“Soft despotism is a term coined by Alexis de Tocqueville describing the state into which a country overrun by "a network of small complicated rules" might degrade. Soft despotism is different from despotism (also called 'hard despotism') in the sense that it is not obvious to the people."

Wednesday, February 07, 2007

Terrror in Acapulco. Wishful Thinking Will Not Control Latin American Gangs.

One of the true outrages of human behavior is that in the downward spiral to depravity, outrage accelerates and becomes a virus copied and transferred by the maggots that infect the herd. It is a universal pathology. We see many current examples, most recently in the religion of peace. The insanity hard-wired into Islam allowed the mimicking of suicide bombing to accelerate to the point that the supply of suicide murderers actually exceeds demand.

Abhorrent and lethal behavior developed in Chechnya, was copied in Iraq and has since blown-back to Afghanistan.

There has always been the fear that the violent atrocities in Iraq would be copied and further developed outside of Iraq. The concern was ridiculed and twisted to be anti-American, leftist, and non-patriotic, but the drivel about being able to isolate and destroy the jihadis on a select field of battle in Iraq so we would not fight them in the Americas (as if Baghdad was Agincourt), was always patent nonsense.

Well, the wheel, as always, turns, and in this case towards our neighbor to the south. Latin American gangs in Mexico have brazenly spiced things up a notch.

An assault and attack in Acapulco has a real whiff of some jihadi salsa. Narco-terrorist gangs, dressed as police, attack government offices, murder police and government officials and video record the attack.

Latin America is rife with human flotsam. It is churned out in battalion strength, funded by drug money and virulent antiestablishment Marxists and anarchists. Many of them are in every American city. There are many more potential terrorists in the US from Latin america than there are from the Middle East. They are lethal and have the potential to become more so. I hope this is not a hint of things to come, but security and national policies should never be built on wishful thinking.

Seven dead in Acapulco ambushes

"Acapulco used to be a paradise resort before the gangs moved in"

At least seven people have been killed in simultaneous attacks on government offices in Mexico's resort of Acapulco.
In one attack, gunmen opened fire at a state attorney general's office, killing two policemen, a public prosecutor and a secretary.

Elsewhere, two policemen and a secretary were killed when another group attacked a police station.

The attacks come after President Felipe Calderon ordered thousands of troops to the city to tackle drug-related crime.

The twin assaults, which occurred just before 1100 (1700 GMT), were carried out by groups of about eight heavily armed gunmen said to be wearing army-style khaki uniforms. At one of the offices a gunman asked those inside "Are you the only ones here?", before the other men opened fire. Eyewitnesses say both attacks were filmed by the gangs.

President Calderon has called an emergency meeting with his security cabinet to discuss the attacks in two neighbourhoods about 15km (nine miles) north of the tourist zone.

Wave of attacks

The BBC's Duncan Kennedy in Mexico says Acapulco, once a haven for film stars, has suffered a wave of attacks in the past year as rival drug cartels fight to control coastal smuggling routes.

Last month the president sent almost 8,000 troops and federal police to the region to tackle the gangs. A further 16,000 have been sent to other lawless regions of the country.

Tourists have not been immune from Acapulco's violence either. On Saturday two Canadian travellers suffered minor injuries after being grazed by bullets at one of the city's hotels.

In January there were 190 gang-related deaths in Mexico - just a handful less than a year ago despite the government crackdown.


  1. OT. nothing like stepping on my own post but anyway. From a previous thread:

    Bob W. said...
    Esteemed commenters at the Bar,

    You all rock, as always! I have been absent of late, but I have been working really long hours getting ready to head out.

    Productivity over at my blog has been sporadic and slightly less refined over the past few weeks, but I continue to lurk here, there and everywhere!

    I remain the contrarian, minority optimist here in the Elephant Bar commentary section, it would seem.

    I am not ready to throw in the towel and start saying things like "After Iraq collapses we will then be forced to. . ." because I still do not believe that utter failure is a foregone conclusion.

    I am curious to see what impact General Petraeus has on the Iraq equation, and I recognize that any policy or activity changes will not
    impact the system over night.

    Darting to another subject, Deuce, don't you think that Iran's possession of nuclear weapon technology represents, at the bare minimum, a cumulative threat increase to the United States??

    The more nations (especially "rogue" type nations) that possess nuclear technology, the greater the chance of this technology landing in the hands of an individual/organization intent on disrupting the world order, as it were?

    Another glass of wine, then bed for me, I think!

    Tue Feb 06, 09:23:00 PM EST

    2164th said...
    Bob, I do not think Iran having a nuclear weapon is a good thing. I think it is a catastrophic thing. I feel the same way about North Korea and Pakistan. The relevant question are what should be done to discourage them from getting them and what to do if they make the choice?

    My biases are based on my experience. Having spent some significant time in the USAF and having specialized in the detection, surveillance and analysis of Soviet nuclear missile capabilities and intent, I developed what I believe to be reasonable levels of expectations on the doable. The US and her allies contained the Soviet and then Chinese nuclear threat. I remember being on duty the night the Chinese set off a nuclear test at Lop Nor. Our detection capabilities misinterpreted this event as a multiple missile launch of an indeterminate number. Common sense and good analysis prevailed, and in short time the error was noticed and a disaster averted.

    Technology changes as do threats but human behavior does not. There was never any assurance that it would be possible to overwhelm the Soviets with a preemptive nuclear exchange. There were some who thought it could be done at an acceptable cost. They were from the existentialist school. There are those today that still adhere to the same thinking mainly as it applies to Israel and Iran. It is technically possible for the US or Israel to remove or reduce Iranian nuclear capabilities. It would be a tactical success and a strategic disaster. For the cost of 19 dead, AQ caused the US one trillion dollars in damage, killed three thousand plus, plus, plus.

    I respect the ingenuity and determination of my enemies. Attacking Iran would strengthen the jihad, not weaken it. Air warfare is remarkably inefficient as a strategic weapon. It was used to get Saddam and it failed. It was used to get bin laden and to date, no one knows. It was used in Serbia and we hit the Chinese embassy. It never stopped the North Vietnamese from achieving their strategic goal of controlling all of Viet Nam.

    Air warfare comes with huge diplomatic and political liabilities. It has a use and is an awesome deterrent, but it is an augmentation to warfare. The US does not have the political sustainable ambition and the endurance and necessity to destroy Iran. It has the technical ability, but it will not use it, no more than we did in Viet Nam or Iraq. Viet Nam and Iraq did not make the US look stronger or smarter. Iran would be no different.

    Iran is no existential threat to anyone except Iran. Recent military events for Israel and the US should be enough to chasten some of the firebrands in both governments.

    Wed Feb 07, 02:15:00 AM EST

  2. Great photo, that is one scary looking M-F. Figure that facial tattooing is an expression of true tribalism, that man is declaring absolute and permanent estrangement from everyone except his gang. The concepts right and wrong exist only in relation to the opinion of his homies, just like all the tribal Muslimoids were struggling with in the ME right now.

    William Lind has notes the spread of 4th generation warfare into the hispanic gangs, and makes some prediction about border security and links to terrorism.

    Anyone else figure that the internet enabled anarchist underclass will spring up in hispanic america worse than did revolutionary marxism?

    Same cure for both of course (friendly oppressive dictators), assuming we don't keep insisting on democracy and human rights.

    Ralph Peters

    Those birds appear to have been knocked down by a combination of shoulder-fired, surface-to-air missiles (SAMs) and gunfire. Gunfire's always been a threat, but aircraft are surprisingly tough to hit unless you know what you're doing. Man-pack SAMs require some basic training, but find their targets much more reliably.

    Unless these shoot-downs were a weird blip, foreign powers are involved, providing the missiles and training - probably outside of Iraq. Our intel services either already know who's lurking behind our enemies' new capabilities or will confirm it soon enough.

    And who might those third parties be?

    Iran? You bet. Even though those claiming responsibility for the shoot-downs register as Sunni Arabs, the Iranians are perfectly willing to aid their long-term enemies to defeat

    Iran and Syria need to be punished.
    That means military action from the air.

    And no, it won't lead to an Iranian invasion force landing at the Hamptons.
    Resolute force is the most-underestimated tool in our geopolitical arsenal.

  4. LA Police Chief Bratton reports crime down in all areas but one:
    Hispanic Gangs out of control.
    Thank you, President Bush.

  5. Just do a "Live Search" or "Google" on Hispanic Gangs and Islam and you'll see this problem is much larger than people realize.

    Thanks, President Bush!

  6. Churchill's folly may be ending via Bush's folly. The Turks knew better. The triplets seem to be a-birthing, again. A naming party seems in order. How about, going from the south towards the north, Sumer, Babylon, and Assyria? All noble names, each having had at least an earlier moment in the sun.

  7. Another chopper down.

    About the chopper thing - the way it hit, a sudden rash of shootdowns, and the immediate use of multiple weapons types points to a specialized muj air defence unit (cell?) starting operations, rather than adding individuals and weapons to groups already in place. That again points to a state sponser, figure Syria if Sunni or Iran if Shia.

    The date this thing started is again end January, so project a couple weeks back for deployment, more like two months.

    Add that to Karbala. Figure a couple weeks to a couple months to set that up.

    Where does that put us?

    Hypothesis : The november US elections may have caused some bastards to perceive the US effort in Iraq to be going wobbly. They may well have perceived that any possibility of the USA striking back against a third party even blatently stirring up Iraq will have gone with a dem congress. Back around nov-dec they gave the green light to a number of semi-covert operations which had been too hot to consider with a 'publican congress. They mayigure a good push now can cause congress to keel over, the US to withdraw, Iraq to fall into their hands and murder any chance for a republican win in '08. Takes time (a couple months) for units to move and infiltrate, supplies to arrive, rehearsals to finalise. We're seeing their efforts starting to cut in now. The bastards being Iran or Syria or both.

    The USA knew something was coming and hence the surge ... that would mean the surge is not an offensive operation, but a proactive defence, and explains why US forces suddenly must take the lead contrary to the general thrust of Vietnamization up to this point. Figure the US could actually go out of its way to cover up Iranian involvement unless a decision to strike Iran is made, when it would be used as a smoking gun.

    Test: If this is true, we should see a series of events like the chopper shootdown or Karbala kidnapping, where the "insurgents" suddenly manifest surprising capabilites.

  8. fellow I will cut and paste this to the next post.