The Misadventures of Curious Anna

Saturday, February 23, 2008
ick!

just got this e-mail. contains an argument for why we should support the war. i know i shouldn't get caught up in these things, but it upset me because its so misinformed and fear mongery and so many people are probably reading it and nodding their heads! so, with full knowledge that it will do little good and will mostly be read by people who already agree with me, here is a point by point refutation of it. i corrected it in the style i correct freshmen papers in my TA class. this one would have gotten an F.


A different spin on the war in Iraq: This WAR is REAL Dr. Vernon Chong, Major General, USAF, Retired
To get out of a difficulty, one usually must go through it. Our country is now facing the most serious threat to its existence, as we know it, that we have faced in your lifetime and mine (which includes WWII).

makes no effort to support this claim with any evidence, he just says it.

y seriousness is greatly compounded by the fact that there are very few of us who think we can possibly lose this war and even fewer who realize what losing really means.First, let's examine a few basics:1. When did the threat to us start? Many will say September 11, 2001. The answer, as far as the United States is concerned, is 1979, 22 years prior to September 2001, with the following attacks on us: * Iran Embassy Hostages, 1979; * Beirut , Lebanon Embassy 1983; * Beirut, Lebanon Marine Barracks 1983; * Lockerbie , Scotland Pan-Am flight to New York 1988; * First New York World Trade Center attack 1993; * Dhahran , Saudi Arabia Khobar Towers Military complex 1996; * Nairobi , Kenya US Embassy 1998; * Dares Salaam , Tanzania US Embassy 1998; * Aden , Yemen USS Cole 2000; * New York World Trade Center 2001; and * Pentagon 2001. (Note: during the period from 1981 to 2001 there were 7,581 terrorist attacks worldwide.)
2. Why were we attacked?Envy of our position, our success, and our freedoms. The attacks happened during the administrations of Presidents Carter, Reagan, Bush

false. Envy plays a role, but much more important is the fury over Israel, globalization, and imperialist capitalist policies (read OIL) encroaching on their cultures. They view themselves as having been under attack by the west for decades. They also have a much longer memory than we do and are culturally close to their ancestors and thus still thoroughly remember the atrocities of the crusades and of colonialism in the 19th and 20th centuries.

1, Clinton, and Bush 2. W e cannot fault either the Republicans or the Democrats, as there were no provocations by any of the presidents or their immediate predecessor, President Ford.
3. Who were the attackers?In each case, the attacks on the US were carried out by Muslims.
4. What is the Muslim population of the World?25%.
5. Isn't the Muslim religion peaceful?Hopefully, but that is really not material. There is no doubt that the predominately Christian population of Germany was peaceful, but under the dictatorial leadership of Hitler (who was also Christian, a Catholic), that made no difference. You either went along with the administration or you were eliminated. There were 5 to 6 million Christians killed by the Nazis for political reasons (including 7,000 Polish priests).

This is a poor analogy – the muslims are not united around a single leader any more than they are united around the concept of killing the infidels. Everyone always likes to compare the bad guys with the Nazis, but there are too many differences here to enumerate.

Thus, almost the same number of Christians were killed by the Nazis as the six million holocaust Jews who were killed by them, and we seldom hear of anything other than the Jewish atrocities.

Mildly aniti-semitic?

Although Hitler kept the world focused on the Jews, he had no hesitancy in killing anyone who got in the way of his extermination of the Jews or of taking over the world - German, Christian, or any others.Same with the Muslim terrorists. They focus the world on the US, but kill all in the way -- their own people or the Spanish, British, French or anyone else. The point here is that, just like the peaceful Germans were of no protection to anyone from the Nazis, no matter how many peaceful Muslims there may be, they are no protection for us from the terrorist Muslim leaders and what they are fanatically bent on doing -- by their own pronouncements -- killing all of us "infidels." I don't blame the peaceful Muslims. What would you do if the choice was to remain silent or be killed?

Fear mongering. I see only generalities and no facts in the paragraph above. You must support your argument with facts.

6. So who are we at war with?There is no way we can honestly respond that it is anyone other than the Muslim terrorists. Trying to be politically correct and avoid verbalizing this conclusion can well be fatal. There is no way to win if you don't clearly recognize and articulate who you are fighting.

Clear articulation of who we’re fighting is lacking in the essay. Muslims covers one in five people in the world. Muslim terrorists is far too blurry a line to call it clear or articulate.

So with that background, now to the two major questions: 1. Can we lose this war?2. What does losing really mean? If we are to win, we must clearly answer these two pivotal questions:We can definitely lose this war and, as anomalous as it may sound, the major reason we can lose is that so many of us simply do not fathom the answer to the second question - What does losing mean? ; ; It would appear that a great many of us think that losing the war means hanging our heads, bringing the troops home, and going on about our business, like post-Vietnam. This is as far from the truth as one can get.What losing really means is:We would no longer be the premier country in the world.

Spelling errors, and lack of analysis of what USA’s premiership really means and how we got there.

The attacks will not subside, but, rather, will steadily increase. Remember, they want us dead, not just quiet. If they had just wanted us quiet, they would not have produced an increasing series of attacks against us over the past 18 years. The plan was, clearly, for terrorists to attack us until we were neutered and submissive to them.

Bad logic, no facts, even with the word ‘clearly’ inserted

We would, of course, have no future support from other nations, for fear of reprisals and for the reason that they would see; we are impotent and cannot help them.They will pick off the other non-Muslim nations, one at a time. It will be increasingly easier for them. They already hold Spain hostage. It doesn't matter whether it was right or wrong for Spain to withdraw its troops from Iraq . Spain did it because the Muslim terrorists bombed their train and told them to withdraw the troops. Anything else they want Spain to do will be done. Spain is finished.

Laughable assertion! Spain is FINISHED? What? Spain prosecuted and incarcerated the men responsible for the attacks. Spain withdrew its troops for a number of reasons, not because they were cowed by the Madrid attacks.

The next will probably be France . Our one hope with France is that they might see the light and realize that if we don't win, they are finished, too, in that they can't resist the Muslim terrorists without us. H owever, it may already be too late for France . France is already 20% Muslim and fading fast.

This is much worse; leaving out all the pandering to peaceful Muslims made earlier, author now attacks all Muslims everywhere. Vast majority of Muslims in France are peaceful, and contribute to the country and culture, far from overriding French customs. There are issues, like wearing the veil in schools and poverty and discrimination against those of Arab descent, however to say France will soon become a Muslim country or turn against other western nations is outrageous.

Without our support, Great Britain will go, also. Recently, I read that there are more mosques in England than churches.

This is not an argument, it’s a timely observation. The fact does not support the assertion, and I’ve lost track of what the assertion was. If there are lots of Muslims, the country will become backwards and murderous? I missed that somewhere.

If we lose the war, our production, income, exports, and way of life will all vanish as we know it.

Such rampant fear mongering! based on bad logic.

After losing, who would trade or deal with us if they were threatened by the Muslims? If we can't stop the Muslim terrorists, how could anyone else? The radical Muslims fully know what is riding on this war, and therefore are completely committed to winning, at any cost. We'd better know it, too, and be likewise committed to winning at any cost. Why do I go on at such lengths about the results of losing? Simple. Until we recognize the costs of losing, we cannot unite and really put 100% o f our thoughts and efforts into winning. And it is going to take that 100% effort to win.So, how can we lose the war?Again, the answer is simple. We can lose the war by "imploding."That is, defeating ourselves by refusing to recognize the enemy and their purpose and failing to dig in and lend full support to the war effort. If we are united, there is no way that we can lose. If we continue to be divided, there is no way that we can win.Let me give you a few examples of how we simply don't comprehend the life and death seriousness of this situation:President Bush selects Norman Mineta as Secretary of Transportation. Although all of the terrorist attacks were committed by Muslim men between 17 and 40 years of age, Secretary Mineta refuses to allow profiling. Does that sound like we are taking this thing seriously? This is war! For the duration, we are going to have to give up some of the civil rights to which we have become accustomed. We had better be prepared to lose some of our civil rights temporarily or we will most certainly lose all of them permanently.And don't worry that it is a slippery slope. We gave up plenty of civil rights during WWII, and immediately restored them after the victory ... and, in fact, added many more since that time.

Historical analogies are worthless, but if we’re going to use them, let’s talk about the death of the Roman republic and founding of an Empire. Resulted from the slow erosion of civil rights during the wars with the barbarians until finally Caesar seized all power.

Do I blame President Bush or President Clinton before him? No, I blame us for blithely assuming we can maintain all of our Political Correctness and all of our civil rights during this conflict and have a clean, lawful, honorable war. None of those words apply to war. Get them out of your head.

Ugly refutation of everything America always wanted to stand for. If we’re only a good nation of good people in times of peace, what kind of nation does that make us?

Some have gone so far in their criticism of the war and/or the Ad mi nistration that it almost seems they would literally like to see us lose.I think some actually do. I hasten to add that this isn't because they are disloyal. It is because they just don't recognize what losing means.

Fails to take into account real arguments of those who would withdraw the troops.

Nevertheless, that conduct gives the impression to the enemy that we are divided and weakening. It concerns our friends and it does great damage to our cause.Of more recent vintage, the uproar fueled by the politicians and media regarding the treatment of some prisoners of war perhaps exemplifies best what I am saying. We have recently had an issue involving the treatment of a few Muslim prisoners of war, by a small group of our military police.. These are the type prisoners who just a few months ago were throwing their own people off buildings, cutting off their hands, cutting out their tongues, and otherwise murdering their own just for di sagreeing with Saddam Hussein.And, just a few years ago, these same type prisoners chemically killed 400,000 of their own people for the same reason. They are also the same type of enemy fighters who recently were burning Americans and dragging their charred corpses through the streets of Iraq . And, still more recently, the same type of enemy that was and is providing videos to all news sources internationally of the beheading of American prisoners they held.

Inference – they deserve it. Are we arguing from a Christian perspective? In that case,
vengeance is the Lord’s. if we are arguing from a reasonable secular perspective, torture hardly reduces the occurrence of the above acts. And once again, America soils its image of having the moral high ground. If we commit the same acts as our enemies, how can we expect the neutral parties to side with us?

Compare this with some of our press and politicians, who for several days have thought and talked about nothing else but the "humiliating" of some Muslim prisoners -- not burning them, not dragging their charred corpses through the streets, not beheading them, but "humiliating" them.Can they be for real?

The effect of the Abu Ghraib scandal on Muslim minds has been deep and lasting. Humiliation resulting from study of particular vulnerabilities in the Arab consciousness (sexuality, particular insults, etc). Once again, so much for the moral high ground.

The politicians and pundits have even talked of impeachment of the Secretary of Defense. &nbs p;If this doesn't show the complete lack of comprehension and understanding of the seriousness of the enemy we are fighting, the life-and-death struggle we are in, and the disastrous results of losing this war, nothing can.

Nothing else is said here about the Secretary of Defense - bringing him up now in this context is naive. (this e-mail must be old too because this secretary resigned soon after the scandal to the vast relief of an embarrassed administration)

To bring our country to a virtual political standstill over this prisoner issue makes us look like Nero playing his fiddle as Rome burned -- totally oblivious to what is going on in the real world. Neither we, nor any other country, can survive this internal strife. Again, I say, this does not mean that some of our politicians or media people are disloyal. It simply means that they are absolutely oblivious to the magnitude of the situation we are in and into which the Muslim terrorists have been pushing us for many years.These people are a serious and dangerous liability to the war effort.We must take note of who they are and get them out of office.

Start the witch hunt! A serious and dangerous liability? Thanks mr. mccarthy.

Remember, the Muslim terrorists stated goal is to kill all infidels. That translates into ALL non-Muslims -- not just in the United States , but throughout the world. We are the last bastion of defense.

What? What? Muslim interests do not run Europe, nor Africa (although influential in the north and dominant in some countries), not South America, nor Asia, nor North America, nor the Indian subcontinent, nor Australia, nor …. Talk about arrogance.

We have been criticized for many years as being 'arrogant.' That charge is valid. We are arrogant in that we believe that we are so good, powerful, and smart that we can win the hearts and minds of all those who attack us, and that, with both hands tied behind our back, we can defeat anything bad in the world. We can't!If we don't recognize this, our nation, as we know it, will not survive, and no other free country in the world will survive if we are defeated.

What?

And, finally, name any Muslim countries throughout the world that allow freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, equal rights for anyone -- let alone everyone, equal status or any status for women, or that have been productive in one single way that contributes to the good of the world.

Turkey. Jordan. Syria. Indonesia. Uzbekistan. Malaysia. China. The cultural difficulties that have arisen are a result of the clash between Arab Muslim culture and Euro Western culture – not between Christianity and Islam. As for being productive in one single way, if it were not for the Arabs preservation and expansion of classical texts and philosophy during the middle ages, Europe would never have had a Renaissance. Or a tradition of chivalry (that’s right, a system of rights for women established by the Muslims LONG before western Romans or Germans ever thought of treating women like anything other than cattle). The above statement is utterly ignorant.

This has been a long way of saying that we must be united on this war or we will be equated in the history books to the self- inflicted fall of t he Roman Empire . If, that is, the Muslim leaders will allow history books to be written or read.If we don't win this war right now, keep a close eye on how the Muslims take over France in the next 5 years or less. They will continue to increase the Muslim population of France and continue to encroach, little by little, on the established French traditions.The French will be fighting among themselves over what should or should not be done, which will continue to weaken them and keep them from any united resolve. Doesn't that sound eerily familiar?

Can’t make an argument based on something that hasn’t happened. Yes, let’s watch France together and see how that goes.

Democracies don't have their freedoms taken away from them by some external military force. Instead, they give their freedoms away, politically correct piece by politically correct piece.And they are giving those freedoms away to those who have shown, worldwide, that they abhor freedom and will not apply it to you or even to themselves, once they are in power. Muslims have universally shown that when they have taken over, they then start brutally killing each other over who the few will be controlling the masses.

No facts, only wild generalities. This has happened in some countries, but the vast history of Islam shows as many examples of wise and generous rulers. The aversion to democracy is rooted in the democratic separation of church and state – an aversion many American Christians share. Muslims believe it is hubric to try to rule themselves, as God is always in charge.

What is happening in Iraq is a good example. Will we ever stop hearing from the politically correct about the "peaceful Muslims?"

Wow

I close on a hopeful note by repeating what I said before: If we are united, there is no way that we can lose. I hope now, after the election, the factions in our country will begin to focus on the critical situation we are in, and will unite to save our country. It is your future we are talking about. Do whatever you can to preserve it. I reiterate: our national election is under way.
After reading the above, we all must do this, not only for ourselves, but for our children, our grandchildren, our country, and our world. Whether Democrat or Republican, conservative or liberal ... and that includes the Politicians and media of our country and the free world.Please forward this to any you feel may want, or NEED to read it. Our "leaders" in Congress ought to read it, too. There are those who find fault with our country, but it is obvious to anyone who truly thinks through this, that we must UNITE!

Finding fault and improving is the cornerstone of democracy as well as of personal growth.

Lastly, I wish to add: at the risk of offending, I sincerely think that anyone who rejects this as just another political rant, or doubts the seriousness of this issue, or just deletes it without sending it on, is part of the problem. Let's quit laughing at and forwarding the jokes and cartoons that denigrate and ridicule our leaders in this war against terror. They are trying to protect the interests and well being of the US and its citizens. Best we support them.

Dangerous overstatement – best we support them? Best the Muslims support Saddam Hussein. You criticize Muslims for being tolerant of bad leaders, then suggest we do not question our own.

well, i tried to be reasonable and somewhat neutral about this but towards the end i just became speechless. sorry.