The Coming Attack

www.jrnyquist.com | June 24, 2002 | J. R. Nyquist

[GOP_1900AD]

How confident are you that Pakistan and the PRC have been on the up and up? That's the answer to your question...

[GOP_1900AD]

On 9/11, Bush followed the same protocol as would be followed in an ICBM strike on US soil. He went to a secret bunker. We went to counterstrike ready status. Now why would we do that in response to simple "terrorism," and why did our adoption of that response stop the attacks? Think.... "and the states who sponsor them..."

[GOP_1900AD]

You might have described Bodansky, who is also well interviewed...

[185JHP]

They (the Islamists) are operating under some seriously warped assumptions, among them: (1) they think the U.S. is "X42 writ large" and (2) they think that our innate decency, not wanting to cause widespread civilian deaths, waiting to make sure we hit the right people, is weakness. It's part of the thug mindset to believe that "if you could, you would - that you haven't means you can't." They don't realize that the girly-men and the leftist sapheads aren't in control in the WH at this time. Some real painful experiences are coming for them - maybe real soon.

[GOP_1900AD]

A few other facts. Ex-Marine, UC Irvine Masters, author of "The Origins of the Fourth World War: The Coming Wars Of Mass Destruction." and one very busy man. What he writes and says is actually not all that far off from what folks like Kagan, Cheney, Gaffney, and Perry (the one on Newsmax, not the liberal one!) have been saying. In essence, his central message is that we have not learned from other past (and now failed) "democratic" civilizations who, after a period of supramecy, allowed whatever version of "PC" and creeping social decay to inhibit their ability to coldly calculate what steps were necessary to defend their nations and preempt growing geopolitical threats. The most recent example (not mentioned in his book, unfortunately) was the UK, 1919 - 1939. Liberals, homosexuals, peacenicks, nihilists, communists, and, I hate to mention, myopic businessmen who naively believed that commerce was the antidote to all aggressive regimes and subsequent war, dominated the public square in the UK at that time. They defunded defense, and cowered from confronting an escalating series of afronts to their geopolitical position.

Have we not, in essence, really done the same? I urge you all to avoid viewing 9/11 solely in terms of Al Qaida, so called "terrorism" or even solely in terms of the band of Islamic nations in the southern half of Asia. Look back as recently as summer 2001. At that time, I was seeing verious reports in the press about the PRC leading a cabal of nations, including all of the present "Axis of Evil" and increasingly even Russia and the CIS, ostensibly, "to challenge American hegemony" blah, blah, blah. How can we view this rhetoric, the EP3 attack, 9/11, the latest intifada, the Pakistani aggression in Kashmir, the Burmese aggression on the Thai border, and a number of other less than favorable (for the West) geopolitical events as being mere coincidence? It's is high time for us traditionally naive, benefit of a doubt giving Americans to take a much darker view of the overall geopolitical situation and to immediately cease trusting nations of not only the "Axis of Evil", but a number of others including the PRC, Russia, Belarus, Ukraine, Cuba, Myanmar, Laos, and others. The next axis, which Bodansky titled "The Trans-Asian Axis" is jelling, and by the time the actions of the Axis become 11 O'Clock News obvious, it will be too late for us to get our act together. Prove me wrong.

[bvw]

Guess I was a bit off on that worry. But looking in my box of worries here see I still have aplenty left.

[tall_tex]

Thanks for the info. Tom

[Argus]

I think the best way to prevent further catastrophic attacks on America is to take the war to the enemy, as Pres. Bush stated in his West Point speech. We're at war, let's get on with it.