Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Price of Panseyhood
Rense.com ^ | Sept-13-2001 | Ned Stafford

Posted on 09/16/2001 5:42:22 PM PDT by GhostSoldier

The World Trade Center Attack -The Price Of Pansyhood

By Ned Stafford

Newsbytes.com

9-13-1

Fred Reed writes a weekly column for the Washington Times Metropolitan section and also used to write a column for the Air Force Times. His style is gritty, tell-it-like-it-is, definitely not Politically Correct. Some of it is no doubt offensive, but worthwhile to reflect upon the words and his message. The article below is not from a politician or the media, but a warrior. It is controversial, but it makes a distinctive point. Fred Reed is a former Marine. The World Trade Center - The Price Of Pansyhood By Fred Reed The Washington Times ©Fred Reed 2001. All rights reserved

A few unorganized thoughts regarding the events in New York:

(1) We lost. Our moral posturing about our degradation is merely embarrassing. We have been made fools of, expertly and calculatedly, in the greatest military defeat the country has suffered since we fled from VietNam. The Moslem world is laughing and dancing in the streets. The rest of the earth, while often sympathetic, sees us as the weak and helpless nation that we are. The casualty figures aren't in, but 10,000 dead seems reasonable, and we wring our hands and speak of grief therapy. We lost.

(2) We cannot stop it from happening again. Thousands of aircraft constantly use O'Hare, a few minutes flying time from the Sears Tower.

(3) Our politicians and talking heads speak of "a cowardly act of terrorism." It was neither cowardly nor, I think, terrorism. Hijacking an aircraft and driving it into a building isn't cowardly. Would you do it? It requires great courage and dedication-which our enemies have, and we do not. One may mince words, but to me the attack looked like an act of war. Not having bombing craft of their own, they used ours. When we bombed Hanoi and Hamburg, was that terrorism?

(4) The attack was beautifully conceived and executed. These guys are good. They were clearly looking to inflict the maximum humiliation on the United States, in the most visible way possible, and they did. The sight of those two towers collapsing will leave nobody's mind. If we do nothing of importance in return, and it is my guess that we won't, the entire earth will see that we are a nation of epicenes. Silly cruise-missile attacks on Afghanistan will just heighten the indignity.

(5) In watching the coverage, I was struck by the tone of passive acquiescence. Not once, in hours of listening, did I hear anyone express anger. No one said, coldly but in deadly seriousness, "People are going to die for this, a whole lot of people." There was talk of tracking down bin Laden and bringing him to justice. "Terrorism experts" spoke of months of investigation to find who was responsible, which means we will do nothing. Blonde bimbos babbled of coping strategies and counseling and how our children needed support. There was no talk of retaliation.

(6) The Israelis, when hit, hit back. They hit back hard. But Israel is run by men. We are run by women. Perhaps two-thirds of the newscasters were blonde drones who spoke of the attack over and over as a tragedy, as though it had been an unusually bad storm-unfortunate, but inevitable, and now we must get on with our lives. The experts and politicians, nominally male, were effeminate and soft little things. When a feminized society runs up against male enemies-and bin Laden, whatever else he is, is a man-it loses. We have.

(7) We haven't conceded that the Moslem world is our enemy, nor that we are at war. We see each defeat and humiliation in isolation, as a unique incident unrelated to anything else. The 241 Marines killed by the truck bomb in Beirut, the extended humiliation of the hostages taken by Iran, the war with Iraq, the bombing of the Cole, the destruction of the embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, the devastation of the Starke, the Saudi barracks, the dropping of airliner after airliner-these we see as anecdotes, like pileups of cars on a snowy road. They see these things as war. We face an enemy more intelligent than we are.

(8) We think we are a superpower. Actually we are not, except in the useless sense of having nuclear weapons. We could win an air war with almost anyone, yes, or a naval war in mid-Pacific. Few Americans realize how small our forces are today, how demoralized and weakened by social experimentation. If we had to fight a ground war in terrain with cover, a war in which we would take casualties, we would lose.

(9) I have heard some grrr-woofwoofery about how we should invade Afghanistan and teach those ragheads a lesson. Has anyone noticed where Afghanistan is? How would we get there? Across Pakistan, a Moslem country? Or through India? Do we suppose Iran would give us overflight rights to bomb another Moslem country? Or will our supply lines go across Russia through Turkmenistan? Do we imagine that we have the airlift or sealift? What effect do we think bombing might have on Afghanistan, a country that is essentially rubble to begin with? We backed out of Somalia, a Moslem country, when a couple of GIs got killed and dragged through the streets on TV. Afghans are not pansies. They whipped the Russians. Our sensitive and socially-conscious troops would curl up in balls.

(10) To win against a more powerful enemy, one forces him to fight a kind of war for which he isn't prepared. Iraq lost the Gulf War because it fought exactly the kind of war in which American forces are unbeatable: Hussein played to his weaknesses and our strengths. The Vietnamese did the opposite. They defeated us by fighting a guerrilla war that didn't give us anything to hit. They understood us. We didn't understand them. The Moslem world is doing the same thing. Because their troops, or terrorists as we call them, are not sponsored by a country, we don't know who to hit. Note that Yasser Arafat, bin Laden, and the Taliban are all denying any part in the destruction of New York. At best, we might, with our creaky intelligence apparatus, find Laden and kill him. It's not worth doing: Not only would he have defeated America as nobody ever has, but he would then be a martyr. Face it: The Arabs are smarter than we are.

(11) We are militarily weak because we have done what we usually do: If no enemy is immediately in sight, we cut our forces to the bone, stop most R&D, and focus chiefly on sensitivity training about homosexuals. When we need a military, we don't have one. Then we are unutterably surprised.

(12) The only way we could save any dignity and respect in the world would be to hit back so hard as to make teeth rattle around the world. A good approach would be to have NSA fabricate intercepts proving that Libya was responsible, mobilize nationally, invade, and make Libya permanently a US colony. Most Arab countries are militarily helpless, and that is the only kind our forces could defeat. Doing this, doing anything other than whimpering, would require that ancient military virtue known as "balls." Does Katie Couric have them?

This Site Served


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-54 next last
Some valid points IMHO, others not. For your consideration
1 posted on 09/16/2001 5:42:22 PM PDT by GhostSoldier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: GhostSoldier
You've got my vote!
2 posted on 09/16/2001 5:55:49 PM PDT by SeaDragon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GhostSoldier
Even when Israel was run by one of its women, Golda Meier, it was more decisive than most of our politicians. The Congress can't bring itself to admit we are at war, but passes the hot potato off to Bush so, if anything goes wrong, they can blame him.
3 posted on 09/16/2001 6:00:05 PM PDT by roughrider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GhostSoldier
I can't stand moderates and doves and people who don't believe in anything (athiests). God give us back a spine.
4 posted on 09/16/2001 6:03:52 PM PDT by mattflogel.com
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GhostSoldier
Let the American fe-man BE NO MORE
5 posted on 09/16/2001 6:04:58 PM PDT by clamper1797
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #6 Removed by Moderator

To: GhostSoldier
My first target would be Iraq.

They're already boxed in by the no-fly zone (36th parallel to the north, 33rd on the south).

After a serious propaganda campaign, his own people might overthrow him. If they do, we flood the place with food, medical supplies, and infrastructure.

7 posted on 09/16/2001 6:08:49 PM PDT by Dallas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GhostSoldier
Right between the eyes BTT
8 posted on 09/16/2001 6:11:38 PM PDT by ninonitti
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GhostSoldier
Except for the part about occupying Libya (We already have all the sand we will ever need, thank you very much!) I am in total agreement with Fred. I have been reading his reporting since Vietnam, and he has been a direct and fearless truth-teller. VERY RARE in the American press- probably why he is not carried in 1,000 newspapers. Fred's police reporting alone would cause liberals to wet their pants all over this country! It could cause Upper West Siders to suffer strokes en masse.

Basically, he believes that there is evil in the world, and that holding hands and singing "Kumbaya" does NOTHING to eradicate it. Evil must be confronted by resolute people, and defeated- not once, but over and over again. It is never going to completely go away.

Anyone who believes differently (and there are a few on FR) is a hopeless fool.

9 posted on 09/16/2001 6:14:04 PM PDT by RANGERAIRBORNE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Don Roberts
Yeah, we must get off our pansy butts and kill civilians, more civilians, more women & children. We bombed Pakistan (by mistake),Afghanistan, Sudan, Haiti, Grenada, Panama, Kosovo, Iraq. Let's bomb 'em again. Glory, glory, glory to American bombs. Let's nuke the whole world. Then, by God, we'll have global hegemony. Let's kill the pansy nurses first. Then the MDs and other pansies who value life. We value ourselves and not those other demons who are in our way. Let's take our enormous supply of biological weapons and terrorize the world. Then they'll respect us. We need to bomb women first, then girls and old men. Finally, the rest of 'em. The women are pansies, just like the old men. The younger men will be so distraught by our killing of women and old men that they'll be pansies, just waiting for us to put one foot on top of their dead bodies.

Sounds to me like you would be more comfortable over there. I'm more than willing to chip in on a one-way ticket for ya.

10 posted on 09/16/2001 6:15:20 PM PDT by GhostSoldier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
bttt...an interesting read
11 posted on 09/16/2001 6:15:27 PM PDT by JMJ333
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Don Roberts
Very juvenile...

We're the great white satan. Given the opportunity, these fanatics would conquer the world, not just the middle east.

Personally, I don't want to pray to Mecca five times a day under penalty of death...

12 posted on 09/16/2001 6:17:01 PM PDT by Dallas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: RANGERAIRBORNE
Anyone who believes differently (and there are a few on FR) is a hopeless fool.

Ranger, even after Tuesday, I'm afraid it more than a few.

13 posted on 09/16/2001 6:18:00 PM PDT by GhostSoldier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: longshadow
this thread is for you, my moderate friend
14 posted on 09/16/2001 6:19:02 PM PDT by mattflogel.com
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN, Argee, Criminal Number 18F, f.christian
Ouch...right between the eyes.
15 posted on 09/16/2001 6:19:53 PM PDT by JMJ333
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Don Roberts
It appears that we lost a large number of "women and children" in this atrocity. Why are you so concerned about the enemy? Are you not an American? Or are you just stupid? You are not morally superior in any way to the rest of us- you are just weak.
16 posted on 09/16/2001 6:20:06 PM PDT by RANGERAIRBORNE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Don Roberts
Bravo, this guy is so full of sh*t the entire Kansas City Sewage Treatment facilities couldn't handle him. Thank God he's no longer in service to the nation. His remarks are a disservice to the US.
17 posted on 09/16/2001 6:20:43 PM PDT by CARTOUCHE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: GhostSoldier
The price of pansy-hood is to live in a socialist France-like people's republic. We know what we have to do. But knowing what to do and stepping up and actually doing it are different things.

It bothers me, too, that the TV news keeps calling this whole thing a "tragedy", like it was a hurricane or car accident. In spite of the talking heads, I think that most Americans have gotten over the shock and feel the fangs-out anger that I do. After living in Camelot for too many years, I think that our country is growing up fast. I have faith that we are going to step up and pound the terrorists and their collaborators into the ground. We've been weak on terrorist incidents and other slaps in the face, but this is different. 84% of Amercians are in support of balls-to-the-wall war using every available option and accepting civilian casualties (and that 84% is from CBS, so you know it's more like 94%). The press is very liberal, but don't let them fool you. Play time is over.

18 posted on 09/16/2001 6:26:30 PM PDT by Hillary 666
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JMJ333
I'm afraid I agree with more of that article than I would admit publicly. But outrage against this type of enemy is best eaten cold. This is a new age, requiring a new paradigm. We need the patience and the will of, unfortunately, the North Vietnamese and the willingness to be absolutely ruthless of the former USSR. Are we up to it?
19 posted on 09/16/2001 6:35:03 PM PDT by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Don Roberts
You're no better than the Afghanees. Your post is beyond the pale.
20 posted on 09/16/2001 6:35:44 PM PDT by JMJ333
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-54 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson