Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A Real War: Fighting the Worst Fascists Since Hitler
National Review ^ | 12/5/03 | Victor Davis Hanson

Posted on 12/06/2003 5:19:31 PM PST by bdeaner

A Real War
Fighting the worst fascists since Hitler.

Saddam's Baathists recently blew apart Japanese diplomats on their way to a meeting in Tikrit to discuss sending millions of dollars in aid to Iraq's poor. Their ghosts join those of U.N. officials who likewise were slain for their humanitarian efforts. On the West Bank, three Americans were killed: Their felony was trying to interview young Palestinians for Fulbright fellowships for study in the United States. In turn, their would-be rescuers were stoned by furious crowds — not unlike the throngs that chant for Saddam on al Jazeera as they seek to desecrate or loot the bodies of murdered Spanish and Italian peacekeepers in Iraq while the tape rolls. All this, I suppose, is what bin Laden calls a clash of civilizations.

Jews at places of worship are systematically being blown up from Turkey to Morocco — along with British consular officials murdered in Istanbul, American diplomats murdered in Jordan, and Western tourists, Christians, and local residents murdered by Muslims in Bali, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan. The new rule is that the more likely you are to help, give to, or worship in the Middle East, the more likely you are to be shot or blown up.

Most of the recent dead were noncombatants. All were either attempting to feed or aid Muslims, or simply wished to be left alone in peace. Their killers operate through the money and sanctuary of Middle East rogue regimes, the implicit support of thousands in the Muslim street, and the tacit neglect of even "moderate" states in the region — as long as the tally of killing is in the half-dozens or so, and not noticeable enough to threaten foreign investment or American aid, or to earn European disapproval.

But when the carnage is simply too much (too many Muslims killed as collateral damage or too many minutes on CNN), then suspects are miraculously arrested in Turkey or Saudi Arabia, or in transit to Iran or Syria — but more often post facto and never with any exegesis about why killers who once could not be found now suddenly are. No wonder Pakistani intelligence officers, Palestinian security operatives, Syrian diplomats, and Iraqis working for the Coalition are all at times exposed as having abetted the terrorists.

Yet it hasn't been a good six months for the Islamists' public relations. Billions the world over are slowly coming to a consensus that the Islamists' killing has cast as a shadow over the Middle East — a deeply disturbed place, better left to stew in its own juices. Only its exports of oil, religious extremism, and terror — not its manufacturing, science, medicine, banking, tourism, humanitarianism, literature, research, or philanthropy — seem to earn global attention. This is all a great tragedy, but one that, after September 11, gives us no time for tears.

Remember, even apart from all the killing in Israel and Iraq, all of the deadly terrorism since 9/11 — the synagogue in Tunisia, French naval personnel in Pakistan, Americans in Karachi, Yemeni attacks on a French ship, the Bali bombing, the Kenyan attack on Israelis, the several deadly attacks on Russians in both Moscow and Chechnya, the assault on housing compounds in Saudi Arabia, the suicide car bombings in Morocco, the Marriott bombing in Indonesia, the mass murdering in Bombay, and the Turkish killing — has been perpetrated exclusively by Muslim fascists and directed at Westerners, Christians, Hindus, and Jews.

We can diagnose the cause of this new fascism's growth — which has very little to do with the old canard that racism, colonialism, and the CIA are to blame. Instead, corrupt thugs in the Middle East have for years looted state treasuries. They have imposed Soviet-style state autocracy on tribal societies. And they have stripped basic human rights from a skyrocketing population — one that has received just enough Western medicine and technology to ensure an explosive birth rate, but not enough to encourage the commensurate social, economic, and cultural reform that would prevent such growth from making life in a Baghdad or Cairo desolate.

The demise of the Soviet Union left a terrible legacy — one rarely acknowledged by our own Middle East specialists. Its Stalinist machinery was left in place to kill and torture in awful places like Libya, Iraq, and Syria — but without the coercive force of the Soviets to ensure that such deadly antics did not expand across borders to draw the Russians into unwanted confrontations with the United States. In turn, without Communists to worry about, so-called moderates in places like Egypt and Jordan — excepting, of course, the petrol states of the Gulf — had very little in common, or much leverage, with the United States.

So with the demise of the Cold War, these pathologies came to full maturity. Globalization enticed the appetites of the impoverished — as cell phones, the Internet, and videos, along with fast food and cheap imported goods, gave the patina of prosperity. In fact, internationalization only reminded 400 million that they could have the junk of the West, but without its freedom, material security, education, health care, and recreation. It is one thing to call a friend on a cell phone, and quite another to realize that one's society cannot make the phone, cannot fix it, cannot improve upon it, and cannot even use it as desired — and is reminded of these failures by the very fact of the imported device's daily use.

If the onset of democracy in India, Malaysia, and Indonesia suggested that Islam was not incompatible with consensual government, that hopeful message apparently did not catch on in much of the Middle East. Far from attempting to end the endemic problems of sexual apartheid, illiteracy, religious intolerance, polygamy, and everything from "honor" killings to state-sanctioned legal barbarism, most autocracies in the region allowed Islamic extremists and apologists to champion just such "differences" — as if the existence of such Dark Age protocols and endemic anti-Semitism were proof that the Arab world suffered none of the weakness and decadence of a soft West. Enough fools in the West were always around to nod rather than to challenge such Hitleresque romance — and even to invite such fascists from the Middle East to speak in Europe and the United States to the "oohs" and "ahs" of a few stupid and spoiled self-hating elites.

Into this vacuum stepped the Islamists — fed by Saudi money, blackmailing dictators as they saw fit, championing the poor and dispossessed who found their messages of hatred against the United States and Israel a salve for their own wounded pride and misery. It did not hurt that their enmity of the West was about the only topic of free expression allowed in censored state media.

In their defense, the mullahs in the madrassas at least realized that if it were left to corrupt tyrants like Saddam Hussein, Khadafi, and Assad to offer alternatives to the West, the Arab world would soon be caught up in the same liberalization that had swept Asia and parts of South America and Africa — to the chagrin of the patriarch, imam, and warlord, whose currency is deference received rather than freedom granted.

This strange new fascism explains why millions in the Middle East who in theory do not like a Yasser Arafat, Saddam Hussein, or Osama bin laden still find consolation in the unrelenting opposition of these killers to the West. Kids whose parents were butchered by Saddam Hussein and are now fed and protected by American money and manpower nevertheless dance upon a burned out Humvee while shouting for Saddam to return. The same is true of those on the West Bank who have their capital looted by the Palestinian Authority, their relatives jailed or murdered, and their votes and speech curtailed: They will still praise Arafat to the skies — if he at least mutters some banality about hating the West. Because these are irrational responses — people acting from their appetites and impulses rather than their heads — we here in the United States, in our arrogant worship of our god Reason, with no confidence in or appreciation of our singular civilization, have gone about things pretty much all wrong.

Remember the worry about "getting the message out"? We all know the tiresome refrain: If the Arab world just knew about all the billions of dollars we give; all the Muslims we saved from the Balkans to Kuwait; all the censure we incurred to ease Orthodox Russians' treatment of Muslims in Chechnya, to stop Orthodox Serbian massacres of Albanians, or to discourage Chinese attacks on their own Muslim tribes; then surely millions of the ill-informed would reverse their opinion of us.

Sorry, the truth is just the opposite. The Arab street knows full well that we give billions to Jordan, Egypt, and the Palestinians — and are probably baffled that we don't cut it out. They also know we have just as frequently fought Christians on their behalf as Muslims; they know — if their voting feet tell them anything — that no place is more tolerant of their religion or more open to immigration than the United States. Yes, Islamists all know that opening a mosque in Detroit is one thing, and opening a church in Saudi Arabia is quite another. Hitler wasn't interested in Wilson's 14 Points or how nicely Germans lived in the U.S. — he cared only that we "cowboys" would not or could not stop what he was up to.

No, the message, much less getting it out, is not the problem. It is rather the nature of America — our freewheeling, outspoken, prosperous, liberty-loving citizens extend equality to women, homosexuals, minorities, and almost anyone who comes to our shores, and thereby create desire and with it shame for that desire. Indeed, it is worse still than that: Precisely because we worry publicly that we are insensitive, our enemies scoff privately that we in fact are too sensitive — what we think is liberality and magnanimity they see as license and decadence. If we don't have confidence in who we are, why should they?

To arrest this dangerous trend requires a radical reappraisal of our entire relationship with the Middle East. A Radio Free Europe, though valuable, nevertheless did not free Eastern Europe; nor did Voice of America. Containment and deterrence did. As long as governments in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and many Gulf states encourage hatred of the United States, we must quietly consider them de facto little different from a Libya, Syria, or Iran. For all the glitter and imported Western graphics, al Jazeera and its epigones are not that much different from Radio Berlin of the 1930s.

We had also better reexamine entirely the way we use force in the Middle East. We did not drive on to Baghdad in 1991 out of concern for the "coalition" — and got 350,000 sorties in the no-fly zones in return. We chose to worry about rebuilding before the current war ended, and let thousands of Baathist killers fade away, and in the aftermath allowed mass looting and continual killing before our most recent get-tough policy.

In fact, anytime we have showed restraint — using battleship salvos and cruise missiles when our Marines were killed, our embassies blown up, and our diplomats murdered; allowing the killers on the Highway of Death to reach Basra in 1991; letting Saddam use his helicopters to gun down innocents — we have earned disdain, not admiration. In contrast, the hijackers chose not to take the top off the World Trade Center, but to incinerate the entire building — proof that they wished not to send us a message but to kill us all, and to kill us to the applause of millions, if the recent popularity of Osama bin Laden and his henchmen in the Arab street is any indication.

We had better rethink the entire notion of dealing with the mythical moderates within regimes like Iran and Syria. I am sure that they exist, as they existed in Saddam's Iraq. But we see the moderates now in Iraq and — with all due respect — they are not exactly the stuff of Ethan Allan, Paul Revere, or the Swamp Fox. In fact, in the Middle East, tens of thousands of democrats are more passive in their desire for freedom than are a few hundred fascists in their zeal for tyranny. We should accept that dissidents would never have toppled Saddam on their own — and are not quite sure what to do even in his absence. Victory alone, not stalemate or a bellum interruptum, will free the Arab people and extend to them the same opportunities now found in Eastern Europe.

In short, there is no reason for any American diplomat to have much to do in Teheran or Damascus — the haven of choice for many of the killers who bomb in Turkey, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia. "Getting the message out" to a Syria is like traveling to Warsaw in 1950 to convince the government there how nicely Poles are treated in Chicago; sending peace feelers to Teheran is analogous to doing the same to Cuba in about 1962; discussing policy with Saudi Arabia is like talking to Gen. Franco about the perils of Mussolini or Hitler; incorporating Jordan in our resistance is like counting on a France circa 1940.

Peace and harmony will come, but only when the Middle East, not us, changes-which, tragically, will be brought along more quickly by deterrence and defiance than appeasement and dialogue. President Bush was terribly criticized for his exasperated "bring them on," but that was one of his most honest, heartfelt — and needed — ex tempore remarks of this entire conflict.

We are not in a war with a crook in Haiti. This is no Grenada or Panama — or even a Kosovo or Bosnia. No, we are in a worldwide struggle the likes of which we have not seen since World War II. The quicker we understand that awful truth, and take measures to defeat rather than ignore or appease our enemies, the quicker we will win. In a war such as this, the alternative to victory is not a brokered peace, but abject Western suicide and all that it entails — a revelation of which we saw on September 11.

Despite some disappointments about the postbellum reconstruction and the hysteria of our critics, our military is doing a wonderful job. We should understand that they have the capability to win this struggle in Iraq and elsewhere — but only if we at home accept that we have been all along in a terrible war against terrible enemies.

TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: ageofliberty; baathists; fascism; iran; iraq; islamist; middleeast; syria; terrorism; truthaboutwar; victordavishanson; war; warwar; warwarwar
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-42 next last
To: bdeaner
Hanson bump!
21 posted on 12/06/2003 9:56:53 PM PST by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: defenderSD
This is essentially speculation with little basis in fact. The goal of Op Desert Storm was to kick Iraq out of Kuwait while destroying most of its military equipment. The goal was not to completely destroy the Iraqi army because this would have left Iraq vulnerable to invasion by Iran. The first Bush Administration was hoping that the remaining Iraqi army officers would turn on Saddam and remove him from power. Unfortunately, the army didn't rebel and Saddam stayed in power.

There is nothing speculative about it, then Gen. Colin Powell prematurely ended the war with Pre. Bush's (No. 41)approval. There was NO NEED to completely destroy the Iraqi army, just the Republican guard who were trapped on the "Highway of Death" from Kuwait. Powell said an action to continue would have been "UNCHIVALROUS AND UNAMERICAN". If you remember, WE WON THAT WAR and virtually had the whole world on our side at the time as well.

Futhermore, President George Bush (No. 41) has now publicly regretted taking Powell's ill advised politically correct advice. A prescription for future failure because the problem was not dealt with at the time when we had the whole world on board.

By allowing the remaining Iraqi Republican Guard to get away insured Saddam Hussein's survival.

Iran had enough sense to stay out of Iraq as did Libya. The only country that I can think of that supported Iraq was Yemen. Arafat did as well and that cost him severely.

22 posted on 12/06/2003 11:19:04 PM PST by Mel Gibson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

Comment #23 Removed by Moderator

To: bdeaner
24 posted on 12/06/2003 11:46:06 PM PST by primeval patriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bdeaner
Thank you for the definition. The leftist who yelled that at us was so brave, he was driving by and yelled it instead of getting out of his car and facing us. I can see where some of the leftists look at the definition and then totally distort what a fascist is. They think that just because we truly love our country and exhibit national pride it makes us Nazis.
25 posted on 12/07/2003 12:45:39 AM PST by LoudRepublicangirl (loudrepublicangirl)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: sauropod
read later
26 posted on 12/07/2003 4:48:21 AM PST by sauropod (I believe Tawana! Sharpton for Prez! Slap the Donkey or Spank the Monkey? Your Choice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LoudRepublicangirl
Thanks for your observations & the report of what happened. It shows how much we need this discussion.
27 posted on 12/07/2003 6:29:16 AM PST by GatekeeperBookman ("The War does indeed have many facets; Look at your enemy." Listen to Tancredo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Mel Gibson
Without even going into the NWO, one can see that Powell saw the weakness-that Eastern Blue Blood civility which can't quite deal with the really world of killers. Of course, its almost impossible to look at this without asking why the Pouting Powell is still around!?!

Thanks for your effort & the tagline.
28 posted on 12/07/2003 6:33:03 AM PST by GatekeeperBookman ("The War does indeed have many facets; Look at your enemy." Listen to Tancredo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: bdeaner
I have repeatedly noted that the Adorno book was a fine case we should note-the book is NEVER mentioned by the Left ( media, academia, &etc ). It shows too clearly what they can't allow to be discussed-IMHO. I even had one psych prof who admitted this in class.

I shall print, read, & likely forward your link. Thanks for such useful information!
29 posted on 12/07/2003 6:36:45 AM PST by GatekeeperBookman ("The War does indeed have many facets; Look at your enemy." Listen to Tancredo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: WilliamofCarmichael
You are pretty much on target-but one small differrence between then & NOW.

I think of LBJ as the creature in the old '50's SciFio film, THE THING-it was found buried in the Polar ice in a crashed 'saucer'! James Arness' first role I believe-& he spoke not one word, only walking to his demise in an electric flash. A vegetable creature, a mindless monster prone to crush anyone in his path.

Today we have a somewhat different President. We also have a population which is on-line or likely knows someone who is. Even the flawed & endangered Ma-ha-Rushie has spawned countless little radio 'rushies'.

Thanks for the cautionary observations.
30 posted on 12/07/2003 6:52:04 AM PST by GatekeeperBookman ("The War does indeed have many facets; Look at your enemy." Listen to Tancredo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Mel Gibson
IN ninety one did we not promise the saudis we would not invade iraq, isnt that why they didnt protest our going to war with hussein, I seen or read somewhere that the middle east heads of state were concerned , the saudis were afraid we would take over iraqs oil ,if we took the whole country am I right with this.
31 posted on 12/07/2003 7:20:38 AM PST by douglas1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: LoudRepublicangirl
It actually goes back to the fact that fascists and communists used to be rivals in the recruiting war for the totalitarian-minded intellectuals of Europe. Indeed, they commonly traded members back and forth as happens with faddish elite beliefs. Mussolini was a socialist. So was Hitler, but being the other "side of the same coin" led to great hatred between Communists and Fascists. One side's outlook was "international" and the other was more inward and focused on the "nation" or "Volk."

So somewhere along the line, despite the pact between Stalin and Hitler, the communists viewed the fascists as their arch-enemy, and as such would soon label ANYONE who opposed them as "Fascist."

So what you see today, despite being terribly inaccurate, is merely a continuation of that ideological European war.
32 posted on 12/07/2003 7:31:56 AM PST by Skywalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: bdeaner
Islam _is_ the culmination and combination of religion+facism. Nothing less.

It is antithetical to the concept of a loving, peaceful religion.

It is antithetical to the concept of democracy.

It is antithetical to the notion of "religious freedom".

It is diametrically opposed to EVERYTHING the Judeo-Christian West represents.

Islam and the Western World cannot co-exist in peace. One _must_ triumph over the other.

I prefer that it be OUR side that wins.

Am I implying that the inhabitants of today's Islamic nations can never adopt self-government, religious freedom, social tolerance, and reach peace with the rest of the world? No.

What I _am_ implying is that they can never truly accomplish such achievements so long as Islam lives within them and around them. Remove Islam from the equation, and anything might become possible.

If that means the complete and utter destruction of Islam as cult and religion is required in order to achieve such victory.... well, I won't go further....

In my backyard I have two apple trees. Each and every year, the apples fall to the ground, and each and every year, I have to pick them up and pitch them into the bushes to get rid of them.

If I truly want to rid myself of the problem of falling apples once and for all, what must I do?

- John
33 posted on 12/07/2003 7:37:59 AM PST by Fishrrman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: defenderSD
Not speculation,
you just made the other guy's point.
34 posted on 12/07/2003 7:53:04 AM PST by norton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: an amused spectator; Skywalk
In contrast, the hijackers chose not to take the top off the World Trade Center, but to incinerate the entire building — proof that they wished not to send us a message but to kill us all, and to kill us to the applause of millions, if the recent popularity of Osama bin Laden and his henchmen in the Arab street is any indication.

I have to issue a slight correction re Eminem. The generic nature of the rapper's comments have been pointed out to me.

"We've got a choice: Do we want flush toilets, or do we want to crap behind a rock?"

"The Dixie Chicks, Eminem Barbra Streisand and their like, apparently enjoy the prospect of using the nearest handy rock."

35 posted on 12/07/2003 8:50:05 AM PST by an amused spectator (1,700 innocent civilians saved by United States troops in November, 2003)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: an amused spectator
Excellent edit, my friend.
36 posted on 12/07/2003 9:04:15 AM PST by Skywalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: bdeaner
The good Dr. Ray may be the Larger Hammer often sought.

More, MUCH more:
Below is a list of excerpts from older articles put online by John Ray as a public service. The articles concerned are in general otherwise available only by special request to a University or other major library.


Alker, H.A. (1971) A quasi-paranoid feature of students' extreme attitudes against colonialism. Behavioral Science, 16, 218-227.

Baker, L. D., Di Marco, N. & Scott, W. E. (1975) Effects of supervisors' sex and level of authoritarianism on evaluation and reinforcement of blind and sighted workers. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol 60(1), 28-32.

Breggin, P.R. (1979) The Psychiatric Holocaust. Penthouse, January.

Ellis, A. (1970) Intellectual Fascism J. Human Relations, 18, 700-709.

Alan C. Elms (1970) Those little old ladies in tennis shoes are no nuttier than anyone else, it turns out. Psychology Today, 3, 27-59.

Fracchia, J., Sheppard, C., Pintyr, J., Crovello, J. & Merlis, S. (1972) Personal adjustment and authoritarian attitudes toward the mentally ill. Psychological Reports, 31, 483-486.

Gabennesch, H. (1972) Authoritarianism as World View. American J. Sociology, 77 (5), 857-875.

Garcia, L.T. & Griffitt, W. (1978) Authoritarianism-Situation Interactions in the Determination of Punitiveness: Engaging Authoritarian Ideology. J. Research in Personality 12, 469-478

Gregor, A.J. (1979) Italian Fascism and developmental dictatorship. Princeton, N.J.: Univ. Press.

David J. Hanson (1975) Authoritarianism as a variable in political research. Il Politico, 15, (4), 700-705.

Paul Hartmann (1977) A perspective on the study of social attitudes. European J. Social Psychology, 7 (1), 85-96.

Hogan, R.T. & Emler, N.P. (1978) The Biases In Contemporary Social Psychology. Social Research, 45, 478-544.

Koomen, W. (1974) A note on the authoritarian German family. J. Marriage and the Family, Vol 6 (3), 634-636.

Krishna, K.P. & Prasad, S.C. (1971) Authoritarianism as a Function of Security-Insecurity and Anxiety. Manas, 18 (2), Pp. 85-90.

Krout, M.H. (1937) A Controlled Study of the Development and Attitudes of Radicals. Psychological Bulletin, 34, 706-707.

Larsen, K.S, Coleman, D., Forbes, J. & Johnson, R. (1978) Is the subject's personality or the experimental situation a better predictor of a subject's willingness to administer shock to a victim? J. Personality & Social Psychology, 1972, 22 (5), 287-295

Oskamp, S. & Thompson, G. (1970) Internal inconsistency in the stereopathy-acquiescence scales: A warning note. Journal of Social Psychology, 1970, 81, 73-77.

Penman, K.A., Hastad, D.N. & Cords, W.L. (1974) Success of the authoritarian coach. The Journal of Social Psychology, 92, 155-156.

Ritzler, B. A. (1978) The Nuremberg mind revisited: A quantitative approach to Nazi Rorschachs. Journal of Personality Assessment, 42 (4), 344-353

Simpson, M. (1972) Authoritarianism and Education: A Comparative Approach. Sociometry, Vol. 35, No. 2, 223-234

Singer, E.A. & Wooton, L.M. (1976) The Triumph and Failure of Albert Speer's Administrative Genius: Implications for Current Management Theory and Practice. J. Applied Behavioral Science, 12 (1), 79-103.

Sutherland, S.L. & Tanenbaum, E.J. (1980) Submissive authoritarians: Need we fear the fearful toadie? Canadian Review of Sociology & Anthropology, 17 (1), 1-23.

Suziedelis, A. & Lorr, M. (1973) Conservative attitudes and authoritarian values. The Journal of Psychology, 83, 287-294.

Thomas, D.R. The relationship between ethnocentrism and conservatism in an "authoritarian" culture. J. Social Psychology, 1974, 94, 179-186.

Thompson, D. (1971) Book review of: HITLER'S SS, by Richard Grunberger. Daily Telegraph (Sydney) Saturday, January 30th, p.14.

Titus, H.E. (1968) F scale validity considered against peer nomination criteria. The Psychological Record, 1968, 18, 395-403.

Titus, H.E. & Hollander, E.P. (1957) The California F scale in psychological research: 1950-1955. Psychological Bulletin, 54, 47-64.

Unger, A. L. (1965) Party and State in Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany. The Political Quarterly, 1965, 36 (4), 441-459

Way, J.G. (1973) The relation of student and teacher traits of authoritarianism to student achievement in English. J. Psychology, 85, 229-234.

Zuckerman, M. & Gerbasi, K. C. (1977) Belief in a just world and trust. Journal of Research in Personality, 11 (3), 306-317.

{ go onto the above linked page & these links provide many more pages }
Back to Starting page
Go to John Ray's "Dissecting Leftism" blog
Go to The Mirror site for "Dissecting Leftism"
Go to John Ray's "Political Correctness Watch" blog
Go to John Ray's Main academic menu
Go to Menu of recent writings
Go to John Ray's Home Page

37 posted on 12/07/2003 9:49:45 AM PST by GatekeeperBookman ("The War does indeed have many facets; Look at your enemy." Listen to Tancredo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: douglas1
The Brits were furious about the cease-fire. So were the Saudis, Qataris and other Arab Gulf countries. In fact, Newsweek reported British Gulf commander Gen. Sir Peter de la Billiere went "ballistic" and British Foreign Secretary Douglas Hurd--who happened to be in Washington--jumped Bush about it immediately, unfortunately to no avail.

No, the Saudis were on our side during Operation Desert Storm. The Arab Gulf countries wanted Saddam Hussein removed since they lived closest to the "loose cannon". Keep in mind, that Saddam Hussein also started the war with Iran. Worrying about taking over Iraqi oil had nothing to do with it. Make no mistake about it, the current war ongoing in Iraq is a result of unfinished business from the first war with Iraq. The Kuwaitis hate Saddam Hussein, he raped their women and destroyed their country, naturally they wanted him out. President Bush (No. 41) and Colin Powell held all the cards and did not take advantage of what they had.

38 posted on 12/07/2003 10:21:13 AM PST by Mel Gibson (Colin Powell is living proof that affirmative action is a failure.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: GatekeeperBookman
its almost impossible to look at this without asking why the Pouting Powell is still around!?!

Political Correctness.

39 posted on 12/07/2003 10:26:17 AM PST by Mel Gibson (Colin Powell is living proof that affirmative action is a failure.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Skywalk
I was aware of the rivalry between the communists and fascist-hence during WWII the Russians fighting the Germans. As we have seen, both systems fail humankind. I just find it interesting that many of the "educated elite" continually mislabel those such as myself who do not believe in fascism or socialism with their slurs. They seem to have hijacked history to use to their advantage because they cannot come up with anything else.
40 posted on 12/07/2003 10:45:21 AM PST by LoudRepublicangirl (loudrepublicangirl)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-42 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
Topics · Post Article

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