This War Is For Real

Status
Not open for further replies.

Don Buckbee

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2004
Messages
34
Location
Grayling, MI
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 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:
1. When did the threat to us start?
Many will say September 11, 2001. The answer as far as the United
State 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, Tanza nia 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 provocations 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 )

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 wa y 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 committ ed by Muslim men
between 17 and 40 years of age, Secretary Mineta refuses to allow profiling.
Does that sound like we are taking this 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 WWII, 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 bur ning 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 a nd 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
include 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 w ith our country, but it is obvious to anyone
who truly thinks through this, that we must UNITE!
 
Thanks, Don.

The General certainly puts forth a well-reasoned and very compelling case.

As for his creds:

MAJOR GENERAL (DR.) VERNON CHONG

Retired Nov. 1, 1994.

Major General (Dr.) Vernon Chong is the command surgeon, Headquarters U.S. European Command, Stuttgart, Germany. He advises the commander in chief on all medical matters and health issues that may affect the readiness of military forces in the command. He is responsible for establishing policies for the employment of theater medical resources during crisis, contingency and humanitarian relief operations. Also, he coordinates and integrates medical support activities and develops theater medical plans.

The general entered the Air Force in October 1963 following the completion of a residency in general surgery. He was certified by the American Board of Surgery in April 1964. He has commanded three Air Force medical centers, served as command surgeon of two major air commands, and was commander of the Joint Military Medical Command, San Antonio. The general is a chief flight surgeon, and was a surgeon/flight surgeon member of the DOD launch site recovery team for 15 space launches during the Apollo, Skylab and Apollo-Soyuz programs.

EDUCATION
1955 Bachelor of arts degree in basic medical sciences, Stanford University
1958 Doctor of medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine
1963 Board qualification in general surgery, General Hospital of Fresno County

ASSIGNMENTS
1 October 1963 - June 1965, staff general surgeon and chief of general surgery service, USAF Hospital Scott, Scott Air Force Base, Ill.
2. June 1965 - June 1968, staff general surgeon, later director of intern and resident education, USAF Hospital Tachikawa, Tachikawa Air Base, Japan
3. June 1968 - June 1970, staff general surgeon and instructor in general surgery residency, David Grant USAF Medical Center, Travis Air Force Base, Calif.
4. June 1970 - June 1974, staff general surgeon, chairman department of surgery, and director of hospital services, USAF Academy Hospital, U.S. Air Force Academy, Colorado Springs, Colo.
5. June 1974 - August 1976, staff general surgeon, director of hospital services, and deputy commander, USAF Regional Hospital March, March Air Force Base, Calif.
6. September 1976 - October 1978, staff general surgeon, director of hospital services, and deputy commander, David Grant USAF Medical Center, Travis Air Force Base, Calif.
7. October 1978 - November 1981, commander, David Grant USAF Medical Center, Travis Air Force Base, Calif.
8. November 1981 - March 1985, commander, Malcolm Grow USAF Medical Center, Andrews Air Force Base, Md.
9. March 1985 - February 1987, command surgeon, Headquarters Military Airlift Command, Scott Air Force Base, Calif.
10. February 1987 - May 1990, commander, Wilford Hall USAF Medical Center, Lackland Air Force Base, Texas
11. May 1990 - August 1991, command surgeon, Headquarters Air Training Command, and commander, Joint Military Medical Command, Randolph Air Force Base, Texas
12. August 1991 - present, command surgeon, Headquarters U.S. European Command, Stuttgart, Germany

FLIGHT INFORMATION
Rating: Chief flight surgeon
Flight hours: More than 1,600
Aircraft flown: C-141, KC-135, C-130, T-29, C-5, T-39, C-21, C-12, C-9A, T-33, T-38, H-53, H-3, UH-1

MAJOR AWARDS AND DECORATIONS
Distinguished Service Medal
Legion of Merit with oak leaf cluster
Meritorious Service Medal
Air Force Commendation Medal
National Defense Service Medal
Vietnam Service Medal
Order of Merit-Brazil
Gold Cross of Honor-Germany

OTHER ACHIEVEMENTS
Order of the Sword - bestowed by enlisted personnel of Air Training Command
Clinical professor of surgery, University of Texas Health Science Center-San Antonio
Ira C. Eaker fellow - Air Force Association, Aerospace Education Foundation
Board of Governors, American College of Surgeons
Board of Regents, National Library of Medicine
Board of Regents, adviser, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences
Board of Trustees, Air Force Village Foundation
Board of Directors, Alamo Chapter, American Red Cross, San Antonio

EFFECTIVE DATES OF PROMOTION
Captain Oct 14, 1963
Major Dec 15, 1966
Lieutenant Colonel Aug 8, 1968
Colonel Jun 15, 1973
Brigadier General Oct 1, 1982
Major General Apr 15, 1987

(Current as of May 1994)

Source:

Again, thanks.

MiG
 
I didn't get past this:
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 provocations by any of the presidents or
their immediate predecessors, Presidents Ford or Carter.
Basically, to agree with him you need to agree that bad feelings based on how the west has treated the middle east over the last hundred years is inconsequential in the minds of modern Middle Easterners, and instead they're driven by jealousy.

Riiiiiight.

There's a more compelling argument: people in the middle east are living in a sort of no-way-out poverty that hasn't been seen in this magnitude in a long time. And the west is propping up those leaders that are subjugating the people. The west is an active part of the problem.

Seems like a more compelling "man on the street" level argument than "look at how happy they are -- let's kill them all!"
 
2. Why were we attacked?
Envy of our position, our success, and our freedoms.

Because, you know, the world's a comic book. The plot lines are that straightforward. There's GOOD HEROES..and EVIL VILLAINS who hate the good guys just...because they're good. Right.

Sorry. The world's not that simple.
 
Because he has a weak link in his chain of reasoning, don't be too quick to throw out the entire argument or disdain his other talking points...
...the west is propping up those leaders that are subjugating the people. The west is an active part of the problem.
Problem? Or Solution? Or a bit of both depending on who is in power and who wants to be in power, neh?

If I begin with Iran, circa, oh, say 1947 up to 1979. Shah, backed by CIA/US, we used him, he/they used us life was good for some with the exception of Khoemeni and his ilk who, exiled to Paris, spread the word... change was coming. Late '70's, Shah's secret police SAVAK got quite heavy handed, he's out, Ayatollah's in, religious fervor is good, anything and everything western is bad, the US is now The Great Satan... women's rights (at least in Iran) are back in the 12th century to join the rest of the Islamic world and terrorism, as we now know it, is IN, BIGTIME.

Thus, we help set up Iraq's new boy, one Saddam Hussein, who needs some backing, some chemicals, promises to take care of Iran, our now newfound enemy...

And so the wheel (and our stomach's?) turns. Turns on oil and the need to control trade (or is it politics?) along the age old caravan routes connecting east and west. Couple that with our supposed political disdain to meddle in anything Religion-oriented, yet feeling the economic need to be THE (if not one of the) major trading partners because if Russia or China get in there first... ohmygawdwecan'thavethat... oh well, we're still the great satan.

Just another game of world-wide chess, this time, with some of the pawns falling down within our own neighborhood. Maybe chicken little is right and the sky IS falling. Or pieces of it.

And maybe, the more things change, the more thay stay the same. What's that song with the line in it ..."to the shores of Tripoli"? When and why were we in Tripoli exactly? (rhetorical question, no need to answer... just something to think about)
 
...Hitler (who was also Christian)
This is a little off-topic but important to correct. Hitler was not a Christian. This myth has gotten tossed around a little over the years but just doesn't hold water. Yes, he did twist Christian imagery and themes to give a thin veneer of faith, but he personally disdained Christians and was quite enamored with the occult. He had no love for Jesus and sought to make himself Germany's Messiah and Nazism the religion of the world. It is a shame that many Germans who claimed Christianity nominally did not live out their faith. A great many people who resisted the Nazis and sheltered Jews were Christians who did live out their faith. Many paid the price for it.

OK, enough history, now back to current events...
 
As in most things, everyone seems to have an opinion. Is there is anyone who truly knows the exact reason/reasons the middle east is against the west? Probably not. There are as many different opinions as there are people involved in this whole mess, directly or indirectly. For another opinion, read the book "A Faceless Enemy". Just remember, it's only someone else's interpretation of what they think is going on.
 
Well, personally, I don't <care> why they hate us, or why they seem to hate EVERYONE. It is irrelevant.
A typical instance- Muslim "militants" raid some isolated farm house in Kashmir, drag out the farmers and wife and kids, and kill them. Last night. 20 or 30 dead.
I just do not care about thier issues or cause.
Just whack them.
Worring about their side of the coin is a waste of time and a diffussion of energy. When you have a wasp nest to get rid of you do not get introspective about the fact.
Just whack them.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A typical instance- Muslim "militants" raid some isolated farm house in Kashmir, drag out the farmers and wife and kids, and kill them. Last night. 20 or 30 dead.
I just do not care about thier issues or cause.
Just whack them.

:scrutiny:

In the 1950's, some angry white men dragged some black families out and lynched them in the southern states. I don't care about their issue or cause. They all must be bad, just whack them.

Does that sound right? No?

Taking out EXTREMISTS is always good. Making generalizing statements about entire groups is ignorant.

(And whenever someone says "Just whack them" or somesuch, the question I ask them is "So, you've gone down to your local recruiting office and enlisted, then?")
 
I personally can't believe there are still folks who refuse to see that this is World War IV and it is very much very real.

Yes, World War IV. The fifty-year long "Cold War" with very hot flareups in Cuba, Korea, Vietnam, Central America, Africa, and all kinds of other places was World War III.

Did anyone listen to what Osama Bin Laden said in his last auido tape?

Did you not hear him call for the jihadis to now focus their efforts in Sudan?

Why would he call for jihadists to go to Sudan?

That's where Darfur is. You know, the current "cause celebre" that drew none other than George Friggin' Clooney out for his photo-op this past weekend?

Hmm....let's see......now who is responsible for the genocide that's happening in the Darfur region of Sudan?

That would be fundamentalist Muslim Arab militias known as the "janjaweed" or "horsemen" who ride into a village and whack everyone who isn't a fundamentalist Muslim Arab.

Osama knows there's about to be an international effort to end the jihadist genocide in Darfur. But where better to whack a lot of international peacekeeper infidels in the cause of global jihad??????

There is a whole toxic brew of reasons why these jihadis do what they are doing.

But underlying everything else is a set of radical core beliefs that you should never forget, never disregard, and never attempt to gloss over with politically correct platitudes.

They really do believe that Allah wants Islam, and more specifically a radical, puritanical, medieval form of Islam, to dominate the entire Earth.

They really do believe that any and all who refuse to convert to that form of radical, militant Islam is an infidel and needs to be killed.

They really do want to kill every one of us, or have us convert to their brand of Islam.

Why can't people see that?

Why can't people understand that?

Why do people disregard what the terrorists themselves say, over and over and ove?

Why do so many people in the West insist on indulging in such pseudo-intellectual posturing, trying to sleuth out the "real reasons" why fanatical Islamofascists so willingly kill and even more willingly die in the attack just so long as they kill infidels?

Just listen to what the Islamic fundamentalists say. Watch what they do and how they do it.

Did you not read the speeches and screeds produced by that nutball who ran over people with an SUV in Chapel Hill, North Carolina?

They've been screaming out why they want to kill us for years and years.

Only so many in the West are too busy with narcissistic navel-gazing and philosophizing to notice.

After all, you can't trust the radical head-chopping, woman-oppressing, Koran-quoting suicide-bombing crazies to tell us the "real" reasons why they do all that nasty stuff.

No.

It merely has to be a lot more complicated and intertwined with geo-political conspriacies and the movements of very complex forces.

It can't be that they simply want to kill all the infidels and subjugate the entire world for Allah. No, that's too simple. That's too much like something out of a "comic book."

No, it has to be more complex than that. After all, our complex, Western, post-modern minds have gone way beyond silly concepts like "good" and "evil." Bah....nothing is that simple any more.

No, our Western post-modern minds have left such silly notion as "good" and "evil" so far behind that we cannot imagine anyone having anything as silly and primitive as a "religious belief" he would be willing to commit a suicide attack for. No, it has to be something else.

We must turn to advanced political theory and the ratiocinations of "very smart people" who know better than we do to tell us why.

Why in fact, these "very smart people" even know better even than the radical head-chopping, woman-oppressing, Koran-quoting, suicide-bombing crazies themselves as to why they do all the nasty things they do.

So when the radical Islamofacists tell you, over and over that they want to take over the world for Allah, you must simply not believe them.

When they repeatedly blow themselves up in suicide missions against infidels because Allah demands it, you must simply not believe it.

There has to be a much-more complicated set of "real reasons" behind their suicide attacks.

:rolleyes:

hillbilly
 
Well, personally, I don't give a rats ass why they hate us, or why they seem to hate EVERYONE. It is irrelevant.

If people don't wake up to the "why" of how and when this "war" started, there are bound to be plenty more opportunities (wars) to comtemplate that. I'd rather America plays "live and let live", and fights only the wars she has to.
 
There are many reasons why Arab, and Muslim people hate the US and other Western Countries. The most important is that we support Isreal, and Middle East Dictators. If we would have left the Middle East alone, then we would not be having these problems.
 
We've meddled in the Middle East for geo-political/strategic positioning for decades. After all, they all sit on a LOT of oil.


The costs of defense and war have far outweighed being in a weaker position and just buying the oil and doing business.


Our founders were right. Stay out of foreign affairs. Stick to being Americans. If there is to be any fighting, it should be here at home in every capital to preserve our rights.


America is war crazy, but against people who look differently from us. America should be war crazy with the desire and intent to defend liberty at home.


You can thank the compulsory government propaganda camps (public education) for that.
 
Well, DTOM, all that "stay home" does indeed sound good. Would that it were possible.

We could have stayed home during the Cold War, but I rather doubt you'd be happy with the way things turned out...

As far as those who don't buy into the "They hate our freedoms" comments: I recall the leadership of Iran in 1979 repeatedly explaining why the US is the Great Satan. It seems we let our women dress as they please. We are a secular society. We dance to evil rock-and-roll music. We make salacious movies. There are numerous other aspects to our society which don't please that leadership.

It seems to me that the above things are freedoms we take for granted, here in the U.S. I don't think the Iranian leadership's version of Sharia would be real pleasing to some 280 million of us. But it would make us more socially acceptable to them.

Art
 
There's a more compelling argument: people in the middle east are living in a sort of no-way-out poverty that hasn't been seen in this magnitude in a long time. And the west is propping up those leaders that are subjugating the people. The west is an active part of the problem.

The poverty you speak of is and has been the norm for a long time in the middle east. Even without US involvement.

So you suggest instead of propping up friendly (to us) leaders we should have let Soviet friendly leaders or militant Muslim leaders take control.

Or maybe we could have let them just descend into an anarchist middle ages paradise?

Maybe we should liberate them from their leaders who subjugate them. Oh wait we tried that and Bush has been pilloried for rushing into an unnecessary war.

Hillbilly nailed it
Why do people disregard what the terrorists themselves say, over and over and over?

You lefties and libertarians are clueless. Thank God you guys weren't in office for 9/11.
 
So you suggest instead of propping up friendly (to us) leaders we should have let Soviet friendly leaders or militant Muslim leaders take control.

Interesting tidbit of history: The original fundamentalist state (Saudi Arabia) was created by US backed forces, after we and the british helped them to beat the Ottomans (who almost certainly would've destroyed the fundamentalist groups, had they not been tied up with other concerns in WWI.)
 
Let me put it even more simply for those of you who aren't convinced.

Let's say there was never a single drop of oil in the Middle East.

Let's say the UN decided in 1948 to NOT recreate the state of Israel.

Let's say the only "American Involvement" in the Middle East was by random, bored geologists who wanted to study sand, lots and lots of sand.....

We would STILL be the "Great Satan" precisely because we aren't a fundamentalist Muslim country.

They hate China just as much. The Chinese have had their troubles with Islamic fundamentalists on their western border. They aren't targeting China a lot just yet because China is the Third Great Satan in line behind the USA and Western Europe....Priorities, man, priorities....only two major jihads at a time.

I love it when folks whip out the "poverty" excuse.

Do you not know a flippin' thing about the Taliban in Afghanistan?

The Taliban, mostly foreign nationals like Saudis, WANTED the population of Afghanistan in grinding poverty.

They created draconian laws to guarantee the population of Afghanistan stayed in grinding poverty.

They outlawed TV and Western-style education and and any education at all for women.

If you got caught with a TV by the Taliban, they either beat you severely, or if they were in a bad mood, they executed you. Having a TV meant you were likely to be corrupted and corrupt others with evil ideas from the Great American Satan.

They wanted the population in grinding poverty because if you are poor, you are more likely to be a good, pious Muslim, not distracted by the evil material fruits of the Great Satan.

The Taliban wanted and created in Afghanistan what they saw as the "Perfect Islamic State" modeled right off the latest greatest Muslim paradigm of about the year 650.

Under the Taliban and their fundamentalist Islam, charging interest on loaned money was considered a SIN. Not just a crime, but a SIN for which you would go to Hell.

When you consider interest on loaned money, the basic idea behind modern banking, to be a SIN of the first rate, it's rather hard for you to have any sort of economic development..........

Or am I going too quickly for you?

People DO NOT strap bombs to their bodies and blow themselves up to further the economic development of their people, or to protest another country's foreign policy.

People DO strap bombs to their bodies and blow themselves up when they believe they are soldiers in God's Army, and waging a Holy War against the forces of Satan, and that they will be rewarded in Heaven for their martyrdom.

But nooooo....It can't be that simple......surely not.........

hillbilly
 
We would STILL be the "Great Satan" precisely because we aren't a fundamentalist Muslim country.

They hate China just as much. The Chinese have had their troubles with Islamic fundamentalists on their western border. They aren't targeting China a lot just yet because China is the Third Great Satan in line behind the USA and Western Europe....Priorities, man, priorities....only two major jihads at a time.

Well, China has a population of muslims that it oppresses just like every other religious minority in China. I don't think that's a big mystery as to why they'd have problems.

Is there any evidence for this "great satan" theory at all? Have even the radicals ever attacked countries that have nothing to do with their interests/homelands?

Sorry, I just plain don't buy the "crazed jihadist" theory. You give them too much credit for religious fervor. They are psuedo-politician/soldiers like any other third world guerrillas, with lines of supply, finance, armament, and means of propaganda that need to be defended so that they can increase their power. That's what their disgusting attacks and programs have to do with, not some imaginary "convert the world or die" religious mission.
 
As my final exhibit on this thread, here is something you really must read if you really believe that they don't hate us because of our freedoms.

Here is a link to a translation of Zarqawi's sermon against democracy last year.

In this sermon, which he videotaped and distributed just before the Iraqi elections, he lays out the seven simple reasons why democracy is against the will of Allah.

Even Yahoo.com news reported this story, albeit in the typical "soundbite" fashion of modern American news.

But if you still really refuse to believe they hate us because of our freedoms, then please, please, please explain to me why I should not believe the terrorist himself.

Please please tell me WHY they hate us then.

http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sd&ID=SP85605

As the elections in Iraq drew near, Abu Mus'ab Al-Zarqawi addressed the Iraqi people in a speech that was posted on Islamist websites, in which he stated that democracy and the elections are heresy. This address was supported by similar calls from the Mufti of the Jihad warriors in Chechnya, Sheikh Abu Omar Al-Sayf, and by "Jaysh Ansar Al-Sunna" and other Islamist organizations in Iraq. The following are excerpts from their statements:


'Democracy Is the Very Essence of Heresy, Polytheism, and Error'
In a taped speech from January 23, Al-Qa'ida's leader in Iraq, Abu Mus'ab Al-Zarqawi, raised seven arguments for why democracy equals heresy:

"What harvest has the American aggressors and their Shi'ite allies reaped from the invasion of and aggression against the peaceful lands of Islam? Their outrages and blatant lies have become apparent to the entire world, and their arguments and false claims of achieving security and safety for the apostate Iraqi government have all collapsed. Now they are completely preoccupied with making the big American lie called 'democracy' successful. Americans have been playing with the minds of many peoples with the lie of 'civilized democracy;' they have deluded them that their happiness and prosperity is conditional upon this inadequate human system, and subsequently the infidel American administration declared war on Iraq and Afghanistan because it is the primary protector and guardian of democracy in the world…

"Democracy has come to tell us that the people in a democratic regime constitute both the executive power and the source of authority and that it has the last say in all matters, and no one can appeal [the people's] decisions and no one can criticize [the people's] rulings, for it has full power and it is the source of authority. Its will is sacred, its choice is binding… That which the people permits is permitted, that which it forbids is forbidden, and that which it accepts as law and regime must be accepted as such. Anything else has not sanctity nor value nor weight, even if it is religion or divine law given by the Lord of the world.

"This principle – that is, government of the people [and] by the people – is the very core of the democratic system … and it exists only through this [principle]. This, then, is the 'religion of democracy' which is being praised and glorified with much fanfare. This is what its theoreticians and thinkers and missionaries keep publicizing, and this in fact is what we see and experience in the reality from which we suffer. Democracy, in all its variations and interpretations, is based on principles and foundations, the most important of which may be summarized as follows:

"First: Democracy is based on the principle that the people are the source of all authority, including the legislative [authority]. This is carried out by choosing representatives who act as proxies for the people in the task of legislating and making laws. In other words, the legislator who must be obeyed in a democracy is man, and not Allah. That means that the one who is worshiped and obeyed and deified, from the point of view of legislating and prohibiting, is man, the created, and not Allah. That is the very essence of heresy and polytheism and error, as it contradicts the bases of the faith [of Islam] and monotheism, and because it makes the weak, ignorant man Allah's partner in His most central divine prerogative – namely, ruling and legislating. Allah said: 'Sovereignty is Allah's alone. He has commanded you to worship none but Him' [Koran 12:40]. 'He allows none to share His sovereignty' [Koran 18:26]…

"Second: Democracy is based on the principle of freedom of religion and belief. Under democracy, a man can believe anything he wants and choose any religion he wants and convert to any religion whenever he wants, even if this apostasy means abandoning the religion of Allah… This is a matter which is patently perverse and false and contradicts many specific [Muslim] legal texts, since according to Islam, if a Muslim apostatizes from Islam to heresy, he should be killed, as stated in the Hadith reported by Al-Bukhari and others: 'Whoever changes his religion, kill him.' It does not say 'leave him alone.'

"One may not make a [peace] treaty with an apostate, nor grant him safe passage or protection. According to Allah's religion, he has only one choice: 'Repent or be killed.'

"Third: Democracy is based on considering the people to be the sole sovereign, to whom all juridical matters and conflicts should be referred, and if there is any controversy or conflict between governor and governed, each of them threatens the other to refer to the will of the people and its choice, so that the people should decide on the matter on which is disagreed. This conflicts with and is contradictory to the principles of monotheism, which determines that the arbiter, deciding by His judgment in matters of discord, is Allah and none else. Allah said [Koran 42:10]: ' And in whatever thing you disagree, the judgment thereof belongs to Allah.' Democracy, on the other hand, says: 'And in whatever things you disagree, the judgment thereof belongs to the people and to none beside the people…'

"Fourth: Democracy is based on the principal of 'freedom of expression,' no matter what the expression might be, even if it means hurting and reviling the Divine Being [i.e. Allah] and the laws of Islam, because in democracy nothing is so sacred that one cannot be insolent or use vile language about it.

"Fifth: Democracy is based on the principle of separation between religion and state, politics, and life; what is Allah's is rendered unto Allah, which is just worship in the places designed for it. All other aspects of life - political, economic, social, etc. - are the people's prerogative…

"Sixth: Democracy is based on the principle of freedom of association and of forming political parties and the like, no matter what the creed, ideas, and ethics of these parties may be. This principle is null and void according to [Islamic] law for a number of reasons… One of them is that voluntary recognition of the legality of heretical parties implies acquiescence in heresy… Acquiescence in heresy is heresy…

"Seventh: Democracy is based on the principle of considering the position of the majority and adopting what is agreed upon by the majority, even if they agree upon falsehood, error, and blatant heresy… This principle is totally wrong and void because truth according to Islam is that which is in accordance with the Koran and the Sunna [i.e., the tradition of the Prophet], whether its supporters are few or many; and that which contradicts the Koran and the Sunna is false even if all the people of the world agree on it…"

"It is both noteworthy and surprising that despite the fact that democratic experiments have had damaging consequences for the Muslims, causing weakness, controversy, division, and conflict … despite all this, many people continue to admire democracy and defend it as though they were its owners and creators; their hearts are imbued with the love of democracy as the Children of Israel were imbued with the love of the [golden] calf… Allah has decided this matter: 'I do not worship what you worship, nor do you worship what I worship' [Koran 109:1], and at the end of the same chapter [He says]: 'You have your religion and I have mine' [109:6]. The matter, then, is a matter of principle; it is non-negotiable, and there can be no concession regarding it whatsoever… It is a matter relating to the principles of our creed – nay, it is the very essence of our creed." [1]
 
Shootinstudent.......They bombed a disco in Bali.

They've beheaded Buddhists in Thailand because they were Buddhists.

They kill Hindus in India because they're Hindus.

We're the main target right now because we're the sole remaining superpower.

Western Europe is next on the list.

The rest of the world comes after that.

If you refuse to listen to what they say, then I can't help you at all.

hillbilly
 
2. Why were we attacked?
Envy of our position, our success, and our freedoms.
Uhhhhhhhh great...and I thought Freud was dead... let's make more unfounded pyschological speculation and say that this is all because they think our genitalia are bigger.

3. Who were the attackers?
In each case, the attacks on the US were carried out by Muslims.
So what happened in Oklahoma and Columbine or that crazy Theodore Kaczynski et al. are all just PC liberal media biased garbage? Let's forget that pure-bred Americans are capable of terrorist acts for none of the above reasons.

And don't worry that it is a slippery slope. We gave up plenty of
civil rights during WWII, and immediately restored them after the victory and
in fact added many more since then.
Explain that to all the Japanese-Americans who were sent to concentration camps (oh I'm sorry...Internment camps) and had their property pillaged and never returned.

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!
That's why Vietnam is a thriving center of capitalism and the war in Iraq only cost us $1.7 billion.

So we're supposed to believe Cheech and Chong's assessment of how we should be okay giving up our freedoms just until terrorism is entirely defeated?:rolleyes:
 
Hillbilly,

Look at every one of those situations, and you will find local concerns with locally minded guerrillas.

They've beheaded Buddhists in Thailand because they were Buddhists.

No, they behead buddhists as part of a broader conflict between Malay tribesmen in South Thailand/North Malaysia against the Thai government. To claim that they behead civilians because they are buddhist is the same thing as claiming that the Thai PM's are only torturing and killing the tribesmen because they're muslim.

They kill Hindus in India because they're Hindus.

See: Partition. A close muslim friend of mine lost her entire maternal grandfamily, save one (her grandfather) to Hindu mobs on the India side of the partition. This is not violence out of the blue.

If you refuse to listen to what they say, then I can't help you at all.

Context is everything. I certainly am on your side in realizing that these people need to be stopped, but I think they need to be stopped for humanitarian reasons and also because stability in those parts of the world is necessary to the U.S. I don't think we'll ever have a good means of stopping the terrorist movements if the depth of our understanding stops at "they're crazy jihadists."
 
Hillbilly nailed it. You can handwring all you want about the Nasty Imperialist USA, but the fact is muslim terrorist murderers would be doing this regardless of our actions. And quite frankly, as I repeat myself, it is totally irelevant. The past is past. You can argue the rights and wrongs,from time immemorial and it still DOES NOT MATTER. The question is what do we do now? ( this is always my question to my liberal associates and friends- there is always a litany of complaint and accusation but never to be heard is any sort of a useful suggestion for a course of action.)

Sooner or later, we are going to wake up to reality. It will not be pleasant. And it will test our country like never before.

PS Yes, I would enlist but a 52 year old does not make a very good soldier.

And please, no ridiculous comparisons to McViegh or Kazinzski- those guys were isolated wacko's. There are about 10 jillion murders by muslim funamentalist killers for every isolated instance of a wacko christian abortion clinic bomber.(or the like).
It is sort of wierd reading about Darfur lately, like the press discovered it last year. This has been going on for a very long time. Robert Kaplan wrote about it in the mid 90's, in "Surrender or Starve". A very interesting read about north east africa.
 
I don't think we'll ever have a good means of stopping the terrorist movements if the depth of our understanding stops at "they're crazy jihadists."
They have a perfect opportunity to let the will of the people put them in power and they are taking a pass. They know they do not represent the will of the people. They prefer to bomb and behead in hope of getting us out of Iraq and derailing a popular elected government.

They have the most human and evil of motivations. They want to be in power. Democratic government with human rights enshrined in law is their enemy. We are the foremost proponent of the philosophy they hate.

They are not crazy they are evil.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top