This War Is For Real

[Don Buckbee]

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!

[corpis66]

...huh.

[wolfgang2000]

The only people that don't understand the consequences of this war on terror are the politician and the liberal media.

[Green]

Envy? We keep sticking our nose where it doesn't belong.Yea....I agree.....huh.

[polishshooter]

Hey Green? You DO know that many times in the past we DIDN'T "stick our nose where it didn't belong" and all it really did was put off a BIGGER war for later...with a lot of deaths all around the world that MAYBE could have been avoided if we HAD done so...or at least PREPARED to...

I'm all FOR "sticking our nose where it doesn't belong" if it protects our freedoms, our national interests, and our way of life CHEAPER, NOW....

[southernshooter]

A war is a war nothin about stickin noses or political positions . When you go to war it's not pretty it's not easy or cheap. But sumtimes you have to do what you have to. We are not sticking our nose we're defending our freedom. Freedom that was attacked that unfortunate day in September. Thats just my opion every one has a opion. That don't always see eye to eye.

[Marlin]

I agree with that Polish fella from Indiana. That's my kinda thinkin'!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Green]

Hey,To each his own. I believe George Washington hit the nail on the head in his farewell address. And Polish, we did stick our nose in,in the past. As you said, it cost us dearly. Perpetual war is what we engage in. A war to end war makes no sense. Arms makers and bankers are the one's who profit. Just my opinion.

[Bernie109]

Sorry, being a veteran in this so called war on terror, I can say that this war on terror is quickly taking its place beside the war on drugs, poverty, and other tangents the government goes on. When it comes to this war, I,m going to have to agree with Pat Buchanan and what he says in his books "Where the Right went wrong" and "A Republic, not an Empire".

From what I can see:

Our own abortion clinics kill more American babies than any terrorist group

Our own drug dealers poison more Americans than any nations Chemical weapons

Our own sexual immorality infects more Americans than anybody's bio weapons

Our own Left wing militias (Street Gangs) kill more Americans than any foriegn terrorists.

My own experience in this so called war on terror was limited to two major events.
1) Getting beat up by a Dolphin (Mk-6 Marine mammal system)
2) Pulling my .45 not on a terrorist, but on a pedophile father trying to take back his kids.

I am far more likely to use my 2nd Amendment rights against some domestic scum bag than any foriegn terrorist.

[Bernie109]

Originally Posted by southernshooter

A war is a war nothin about stickin noses or political positions . When you go to war it's not pretty it's not easy or cheap. But sumtimes you have to do what you have to. We are not sticking our nose we're defending our freedom. Freedom that was attacked that unfortunate day in September. Thats just my opion every one has a opion. That don't always see eye to eye.

8 years of our former "Rapist in Chief" trying to impose godless liberalism upon the Islamic world this isn't about us sticking our noses over there?
Sorry, we are not as innocent as you would have us believe.

[JohnK3]

Originally Posted by Bernie109

8 years of our former "Rapist in Chief" trying to impose godless liberalism upon the Islamic world this isn't about us sticking our noses over there?
Sorry, we are not as innocent as you would have us believe.

So, who was sticking their noses over there when Jimmy Carter was Pres and they took hostages in Tehran? Who was sticking their noses over there when Ronald Reagan was Pres and they committed all sorts of acts of terrorism against the US?

Sorry, Bernie. Your Islamic Apologist position just doesn't fly.

[Bernie109]

The Shah of Iran was a CIA Puppet. The Iranians to this day hold that against us.

Regan was President during the Cold war and the Soviets supplied "Them" with weapons as long as they made us miserable. Reagan did the same thing to the Soviets Ala Afgahnistan.

Quite to the contrary, your asertation that we are completly innocent doesn't fly. Imposing our godless liberalism upon them will only make things worse. If you are so much for the war, proceed to the recruiting station and sign up for "A blast in Bagdad".

[Green]

Bernie 109, I personally agree with you. And I personally believe most people do not know more than what our '1st Amendment champions', "the free press" tell us. What and who is a patriot? A lot of different opinions out there. It is almost like talking about the Bible.Interpretations.(to some) America first and her interests. Not those who would 'use' our good blood for their own purpose. Those who have been there know. And by the way.... I voted for Pat,twice. I am a firm believer in voting your concience,not party. Just my opinion.

[Kimber Man]

I guess reading all the above.........everyone has their own ideas about what should be done and etc. That's what makes this County free..........(people)

You know ..I've seen action in war..........and I don't wish that on anyone, I really don't know whats right or wrong anymore..... I guess if it was up to me I would send a couple of " A" bombs and drop them and hope that this would end
this war..........But I think Dr. Vernon Chong, Major General, USAF, Retired also
has something in his notes that makes sense.............

We have been in wars from the start of time and I think we will be in wars for the rest of our time......... Nothing come out good from wars , except the rich get richer.

[wolfgang2000]

Can anybody tell me when surrender has EVER won freedom?

If we are going to keep "our noses" where it belongs, then lets do it whole hog. Our own Oil, and everything else, includeing people. We don't buy anything that doesn't say USA. We don't send anything that has USA out side these borders. It can be done.

[Bernie109]

You don't need to go that far. Keep to the original concept. "trade and commerce with all, entangling alliances with none". Of all the wars we have been involved in, you can probably count the number of truly necessary wars on one hand. When the Tripolian Pirates hijacked our shipping, we were right to stomp them. When someone takes our embasy hostage, we should have wiped them out. Even though we were not totally innocent as far as 9-11 is concerned, we should have been far more agressive in Tora Bora. When we go fourth to "liberate the world" or to "Impose democracy" we have gone too far. If people really want to be free, we can give them the guns and let them do it themselves. We can even assemble an AVG (American Volonteer group) to provide training and assistance. In the words of Sci-FI Author Robert H Hienlin "That which is given has no value" We cannot give anybody freedom and expect them to cherish it. They will never be truly free, only dependent and dependence is not freedom.
Even the concept of freedom is debatable. John Adams warned "Order can only be maintained in a free society when people are inclined towards moral self restraint, the less control there is from within, the more is equired from without." The best we can hope for is a reasonable compromise between liberty and order and it will never be the same for any two people.

[Bernie109]

Originally Posted by wolfgang2000

Can anybody tell me when surrender has EVER won freedom?

If we are going to keep "our noses" where it belongs, then lets do it whole hog. Our own Oil, and everything else, includeing people. We don't buy anything that doesn't say USA. We don't send anything that has USA out side these borders. It can be done.

For one thing, had we stayed out of WW1, those "Stupid Europeans" as we called them back then would have eventually gotten tired of killing each other or they would have simply run out of manpower and resources.
This would have resulted in a more equitable peace where Germany would not have had the treaty of versales shoved down their thraots leading to not only germany going bankrupt but all of Europe going into a depression due to their spending being linked to war dept collections. Without Germany going bankrupt, Hitler would have remained an artist and his name would be alongside Van Gough and other artists. Even the Soviet union might not have come to be for it was the war that made the people fed up with the Czar.

The British would not have created the artificial nations in the Balkins and Iraq. What we are seeing over there today is the results of arrogant intervention now comming apart. Sure we would have different problems today for there will be no peace until the King of Kings returns to establish his Kingdom. Until then, we need to keep our wepons well oiled and our powder dry.

[Bernie109]

Originally Posted by Kimber Man

I guess reading all the above.........everyone has their own ideas about what should be done and etc. That's what makes this County free..........(people)

You know ..I've seen action in war..........and I don't wish that on anyone, I really don't know whats right or wrong anymore..... I guess if it was up to me I would send a couple of " A" bombs and drop them and hope that this would end
this war..........But I think Dr. Vernon Chong, Major General, USAF, Retired also
has something in his notes that makes sense.............

We have been in wars from the start of time and I think we will be in wars for the rest of our time......... Nothing come out good from wars , except the rich get richer.

Well Kimber, all I can say is that you was a Marine, Marines fight because they are Marines and that is what Marines do. I had to think hard and heavy before deciding what branch to join. I love weapons and wanted to go marines but I went Navy for two reaons:

1) Back in 1977, Viet Nam just ended and the nation was in no mood to get involved in another ground war. All of the action appeared to be in the air or on the water and even more so, under the water. (Read "Blind Mans Bluff" I saw some of that) The stories coming from the "Ground Pounder" services were horror stories of spit shinning and spending more time cleaning y our rifle than shooting it.

2) Even though I love weapons, I wanted to learn something more than just how to kill and as a snipe, I did.

By the way, now that the action is on land, It is the Navy that is tuck doing Field days and fire drills.

After 13 years in Subs, I went EOD. In the "Cammo clad Navy" we get to play marines every now and then but not enough to "Hump it out of you"
Actually, were it not for us Sailors practicing at our own time and expense, we would all be "Sarah Brady Soldiers" who would only be good at keeping our weapons safe in battle.

[wolfgang2000]

Bernie, what you say could have happen. We will never know. We (the US) have been having to fight in the middle east since the the early 1800's. If we go out in the world to do buniness then we will have to fight in that world sometime.

You are very right in the return of our Lord!

Still except for being Saved, at no time in world history has freedom been gained by surrender.

[Bernie109]

Surrender...No, But by retreat and retrenching..yes. The Roman Empire was able to pospone its demise by retreat and retrenching. Sometimes, you need to abandon what is not defensable. If we really wanted to shaft those guys over there, we would retreat and retrench, go all out to meet our energy needs without Arab oil. (This would involve everything from increased domestic production, fuel cells, Methanol, Hydrogen, solar, and anything else that works) And telling those guys over there "Keep your oil! Drink it for all we care!"
Of course, this will not bring peace. You will see news reports of how we killed the Arab economy and pictures of starving Arabs on TV every day. And, the terorists would then be hitting us for the poverty we caused them.
One thing I do know, there are reasons for going to war but "World Democracy" is not one of them. Say what you want about Islam, but these people are for the most part are what some call "**********" [edited for racial comment by Staff]. Without the stern discipline Islam provides, these people become extremly lawless. John Adams said it best "The less control there is from within, the more is required from without".

[Green]

I have to say,in my opinion,Bernie109 knows what he says. Very good!

[JohnK3]

Well, Bernie and Green, I guess I just don't agree with you about the "puppet" and other conspiracy-theory concepts. My tinfoil beanie must've fallen off somewhere back there.

[Bernie109]

Originally Posted by JohnK3

Well, Bernie and Green, I guess I just don't agree with you about the "puppet" and other conspiracy-theory concepts. My tinfoil beanie must've fallen off somewhere back there.

It's easy to cheer for war when you are a spectator.
As far as "Freedom" is concerned, I cannot see any foriegn force entering this nation and forcing me to bow to Mecca. Can you open a Janes book of fighting ships and show me the vast armada that would be needed to transport the millions of occupiers over here?

[polishshooter]

Bernie, History is a little more complicated than that.

Your VERY first premise about WWI is DEAD wrong. The Germans did NOT get "the Treaty of Versailles rammed down their throat" BECAUSE we joined the war in 1917...they got it jammed down their THROAT because they quit fighting BECAUSE they THOUGHT they would get peace on terms offered by the UNITED STATES. But our US Senate, yes REPUBLICANS at the time, wanted to "cut and run" and "Retreat and retrench" "behind the oceans!" ("NO INVOLVEMENT IN FOREIGN WARS!" was the election theme of 1920!} They were WRONG then, just as the DEMOCRATS are wrong NOW.


BECAUSE we walked away from our "obligations," THEN the "allies" were FREE to "Ram the Treaty of Versailles down the German throats!" THAT is the failure of the United States in regards to WWI, walking away before it was FINISHED.

And YES many iniquities of the TOV led DIRECTLY to Hitler, as WELL as the fatal "pacifism" that gripped the ENTIRE free world after the depression, who all elected NOT to "stick their noses in other peoples business" when Hitler Violated the treaty in 33. 34, 35, 36, 37, ...when a couple of reinforced BATTALIONS could have marched to Berlin and hung the Nazi B@stard! But that's what happens when we DID allow the "Europeans to settle a European Problem." We PUNTED....and helped send the WORLD into World War II!!!!

And AGAIN, in 38, and 39, a war on OUR terms would have probably SAVED 6 MILLION Jews, and 12 Million Eastern Europeans, if Pacifists and isolationists did NOT keep our military smaller than Romania's! And refuse ANYONE to allow consideration of actually USING what we had... (Except for the measely 35 B-17s, a couple of understrenth regiments and a bunch of untrained Philipino conscripts some armed with single barrel SHOTGUNS under Mcarthur that Roosevelt actually THOUGHT was enough to "scare" Japan...but that's another story!}


And of course, you ignore the "Zimmerman Note," which probably is another cause for a LOT of our problems with Mexico today, which by ANY account was an "Act of War" by the Kaiser against us!

You must remember other quotes from Historians greater than I or you, "Peace does NOT mean the absence of war." And "To have peace, one must ALWAYS be prepared for war..." AND "The 'Perfect' is the ENEMY of the 'good."

Don't they teach THEM either in the revisionist history classes today?


And DON'T get me started on the leftist Shaw of Iran "crap" you have regurgitated from some leftist professor...


You must remember CONTEXT. Stalin's "Internationalism" and Kruschev's "We will BURY you!" ring a bell? Churchill saying he would make a pact with the DEVIL if it made defeating Hitler easier? Keep it in CONTEXT .


History does NOT exist in a vacuum....


And you tell ME...did Jimmy Carter "dumping" the Shaw HELP or HURT the Iranian people???? Can you with a STRAIGHT face say they are better off NOW, standards of living, economy, FREEDOMS, ANYTHING since the first mad Mullah AFTER the Shaw than they were under the Shaw's rule????

But more importantly, you engage in Foriegn affairs to affect YOUR National Security and Interests, so you tell ME. Are WE better off than we would have been if Jimmy Carter would have kept US support of the Shaw. Answer THAT tomoorow when you are putting $3.00 gas in your car tomorrow and trying to remember the FIRST time "Fundamentalist Islamists" gained a STATE of their own...!


Was the Shaw harsh, YES. BUT, again CONTEXT. Was he HARSHER than many OTHER Middle Eastern "Tyrants" of the time? Debatable, but probably NOT. Were we ABLE to influence, and maybe lessen his "harshness" by our support? YES....He WAS listening....Was he our FRIEND in the CONTEXT of the time???? YES...was he PERFECT? HELL no. BUT...If our "friends" in strategic areas of the world HAD to be PERFECT we would have no friends OR any strategic areas of the world to worry about anymore! Somebody ELSE would have them ALL by now, and dictating a Treaty of Versailles to US!!!

And finally, WOULD we have as much "unrest' in the Middle East if Jimmy Carter had MAINTAINED US support for the Shaw??? Probably NOT.

Remember CONTEXT, and another truism, what's the ALTERNATIVE available to us THEN (not what we think 30 years later...)


The MORE you know about History, the LESS you know about History...that is the gratest lesson of studying History you should know.

[wolfgang2000]

Originally Posted by Bernie109

Surrender...No, But by retreat and retrenching..yes. The Roman Empire was able to pospone its demise by retreat and retrenching. Sometimes, you need to abandon what is not defensable. If we really wanted to shaft those guys over there, we would retreat and retrench, go all out to meet our energy needs without Arab oil. (This would involve everything from increased domestic production, fuel cells, Methanol, Hydrogen, solar, and anything else that works) And telling those guys over there "Keep your oil! Drink it for all we care!"".

I agree withyour ideas on oil. Lets start drilling on the coast of CA. and FL. and in the artic TODAY. Lets not forget the refineries. We need twice as many as we have not. Every state should have it own. I think the US could be oil and gas independent in 5 years, if we chain the tree huggers to their trees.

As far as you ideas on "retreating", I strongly disagree. Some things you just can't back away from. If I remember my history Rome was sacked and looted by the huns several times. They even tried to "buy" the huns off. The huns took their loot and still sacked Rome. WHY? Rome lost what made it strong, what made Rome into a Empire. Courage. The Romans didn't have to fight for what they had, it was given to them. Since they didn't "earn" their privileges or rights, they were more that willing to "retreat" from the responcibility of citizenship.

They retreated into oblivion.