View Full Version : War With Terrorists

07-12-2004, 08:36 AM
This is long but well worth reading! GD

This was written by a retired attorney, to his sons, on May 19, 2004.
It is a very important read from a historical perspective; and the
future threat posed by Muslims.

Dear Tom, Kevin, Kirby and Ted,

As your father, I believe I owe it to you to share some thoughts on
the present world situation. We have over the years discussed a lot
of important things, like going to college, jobs and so forth. But
this really takes precedence over any of those discussions. I hope
this might give you a longer term perspective that fewer and fewer of
my generation are left to speak to. To be sure you understand that
this is not politically flavored, I will tell you that since Franklin
D. Roosevelt, who led us through pre and WWII (1933 - 1945) up to and
including our present President, I have without exception, supported
our presidents on all matters of international conflict. This would
include just naming a few in addition to President Roosevelt - WWII:
President Truman - Korean War 1950; President Kennedy - Bay of Pigs
(1961); President Kennedy - Vietnam (1961); [1] eight presidents (5
Republican & 4 Democrat) during the cold war (1945 - 1991); President
Clinton's strikes on Bosnia (1995) and on Iraq (1998). (2) So be sure
you read this as completely non-political or otherwise you will miss
the point.

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). The deadly 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:

When did the threat to us start?
Many will say September 11th, 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; Dar es Salaam,
Tanzania US Embassy 1998; Aden, Yemen USS Cole 2000; New York World
Trade Center 2001; Pentagon 2001. (Note that during the period from
1981 to 2001 there were 7,581 terrorist attacks worldwide). [3]

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 1, Clinton and Bush 2. We cannot fault either the Republicans or
Democrats as there were no provocations by any of the presidents or
their immediate predecessors, Presidents Ford or Carter.

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?

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),
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). (http://www.nazis.testimony.co.uk/7-a.htm). Thus,
almost the same number of Christians were killed by the Nazis, as the
6 million holocaust Jews who were killed by them, and we seldom heard
of anything other than the Jewish atrocities. Although Hitler kept
the world focused on the Jews, he had no hesitancy about killing
anyone who got in his way of exterminating 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, French or anyone else.. [5] 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 shut
up or die?

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.

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. 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 to terrorist attack us
until we were neutered and submissive to them.

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.

The next will probably be France. Our one hope on 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. However, it may already be too late for France. France is already
20% Muslim and fading fast. See the attached article on the French
condition by Tom Segel. [6]

If we lose the war, our production, income, exports and way of life
will all vanish as we know it. After losing, who would trade or deal
with us if they were threatened by the Muslims. If we can't stop the
Muslims, how could anyone else? The Muslims fully know what is riding
on this war and therefore are completely committed to winning at any
cost. We 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% of 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 really digging in and
lending 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 we have become accustomed to. 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 then. 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.

- Some have gone so far in their criticism of the war and/or the
Administration that it almost seems they would literally like to see
us lose. I hasten to add that this isn't because they are disloyal.
It is because they just don't recognize what losing means.
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 people just for disagreeing 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
enemy fighters who recently were burning Americans and dragging their
charred corpses through the streets of Iraq. And still more recently
the same type enemy that was and is providing videos to all news
sources internationally, of the beheading of an American prisoner
they held. 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 this be for real? The politicians
and pundits have even talked of impeachment of the Secretary of
Defense. 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. 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 absolutely oblivious to the magnitude of the
situation we are in and into which the Muslim terrorists have been
pushing us for many years. 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.

We have been criticized for many years as being 'arrogant'. That
charge is valid in at least one respect. 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. 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

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 the 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?

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. They have universally shown that
when they have taken over, they then start brutally killing each
other over who will be the few who control the masses. Will we ever
stop hearing from the politically correct, about the "peaceful

I close on a hopeful note, by repeating what I said above. If we are
united, there is no way that we can lose. I believe that 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

Love, Dad

[1] By the way on Vietnam, the emotions are still so high that it is
really not possible to discuss it. However, I think President Kennedy
was correct. He felt there was a communist threat from China, Russia
and North Vietnam to take over that whole area. Also remember that we
were in a 'cold war' with Russia. I frankly think Kennedy's plan
worked and kept that total communist control out, but try telling
that to anyone now. It just isn't politically correct to say so.
Historians will answer this after cool headed research, when the
people closest to it are all gone.

[2] As you know, I am a strong President Bush supporter and will vote
for him. However, if Senator Kerry is elected, I will fully support
him on all matters of international conflict, just as I have
supported all presidents in the past.

[3] Source for statistics in Par. 1 is

[4] The Institute of Islamic Information and Education.

[5] Note the attached article by Tom Segel referred to in footnote 6
infra, the terrorist Muslim have already begun the havoc in France.
(The note was not attached to the E-mail I received. Gene)

[6] I checked this article with two sources - Hoax Busters and Urban
Myths. It does not come up as a Hoax on either. I also then E-mailed
Mr. Segel and he confirmed the article was his.

[7] "I don't think the Army or any branch of service runs any type of
war any more. It's done by senators and congressmen. There are too
many civilians involved." Returning Iraq veteran, Sgt. 1st Class Greg
Klees as quoted in the Cedar Rapids, IA Gazette on May 13th, 2004.

[8] There are 64 Muslim countries. This does not count countries like
Spain that are controlled by the Muslim terrorists.