An Important History Lesson

Wednesday, August 16, 2006

(This rather long, but decent article, was sent to me by someone that lives in my town. They asked me to post it here. )

Sixty-three years ago, Nazi Germany had overrun almost all of Europe and hammered England to the verge of bankruptcy and defeat, and had sunk more than four hundred British ships in their convoys between England and America for food and war materials.

The US was in an isolationist, pacifist, mood, and most Americans and Congress wanted nothing to do with the European war, or the Asian war. Then along came Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, and in outrage Congress unanimously declared war on Japan, and the following day on Germany, which had not attacked us.

It was a dicey thing. We had few allies. France was not an ally, the Vichy government of France aligned with its German occupiers. Germany was not an ally, it was an enemy, and Hitler intended to set up a Thousand Year Reich in Europe. Japan was not an ally; it was intent on owning and controlling all of Asia. Japan and Germany had long-term ideas of invading Canada and Mexico, and then the United States over the north and south borders, after they had settled control of Asia and Europe. America’s allies then were England, Ireland, Canada, Australia, and Russia, and that was about it. All of Europe, from Norway to Italy, except Russia in the east, was all ready under the Nazi heel.

America was not prepared for war. America had stood down most of its military after WWI and throughout the depression, at the outbreak of WWII, There were army units training with broomsticks over their shoulders because they didn’t have guns, and cars with “tank” painted on the doors because they didn’t have tanks. And a big chunk of our Navy had just been sunk and damaged at Pearl Harbor.

Britain had already gone bankrupt, saved only by the donation of $600 million in gold bullion in the Bank of England that was the property of Belgium and was given by Belgium to England to carry on the war when Belgium was overrun by Hitler. Actually, Belgium surrendered in one day, because it was unable to oppose the German invasion, and the Germans bombed Brussels into rubble the next day anyway just to prove they could. Britain has been holding out for two years already in the face of staggering shipping losses, and the near decimation of its air force in the Battle of Britain, and was saved from being overrun by Germany only because Hitler made the mistake of thinking the Brits were a relatively minor threat that could be dealt with later, and turning his attention to Russia, at a time when England was on the verge of collapse in the late summer of 1940. Russia saved America’s butt by putting up a desperate fight for two years until the US got geared up to begin hammering away at Germany. Russia lost something like 24 million people in the sieges of Stalingrad and Moscow, 90% of them from cold and starvation, mostly civilians, but more than a million soldiers. More than a million.

Had Russia surrendered, then, Hitler would have been able to focus his entire campaign against the Brits, then America, and the Nazis would have won the war.

I say this to illustrate that turning points in history are often dicey things. And we are at another one. There is a very dangerous minority in Islam that either has, or wants and may soon have, the ability to deliver small nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons, almost anywhere in the world, unless they are prevented from doing so.

The Jihadis, the militant Muslims, are basically Nazis in Kaffiyahs. They believe that Islam, a radically conservative (definitely not liberal!) form of Wahhabi Islam, should own and control the Middle East first, then Europe, then the world, and that all who do not bow to Allah should be killed, enslaved, or subjugated. They want to finish the Holocaust; destroy Israel; purge the world of Jews. This is what they say.

There is also a civil war raging in the Middle East, for the most part not a hot war, but a war of ideas. Islam is having its Inquisition and its Reformation today, but it is not yet known which will win - the Inquisition or the Reformation.

If the Inquisition wins, then the Wahhabis, the Jihads, will control the Middle East, and the OPEC oil, and the US, European, and Asian economies, the techno industrial economies, will be at the mercy of OPEC, not an OPEC dominated by the well educated and rational Saudis of today, but an OPEC dominated by the Jihadis.

You want gas in your car? You want heating oil next winter? You want jobs? You want the dollar to be worth anything? You better hope the Jihad, the Muslim Inquisition, loses, and the Islamic Reformation wins. If the Reformation movement wins, that is, the moderate Muslims who believe that Islam can respect and tolerate other religions, and live in peace with the rest of the world, and move out of the 10th century and into the 21st,

Then the troubles in the Middle East will eventually fade away, and a moderate and prosperous Middle East will emerge. We have to help the Reformation win, and to do that we have to fight the Inquisition, i.e., the Wahhabi movement, the Jihad, Al Qaeda, the Islamic terrorist movements.

We have to do it somewhere. We cannot do it nowhere. And we cannot do it everywhere at once. We have created a focal point for the battle now at the time and place of our choosing, in Iraq. Not in New York, not in London, or Paris, or Berlin, but in Iraq, where we did and are doing two very important things:

(1) We deposed Saddam Hussein. Whether Saddam Hussein was directly involved in 9/11 or not, it is undisputed that Saddam has been actively supporting the terrorist movement for decades. Saddam is a terrorist. Saddam is, or was, a weapon of mass destruction, who is responsible for the deaths of probably more than a million Iraqis and two million Iranians.

(2) We created a battle, a confrontation, a flash point, with Islamic terrorism in Iraq. We have focused the battle. We are killing bad guys there and the ones we get there we won’t have to get here, or anywhere else.

We also have a good shot at creating a democratic, peaceful Iraq, which will be a catalyst for democratic change in the rest of the Middle East, and an outpost for a stabilizing American military presence in the Middle East for as long as it is needed.

World War II, the war with the German and Japanese Nazis, really began with a “whimper” in 1928. It did not begin with Pearl Harbor. It began with the Japanese invasion of China. It was a war for fourteen years before America joined it. It officially ended in 1945 – a 17 year war – and was followed by another decade of US occupation in Germany and Japan to get those countries reconstructed and running on their own again – a 27 year war. World War II cost the United States an amount equal to approximately a full year’s GDP – adjusted for inflation, equal to about $12 trillion dollars. WWII cost America more than 400,000 killed in action, and nearly 100,000 still missing in action.

The Iraq war has, so far, cost the US about $160 billion (U.S.GDP in 2006 = 13.04 trillion dollars, which means that the IRAQ war has cost the U.S. approximately 12.5% of a full years GDP), which is roughly what 9/11 cost New York. It has also cost about 2,200 American lives, which is roughly 2/3 of the 3,000 lives that the Jihad snuffed on 9/11. But the cost of not fighting and winning WWII would have been unimaginably greater - a world now dominated by German and Japanese Nazism.

Americans have a short attention span, now, conditioned I suppose by 60 minute TV shows and 2 hour movies in which everything comes out okay. The real world is not like that. It is messy, uncertain, and sometimes bloody and ugly. Always has been, and probably always will be. The bottom line here is that we will have to deal with Islamic terrorism until we defeat it, whenever that is. It will not go away on its own. It will not go away if we ignore it. If the US can create a reasonably democratic and stable Iraq, then we have an “England” in the Middle East, a platform, from which we can work to help modernize and moderate the Middle East. The history of the world is the clash between the forces of relative civility and civilization, and the barbarians clamoring at the gates. The Iraq war is merely another battle in this ancient and never ending war. And now, for the first time ever, the barbarians are about to get nuclear weapons. Unless we prevent them. Or somebody does.

We have four options:

1. We can defeat the Jihad now, before it gets nuclear weapons.

2. We can fight the Jihad later, after it gets nuclear weapons (which may be as early as next year, if Iran’s progress on nuclear weapons is what Iran claims it is).

3. We can surrender to the Jihad and accept its dominance in the Middle East now, in Europe in the next few years or decades, and ultimately in America.

4. Or we can stand down now, and pick up the fight later when the Jihad is more widespread and better armed, perhaps after the Jihad has dominated France and Germany and maybe most of the rest of Europe. It will be more dangerous, more expensive, and much bloodier then. Yes, the Jihadis say that they look forward to an Islamic America. If you oppose this war, I hope you like the idea that your children, or grandchildren, may live in an Islamic America under the Mullahs and the Sharia, an America that resembles Iran today. We can be defeatist peace activists as anti war types seem to be, and concede, surrender, to the Jihad, or we can do whatever it takes to win this war against them. The history of the world is the history of civilizational clashes, cultural clashes.

All wars are about ideas, ideas about what society and civilization should be like, and the most determined always win. Those who are willing to be the most ruthless always win. The pacifists always lose, because the anti pacifists kill them. In the 20th century, it was Western democracy vs. communism, and before that Western democracy vs. Nazism, and before that Western democracy vs. German Imperialism.

Western democracy won, three times, but it wasn’t cheap, fun, nice, easy, or quick. Indeed, the wars against German Imperialism (WWI), Nazi Imperialism (WWII), and communist imperialism (the 40 year Cold War that included the Vietnam Battle, commonly called the Vietnam War, but itself a major battle in a larger war), covered almost the entire century.

The first major war of the 21st Century is the war between Western Judeo Christian Civilization and Wahhabi Islam. It may last a few more years, or most of this century. It will last until the Wahhabi branch of Islam fades away, or gives up its ambitions for regional and global dominance and Jihad, or until Western Civilization gives in to the Jihad. It will take time. It will not go with no hitches. This is not TV. Remember, perspective is everything, and America’s schools teach too little history for perspective to be clear, especially in the young American mind. The Cold War lasted from about 1947 at least until the Berlin Wall came down in 1989. Forty two years. Europe spent the first half of the 19th century fighting Napoleon, and from 1870 to 1945 fighting Germany. World War II began in 1928, lasted 17 years, plus a ten year occupation, and the US still has troops in Germany and Japan. WWII resulted in the death of more than 50 million people, maybe more than 100 million people, depending on which estimates you accept.

The US has taken a little more than 2,000 KIA in Iraq. The US took more than 4,000 killed in action on the morning of June 6th, 1944, the first day of the Normandy Invasion to rid Europe of Nazi Imperialism. In WWII the US averaged 2,000 KIA a week for four years. Most of the individual battles of WWII lost more Americans than the entire Iraq war has done so far But the stakes are at least as high – a world dominated by representative governments with civil rights, human rights, and personal freedoms; or a world dominated by a radical Islamic Wahhabi movement, by the Jihad, under the Mullahs and the Sharia (Islamic law). I do not understand why the American Left does not grasp this. They favor human rights, civil rights, liberty and freedom, but evidently not for Iraqis – in America, absolutely, but nowhere else. The 300,000 Iraqi bodies in mass graves in Iraq are not our problem? The US population is about twelve times that of Iraq, so let’s multiply 300,000 by twelve. What would you think if there were 3,600,000 American bodies in mass graves in America because of George Bush? Would you hope for another country to help liberate America?

Peace Activists always seem to demonstrate where it’s safe, in America. Why don’t we see Peace Activist demonstrations in Iran, Syria, Iraq, Sudan, North Korea, in the places in the world that really need peace activism the most?

The liberal mentality is supposed to favor human rights, civil rights, democracy, multiculturalism, diversity, etc., but if the Jihad wins, wherever the Jihad wins, it is the end of civil rights, human rights, democracy, multiculturalism, diversity, etc. Americans who oppose the liberation of Iraq are coming down on the side of their own worst enemy.

If the Jihad wins, it is the death of Liberalism. Everywhere the Jihad wins, it is the death of Liberalism. And American Liberals just don’t get it. Please consider passing along copies of this to students in high school, college and university as it contains information about the American past that is very meaningful TODAY – history about America that very likely is completely unknown by them (and their instructors, too).

By being denied the facts and truth of our history, they are at a decided disadvantage when it comes to reasoning and thinking through the issues of today. They are prime targets for misinformation campaigns beamed at enlisting them in causes and beliefs that are special interest agenda driven.

20 comments:

Christopher said...

Man... you are going to catch a mouthful of piss for writing this. I salute you.

The war in Iraq has until 2008 to succeed. Then our new liberal leaders will pull out all the troops, lower gas prices and play the appeasement game with the Fundamental Islamists until we have another huge tragedy, most likely Nuclear, hopefully not in the US.

People can't see that Iraq was the only viable target in that region. Yes, deliberately creating a was zone is very bad. Almost evil. But we needed and need that war zone. Do the liberal voters in America honestly believe all the crap about conservatives? Would our ENTIRE government support a war with no purpose?

How come congress is silent for the most part?

Let's face it. They have information we don't. And while they may not like taking the pill, they are doing it to stay alive.

Now, I'd like to turn things over to Dr. Mantodea and the Angry Veteran, who will attempt to consume the Captain and I in flames from their eyes.

I didn't write this, (yes, that is the truth) but I will pass on the responses to the person who did write it.

Christopher said...

Duh! I see it. Disclaimer at the top.

I never read those.

People in your town read the WoW?

Sick...

They sure do.

Two points are flawed:

(1) We deposed Saddam Hussein. Whether Saddam Hussein was directly involved in 9/11 or not, it is undisputed that Saddam has been actively supporting the terrorist movement for decades. Saddam is a terrorist. Saddam is, or was, a weapon of mass destruction, who is responsible for the deaths of probably more than a million Iraqis and two million Iranians.

Reality: Saddam is a secular Sunni who hated the Al Qaeda Shia and did not give them any support. Saddam was a fascist leader who was no threat to anyone outside his country thanks to our no fly zones and embargoes. See, Eisenhower and the containment policy of post WWII.

(2) We created a battle, a confrontation, a flash point, with Islamic terrorism in Iraq. We have focused the battle. We are killing bad guys there and the ones we get there we won’t have to get here, or anywhere else.

Reality: No, we created a new Afghanastan, a completely ungovernable state with porous borders that is a huge training ground for AQ now. See, general Shinseki who told congress how many soldiers we would actually need to occupy Iraq and was given an early retirement by Rumsfeld.

Christopher said...

Boo!

Too predictable. I could have written that for you AV.

I love an arguement about Saddam Hussein and terrorism. As if either person knows what Saddam was doing...

Dr. Mantodea said...

It's a shame the writer of that article has not spent as much time researching the current geopolitical situation as he did the one 60 years ago. Then again, his understanding of what happened in WW2 is also at the level of an 8th grade history student.

Childish and superficial comparisons are what created the cluster fuck we are in now. Remember all those rosy predictions from the hawks about what would happen in Iraq after we liberated it? Oops, I guess they don’t know as much as they think about how the world works.

But I suppose it’s all better to blame the liberals for everything.

We’ve already heard the whole lame bullshit statement; “The Liberals want to appease the bad guys until the knock down our front door! Be afraid! Vote Republican!” And it just gets even more hollow sounding with each passing year in which these chest thumping neocons manage to fail at every single one of their “projects”.

Everything they touch turns to shit, but apparently you can cover up your own incompetence by fabricating hypothetical screw-ups from people who aren’t even in power and haven’t been in power for years.

Christopher said...

We'll see how you feel when you're begging for a gun to defend your home when those communist terrorist rebels get here.

While Clinton was playing footsie with Charlie Chan, Abdullah von Quaeda gathered enough strength to sucker punch us.

You actually think that if we just let them be, they'll leave us alone? Unlikely.

Why do they attack us?

Answer that and then ask yourself if either party has the stones to back away from the ticking time bomb that is Israel.

Dr. Mantodea said...

They attack us because “They Hate Our Freedom,” haven’t you been listening to what the President says?

And funny how the blame only goes as far back as to Clinton, not to the previous administrations that put in motion the very environment that created these terrorist organizations.

I don’t know if either political party has what it takes to stop fucking up, but I do know one thing for certain, you will never get anyone in power who will do a good job if you keep re-electing the same screwball assnuggets into office every term.

Christopher said...

They attack us because we support Israel and we have troops on holy ground.

The Reagan Administration did not knowingly create this situation. They were fighting communism. And they won.

Reagan did not create terrorism. That's silly.

Let's bring the blame all the way Back to George Washington. If he hadn't fought for independence, non of this would have ever happened! Stupid Washington!

Wow! I must say, this article impressed me. I may not agree with it entirely. I may be much closer to liberal than conservative (and no, Murk, I'm not a liberal, I just seem to fall close to liberals on many issues). And I'm no expert in history or current events, to be honest. But I'm buying a lot of this. Did I agree to going to war in Iraq? No. However, it seems true, this Jihad is about taking over the world, and is intolerant of freedom of choice and freedom of religion. And this is no country or government, there is no 'place' we can go attack these jihadists. So, we picked Iraq. Maybe not the best place, but a place none the less.
I am far from a fan of the Bush family. But I'm far from a fan of any president that has sat in my lifetime.
But I do like my freedom. I think America needs a lot of work, a real lot. I welcome chaos, as rebirth follows. But I do not welcome a totalitarian control over my life and the lives of my kinsmen.
So, I do think we need to fight these fuckers. I don't know if everything in this article is true, but it sure feels right. These fools want to take over the world. (of course, so does the american government). And they can't have my world.

When some punk is casing your house, to you call the police proactively, or do you wait until he bashes down the door and holds a gun to your head?

Finally. I did something right around here.

One flaw in the logic. The US and the World economy are so tightly wound together that much of the rest of the world will not allow the US to get destroyed or go bankrupt. If that occurs the many of the governments of world will also collapse, without the US, OPEC is no longer financially viable.

Toyi said...

Reagan? what Reagan did? oh a big mistake back in ES, he supported ES Government with military strategies and with weapons, planes... for what? to kill civils that is what Reagan did back then, ES Gov asked for help cause they couldn't handle Guerrillas but Reagan instead of investigating 1st.. threw a hand full loaded with guns, what Gov used those guns for? to kill civils... actually Guerrillas in ES was protecting the town from Gov itself.

Christopher said...

The El Salvador government did that, not Reagan.

If some guy asks me for a dollar, and I give it to him, and heuses it to make a bomb, is that my fault?

Look. I'm not belitting what you went through, but Ronald Reagon did not attack your town.

This is the problem. The US sends money and aid to countries and then gets blamed whenever those countries do something horrible with the money.

That's why I've said for years we need to withdraw from foriegn affairs completely, except for trade. It's my new philosophy.

Trade, no aid.

Toyi said...

My post was ironic, but let me put details.

Well hello??? Reagan not only gave a dollar, oh if you are politically informed, US will not release a single dollar for war w/o knowing what is for in specific, he sent troops over there too and you know what ES gov did on top of that!!! they raped 4 US nuns that were there just to help the war disabled, Reagan just didn't care enough for civilians that is it... only after the mozote massacre(An entire killing of a town)and just because UN and Europe cared enugh to press on US... then US said "Oh opps our mistake"

US also financed the Taliban and Saddam, I don't think they would have if they could have seen the future.

Anonymous said...

Unless they were a time lord like me.

Christopher said...

Yeah, the US government and all its leaders for thepast 20 years are shitheads and hate everyone.

Let's just admit it people. The United States of America is EVIL!!! The President is EVIL!!! All former presidents are EVIL!!! Congress: EVIL!!!

Yup. We just suck as a nation.

Hobbs,

Don't be so easily swayed. Of course the article "feels" right, that was it's point. But, sadly, the feeling conveyed is not connected to fact. There is no worldwide Jihad that is anything like the Axis powers of WWII or the Warsaw Pact of the Cold War. So, forget about the clash of civilizations hype.

There are many poor, disenfranchised, radicals in the Middle East. Their governments, mornarchies and dictatorships, keep them pacified by supporting Wahabbism and other anti-Western movements. These governments direct their people's anger at teh US so they don't look at teh problems in their own country. Sound familiar?

Also, you fight terrorism by reducing or removing the factors that create terrorists; namely poverty and a feeling of persecution by the US. By invading Iraq, we increased those factors, not reduced them. People who were not radicalized before are certainly now, now that we have killed nearly a 100,000 innocent Iraqi's (cluster bombs don't discriminate) and have highly publicized human rights violations in Gitmo and in theater.

You want to fight terrorism? Support Turkey, a Muslim nation making a transition into a western democracy. Rebuild Afghanastan. But no, instead of capitalizing on the success in Turkey and finishing the war and rebuilding in Afghanastan, we have turned Iraq into another Afghanastan.

 
 
 
 
Copyright © Wand of Wonder 2.0