In case you missed it, World War III began in November 1979... That alarm has been ringing for years.
U.S. Navy Captain Ouimette is the Executive Officer at Naval Air Station, Pensacola, Florida. Here is a copy of the speech he gave last month. It is an accurate account of why we are in so much trouble today and why this action is so necessary.
AMERICA NEEDS TO WAKE UP! That's what we think we heard on the 11th of September, 2001, (When more than 3,000 Americans were killed) and maybe it was, but I think it should have been "Get Out of Bed!" In fact, I think the alarm clock has been buzzing since 1979 and we have >continued to hit the snooze button and roll over for a few more minutes ofpeaceful sleep since then. It was a cool fall day in November, 1979, in a country going through a religious and political upheaval when a group of Iranian students attacked and seized the American Embassy in Tehran. This seizure was an outright attack on American soil; it was an attack thatheld the world's most powerful country hostage and paralyzed a Presidency.
The attack on this sovereign U. S. embassy set the stage for events to follow for the next 23 years.
America was still reeling from the aftermath of the Vietnam experience and had a serious threat from the Soviet Union when then, President Carter, had to do something.
He chose to conduct a clandestine raid in the desert. The ill-fated mission ended in ruin, but stood as a symbol of America's inability to deal with terrorism.
America's military had been decimated and downsized/right-sized since the end of the Vietnam War. A poorly trained, poorly equipped and poorly organized military was called on to execute a complex mission that was doomed from the start.
Shortly after the Tehran experience, Americans began to be kidnapped and killed throughout the Middle East.
America could do little to protect her citizens living and working abroad. The attacks against U.S. soil continued.
In April of 1983, a large vehicle packed with high explosives was driven into the U.S. Embassy compound in Beirut. When it exploded, it killed 63 people.
The alarm went off again and America hit the Snooze Button once more.
Then just six short months later a large truck heavily laden down with over 2,500 pounds of TNT smashed through the main gate of the U.S. Marine Corps headquarters in Beirut and 241 U.S. servicemen are killed. America mourns her dead and hit the Snooze Button once more.
Two months later in December, 1983, another truck loaded with explosives is driven into the U.S. Embassy in Kuwait, and America continues her slumber.
The following year, in September, 1984, another van was driven into the gate of the U.S. Embassy in Beirut and America slept.
Soon the terrorism spreads to Europe. In April, 1985, a bomb explodes in a restaurant frequented by US soldiers in Madrid.
Then in August a Volkswagen loaded with explosives is driven into the main gate of the US Air Force Base at Rhein-Main. 22 are killed and the Snooze Alarm is buzzing louder and louder as U.S. interests are continually attacked.
Fifty-nine days later a cruise ship, the Achille Lauro, is hijacked and we watched as an American in a wheelchair is singled out of the passenger list and executed.
The terrorists then shift their tactics to bombing civilian airliners-- >when they bomb TWA Flight 840 in April of 1986, that killed 4 and the most tragic bombing, Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988, killing 259.
Clinton treated these terrorist acts as crimes! In fact we are still trying to bring these people to trial. These are acts of war!
The Wake-Up Alarm is getting louder and louder. The terrorists decide to bring the fight to America. In January 1993, 2 CIA agents are shot and killed as they enter CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.
The following month, February, 1993, a group of terrorists are arrested after a rented van packed with explosives is driven into the underground parking garage of the World Trade Center in New York City. Six people are killed and over 1000 are injured.
Still this is a crime and not an act of war? The Snooze Alarm is depressed again. Then in November, 1995, a car bomb explodes at a U.S. military complex in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, killing seven service men and women.
A few months later in June of 1996, another truck bomb explodes only 35 yards from the U.S. military compound in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. It destroys the Khobar Towers, a US Air Force barracks, killing 19 and injuring over 500.
The terrorists are getting braver and smarter as they see that America does not respond decisively.
They move to coordinate their attacks in a simultaneous attack on two US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. These attacks were planned with precision.
They kill 224 America responds with cruise missile attacks and goes back to sleep.(That might have killed a camel) The U.S.S. Cole was docked in the port of Aden, Yemen, for refueling on 12 October 2000, when a small craft pulled along side the ship and exploded killing 17 US Navy Sailors. Attacking a U.S. War Ship is an act of war, but we sent the FBI to investigate the crime and went back to sleep.
And of course you know the events of 11 September, 2001.
Most Americans think this was the first attack against U.S. soil or in America. How wrong they are.
America has been under a constant attack since 1979 and we chose to hit theSnooze Alarm and roll over and go back to sleep.
In the news lately we have seen lots of finger pointing from many high officials in government over what they knew and what they didn't know.
But if you've read the papers and paid a little attention, I think you can see exactly what they knew.
You don't have to be in the FBI or CIA or on the National Security Council to see the pattern that has been developing since 1979.
The President is right on when he says we are engaged in a war.
I think we have been in a war for the past 23 years and it will continue until we as a people decide enough is enough. America needs to "Get out of Bed" and act decisively now. America has been changed forever.
We have to be ready to pay the price and make the sacrifice to ensure our way of life continues.
We cannot afford to keep hitting the Snooze Button again and again and roll over and go back to sleep.
After the attack on Pearl Harbor, Admiral Yamamoto said, "...it seems all we have done is awakened a sleeping giant." This is the message we need to disseminate to terrorists around the world.
This is not a political thing to be hashed over in an election year = this is an AMERICAN thing!
This is about our Freedom and the Freedom of our children in years to come.
quote:Originally posted by glassman: tony, you need to get more sleep.... WW3 is over this one is WW4...LOL
Right on Tony.
Those who are against the Iraq invasion and liberation are, knowingly or unknowingly, enemies of the US and supporters of terrorism.
The fact is that nations are always at war with each other, competing in the world market place, strengthening their economic leverage in a political war with other nations, and at times, engaging in actual combat. This is a fact of life that will never change, and should not change (understandable when you understand life and personality).
Liberals will disagree, but they can only argue back by demeaning the source - their typical level of counter-argument.
posted
MOST AMERICANS DON'T know anything about WAR! WAR is basically a legal way of murdering people IMO! Think of how many IRAQIS have been killed. Over 100,000 civilians and more added daily! I don't blame people for standing up against what they believe are occupiers. If I lived somewhere and another nation came and killed my family I would take up arms against them. I just can't believe they call civilian KILLINGS collateral damage! The US says all people fighting us are terrorists. This is just not true. I don't see how we can FORCE are western values on to the MUSLIMS. I just don't see it working. Sure there are terrorists there NOW but MOST are native IRAQIS!
May GOD BLESS our troops! They are only doing what they are told!
[This message has been edited by osubucks30 (edited November 08, 2004).]
posted
the election is over... the troops need YOU.... if you don't agree with the politicians then work effectively to change their minds... the troops are just following orders... don't make the situation worse for them..
[This message has been edited by glassman (edited November 08, 2004).]
quote:Originally posted by glassman: the election is over... the troops need YOU.... if you don't agree with the politicians then work effectively to change their minds... the troops are just following orders... don't make the situation worse for them..
[This message has been edited by glassman (edited November 08, 2004).]
Actually, yes glass the election is over and it would seem that America does agree with the administration about the war on terror. I do not feel pitty towards your apparent lack of ability to understand why war is preferable to words of compasion and sensetivity towards those who would do us harm. I am somewhat frustrated by your apparent mental lackings. You have sided with our enemy on every occasion. The proof is in... you are an unamerican communist sympathizer without the balls to declare it for yourself. Get over it glass, we all know who you are. Atleast have the guts to stand up for who you are rather than give some witless diatribe about why I am wrong about you.
Posts: 1019 | From: Are You With The CIA? | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
true OSU, and it does require a minor amount of intellect to understand that.... LOL Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
apparently,besides waiting for the election to be over, we were ALSO waiting for some 5000 Iraqi troops to complete training so they could participate in this offensive.... unfortunately it appears that about half of them went AWOL..... expect more of that.... too many "optimists" in certain areas think that we are welcome liberators... we WILL prevail tho...
Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
It should be easy. We are fighting foot soldiers with tanks and bombs. All I am worried about in the civilain casualities. I think there may be nothing left after we complete the mission!
Posts: 1458 | From: Ohio | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osubucks30: MOST AMERICANS DON'T know anything about WAR! WAR is basically a legal way of murdering people IMO! Think of how many IRAQIS have been killed. Over 100,000 civilians and more added daily! I don't blame people for standing up against what they believe are occupiers. If I lived somewhere and another nation came and killed my family I would take up arms against them. I just can't believe they call civilian KILLINGS collateral damage! The US says all people fighting us are terrorists. This is just not true. I don't see how we can FORCE are western values on to the MUSLIMS. I just don't see it working. Sure there are terrorists there NOW but MOST are native IRAQIS!
May GOD BLESS our troops! They are only doing what they are told!
[This message has been edited by osubucks30 (edited November 08, 2004).]
didn't terrorists come in and kill people from your country???????
you haven't taken up arms.
hmmmmmm......
Posts: 9110 | From: boston, ma | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
IRAQ DID NOT ATTACK US! THEY HAVE NO CONNECTION WITH 9/11!! BUT POLLS STILL SUGGEST THE AMERICAN PEOPLE BELIEVE THEY DID!!
WHY DO THEY THINK IRAQ WAS INVOLVED? BECAUSE BUSH LIED AND MISLEAD THE AMERICANS AND THE REST OF THE WORLD. I WOULD TAKE UP ARMS IF WE WERE INVADED BY ANOTHER COUNTRY!!
THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A DEFENSIVE STRIKE AND A PRE-EMPTIVE STRIKE!!! YOU CAN"T START HAVING PRE-EMPTIVE WARS!!!!! WE CAN'T FIGHT THE WHOLE MUSLIM WORLD!!!!!!
posted
It is not about Iraq being connected to 9/11. Bush never asserted any such connection, and did not lie about anything.
It is about mideast stabilty, necessary for the world economy. We took the fight to the terrorists in Iraq simply because the terrorists and Saddam were both threats to mideast stability.
We are winning the war and will make the mideast secure, and avoid a world wide depression which otherwise would have occurred.
It is about your ability to live a decent life. This means that other people, who would ruin your life or kill you, must be killed. If you can't accept this, move to Canada and hate the US from there.
quote:Originally posted by osubucks30: THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A DEFENSIVE STRIKE AND A PRE-EMPTIVE STRIKE!!! YOU CAN"T START HAVING PRE-EMPTIVE WARS!!!!! WE CAN'T FIGHT THE WHOLE MUSLIM WORLD!!!!!!
A defensive strike follows a past enemy attack, to prevent or reduce future such enemy atacks, while a pre-emptive strike is before a future enemy attack, to prevent or reduce such enemy attacks. Both are defensive in that they both aim at preventing or reducing future enemy attacks.
The atomic bombs used on Japan were pre-emptive strikes which avoided an invasion of Japan which would have killed millions in a prolonged war on Japanese soil, which the Japanese were prepared to fight to the last person alive. Even Japanese women and children were being trained to fight a prolonged war on Japanese soil.
If you could have prevented the pre-emptive use of atomic bombs in WW II you would have been responsible for millions of lives. Is that what you want?
quote:Originally posted by osubucks30: In case yoy FORGOT Japan attacked Pearl Harbor!! So it was a defensive stike!! NOT A PRE-EMPTIVE ONE! YOU LEFT THAT POINT OUT!!
No, we were not in much danger from attack by Japan, and had not been attacked recently, just before we used atomic bombs against them. Japan was preparing to defend the homeland against our invasion, and we were preparing to invade Japan. Our use of atomic bombs was in no way defensive except as pre-emptive aggression to prevent further war - a defense against future bloodshed.
We could have negotiated a truce in which we agreed to go home if both sides ceased hostilities. However, Japan would have rebuilt its war machine and then invaded Asia as they had done before Pearl Harbor. Ultimately, we might have to come back and finish the job after Japan over-ran Asia.
Defeat of Japan necessitated invasion, in a war lasting many years, or a pre-emptive atomic strike to prevent this. We saved lives in using atomic bombs in pre-emptive strikes.
Our defeat of terrorism in the next few years will come at a cost, but will save lives over the long haul. Invading Iraq is essential to this effort.
quote:Originally posted by osubucks30: IRAQ DID NOT ATTACK US! THEY HAVE NO CONNECTION WITH 9/11!! BUT POLLS STILL SUGGEST THE AMERICAN PEOPLE BELIEVE THEY DID!!
WHY DO THEY THINK IRAQ WAS INVOLVED? BECAUSE BUSH LIED AND MISLEAD THE AMERICANS AND THE REST OF THE WORLD.
Many liberals say invading Iraq was a bad idea. They didn't say this at the time of the invasion, however. Liberals are good at whining and complaining but bad at problem solving. They now whine about invading Iraq. Exceptions such as Lieberman show some liberals appreciate reality, though most live in La La land. What would have happened, if liberals had their present wish, if we had not invaded Iraq?
1. Saddam had WMD - that is a fact. He also had WMD developmental programs on hold, ready to be activated when UN sanctions were lifted - that is a fact.
2. The US would have soon recalled their military from the mideast, if the weapons inspections were extended, under world pressure, given that UN inspectors failed to discover Saddam's WMD (which could have gone to Syria or have been buried in the desert). The UN weapons inspections would have been discontinued and sanctions lifted.
3. Saddam would then reinstitute WMD development. He was close to developing atomic bombs in the early 90s and would return to quickly develop them.
4. To pursue his goal of taking over the mideast and then marching through Israel in victory, he would plan another invasion of Kuwait. In order to tie up the US., he would have secretly supplied WMD (including nuclear) to Al-Qaeda for them to attack New York and Washington. While the US was in chaos over these attacks, Saddam would have attacked Kuwait with WMD. After securing their oil, he would attack Saudi Arabia and established Iraq as the most powerful nation in the mideast. Oil prices to the US and its allies (not France, Germany, Russia or China) would skyrocket. Meanwhile, he would continue to secretly supply terrorists with WMD in continuing attacks on US soil.
5. The US would go into economic depression. It would not be a peaceful one like in the 30s - it would involve riots and gang robbery, with many people being killed.
6. Israel might have to use nuclear weapons against Saddam if Saddam did not try a first strike to defeat Israel quickly - either way the oil supply in the mideast would be disrupted, provoking a world wide depression.
Liberals living in their La La world say this all could never have happened.
Those who understand history would say it could easily have happened.
The Hawks Loudly Express Their Second Thoughts The following article is more broadly about how initial supporters of the war in Iraq are having second thoughts, or doubts about how it has been conducted. It's relevant to this site for two reasons: 1) it mentions a number of neoconservatives (Max Boot, Charles Krauthammer, Bill Kristol, and more) amongst the ranks of the disappointed, and 2) it speaks of how traditional conservatives (like CNN pundit Tucker Carlson, for example) are waking up to the fact that they allowed themselves to be spun into supporting a war which is not reflective of a conservative view of government's role.
That sentiment is summed up best in this sentence:
How, they wonder, did so many conservatives, who normally don't trust their government to run a public school down the street, come to believe that federal bureaucrats could transform an entire nation in the alien culture of the Middle East?
Good question.
LOL
[This message has been edited by glassman (edited November 08, 2004).]
posted
It comes down to a simple choice! Sit and do nothing, and allow the terrorists to take over the world, and do whatever they want, to whomever they want, or go after them, and stop them before they kill innocent people, our family and friends!
Posts: 622 | From: USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osubucks30: IRAQ DID NOT ATTACK US! THEY HAVE NO CONNECTION WITH 9/11!! BUT POLLS STILL SUGGEST THE AMERICAN PEOPLE BELIEVE THEY DID!!
WHY DO THEY THINK IRAQ WAS INVOLVED? BECAUSE BUSH LIED AND MISLEAD THE AMERICANS AND THE REST OF THE WORLD. I WOULD TAKE UP ARMS IF WE WERE INVADED BY ANOTHER COUNTRY!!
THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A DEFENSIVE STRIKE AND A PRE-EMPTIVE STRIKE!!! YOU CAN"T START HAVING PRE-EMPTIVE WARS!!!!! WE CAN'T FIGHT THE WHOLE MUSLIM WORLD!!!!!!
where did i mention 9/11?????? al queda are on the only terrorists,
pre-emption would've been nice on binladen before 9/11 though....
if you think there were no terrorists, support for terrorist, funding for terrorists and terrorist training camps in iraq, you are mistaken.....
yes there are other places with them also and i hope we find a way to dig'em out...
Posts: 9110 | From: boston, ma | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The initial post on this thread speaks volumes... Past administrations treated acts of terror as criminal action versus isolated acts of war. So while we seek, capture, try, and punish those evildoers, their bretheren continue to train and plan for future attacks against us. WOW...that really did a lot of good. Look at how many attacks have transpired since 79'. All because we took on a position of passivism and treated terror as an insignificant threat--or as Kerry calls it "a nuisance".
Taking an offensive position against them is what has been needed. Past passivism has gotten us nowhere and has encouraged terrorists to further their agenda, fund themselves and plan more elaborate schemes.
One agruement I don't understand from the liberal side is this: They critisize those of us who support the war and encourage its offensive position, when history has shown that our own inactivity in dealing effectively and definitively with each terrorist act has shown to be totally ineffective. What would they have us do--continue to turn a blind eye, and continue along the path of least resistence? It doesn't work. 9/11 happened precisely because of our appethetic position and not taking advantages of opportunities that were presented to us.
Furthermore, for those who distain the war in Iraq, remember; Bush's mandate for war, which had virtually unanimous congressional support, stated that we would root out terrorists and those that harbor them--Iraq is/was included in that equation.
[This message has been edited by pennyearned (edited November 09, 2004).]
even the real conservatives are scratching their heads over this one....i saw Newt Gingrich TODAY say we should be out of Iraq already....
General Powell said EARLY ON ..it's pottery barn rules...
you break it? you bought it...
it's ours now so quit lying to yourselves and get over it...we will win IN SPITE of the idiocy...
Bush held meetings with congressional leaders to EARN the vote for war powers...he was granted them.... what he did with them was HIS decision...LOL he earned that vote with "evidence" that WMD's were present and even 45 minutes from being deployed....sheesh...
[This message has been edited by glassman (edited November 09, 2004).]
quote:Originally posted by glassman: you guys are rewriting history AGAIN...
even the real conservatives are scratching their heads over this one....i saw Newt Gingrich TODAY say we should be out of Iraq already....
General Powell said EARLY ON ..it's pottery barn rules...
you break it? you bought it...
it's ours now so quit lying to yourselves and get over it...we will win IN SPITE of the idiocy...
Bush held meetings with congressional leaders to EARN the vote for war powers...he was granted them.... what he did with them was HIS decision...LOL he earned that vote with "evidence" that WMD's were present and even 45 minutes from being deployed....sheesh...
[This message has been edited by glassman (edited November 09, 2004).]
I believe we should be there, but don't approve of all we've done. Unlike previous administrations, at least Bush had the kahunas to deal aggressively with a legitimate threat--terror as a whole.
We should be done and over with regarding Iraq. Too much political BS involved. In that way Bush is no different than Clinton or Carter.
Regarding WMD's, I really don't care...Iraq habored terrorists and they were next in line after Aphganistan. Glass, you seem hellbent on the WMD thing. If Saddam didn't have them, then why did he not allow inspectors in for so long, or kick them out when they were meddling too much?
WMD's posed only one reason we went to war in Iraq. Harboring terrorists is another. Just because solid proof of the former is unsubstantiated, doesn't illigitimize the later as a cause.
posted
the WMD thing? it was wasted political capitAl that's why i am so BENT on it... it's history now, but i like to keep the facts in order so we can improve next time..
i'm accustomed to being called liberal by the conservatives and conservative by the liberals..done is done..i'm moving on... the troops are in there right now cleaning out the mess. support them. don't whine about collateral damage, they have to worry about their own skin FIRST
you guys that keep make EXCUSES for failure are the real problem....
i don't have a political agenda...i look at the situation and TRY to come up with a realistic theory about what is going on...(i know i am not always right )
for instance the first post on this thread? stupid..of course we have been at war since 1979....only an idiot doesn't know that, we have been at war with Russia/USSR since half-way thru WW2 too, we don't have to shoot to win wars, it just wastes money.... we are still at war with Russia by the way...
posted
for instance the first post on this thread? stupid..of course we have been at war since 1979....only an idiot doesn't know that, we have been at war with Russia/USSR since half-way thru WW2 too,
Hey i resemble that remark LOl,ieven posted it.LOL oh you want to get personal,why you no good LOL Been busy not much time to even look at market last 2 days.Hope you guys are making money.
quote:Originally posted by glassman: as fara s the terroist thing in iraq? if they didn' have the SECOND LARGEST oil reserves in the world? we wouldn't bother....
why don't we take Columbia? they are poisoning our kids.... HMMMMM?????
kosovo, no oil, afghanistan, no oil...
Posts: 9110 | From: boston, ma | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
yeah, and how many troops are still in those countries??LOL do not misundertake me just because the oil is there, doesn't mean it's not national security....
if the people really wanted a democracy? we wouldn't be fighting right now, and the insurgency was NOT planned for...
[This message has been edited by glassman (edited November 09, 2004).]
posted
i like this thread but alot of people are missing a very important point about terrorism.. all these attacks on our embassies, ships and the twin towers are in retaliation for our military and finacial support of israel, who invaded and are illegally occupying palestinian land. And whenever israel decides to roll into palestine (with US supplied tanks and f-16s) and kill some people it echoes throughout the muslim world that the united states is supporting these acts against there people.. and they cant compete with the US militarily, so terrorism is their tactic of choice..
It makes me wonder alot about how the US always comes to the aid whenever one country invades another. ie kuwait, but israel has been doing this to the palestinians for decades and we give them money and weapons.. ???? that can only mean one thing, the united states supports these acts against palestinians and for that reason we will continue to be the target for terrorism, period.
Posts: 678 | From: currently in hiding due to investigation | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
sama is still running around...thats failure....
