ISIS hostage Kayla Mueller is dead. Yahoo/Reuters

Kayla Mueller. Yahoo/AP

U.S. ISIS hostage Kayla Mueller has been confirmed to be dead. Yahoo/Reuters. Her family received an e-mail and photograph that U.S. intelligence officials have determined to be authentic. ISIS claims that Mueller was killed in a Jordanian airstrike. U.S. officials dispute the claim, saying that Mueller was killed in some kind of combat situation. Mueller was thought to be the last American held by ISIS but U.S. officials said that more were being held by the terrorist state. President Obama vowed to bring the people responsible for Mueller's captivity to justice. 

My Comment:

Sad news, but not unexpected. There was almost no chance of the reports of Mueller being dead being false. This is just confirmation of what we already knew. There was little chance of her being released and a fairly good chance of her getting murdered anyways. My thoughts are with her and her family and friends. 

There was some new information in this article that I wasn't aware of before. The first was what the United States thinks happened to Mueller. ISIS said she was killed in a Jordanian airstrike. That never made much sense because it was just too convenient for ISIS. After all Jordan had just stepped up their attacks on ISIS when this news broke. Obviously ISIS wanted to paint their air campaign as brutal and indiscriminate. It wouldn't have worked anyways because ISIS was still responsible for kidnapping Mueller and putting her in the position where she could be killed. 

Either way that doesn't seem to be what happened. The U.S. claim is that she was killed in some kind of ground combat. That raises some pretty huge questions. Who killed her? Why were they fighting ISIS? Was it a rescue operation or an attempted kidnapping? Or was she just in the wrong place at the wrong time? Did ISIS kill her themselves because they thought they would lose her? Indeed, the revelation that she was killed in combat just raises more questions then it answers.

The second major revelation is that there are more hostages held by ISIS. Reuters floated the name Austin Tice, a journalist who disappeared in Damascus, but that is just speculation. Who are these hostages? Who knows. But whoever they are there seems to be very little chance of them being released. To date every American hostage held by ISIS has either been executed or killed. With official American policy being not to negotiate with terrorists there is little chance of these people of being released without a rescue operation.. 

Rebels come close to closing Debaltseve pocket while Ukraine starts new offensive near Mariupol. Yahoo/Reuters

A Ukrainian soldier jumping off of a tank damaged in Debaltseve. Yahoo/Reuters. 

Rebels are getting closer to closing the Debaltseve pocket while Ukraine's National Guard have started a new offensive near Mariupol. Yahoo/Reuters. Rebels are pushing hard in Debaltseve, which is a major rail hub between the two rebellious cities of Donetsk and Luhansk. Capturing the city would link the two cities and trap a major portion of the Ukraine Army. Rebels are also launching rocket attacks targeting positions far beyond the front lines. Meanwhile, Kiev has announced a new offensive by their volunteer battalions in the south of the country near the strategic city of Mariupol. They claim that their units are having success in the south but provide little evidence for their claims. The attack comes after reports of rebels massing troops in the area. Both sides are trying to gain ground on the eve of peace talks involving European leaders and Russia.

My Comment:

The situation for Ukraine seems very bad right now. All indications are that they are going to lose the battle for Debaltseve. As I said previously, it isn't just the town, it is a major pocket of troops that could be cut off as well. Ukraine needs to pull out and pull out quickly if they hope to save those troops. Once those troops are surrounded they will have little choice other then surrender or destruction. Ukraine, of course, can not afford to lose that many troops and that much equipment. Defeat in Debatlseve won't mean that Ukraine has lost the war, but it would bring it that much closer to defeat.

The attack in Mariupol isn't going to change anything in Debaltseve. It's too far away and I doubt there will be any major breakthrough. Indeed, I'm not quite sure if I trust Kiev when they say that they are pushing the rebels back. The rebels were massing troops in the area and were in defensive positions. Unless the Ukrainians did some kind of flanking move, I am guessing that any defeats they inflicted on the rebels will be temporary ones. They could delay or even stop the attack on Mariupol though, which is almost certainly their goal. 

It seems obvious to me that Ukraine cares more about Mariupol then Debaltseve. Both are strategically important but losing Mariupol would be a bitter pill to swallow. Mariupol is a major transportation hub and is an important port on the Sea of Azov. Losing it would have massive economic consequences. Considering Ukraine's economy is already reeling that could lead to the utter collapse of the government. I'm calling it now, Ukraine is going to lose this war. The only thing that could possibly save them is massive Western intervention, and I don't see that happening since it would be World War III. 

Should Brian Williams lose his job? Yahoo/AP

Brian Williams. Yahoo/AFP

Debate rages about what the fate of Brian Williams will be. Yahoo/AP. Brian Williams, the news anchor for NBC Nightly News, has admitted to falsely claiming that he was in a helicopter crash during the Iraq War. Some people think that Williams will survive the scandal due to high ratings for NBC Nightly News. Williams has "stepped away" from the news program for awhile. Some are calling for Brian Williams to step down or be fired. Since the scandal erupted, the ratings for NBC Nightly News has tanked. In more bad news for Williams, new accusations of embellishment have arisen over statements he made over the 2006 war between Israel and Hezbollah. During the war Williams was in a helicopter watching Hezbollah firing rockets at Israel from a distance of six miles. Williams later claimed on The Daily Show and a speech at an university that the rockets were "just under him".

My Comment:

This is such a strange story to me. There have been so many incidents of the media either making stuff up or deliberately lying about the news to fit a narrative, I can't see how Williams embellishing his own life is even in the same category. Off the top of my head, think of how NBC edited the George Zimmerman tape to make him look racist. How about when ABC made up the "pink slime" scandal and cost the beef industry millions of dollars? And, lest we forget, Dan Rather made up a bunch of stuff about President Bush's wartime service record. In short the news media has almost no credibility in the first place. 

In short, the scandal about Brian Williams doesn't hurt my opinion about NBC news, or mainstream journalism in general, because my opinion of them could not get any lower. Should Williams be fired? Of course he should be. You can't trust someone that lies about news stories he has been involved in. But almost everyone in the media should be fired because everyone in the media lies. And compared to the lies the rest of the media makes everyday, lying about being under fire during the Iraq War is a pretty minor one. 

So what are the consumers supposed to do? My advice is to not trust one source exclusively. When I write these posts I usually use only one or two sources for citations, but I read from multiple sources. You also have to realize who is biased to what. For example, RT is clearly Russian propaganda, the Daily Mail has no credibility whatsoever, Fox News has a conservative bias and all the other major networks have either a center left or a left wing bias. Other then that there isn't much you can do other then question everything. Just because the media says something doesn't mean it is true. And, of course, that's just as true as me as it is for the media. 

Fort Hood shooting victims to finally be awarded Purple Hearts. Washington Post.

Washington Post/U.S. Army

Victims of the 2009 Fort Hood shooting are finally going to be awarded the Purple Heart Medal. Washington Post. 6 years after Major Nidal Hasan went on a rampage that killed 13 people and wounded 30 more, soldiers wounded in the battle will receive the decoration awarded to soldiers injured in combat. Some civilians will receive the non-military equivalent Defense of Freedom Medal. Both medals can be awarded for people injured in international terrorist attacks, but until recently the military did not consider the Fort Hood attack as an international terrorist attack. Major Hasan was in communication with Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula propagandist Anwar Al-Awlaki, who encouraged him to carry out the attack. Congress had to change the law to expand the definition of an international attack in include attacks where the attacker was in contact with terrorist organizations. Until the change of the law the Army officially declared the 2009 attack "workplace violence".

My Comment:

About damn time! The fact that it took 6 years for this to happen is a travesty. The 2009 Fort Hood attacks was of course a terrorist attack. Like the article said, Hasan was in contact with Anwar Al-Awlaki, who, before he got annihilated in a drone strike back in 2011, was a major Al-Qaeda figure, who is rumored to also have funded the Charlie Hebdo attackers. To argue that the attack in 2009 was anything other then am international terrorist attack was insane. The fact that Hasan was a U.S. citizen was irrelevant. If he was in contact with Al-Qaeda then he was a terrorist. The men and women killed and wounded by him were under enemy fire. 

As for the reluctance to declare the Fort Hood shooting a terror attack, I blame the president. It is my opinion that he downplayed the international angle in order to make it look like the threat of international terrorism during his first 4 years of his presidency was non-existent. He had an election to worry about and domestic programs to push. International politics and national defense have always been treated as a distraction by this White House at best. The last thing he needed was a major terrorist incident during his term. So it became "workplace violence" and a "mass shooting" instead of a terrorist attack. And of course, it allowed him to push his narrative of gun control as an added bonus. 

The fact of the matter was that this was always a political decision. To be fair, awarding the medals is a political decision as well. The Republican controlled congress will score points for this. But those are points that never should have been political in the first place. As soon as it was clear that Hasan was in contact with Al-Qaeda the wounded and dead should have gotten their medals. The fact that they didn't is a national disgrace. 

The medals themselves are mostly a symbolic gesture. That isn't to say they aren't important in themselves, but receiving a Purple Heart allows for some benefits. These include better access to health care and added preference for government jobs. It is about time that the victims of the Fort Hood attack got these benefits. 

The Untied States has given Lebanon 25 million dollars worth of weapons to fight Islamic extremists. Yahoo/AP

Artillery being delivered from the ship holding $25 million worth of weapons. Yahoo/AP

$25 million worth of weapons and ammunition have arrived in Lebanon from the United States, for use in the fight against Islamic militants. Yahoo/AP. 70 M198 howitzers along with over 26 million shells were among the weapons delivered. The American assistance comes after several incursions from the Syrian border from both the Al-Qaeda affiliated Al-Nusra Front and forces from the Islamic State. In August, fighters from both groups captured a couple dozen Lebanese soldiers, and still hold around 20. Lebanon is now the fifth largest recipient of American aid with over $100 million worth of weapons in the past year and $1 billion in the past 8 years. Saudi Arabia is also pledging to provide $3 billion worth of weapons, bought from the French, as well. Lebanon's military is seen as an unifying force and is made up of Christians, Druze and both Sunni and Shia Muslims. 

My Comment:

Lebanon has long been a country that has been surrounded by threats. They pulled themselves out of a long civil war, and several minor wars with Israel, only to be threatened by the utter chaos that is Syria right now. It is not surprising that they are looking for new weapons, and America is only too happy to provide. ISIS and the Al-Nusra front have been content to conduct small scale raids and attacks but have not had a major campaign in Lebanon. Given the success both groups are having in Syria and the relative weakness of both the Syrian government and the Free Syrian Army, it is possible that this will change. If and when that happens Lebanon needs to be prepared, and these weapons will go a long way to help them. 

Given how chaotic the region is, it is no surprise that there are tons of weapons flowing into the Middle East right now. America is a major player in the arms trade, and in many cases they are just giving these weapons away. That is of course a double edged sword. ISIS managed to capture huge amounts of tanks, humvees, artillery, guns and ammunition from the Iraqi army. This could happen again in Lebanon or any of the other states in the region, should ISIS, or any other Islamic extremist group, manage to have success in the region. 

Still, if Lebanon can use these weapons effectively none of that should happen. Lebanon's army is much better then Iraq's and the country is much less divided then Iraq's was and is. Overall, giving these weapons to Lebanon is probably a good thing, but I would much rather have them actually pay for these weapons then have them just get them for free. Still, as far as tax dollars go, it could be spent on worse things. Fighting Islamic extremism is a just cause, but if we have to do it, why do it for free?