THE WAR

Please take the time to read the attached essay by Dr. Chong. It is without
a doubt the most articulate and convincing writing I have read regarding the
War in Iraq. If you have any doubts please open your mind to his essay and give
a fair evaluation.

I had no idea who Dr. Chong is or the source of these thoughts... so when I
received them, I almost deleted them - as well written as they are. But
then I did a "Google search" on the Doctor and found him to be a retired Air Force
Surgeon of all things and past Commander of Wilford Hall Medical Center in
San Antonio. So he is real, is connected to Veterans
affairs in California, and these are his thoughts. They are worth reading
and thinking about! (the same Google search will direct you to some of his other
thought provoking writings.)

Subject: Muslims, terrorist and the USA. A different spin on Iraq war.

This WAR is for REAL! Dr. Vernon Chong, Major General, USAF, Retired

Tuesday, July 12, 2005
To get out of a difficulty, one usually must go through it. Our country is
now facing the most serious threat to its existence, as we know it, that we
have faced in your lifetime and mine (which includes W.W.II).

The deadly seriousness is greatly compounded by the fact that there are
very few of us who think we can possibly lose this war and even fewer who realize
what losing really means.

First, let's examine a few basics:

1. When did the threat to us start?
Many will say September 11, 2001. The answer as far as the United States is
concerned is 1979, 22 years prior to September 2001, with the following
attacks
on us:

* Iran Embassy Hostages, 1979;
* Beirut, Lebanon Embassy 1983;
* Beirut, Lebanon Marine Barracks 1983;
* Lockerbie, Scotland Pan-Am flight to New York 1988;
* First New York World Trade Center attack 1993;
* Dhahran, Saudi Arabia Khobar Towers Military complex 1996;
* Nairobi, Kenya US Embassy 1998;
* Dares Salaam, Tanzania US Embassy 1998;
* Aden, Yemen USS Cole 2000;
* New York World Trade Center 2001;
* Pentagon 2001.

(Note that during the period from 1981 to 2001 there were 7,581 terrorist
attacks worldwide).

2. Why were we attacked?

Envy of our position, our success, and our freedoms. The attacks happened
during the administrations of Presidents Carter, Reagan, Bush 1, Clinton and Bush
2. We cannot fault either the Republicans or Democrats as there were no
provocation's by any of the presidents or their immediate predecessors, Presidents Ford
or Carter.

3. Who were the attackers?
In each case, the attacks on the US were carried out by Muslims.

4. What is the Muslim population of the World? 25%.

5. Isn't the Muslim Religion peaceful?
Hopefully, but that is really not material. There is no doubt that the
predominately Christian population of Germany was peaceful, but under the
dictatorial leadership of Hitler (who was also Christian), that made no
difference. You either went along with the administration or you were
eliminated. There were 5 to 6 million Christians killed by the Nazis for
political reasons (including 7,000 Polish priests). (see
http://www.nazis.testimony.co.uk/7-a.htm (http://www.nazis.testimony.co.uk/7-a.htm) )

Thus, almost the same number of Christians were killed by the Nazis, as the
six million holocaust Jews who were killed by them, and we seldom heard of
anything other than the Jewish atrocities. Although Hitler kept the world focused on
the Jews, he had no hesitancy about killing anyone who got in his way of
exterminating the Jews or of taking over the world
- German, Christian or any others.

Same with the Muslim terrorists. They focus the world on the US, but kill all in
the way -- their own people or the Spanish, French or anyone else. The
point here is that just like the peaceful Germans were of no protection to anyone
from the Nazis, no matter how many peaceful Muslims there may be, they are no
protection for us from the terrorist Muslim leaders and what they are
fanatically bent on doing -- by their own pronouncements -- killing all of
us "infidels." I don't blame the peaceful Muslims. What would you do if the
choice was shut up or die?

6. So who are we at war with?
There is no way we can honestly respond that it is anyone other than the
Muslim terrorists. Trying to be politically correct and avoid verbalizing this
conclusion can well be fatal. There is no way to win if you don't clearly
recognize and articulate who you are fighting.

So with that background, now to the two major questions:

1. Can we lose this war?

2. What does losing really mean?

If we are to win, we must clearly answer these two pivotal questions

We can definitely lose this war, and as anomalous as it may sound, the
major reason we can lose is that so many of us simply do not fathom the answer to
the second question - What does losing mean?

It would appear that a great many of us think that losing the war means
hanging our heads, bringing the troops home and going on about our business, like
post Vietnam. This is as far from the truth as one can get.

What losing really means is:
We would no longer be the premier country in the world. The attacks will
not subside, but rather will steadily increase. Remember, they want us dead,
not just quiet. If they had just wanted us quiet, they would not have produced
an increasing series of attacks against us, over the past 18 years. The plan
was clearly, for terrorist to attack us, until we were neutered and submissive
to them.

We would of course have no future support from other nations, for fear of
reprisals and for the reason that they would see, we are impotent and
cannot help them.

They will pick off the other non-Muslim nations, one at a time. It will be
increasingly easier for them. They already hold Spain hostage. It doesn't
matter whether it was right or wrong for Spain to withdraw its troops from Iraq.
Spain did it because the Muslim terrorists bombed their train and told them to
withdraw the troops. Anything else they want Spain to do will be done. Spain is finished.

The next will probably be France. Our one hope on France is that they might
see the light and realize that if we don't win, they are finished too, in that
they can't resist the Muslim terrorists without us. However, it may already be
too late for France. France is already 20% Muslim and fading fast!

If we lose the war, our production, income, exports and way of life will
all vanish as we know it. After losing, who would trade or deal with us, if
they were threatened by the Muslims. If we can't stop the Muslims, how
could anyone else?

The Muslims fully know what is riding on this war, and therefore are
completely committed to winning, at any cost. We better know it too and be likewise
committed to winning at any cost.

Why do I go on at such lengths about the results of losing? Simple. Until
we recognize the costs of losing, we cannot unite and really put 100% of our
thoughts and efforts into winning. And it is going to take that 100% effort to win.

So, how can we lose the war?
Again, the answer is simple. We can lose the war by "imploding." That is,
defeating ourselves by refusing to recognize the enemy and their purpose,
and really digging in and lending full support to the war effort If we are
united, there is no way that we can lose. If we continue to be divided, there is no
way that we can win!

Let me give you a few examples of how we simply don't comprehend the life
and death seriousness of this situation.

President Bush selects Norman Mineta as Secretary of Transportation.
Although all of the terrorist attacks were committed by Muslim men between 17 and 40
years of age, Secretary Mineta refuses to allow profiling. Does that sound
like we are taking this s thing seriously? This is war! For the duration, we are
going to have to give up some of the civil rights we have become accustomed to.
We had better be prepared to lose some of our civil rights temporarily or we will
most certainly lose all of them permanently.

And don't worry that it is a slippery slope. We gave up plenty of civil
rights during W.W.II, and immediately restored them after the victory and in fact
added many more since then.

Do I blame President Bush or President Clinton before him?
No, I blame us for blithely assuming we can maintain all of our Political
Correctness, and all of our civil rights during this conflict and have a
clean, lawful, honorable war. None of those words apply to war. Get them out of
your head.

Some have gone so far in their criticism of the war and/or the
Administration that it almost seems they would literally like to see us lose. I hasten to
add that this isn't because they are disloyal. It is because they just don't
recognize what losing means. Nevertheless, that conduct gives the
impression to the enemy that we are divided and weakening. It concerns our friends, and
it does great damage to our cause.

Of more recent vintage, the uproar fueled by the politicians and media
regarding the treatment of some prisoners of war, perhaps exemplifies best what I am
saying. We have recently had an issue, involving the treatment of a few
Muslim prisoners of war, by a small group of our military police. These are the
type prisoners who just a few months ago were throwing their own people off buildings, cutting off their hands,
cutting out their tongues and otherwise murdering their own people just for disagreeing
with Saddam Hussein.

And just a few years ago these same type prisoners chemically killed
400,000 of their own people for the same reason. They are also the same type of enemy
fighters, who recently were burning Americans, and dragging their charred
corpses through the streets of Iraq.

And still more recently, the same type of enemy that was and is providing
videos to all news sources internationally, of the beheading of American prisoners
they held.

Compare this with some of our press and politicians, who for several days
have thought and talked about nothing else but the "humiliating" of some Muslim
prisoners -- not burning them, not dragging their charred corpses through
the streets, not beheading them, but "humiliating" them.

Can this be for real?

The politicians and pundits have even talked of impeachment of the
Secretary of Defense. If this doesn't show the complete lack of comprehension and
understanding of the seriousness of the enemy we are fighting, the life and
death struggle we are in and the disastrous results of losing this war, nothing
can.

To bring our country to a virtual political standstill over this prisoner
issue makes us look like Nero playing his fiddle as Rome burned -- totally
oblivious to what is going on in the real world. Neither we, nor any other country,
can survive this internal strife. Again I say, this does not mean that some of
our politicians or media people are disloyal. It simply means that they are
absolutely oblivious to the magnitude, of the situation we are in and into
which the Muslim terrorists have been pushing us, for many years.

Remember, the Muslim terrorists stated goal is to kill all infidels! That
translates into ALL non-Muslims -- not just in the United State, but
throughout the world.

We are the last bastion of defense.

We have been criticized for many years as being 'arrogant.' That charge is
valid in at least one respect. We are arrogant in that we believe that we are so
good, powerful and smart, that we can win the hearts and minds of all those who
attack us, and that with both hands tied behind our back, we can defeat anything
bad in the world!

We can't! If we don't recognize this, our nation as we know it will not
survive, and no other free country in the world will survive if we are defeated.

And finally, name any Muslim countries throughout the world that allow
freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of religion, freedom of the press,
equal rights for anyone -- let alone everyone, equal status or any status for
women, or that have been productive in one single way that contributes to the
good of the world.

This has been a long way of saying that we must be united on this war or
we will be equated in the history books to the self-inflicted fall of the
Roman Empire. If, that is, the Muslim leaders will allow history books to be
written or read.

If we don't win this war right now, keep a close eye on how the Muslims
take over France in the next 5 years or less. They will continue to increase
the Muslim population of France and continue to encroach little by little, on
the established French traditions. The French will be fighting among
themselves, over what should or should not be done, which will continue to weaken
them and keep them from any united resolve. Doesn't that sound eerily familiar?

Democracies don't have their freedoms taken away from them by some
external military force. Instead, they give their freedoms away, politically
correct piece by politically correct piece.

And they are giving those freedoms away to those who have shown,
worldwide that they abhor freedom and will not apply it to you or even to themselves,
once they are in power.

They have universally shown that when they have taken over, they then
start brutally killing each other over who will be the few who control the
masses.
Will we ever stop hearing from the politically correct, about the
"peaceful Muslims"?

I close on a hopeful note, by repeating what I said above. If we are
united, there is no way that we can lose. I hope now after the election, the
factions in our country will begin to focus on the critical situation we are in,
and will unite to save our country. It is your future we are talking about!
Do whatever you can to preserve it.

After reading the above, we all must do this not only for ourselves, but
our children, our grandchildren, our country and the world.

Whether Democrat or Republican, conservative or liberal and that includes
the Politicians and media of our country and the free world!

Please forward this to any you feel may want, or NEED to read it. Our
"leaders" in Congress ought to read it, too. There are those that find fault with
our country, but it is obvious to anyone who truly thinks through this, that
we must UNITE!

If you would like to see who this fellow is go to this Air Force web
sight and look him up.
http://www.af.mil/bios/alpha.asp?alpha=C (http://www.af.mil/bios/alpha.asp?alpha=C)

Received this at work from my boss, thought it was a very interesting read. I'm sure alot of you will disect it. Have a good time with it.

:devil

*waits for the usual suspects to appear*

It's an interesting read and to be honest not far from what I feel.

Fandros Finglaflin

I have a problem when I get to his question 5 where he states that Adolf Hitler was a Christain. Adolf Hitler was most certainly NOT a Christain. He was spiritual according to everything I've read, but he was also into the occult and other counter culture things like that. He played on being a Christain to embolden the German populace, but in all actuality, he was not a Christain.

Here comes Snopes!

I have a problem when I get to his question 5 where he states that Adolf Hitler was a Christain. Adolf Hitler was most certainly NOT a Christain. He was spiritual according to everything I've read, but he was also into the occult and other counter culture things like that. He played on being a Christain to embolden the German populace, but in all actuality, he was not a Christain.My understanding however is that Hitler publicly played himself to be a Christian, partially as a matter of building support and for his own identity. This caused a great deal of confusion among people prior to the war and added to the denial of what was happening in Germany. Certainly after the war there are still Jewish groups who view Christians as having had a hand in Germany's actions. While his actions may have been decidedly un-Christian, his claim as such had a major affect.

good read

That is a very dangerous writing...anyone who can't figure out why most definately deserves to live in a country that would hold it dearly as a way to go.

Subject: Muslims, terrorist and the USA. A different spin on Iraq war.

Is that the latest for going into Iraq? Where is the reality?


2. Why were we attacked?
Envy of our position, our success, and our freedoms. The attacks happened
during the administrations of Presidents Carter, Reagan, Bush 1, Clinton and Bush
2. We cannot fault either the Republicans or Democrats as there were no
provocation's by any of the presidents or their immediate predecessors, Presidents Ford or Carter.

Surely a different spin but one that is not remotely accurate.

If we lose the war, our production, income, exports and way of life will all vanish as we know it.

I guess our current vanishing of the above will stop soon so we can stop it from vanishing because of muslims.


This is a very dangerous letter...it is reminiscint of nazi germany propoganda...very scary...very scary that people so easily buy into simplified crap like this. Shame on the writer.

You're scary Rover, you spin on it because it doesn't place blame on Bush and co for all those nasty attacks.....including those that happened before him. ;P

I'm glad to see the populace waking up to the fact that all the left has ...again...for 2006 is. We hate Bush, we're not the right!!

Fandros

Right is right and wrong is wrong...that is just plain wrong.

"They hate us for our freedom"

/sigh.

What absolute rubbish

Hardly rubbish....Their Iman's do preach that our excessives and luxuries are evil.

Their Iman's use us to control their flocks, their Iman's think for them and continue to spew this hatred for all things Western because we have and they do not. They do not because we have....it's a mantra really.

Not rubish at all, actually dead on fact.

Fandros

Its a childish and simplistic look at a massively complicated issue.

They could give a damn about our freedoms. They hate us for very real reasons. They hate us for backing brutal and oppressive dictators in their region, they hate us for selling weapons to both sides, they hate us for support of Israel. They hate us for the proping up of regimes that serve our political purposes but deny them these very freedoms that we think they hate us for.
‘Muslims do not hate our freedom, but rather they hate our policies [the report says]. The overwhelming majority voice their objections to what they see as one-sided support in favor of Israel and against Palestinian rights, and the long-standing, even increasing, support for what Muslims collectively see as tyrannies, most notably Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Pakistan and the Gulf states. Thus, when American public diplomacy talks about bringing democracy to Islamic societies, this is seen as no more than self-serving hypocrisy.

Do you understand the fact that we are losing a PR war to people who saw the heads off people on video? Oh it must be our freedoms they hate, because people in the middle east must be morons to us, this greater species with this advanced intelligence able to condence the most complex and interwoven aspects of societal causation into a 4 seconds soundbite, easily digestable for mass consumption.

Do you understand the fact that we are losing a PR war to people who saw the heads off people on video?


Unfortunately quite a few people have no comprehension of that or as to why that is. It is either a denial or a refusal to believe that perhaps in certain cultures we can't sell what is bought here.

Its a childish and simplistic look at a massively complicated issue.



So people in 3rd world countries, who have no exposure to any independant news sources have come to the objective conclusion that hating the USA is the correct position.
What sort of fantasy world do you live in where people that don't even have a 3rd grade education are so cosmopolitan?
Most of the people that hate us, don't even know why they hate us. It's just good enough for them that their Imans have told them to do so.
Bad crops this year? Blame the Satanic United States. Your son was killed in a roadside bombing? Blame the Americans we were trying to kill when your son stepped in front of the bomb.
Don't you get it?

ugh...

Hate to say this but...

Ding ding ding Sixee has it right.

Oooo wait, folks living at the bare minimum of so called human existence do indeed normally posess wordly views.

Fandros

Here comes Snopes!
Indeed. (http://www.snopes.com/rumors/soapbox/chong.asp) Trikki, I'll be sending you information on some valuable land in northern Nevada that you can purchase from me at a good rate. Free bridge included.

The piece itself is a shrill, hyperbolic mess filled with inaccuracies. [qutoe]Although all of the terrorist attacks were committed by Muslim men between 17 and 40
years of age, Secretary Mineta refuses to allow profiling. Does that sound
like we are taking this s thing seriously? This is war![/quote]
OMG WAR! I'm not sure how you can easily identify a Muslim male just by looks. You could guess "Arab-looking," but not only is that inexact, not all terrorists or wannabe terrorists are Middle Eastern (e.g., Richard Reid, the "shoebomber").
For the duration, we are
going to have to give up some of the civil rights we have become accustomed to.
We had better be prepared to lose some of our civil rights temporarily or we will
most certainly lose all of them permanently.
Terrorism is a tactic, usable by anyone, not an enemy. There is no end to a war that has no actual enemy as its target. Also, governments are loathe to dispense with any power they acquire.
ugh...

Hate to say this but...

Ding ding ding Sixee has it right.
I think you can rest easy, Fanny. The reasons for hating us that L2 stated (and which were not addressed by Sixee) don't require a particularly "cosmopolitan" viewpoint (compared to, say, "hating us for our freedoms" which does require more information and understanding of just what freedoms we have). The US did back Hussein and the Shah, and backs the Pakistani leader and the Saudi royals. The US does back Israel (rightly or wrongly isn't the issue). There are other reasons to hate us (many not at all reasonable), but saying, "They're just dumb" simply obfuscates the matter as much as saying, "That's what the imam told me."

BTW, Rover you are correct. Here is the snopes link, and yes this writing attributed to Dr. Chong was not written by him.

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/soapbox/chong.asp

Origins: The above-quoted essay about the war on terrorism is yet one more example of misattribution through e-mail forwarding. Although USAF Major General Vernon Chong is indeed a real person, the essay was not written by him; it was something he came across and forwarded to an acquaintance via e-mail, thereby attaching his name to it and inadvertently causing other recipients to erroneously assume he was its author.

This essay began circulating back in mid-2004 under the title "THE WORLD SITUATION — A LETTER TO MY SONS," with the following opening: This was written by a retired attorney, to his sons, May 19, 2004.

Dear Tom, Kevin, Kirby and Ted,

As your father, I believe I owe it to you to share some thoughts on the present world situation. We have over the years discussed a lot of important things, like going to college, jobs and so forth. But this really takes precedence over any of those discussions. I hope this might give you a longer term perspective that fewer and fewer of my generation are left to speak to. To be sure you understand that this is not politically flavored, I will tell you that since Franklin D. Roosevelt, who led us through pre and WWII (1933 - 1945) up to and including our present President, I have without exception, supported our presidents on all matters of international conflict. This would include just naming a few in addition to President Roosevelt - WWII: President Truman - Korean War 1950; President Kennedy Bay of Pigs (1961); President Kennedy - Vietnam (1961); eight presidents (5 Republican & 4 Democrat) during the cold war (1945 - 1991); President Clinton's strikes on Bosnia (1995) and on Iraq (1998). So be sure you read this as completely non-political or otherwise you will miss the point.

Our country is now facing the most serious threat to its existence, as we know it, that we have faced in your lifetime and mine (which includes WWII). The deadly seriousness is greatly compounded by the fact that there are very few of us who think we can possibly lose this war and even fewer who realize what losing really means. First, let's examine a few basics:
Somewhere along the chain of multiple forwardings, someone rewrote the first few paragraphs and mistakenly attributed the entire piece to General Chong. We have not yet been able to ascertain the identity of the original author.

bah you bastard, beat me by the time it took me to make my post :(

I figured it was on snopes as a falsely attributed email, Trikki has hit 100% so far with these.

Eppppp

Fandros

Regardless, the Points made in the message are valid, even if the author is in question.
I just think people trying to scrape a living out of the dirt don't really care who is in power, or who back what failed dictator.
They want an answer to why their life is so bad, and the answer is unerringly, The United States of America.
While they might not hate our freedoms, the Imans, who see us as a corrupt and immoral country, do.
So if I understand the gist of L2's post, we just need to pull out of the Middle East, quit selling arms to everyone, let Israel fight its own fight, and withdraw from the world.
I remember the last time the US did that, and the outcome was we were pulled into a World War.
So do you fight here and there, a little at a time, and stop a major conflict from happening, or do you withdraw untill there's a big explosion, then come in like the cavalry to save the day?
The only problem is, when you are dealing in modern warfare, there is no riding in to save the day. Nuclear bombs kinda make this mode of thinking outdated.

Sixee do you have any clue as to what you are talking about?

I remember the last time the US did that, and the outcome was we were pulled into a World War.


Dates Times Locations please.

'I remember the last time the US did that, and the outcome was we were pulled into a World War.'

- As a pretty advid historian.. what are you on about? Are you talking about US Splendid Isolation after the Great War? 'Cause that didn't have anything to do with the Second World War.


'They hate us for our freedom'

- Oh, geeze.
Another one of those "US = Freedom, Muslims = Oppress Women" bits of writing from an old army bloke.
Recycled_Rubbish_0072726

Rover, I don't have time to sit here and give you a history lesson.
If you can't figure out that I'm talking about the US's isolationist attitude before WWII, and how we were drug into the war because Japan figured we didn't have the stomach to fight them because of it, your avatar should read: "Somewhere in Penisylvania a villige is missing its Idiot."

Japanese intervention and pre-emptive strike had nothing to do with US isolationism.

bah you bastard, beat me by the time it took me to make my post
Bwaha!

Rover, I don't have time to sit here and give you a history lesson.
Now that's worth a good laugh in itself.

Here's where we reach the part of the thread where no one an come up with a constructive argument.
So they fall back on personal attacks.

Japanese intervention and pre-emptive strike had nothing to do with US isolationism.

Go have another pint, you Pickled Limey. BEFORE WWII, BEFORE!
The U.S. had adopted an isolationist attitude before the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. Get your head out of the alcohol long enough for your vision to clear up.

Now that's worth a good laugh in itself.

So rather than come up with a constructive counterpoint, you fall back to personal attacks. Typical.

Rover, I don't have time to sit here and give you a history lesson.
If you can't figure out that I'm talking about the US's isolationist attitude before WWII, and how we were drug into the war because Japan figured we didn't have the stomach to fight them because of it, your avatar should read: "Somewhere in Penisylvania a villige is missing its Idiot."

Believe me you are the last person who I would look for a history lesson from. Your posts are still filled with lack of thought and intelligence.

Go have another pint, you Pickled Limey. BEFORE WWII,


WW I was known as the great war, I would guess that makes you a pickled
idiot?

"Somewhere in Penisylvania a villige is missing its Idiot."

I'm guessing that was a general attack and not personal?...nice try my little retarded one.

Lol poor Trikki. I still love her though. The article lost me right around..we should give up our civil rights.

WW I was known as the great war, I would guess that makes you a pickled
idiot?





When did we start talking about WWI?
I was talking about WWII.
Try and Focus....

Pooly composed, backassward ideas, simplistic analysisand lacking in much factual information. That's how'd I'd sum up this article.

...and no, it has nothing to do with blaiming Bush for the Middle East problems. Those pre-date Bush, Clinton, this country, and this millenia. It's always been a problem, whether born of religion, ideaology, race, tribe or whatever.

As to why "they" hate the US, it's way more complex than "they hate our freedom" drivel or "they hate our Middle East policies". It does have to do with both of those things but even more. It's a viscious combination of those things plus the simple fact that these poor, ignorant people are kept that way by ruthless dictators and told lies (and some truth) to keep them destitute and full of hate for the west. It also has to do with a religion that openly promotes killing "infidels", that infidels aren't human, and dying by killing indfidels gets you 72 virgins. Under the "freedom" heading add, wealth, wastefulness, pompasity, and "fill in the blank with other I hate Americans generalities". Under mid-east policies fill in our support for the "zionist regime no matter what" BS, backing Saddam while he was exterminating his people and Iranians, Iran/Contra, and the backing of other ruthless dictators...amoung other things.

Add it all up and you've got a lot of hate.

I don't even want to go into the linking of the Iraq war and the supposed "war on terror"........Afghanistan fine...but not Iraq. If we were truly going after regimes that sponsor terror then evil Syria, Iran and NK would be way before Iraq as far as support world terror. ...and yes, I do know that Saddam gave rewards to the families of suicide bombers, but compared to what the rest do, and the threat that poses to the US...that's peanuts. WMDs was an exuce, a false excuse.....Iraq was a convient target for an administration that wanted a war....for many reason (some valid, some not).

See, Halo said:

- As a pretty advid historian.. what are you on about? Are you talking about US Splendid Isolation after the Great War? 'Cause that didn't have anything to do with the Second World War.


then you said:

Go have another pint, you Pickled Limey. BEFORE WWII, BEFORE!
The U.S. had adopted an isolationist attitude before the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. Get your head out of the alcohol long enough for your vision to clear up.

Which shows that you tried to make him look clueless...but really you were the clueless one and Halo in fact was correct. You were talking about WWII of which what you stated was at the least misguided (but that is understandable coming from you) and Halo pointed out that "After The Great War" which would be pre-WWII but you didnt understand which is obvious from your answer.

First off all...

We arent just losing the Arab and Persian "Street". We are losing the middle class, the university level. The movers and the shakers of Muslim society. Do you think that is a society of "people with a 3rd grade education"?

Name one single part of Muslim society that we are winning over... You cant. From top to bottom we are losing the war of ideas in the Middle East.

What sort of fantasy world do you live in where people that don't even have a 3rd grade education are so cosmopolitan?
I guess the opposite of the one you live in where the people in the middle east are ignorant savages. We are losing not only the lower echelons of muslim society, but all echelons. Can you grasp the enormity of that?
Mohammad Atta was an engineer from a middle class family.

Most of the people that hate us, don't even know why they hate us.
You really have no idea how well informed people are. Do you understand the availibility and access that people globally have to the internet.
Look at places like Dubai, Jordan Qatar, Kuwait.. these are wealthy advanced countries with thriving middle classes, and we are no more winning the hearts and minds there than we are in lowest slum in Algeria or Syria.

Bad crops this year? Blame the Satanic United States. Your son was killed in a roadside bombing? Blame the Americans we were trying to kill when your son stepped in front of the bomb.
Don't you get it?
No, I do get it. We act like we are virgins in the middle east.. OH LORDY, WHY IS THIS HAPPENING TO US.. Oh no sir. They "knew" us before we were virgins. We are regional players and at times our national interests have made us take certain actions which have had tremendous blowback.

I just think people trying to scrape a living out of the dirt don't really care who is in power, or who back what failed dictator.
really?
Let me ask you... if you could go back in time, would you place the Shah of Iran on the throne in 1953 as the CIA did?
Seems those dirt farmers cared enough in 1979.

So if I understand the gist of L2's post, we just need to pull out of the Middle East, quit selling arms to everyone, let Israel fight its own fight, and withdraw from the world.
Once again, you fail at understanding.
The line "they hate us for our freedoms" is a lie. Why do you recoil so strongly against looking at the REAL reasons why they hate us.
What is so threatening about taking an honest assessment of the viewpoint of those who are opposed to us?
This administration throws out a "They hate us for our freedoms" line with the most malicious intent. To stop us from thinking about it too much. Because if we thought about it, it might make us realize that maybe we should switch gears in how we operate there.
It is moronic line that sucks in introspective thought like some ideological black hole.
What freedoms do they hate specifically?
"DAMN YOU GREAT SATAN AMERICA AND YOUR FREE SPEECH!"

Have they declared a jihad against habius corpus?

You are right, I missed the fact he was talking about WWI.
My Apologies, you Pickled Limey.
Regardless, my point is, adopting an isolationist attitude is rarely the answer.

Iraq was a convient target for an administration that wanted a war....for many reason (some valid, some not).

Very true. I think the 1 thing that a lot of people miss out on is Iraq is in the middle of a bunch of countries that don't like us.
If things were to die down in Iraq, it would be strategically the best place to have under our control.

What freedoms do they hate specifically?
"DAMN YOU GREAT SATAN AMERICA AND YOUR FREE SPEECH!"

Have they declared a jihad against habius corpus?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/december/26/newsid_2542000/2542873.stm

He's not American, but it was a Fatwa against him for his freedom to say what he wanted.

Im really getting tired of having to explain things to you.

Rushdie was a very prominient author in the Middle East. A champion of secularism. The Fatwa against his book was as much a reaction against the portrayal of Muhammad in the book as it was a move to marginalize a cultural force in Muslim society.

What does an Indian authors book have to do with why they hate our freedoms? This is sort of 7 Degrees of Kevin Bacon type thinking that leads people to try to link Saddam Hussien to Osama Bin Laden.

The Fatwa was against him, not his book.
So you think that issuing a death sentence against someone because of a fictitonal portrayal of Muhammad in some way supports free speech?
How do you figure?
So we should just view suicide bombers as "political statements"?
Next thing you'll be telling me is sawing off human heads is "Performance Art".
They hate our "freedoms", because to them our "freedoms" are blasphemous to them.
Remember the Mohammad Cartoon riots? Remember Comedy Central not showing the depction of Mohammad on South Park?
It's all about control, and the opposite of control is freedom.

The Fatwa was against him, not his book.

and the Scopes Monkey trial was against a person, not a textbook. Is there a point to this statement? Do you accuse chestnuts of being lazy?

You havent related The Satanic Verses to why Muslims hate America. Im patiently waiting for the explaination. What does Rushdie have to do with our freedoms?

Did he not have the freedom to write what he wanted?
Does he now have to hide because he exercised those rights?
Isn't the freedom of speech and thought 1 of the basic, human rights, as laid down by our Constitution?
Do you not see the connection?

Apology accepted, Sixtee.

Just another example of your inability to construct a coherent and rational response based upon the facts presented to you.
In other words, you f00ked it up, prick.

Nothing wrong with isolationism every now and again. Certainly never posed any problems to the US, historically.
Infact, US power grew upon the isolationism afforded it by the Royal Navy.

US power grew upon the isolationism afforded it by the Royal Navy.


And those lend-lease destroyers they were sailing around in.

I figured it was on snopes as a falsely attributed email, Trikki has hit 100% so far with these.

Yeah, but she is cute and has a sweet sig!:cool:

I'm just here for the beer. I love all the rep hits, good and bad! :p Like, I'm the devil!?

I get an interesting email, I post it. I don't check the snopes. It don't matter to me. :)

:devil

'And those lend-lease destroyers they were sailing around in.'

- I wouldn't really call the 10 rather obsolete lend-lease destroyers during the Second World War as the bulwark of the Royal Navy that protected the US as it was growing up.

US foreign policy hid behind the RN, it enforced its Monroe Doctrine (which was violated by Britain anyway because, well, it could violate it) upon the basis that it was safetly seperated from European powers, by, uh uh, guess what.

When it angered the RN, its capital was burnt to the ground by RN operations.

When it pleased the RN, the pax Britannica afforded it the security and peace that allowed it to expand, like the Russian empire, in to the vast wastes of its hinterland.

Don't be fooled, most scholars agree that the RN was one of the critical foundations on which the US state was able to flourish.

4 out of 5 scholars agree that flourishing with Royal Navy prevents border loss.

I'm just here for the beer. I love all the rep hits, good and bad! :p Like, I'm the devil!?

I get an interesting email, I post it. I don't check the snopes. It don't matter to me. :)

:devil

Why would someone give a bad rep for posting that...I personally just found it funny that every email you have posted along the patriotic lines was debunked by snopes...doesnt make you a bad person deserving neg rep hits.

Coming from the neg rep king like yourself, I am surprised to here that from you.

I just think it's funny he just Neg Reps me and just puts "idiot" in the rep line.
I know he loves me....

Coming from the neg rep king like yourself, I am surprised to here that from you.

LOL...are you serious? Funny, I'm surprised you would post that...so I guess that makes you queen then...but the title, in your case, is appropriate.

Got this Neg rep hit:

"Don't assume you are right, just because you type alot."

Doesn't even make sense and it was unsigned. I never assume I'm right and often shift my view of things based on conversation here and thing I read and experience.......and with how slowly I type, I never type "alot". :)

Trikki - I negative rep'd you because that article was a porrly written fake and you mis-represented it...as I said in my rep hit. The rep hit is a reflection on the quality of the post....which was nothing more than passing around yet another internet spam pile.

I got this one, from Sixee although its unsigned, yours is from Sixee also.

"Not everything needs to be about Bush/Cheney. Grow a new track for your mind."

LOL, Actually, I always sign mine, Positive or Negative.

Trikki - I negative rep'd you because that article was a porrly written fake and you mis-represented it...as I said in my rep hit. The rep hit is a reflection on the quality of the post....which was nothing more than passing around yet another internet spam pile.

No worries, cus I offset your neg hit with a + one, cus after all, Trikki likes beer and Lady Death, and has a sweet sig.:D

Trikki - I negative rep'd you because that article was a porrly written fake and you mis-represented it...as I said in my rep hit. The rep hit is a reflection on the quality of the post....which was nothing more than passing around yet another internet spam pile.

Ailwon, I'm not mad at ya. You signed your rep hit. For that you are a stud. If anything I now know who you are. ;)

As for you Taleran. FFS man, sign your negative rep hits! I know the way you post so well that I am almost 100% sure whenver you pos or neg me. You bastard. Now if you will excuse me, I'm going to continue with my "sexay pahrtay" :spade

:devil

Uhh .. she told you.