Your comments and questions are always welcome. To send comments and questions please click here to go to our main page.
June 30, 2004
A letter from a concerned American father about the state of America and the world.
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); [1] eight presidents (5
Republican & 4 Democrat) during the cold war (1945 - 1991); President
Clinton's strikes on Bosnia (1995) and on Iraq (1998). [2] 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:
1.
When did the threat to us start? Many will say September 11th, 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; Dar es 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 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).
(http://www.nazis.testimony.co.uk/7-a.htm). Thus, almost the same number of
Christians were killed by the Nazis, as the 6 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 whom 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 to terrorist 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 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 enemy fighters who recently were burning Americans and dragging their
charred corpses through the streets of Iraq. And still more recently the same
type enemy that was and is providing videos to all news sources internationally,
of the beheading of an American prisoner 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 States, but throughout the world. We are
the last bastions 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.
Love, Dad