Posted on 02/14/2015 4:52:49 AM PST by OwenKellogg
We are at war!
World War III has started and apparently our government is unwilling to acknowledge it.
Prior to World War II, efforts were made throughout Britain and the United States to avoid war at all costs with disastrous consequences. We will face the same disaster if we do not face reality immediately.
In the Britain of the 1930's, Chamberlain attempted to appease Hitler until it was too late for Poland and the world. His appeasement increased the death toll from that war substantially.
In the year 2015, the parallels to 1939 are striking. We are in denial. Our nation cannot even give the enemy a name let alone develop the strategy to defeat it.
Face reality America, our nation is at war.
To not deal with Islamic extremists forcefully and on a united front will be disastrous for the world.
Unlike World War II, we have almost instantaneous information on the brutality of ISIS, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram and other extremist groups. Recently the burning alive of a Jordanian pilot (story line only – no video out of respect for a fellow serviceman) and the almost nonstop beheadings were available on YouTube and other social media sites. This time there can be no denial of these atrocities as was done with the denial of the atrocities against the Jews during World War II.
As we debate whether or not the enemy are Islamic extremists or not, people are dying, nations are falling, the enemy is getting stronger, and we are becoming numb to the horrific tragedies unfolding before us.
Pursuing the axis of evil was a strategy of President Bush. When President Obama took office that strategy was abandoned. The term terrorist and Islamic extremism were literally banned and terms like workplace violence came into vogue.
President Bush correctly saw the evil for what it was. He understood the enemy. He understood what happened on September 11, 2001. He did something about it.
President Obama on the other hand has focused on a strategy of appeasing his base of support in the United States.
Bombing is not a strategy.
Announcing dates of withdrawal from Iraq is not a strategy.
Announcing dates of withdrawal from Afghanistan is not a strategy.
Announcing that ground troops will not be used is stupid.
Building a coalition of allies is a strategy.
Understanding the threat and identifying it as a threat is a strategy.
Neutralizing the threat is a strategy and desired outcome. There can be no other solution to the current quandary that we are in than to deal with this threat decisively and aggressively.
During World War II, Germany was called Nazi Germany. In much the same way, terrorism in the name of Islam is called Islamic extremism. Islamic extremism is the threat.
Just as in Nazi Germany, and in Fascist Italy and in Fascist Japan, there were many decent citizens of German, Italian, and Japanese nationalities. The decent citizens were overwhelmed by the sheer brutality of the nations in which they lived.
During my time in Afghanistan and Iraq, I had the distinct pleasure of getting to know many Iraqis and Afghans. These individuals were more than willing to fight against tyranny and Islamic extremism. However, the moment President Obama announced dates of withdrawal, he sealed the fate of those willing to resist the Islamic extremist.
While in Iraq I was shown videos of what Saddam Hussein and his minions did to the Iraqi population. We have no frame of reference in this country of such brutality. To this day those videos are a stark reminder of how evil people gain control of others
Announcing the withdrawal from any nation before the conflict is over or what military options you will and will not consider, you have sealed your fate and lost the war.
To complicate matters, the executive branch has declared a peace dividend and started to demobilize American military forces before the war has truly begun. This is national suicide.
The strategy to defeat Islamic extremism is extremely simple.
Islamic extremists must know that the United States in this battle until the end. The extremist must know that we will fight with our allies to include Muslim nations as one force to defeat a common enemy.
Covert military forces would be used and would include our own Special Forces, Marine Force Recon, Navy Seals, 93rd Wing U. S. Air Force as well as the CIA and our allies special forces.
Special Forces provide a much smaller footprint for the enemy and are specially trained for counter insurgency operations. They are the right force at the right time.
We must also recognize that protecting our national treasury is our mission and the terrorist's objective.
We must be smart about fighting this war and be prudent in how we spend our limited resources. We must fight insurgencies with counterinsurgency tactics.
When we combine words and actions and show a national intent to defeat the extremist, the terrorist base of support will evaporate rapidly and the decent people in the affected nations such as Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Indonesia will understand that they have an ally they can rely upon and trust to help destroy terrorism from within.
The Islamic extremists can be destroyed. Nothing, however, will happen until we acknowledge that we are at war whether we like it or not.
---------- Frank Ryan, a CPA and retired colonel in the U.S. Marine Corps Reserve served in Iraq and briefly in Afghanistan and specializes in corporate restructuring and lectures on ethics for state CPA societies.
Saudi Arabia, as the nexus and active exporter of Whabbism is a significant component of the enemy. W was never up to addressing the issue.
Whether or not we have a Strategic Air Command, there are bombing strategies in military aviation history that were successful and sustainable and there is a strategy for the 21st century. It just needs refinement and time but not too much time. Whatever book on war you say (and you seem to think that it’s a winner) ISIS is writing, if the United States of America had the will, and to have it in spades, “Mohammed’s book” would be just another footnote in World History that should be criticized if not ridiculed.
“We are past the pissing and moaning stage.”
That’s a fact.
Two facts:
* We have no (real) money for an overseas war. None.
* Obama, and the military leadership remaining under him, would be directing that overseas war.
* The organizations and governments we would arm and empower there likely to become our enemies.
* Many, many young men you know would die for those organizations.
Solution: Get out completely. Shut the borders to all of them. Spend the defense budget on military defense of North America.
* sorry, four facts
I’ve been calling this guy the 20’th hijacker since the day he was elected. He broke into the cockpit of America, and has the stick pushed forward as far as it will go.
“I’ve been calling this guy the 20’th hijacker since the day he was elected. He broke into the cockpit of America, and has the stick pushed forward as far as it will go.”
Obama continues to prove himself as a political predator and he won’t stop trying after he leaves the White House.
It really is too bad that we can’t carpet bomb ISIS. Unfortunately it’s sort of a hostage situation over there so we can’t do the brute force thing.
>>“Bombing is not a strategy.”<<
A wider middle eastern war will truly ramp up when Israel begins dismantling Iran’s nuclear program.
Then, it will be on.
I will support total war with no idiot rules of engagement. I will not support "winning hearts and minds" nation building. We tried that and lost.
Our political “leaders” will never admit that Islam is the problem. Egypt’s President did. Historic speech that most people never heard about.
The people most closely following the Koran and the example of their prophet are ISIS, Taliban, Boko Haram, etc.
Islam means submission and every Mulim is obligated to the goal of global submission.
#3 graphic is chillingly true
This war requires a Japanese cockroach solution just like last time only a good bit more.
Dubya set us back 25 years in properly addressing the problem with that line.
That's kind of a straw man. Sure we brought hell down on those places with our incendiary bombs and nukes, but those wouldn't have won those wars. Germany and Italy had to be taken on the ground. Japan would have still needed to be taken on the ground, with millions lost on both sides, if they hadn't surrendered(I believe it was going to be called "Operation Olympic"). Luckily those two Nuclear bombs took away their desire to fight on. Now, THAT was some 'Shock and Awe'.
No, it was a speech by President Shrub. Then he got to Baghdad and stopped to pretend he could civilize an Islamist Sunni-Shia civil war with borrowed money.
WE KNOW they’ll eventually nuke us in the future — whether or not we nuke them...
Which begs the philosophical question of pre-emptive strikes. Here’s an analogy I’ve designed. I’m interested in any critical opinion on the logic:
1. Suppose, your neighbor hates you and has a beautiful kind wife.
2. Suppose his hobby is raising a lot of rattlesnakes in his backyard.
3. Suppose there is no fence between your yard and his and there is no way to build an effective barrier.
4. Suppose he has threatened to kill you with his rattlesnakes and there’s deep grass all around your house...
5. Suppose you realize that eventually his rattlesnakes WILL kill you.
WHAT WOULD YOU DO? __________
a) Do you blow up his house including him and all the rattlesnakes and his innocent/beautiful wife?
b) Or do you wait until your certain future of death by rattlesnakes?
Clearly, it’s NOT wise for you to wait for your certain death, so your only LOGICAL choice is to nuke your neighbor.
Your dilemma is you that know that there will be innocent casualties (e.g. his beautiful/innocent wife would die in the blast), but you will not be killed in the future by him and you will rid the world of this evil man and his weapons.
THEREFORE, from a pure survival standpoint, wouldn’t it make more sense to nuke (with a Neutron Bomb) all of ISIS and all other evil factions in the Middle East? Unfortunately this would result in innocent casualties, but we know that it is a certainty that there WILL BE MANY innocent casualties in the Western world if we wait to be attacked. So we then the choice is distilled into do we want the innocent casualties to be theirs or ours?
Source: Ross Perot once mentioned the analogy of a rattlesnake in your backyard. I merely expanded upon the idea.
When the SHTF and if it does it before 2016 it might be a very long time before another D is elected to the highest office in our land.
I pray for our troops. He has shown he does not value or care for them.
I would give GWB maybe a C or C+ for his efforts after 911.
Of course O gets a big fat F. Actually a ZERO.
Killing the most active of the islamics has been done only a few at a time at great expense and risk to our people. We need a wholesale attrition of this enemy.
Imagine a non-contagious biological agent that is capable of permanently sterilizing men, which could be broadcast by drones.
The violence of islamics against the rest of the world has been going on since the lifetime of mohammed (piss be upon him)and there is no end in sight. Even if millions of them were killed with nuclear weapons, at some point in the future the survivors would regrow their population and come back with a fresher reason to hate us.
The only truly effective long term strategy would be to prevent them from reproducing and cause them to die off.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.