September 11, 2001 — America was blindsided by the forces of radical Islam. Pre-9/11, American leaders rightly understood that the vast majority of the world’s Muslims were generally peace-loving people who posed no threat to our homeland. But they failed to adequately comprehend, much less counter, the theology, political ideology, and operational strategy of men like Osama bin Laden.
The results were devastating. The attacks against the World Trade Center, against the Pentagon, and over Shanksville, Pa., killed nearly 3,000 Americans, along with individuals from 93 other nations, in the most devastating sneak attack since we were blindsided by the Imperial Japanese at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941.
Today, President Obama and members of his administration still refuse to use the term “radical Islam,” even as Jordan’s King Abdullah II, a direct descendant of the Prophet Muhammad, candidly admits that the West is engaged in a “third world war” against Islamic terrorism. Abdullah adds that, at its core, “this is a Muslim problem. We need to take ownership of this. We need to stand up and say what is right and what is wrong.”
The king is right. The threat of radical Islam to the U.S. and our allies is serious and ongoing.
That said, there is a dramatic shift underway in the Muslim world. The most serious threat we face in the Middle East and North Africa is no longer radical Islam but apocalyptic Islam.
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Army General Mark Milley arrives to brief members of the U.S. Senate on developments with Iran after attacks by Iran on U.S. forces in Iraq, at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, U.S., January 8, 2020…
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Army General Mark Milley arrives to brief members of the U.S. Senate on developments with Iran after attacks by Iran on U.S. forces in Iraq, at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, U.S., January 8, 2020(photo credit: REUTERS/TOM BRENNER)
WASHINGTON – Iran’s missile attack on Wednesday had been intended to kill US personnel at Iraq’s al-Asad airbase, the top US military officer said, in remarks that suggested that Tehran was, and perhaps still is, willing to risk major US retaliation. Army General Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was not ready to say whether Iran was done after its unprecedented attack on two Iraqi bases that host troops from the United States, Canada, Denmark, the United Kingdom, and other nations.
Asked if perhaps Iran would see this as an incomplete mission, given the lack of US fatalities, Milley said: “I think it’s perhaps too early to tell.”Milley said he and others in the military “fully expect” Shia militia groups in Iraq, backed by Iran, to carry out attacks against the US and US-led forces in Iraq and Syria: “That’s a very real possibility.”His remarks came hours after President Donald Trump on Wednesday suggested Iran was “standing down” after it fired missiles at US forces in Iraq overnight, as both sides appeared to be looking to defuse a crisis over the US killing of an Iranian general. Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif had said the strikes “concluded” Tehran’s response to the US killing of Iranian commander Qasem Soleimani on Jan. 3. Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, addressing a gathering of Iranians chanting “Death to America,” said the missile attacks were a “slap on the face” of the United States and said US troops should leave the region.
Trump said the United States did not necessarily have to respond militarily to Iran’s attack.US Defense Secretary Mark Esper, standing alongside Milley, cautioned that the US military remained “poised and ready.”Milley and Esper offered the most detail to date about the Iranian missile attack overnight, telling reporters at the Pentagon that Iran fired 16 short-range ballistic missiles from at least three locations inside Iran. At least 11 of them hit al-Asad, while at least one other missile hit a facility in Erbil, Iraq. The others failed in flight. Esper said targets hit included tents, a helicopter and a parking lot and there was no major damage.
MISSILES WITH SIGNIFICANT POWERMilley noted the missiles had 1,000 to 2,000-pound warheads on them, each with significant explosive power and “kill radius.”I believe, based on what I saw and what I know, is that (the strikes) were intended to cause structural damage, destroy vehicles and equipment and aircraft and to kill personnel. That’s my own personal assessment,” Milley told reporters.”But the analytics is in the hands of professional intelligence analysts. So they’re looking at that.”Milley and Esper said actions taken by military personnel safeguarded lives, as well as an early warning from US military systems that detect such missile activity. Milley noted that bases like al-Asad have to scatter plans, bunkers and protective gear to help protect forces that come under attack. Esper and Milley said they were unaware of any heads-up from Iraq about the coming attack after Baghdad said it was notified by Tehran of the strike. Source jpost.com/
In a Time of Great Peril, the High-Tech Thought Police Are Censoring the Truth
Question — Why Are These High-Tech Conglomerates Afraid of the Truth? The answer, Because They Know the American People Have Become Lazy, Like Sheep They Need a Leader and They Chose High-Tech, It Will Be the Downfall of This Country Unless the People Change Course or the Mindset of These High-Tech Elitists stop suppressing the truth. If the people don’t wake-up, they will begin to live in the worst nightmare of their lives, “Lost Social Media Reality”…
Where will this sinister person come from? Some have speculated that he will come out of Syria since one of his prophetic types in history — Antiochus Epiphanes (215-164 BC) — was a Syrian tyrant. But Antiochus was actually of Greek heritage. Could he, therefore, be a Greek? It is not likely.
It is much more likely that he will rise out of the heartland of the old Roman Empire and that he will be of Italian descent. This conclusion is based upon a statement in Daniel 9:26. In that passage the Antichrist is referred to as “the prince who is to come,” and he is identified as being from the people who “will destroy the city and the sanctuary.”
We know from history that both Jerusalem and the Jewish Temple were destroyed by the Romans in 70 A.D. Therefore, according to Daniel, the Antichrist must be of Roman heritage.
Will he be a Jew? Many assume he will be because Jesus said, “I have come in My Father’s name, and you do not receive Me; if another shall come in his own name, you will receive him” (John 5:43). Based on this statement, people ask, “How could the Jews possibly receive a Gentile as their Messiah?”
But the Bible does not teach that the Jews will receive the Antichrist as their Messiah. It teaches they will accept him as a great political leader and diplomat and that they will put their trust in him as the guarantor of peace in the Middle East.
But the moment he reveals himself as the Antichrist by desecrating the Jew’s rebuilt Temple and blaspheming God, the Jewish people will revolt. They will reject him as Messiah, and he will respond in fury by attempting to annihilate them.
The Antichrist does not have to be a Jew. And, in fact, the Bible makes it clear that he will be a Gentile. In Revelation 13:1 he is portrayed as a “beast coming up out of the sea.” The sea is used consistently throughout the prophetic scriptures as a symbol of the Gentile nations (Daniel 7:3; Luke 21:25; and Revelation 17:1).
By contrast, the Antichrist’s right-hand man, the False Prophet, who will serve as his religious leader, will be a Jew. This is revealed in Revelation 13:11 where it says that John saw “another beast coming up out of the earth [literally, the land].” Just as the sea is used symbolically in prophecy to refer to the Gentile nations, the land (or earth) is used to refer to Israel. This does not mean the False Prophet will be an Orthodox Jew. It only means that he will be of Jewish heritage. Religiously, he will be an apostate Jew who will head up the One World Religion of the Antichrist.
The Birth Pains Are Growing Stronger….
One of the signs of ruling class collapse is when they can no longer enforce the rules that maintain them as a ruling class. When the Romans started making exceptions to republican governance, it was a matter of time before someone simply decided the rules no longer applied to them. Perhaps the robot historians will consider Obama our Marius or Sulla. Maybe that person is in the near future. Either way, the rule of law is over and what comes next is the rule of men.
“Man will ultimately be governed by God or by tyrants.” as in Nancy Pelosi (D-San Fran-feces)
Our government has been overthrown. As evidenced by Trump’s capitulation on the border, his recent servitude to the GMO industry and his acquiescence to the warmongers, our President has been compromised. Our liberties are being eliminated one by one. Gun confiscation is next. The Constitution is gasping its last breaths. Our borders are destroyed and our culture has been turned upside down by every perversion known to man.
Julian Assange: The CIA director is waging war on truth-tellers like WikiLeaks By Julian Assange Opinions April 25 at 7:39 PM Julian Assange is editor of WikiLeaks. Mike Pompeo, in his first speech as director of the CIA, chose to declare war on free speech rather than on the United States’ actual adversaries.
Tagged Under: tribulation, antichrist, digital gulag Iran, War, GOD,Benjamin Netanyahu, Iran Donald Trump
The 127 Faith Foundation: We do not solicit donations from “those on disability, on a fixed income, or those who cannot afford to give.” Please Pray!
Or, make checks payable to:
The 127 Faith Foundation
PO Box 127
Pontotoc, TX 76869
The number of Orphans aging out of Child Protective Custody has grown at an alarming rate. The 127 Faith Foundation receives many requests each week to house them at our ranch. Our prayer is that the good people of our country will step up to the challenge and offer financial support for "the least among us." We need your help! StevieRay Hansen, Founder, The 127 Faith Foundation
Here are some common liberal tricks that many people fall for: When a liberal theory of pseudo-science is disproved or discredited, thay simply change the…Read More
Facebook is now apparently censoring political posts which violate its “Statement of Rights and Responsibilities” as hate speech,?
[!(https://hnewswire.com/content/images/2017/02/aefder.jpg?resize=150%2C150)](http://188.8.131.52/aefder/) [!(https://hnewswire.com/content/images/2017/01/c0pgcvjukaasqvg.jpg?resize=150%2C150)](http://184.108.40.206/c0pgcvjukaasqvg/) Former Facebook Workers: We Routinely Suppressed Conservative News.. Killing babies OK, conservative view points BAD, hate speech” Something Wrong with our Social media…Read More
We make every effort to acknowledge sources used in our news articles. In a few cases, the sources were lost due to a technological glitch. If you believe we have not given sufficient credit for your source material, please contact us, and we will be more than happy to link to your article.