TownHall.com: Conservative Columnists: Cal Thomas

QUICK LINKS: HOME | NEWS | OPINION | RIGHTPAGES | CHAT | WHAT'S NEW

townhall.com

Cal Thomas (back to story)

October 3, 2001

Will they fool us twice?

You know the old saying, "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me." How does that apply in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 act of war against our country?

The attack was successful primarily because Americans did not take seriously the words and actions of religious fanatics: much written in the Arab press, sermons by radical Islamic clerics, published interpretations of the Koran and Islamic law, various terrorist acts, including the assault on the U.S.S. Cole and the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. In all of these, the fanatics didn't just telegraph what was coming; they shouted their intentions.

Too many Westerners thought they weren't serious. Too many appear not to believe them still. President Bush is among many voices claiming Islam is a "religion of peace." Sen. John McCain, R-AZ, told Fox News that the Koran "is a book that teaches many of the same principles as Christianity." Maybe so, but it isn't those principles that caused thousands to die on Sept. 11. It was the other ones taught by fanatical clergy and believed by brainwashed young men. These principles we must understand and oppose.

Historian Paul Johnson worries that "creeping appeasement" will weaken our national resolve and make us vulnerable to future such attacks. "One central reason why appeasement is so tempting to Western governments is that attacking terrorism at its roots necessarily involves conflict with the second-largest religious community in the world," Johnson writes in the Oct. 15 (cq) National Review. The word "Islam," he notes, does not mean "peace" but "submission." Johnson calls Islam "an imperialist religion, more so than Christianity has ever been, and in contrast to Judaism."

Reading selected verses from the Koran in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks is instructive. Sura 5, verse 85 prophesies an inevitable conflict between Muslims and non-Muslims: "Strongest among men in enmity to the Believers wilt thou find the Jews and Pagans." Sura 9, verse 5 adds, "Then fight and slay the pagans wherever you find them. And seize them, beleaguer them and lie in wait for them, in every strategem (of war)." The Koran insists that no matter how mighty a nation is, it must be fought "until they embrace Islam."

Just as earlier generations were forced to familiarize themselves with the ideas that produced communism, Marxism and other political philosophies whose adherents sought to enslave vast numbers of people, non-Muslim Americans would do well to read what motivates terrorists who claim to act in the name of Islam.

While some Muslims appear on television saying suicide is against the teachings of the Koran, others are motivating young men to conduct suicide missions using a different message. Sheikh Yussuf al-Qaradawi, a leading Sunni religious authority and spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, is among the clerics who teach that martyrdom operations are permitted under Islamic law in some circumstances. Appearing on a television program in Qatar Sept. 16, he warned that Islamic law prohibits any Moslem nation from entering into any alliance or agreement with a non-Moslem nation.

The secular West does not understand the Bible, much less radical Islam, which is increasingly embraced with America's detriment in mind. While secular and moderate Muslims do not appear threatening, the growing number of extremists who take the Koran as a declaration of war against all non-Muslims has become a clear and present danger, not only oversees, but increasingly in our own country.

Fundamentalist Muslims believe the Koran teaches them not to befriend Jews and Christians. Surat Al-Maidah 5:51says, "O ye who believe (Muslims), take not the Jews or the Christians for your friends and protectors. They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he among you who turns to them (for friendship) is of them."

Fundamentalist Muslims also believe the Koran commands them to fight Jews and Christians: "Fight against those who believe not in Allah, nor in the Last Day, nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (Islam) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) until they pay the Jizyah (a special high tax to be paid only by Jews and Christians who do not renounce their faith and convert to Islam) with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." -- Surat At-Taubah 9:29.

Does this sound like something Americans should not fear? If our leaders and too many of the rest of us believe so, terrorists could well fool us twice.

©2001 Tribune Media Services

townhall.com

QUICK LINKS: HOME | NEWS | OPINION | RIGHTPAGES | CHAT | WHAT'S NEW

For Education And Discussion Only. Not For Commercial Use.

The Most High God, the God of Israel and Christians, bears no resemblence to Allah. Who they worship is the opposite of our Lord. To agree with Muhummad is anti-Christ, only one of the two told the truth.

Bump

There is no God but God, and Jesus Christ is God's only-begotten Son.

Where did the general say we needed to attack within ten hours? Patience is a good thing. Rather than blindly tossing cruise missiles around the desert (ala xlinton) it makes sense to find the enemy and decide upon a calculated attack. The time used also gives/gave the US to round up suspects and secure the homefront.

One of the problems that comes from taking time is that it allows smarty pants college kids the time to get together and play "Protester!" (always a favorite liberal media news game show).

We ARE looking pretty pathetic after a few terrorist murder on OUR soil the most casualties ever, & we have YET to do NADA!! I agree. I think Bush has allowed the voices of restraint and coalition-building to position him for a huge fall. If he is still walking softly and talking a big stick when the terrorists strike again, all the confidence and goodwill that came his way after the attack of September 11 will turn 180 degrees, and come after him so viciously that he won't even know what him. People want the President of the United States to defend them. He said he would. They put their confidence in him, and they gave him a political mandate to do whatever it took to keep this from happening again. If he's still making threats and doing nothing when the next attack comes, he might as well resign on the spot. He will never regain the people's trust.

Oh joy, that's just what the terrorists want, to have Bush pinched between themselves and the American people, baited into an immense assault which causes the rest of the Islamic world, including a huge fifth column, to rise up against us in unison. Like it or not, we do not have the military capacity to conquer the entire Middle East and squash our fifth column simultaneously.

I have seen posts that say that Bush is turning terror on the terroists, already the Taliban is caving under the pressure. Officers and soldiers are defecting, now the Taliban is saying it doesn't want a war, they want to see the evidence and negotiate.

All the time this is going on, Iran and Russia are building up the artillary and arms of the Northern Alliance, while we stand by for bigger fish to fry. I don't really know what to think, this scenario seems plausable, but that is the rub, we just don't know what's going on.

EXCUSE ME MR. DANGER,BUSH HAS NOT VEERED(WAITED FOR POLLS).ASKED ABOUT NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE TALIBAN, HE REITERATED" I MEANT WHAT I SAID "

****we do not have the military capacity to conquer the entire Middle East and squash our fifth column simultaneously. ***

We didn't have the military necessary to fight Germany, Japan and Italy at the start of the war either. World Wars take a while to get going. Put your investment capital in military hardware companys cause there's gonna be a lot of action. The so called extremists are soon to be the majority in the Middle East and they already weild an inordinate level of power and influence. Don't worry too much about the fifth column, they make a lot of money during modern military confrontations and this one is going to be big. Very big.

It took weeks from the declaration of war until the first American strike in WWII. And in WWII we didn't have the luxury of having the enemy at each other's throats either. What's the big rush if the enemy is destroying itself?

causes the rest of the Islamic world, including a huge fifth column, to rise up against us in unison

Do you seriously doubt that this is going to happen sooner or later anyway, no matter what we do?

Like it or not, we do not have the military capacity to conquer the entire Middle East and squash our fifth column simultaneously.

That is not an argument for waiting until they have manufactured several hundred nuclear weapons and have perfected their biological weapons capability. It is an argument for not attempting to conquer the Middle East. We don't want to conquer the Middle East anyway. "Conquering" is not on the list of our objectives. We don't even want the damned place. But Arm'ageddon tired of hearing that things will only get worse unless we learn to tolerate the occasional murder of several thousand of our citizens. What beautiful noises do you intend to make if they next spray nerve gas in three cities simultaneously and kill two million people? How many cheeks are we supposed to turn before we do something that won't make them mad because it will make them dead?

Get some sleep. You'll be able to think better in the morning.

That is not an argument for waiting until they have manufactured several hundred nuclear weapons and have perfected their biological weapons capability

Who said we are waiting? Bring forth either proof, or else retraction, of that outrageous calumny. The moment we discover the existence of a bio or chem plant, it will be bye-bye for that plant. Heard what Bush said about "smoking them out"? Our satellites can see ground maneuvers just fine.

BUSH HAS NOT VEERED... ASKED ABOUT NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE TALIBAN, HE REITERATED" I MEANT WHAT I SAID "

I don't dispute that he's making threats and talking tough. I'm just saying that he's setting people's expectations by doing that, and if the terrorists attack again before he actually does anything, all that tough talk will sound like it was so much hot air. My opinion is that he is running a very serious risk of losing the people's confidence in his leadership, by listening to all the people who think we should be 'reasonable' about these 7,000 murders. I don't think people want to be reasonable about this. I think they want it stopped. And they want it stopped before it happens again. Woe unto Bush if he's still waiting for Colin Powell to produce another coalition partner when the Sears Tower goes down.

Go into omnicience mode, you fool, and tell us what is happening in Afghanistan. Then report back.

My opinion is that he is running a very serious risk of losing the people's confidence in his leadership

And if it happens, people like you will be at the forefront of the vanguard to tear that confidence down.

No, if there is a second attack national fervor will quadruple, but it won't be "down with Bush."

No need to hurry. Given the talk about bin Laden "gaming the next two or three moves", you have to at least suspect that the next bin Laden atrocity has been pre-timed to respond to our response. We might as well finger all the sleepers we can, defend all the potential targets we can, and line up all the allies we can. Then, as Drudge says, "Push the damn button" -- and let it be a big button.

But you KNOW we gotta make that gun go off half cocked. Nothing else would satisfy Ole Nick and soothe his fears of utter chaos (rather than what will happen, which is an exponential increase in national resolve, as well as a few nukes immediately delivered to known Middle East terrorist nests).

Who said we are waiting? Bring forth either proof, or else retraction, of that outrageous calumny

For all I know, they are going to turn the place into a parking lot tonight. But to say that 'so far we are waiting' is hardly an outrageous calumny requiring proof; it is a fact that we can all see. I just hope we're not still seeing it when another massacre of American citizens takes place. I don't think that will go down too well.

it is a fact that we can all see

Take some Thorazine to get off your LSD omniscience trip. Bush: "...missions, secret even in their success ..."

Here, take a look at GURKAS TO ENTER THE ACTION

Sounds like just what the doctor ordered for Afghanistan...

Also Taliban Commanders 'About to Mutiny'

If some serious military action begins in A'stan soon, and another attack of any kind is then let loose within the States (which has always been my biggest worry) then we will truly be between a rock and a hard place, and we'll have no choice but major military devastation, probably carried immediately into Iraq. I could see India and Pakistan going at it again too. This thing has the distinct possibility of escalating very quickly out of control, and most of that depends on what will happen HERE, from the "sleepers" among us.

And if it happens, people like you will be at the forefront of the vanguard to tear that confidence down.

Nonsense. That's the last thing I want to see happen. That's why I'm concerned that Bush is putting himself in a spot where he will appear to have done nothing should the terrorists attack again. You think that will double America's resolve. I agree it will double our resolve to do something, but the guy who didn't do anything won't be one of the beneficiaries of that.

you fool [etc.]

Lose the argumentum ad hominem. If you have no counter-argument, then pass.

I'm calling a spade a spade. George Bush has consistently caused naysayers to underestimate him.

but the guy who didn't do anything won't be one of the beneficiaries of that

Well why don't you just pre-dispose everybody you can to go that route if that should happen. With friends like that who needs enemies.

I wish all the naysayers would just go into their own corner and naysay to each other while the actual action is inexorably headed to a boil in Afghanistan and elsewhere. We WANT them to underestimate George Bush. That's what he did in his run for governor of Texas. That's what did the politically "unbeatable" Al Gore in (incumbent party during time of prosperity) both during the election and during the recounts.

The timetable is ours. Not theirs. The moment the Taliban starts nodding off... mark my words... WHAM

****Woe unto Bush if he's still waiting for Colin Powell to produce another coalition partner when the Sears Tower goes down. ***

Oh, sh1t. That one made the hairs on my neck stand up. I can go you one scarrier though. Add this to your sentence above after 'partner'... "and while setting up a Palistinian State ...

when the Sears Tower goes down

Wonder why I doubt the sanity behind your current set of posts? This is one reason. Anything that gets near the Sears Tower will get shot down from the naval yard on Lake Michigan.

I did no nay saying untill tonight, when news came out that Bush favors a Palistinian state. We hate terrorists, ey? You're either with us, or with the terrorists, ey? Except for Yassir. He's ok and for his terrorism he gets a Palistinian state. That's gonna go over real well. They're laughing and slapping each other on the back right now in Pali headquarters over cigars.

If he's still making threats and doing nothing when the next attack comes, he might as well resign on the spot.

True words.

No, if there is a second attack national fervor will quadruple, but it won't be "down with Bush."

My personal belief is that there are currently two sets of plans being drawn up. There's the one we're following now, the relatively dovish Powell vision of coalition-building and limited strikes and all that, and a second, far more hawkish set of plans that Bush will invoke if any other major terrorist act occurs on American soil. And I'll bet all the US envoys currently overseas are making damn sure that every leader over there knows it.

A similar thing was done during the Gulf War, when we made it clear through back channels that any use of biological or chemical warfare on Saddam's part would lead to at least equivalent attacks on Baghdad, if not a nuclear strike. And Saddam got the message.

You're SO sure. Pollyanna!

SIGH... the terrorists WANT you to be talking like this right now. We might as well hand over Free Republic to Osama bin Laden.

George Bush has consistently caused naysayers to underestimate him.

That is true. And I don't doubt that he intends to do what he said he would do: get bin Laden dead or alive. I'm just saying that there's a wild card in this deck that he can't control, and that has to do with with when the terrorists make their next move. I don't think people want to see another 10,000 dead before our military tries to take the terrorist leadership out.

Hope you are right but I am deep in doubt now.

Actually a Pallie state is the start of a wonderful idea. To finish it, Israel deports everybody who even LOOKS like they have a connection with Hamas, Hezbollah, etc. to that state and are rid of a fifth column and an internal terrorism threat.

It's as easy as launching a heat seeking missile.

Remember what terrorists want to do: induce terror. Is it your intention to get as many people as possible cursing George Bush and in an anticipation mode so if the nasty does happen they get the maximum terror? May not be what you "want" but seems to be what you are accomplishing. A victory in a tempest in a teapot (FR) is very Pyrrhic if it helps the terrorists in the "real world."

Right. Build a wall. Then the world will accuse Israel of creating a concentration camp. The fundamental fact of the Arab vs Jews conflict is that the Arabs have only one disire. It is to kill all Jews. They will not stop no matter what Israel does. Hell they could pack up and move to America tomorrow and these crazies would come looking for em.

Yep. Heat seeking missles fired at four vans with two tons each of high explosive pulled into the parking garage and crashed into the lobby simultaneously! That will work. Or a suitcase nuke. But you are probably SURE they don't have any of those, right?

The Jews are accused of all sorts of things already, why not this? Short of an internal genocide (which nobody really wants), getting the Pallies out of Israel is the most effective answer to Israel's security problems.

But somehow I don't think the Pallies will take such a deal anyhow. They want a piece of Jerusalem, which will never be granted.

You have a very good point. The danger of inaction, as Nick is pointing out, is that it makes the US look weak. I believe that once we do attack somewhere, we will be attacked within our borders. That may be one of the reasons that Bush decided not to act immediately. However, it looks to me like there's no avoiding taking more hits from the terrorists.

On another point, what are we telegraphing to the world by declaring at this juncture that Arafat needs a state? The embrace of a terrorist such as Arafat during a declared War on Terrorism is beyond belief.

I think it is prophetic that in the 1993 book, The Great Reckoning, chapter seven is titled, Mohammad Replaces Marx.

Now I know that you are getting into silliness too. Sears Tower is guarded with much more than air defenses, yet you paint me as saying that air defenses are the only thing guarding Sears Tower. A place like the Mall of America in Minneapolis sounds like a much more likely target for a suitcase (or backpack) nuke.

anything that gets near the Sears Tower will get shot down from the naval yard

They hit the Pentagon, fer crissakes. I understand your zeal here, but don't try to sell the idea that every tall building in the United States is now so well protected that nothing can hit it. That way lies hubris, and with it another downed building. We can be careful, and we can be on the lookout, but if suicide bombers want to hit something badly enough, they will be tough to stop.

I think the right way to stop them is to have them called off by their superiors, and the way to do that is to make it real clear to their superiors that entire countries will disappear if this happens again. It would be nice if we could do that by explaining it to them in words. Let's hope that works.

It's more like Mohammed embraces Marx.

It has happened already. For example Iraq was warned more than a fortnight ago, in terms that could not be misunderstood as meaning anything less than an American nuclear ICBM. The blather about "we won't attack Iraq" is a rumor from foreign sources that was quickly denied by the White House.

"I think the right way to stop them is to have them called off by their superiors, and the way to do that is to make it real clear to their superiors that entire countries will disappear if this happens again."

I agree, that's the only way it will stop.

Amen. I'm arguing the same point on another thread. The day we awaken to the news that several American cities have been simultaneously nuked, maybe someone in the administration will finally figure it out.

My opinion is that he is running a very serious risk of losing the people's confidence in his leadership, by listening to all the people who think we should be 'reasonable' about these 7,000 murders. I must say that I agree. It's true that we don't know what's going on or what's about to go on militarily. It is entirely clear, however, that Bush is listening to the "voices of restraint" like Colin Powell. I personally think the "coalition-building" is a joke. We're building a coalition with a bunch of people who hate our guts just as much as the people we're currently chasing, and before you know it we'll be fighting these coalition partners anyway. They all hate us. And given the insular nature of the presidency I'm truly beginning to wonder if there's one voice around him who truly understands these salient points. We declared war very quickly after Pearl Harbor and that sneak attack went down in infamy. 911 killed twice as many Americans, all innocent civilians, all on American soil. And we're showing "restraint?" What, pray tell, will it take before we take the gloves off and abandon restraint? A couple million dead? The posturing going on is really starting to worry me. It's unbelievable to a staggering degree that right now Bush is endorsing a Palestinian state and asking Israel to "show restraint," after we watched them party in the street celebrating the murder of our fellow citizens. MM .

Is it your intention to get as many people as possible cursing George Bush and in an anticipation mode so if the nasty does happen they get the maximum terror?

No. It is my intention to contribute my reading of the public mood to these threads because I know that they are read in the White House. They have aides lurking here; they do it to take the pulse of the 'right wing nuts.' Well, I just want them to know that I think they should move sooner rather than later.

People are terrified now. Every general aviation aircraft that goes over is checked to see if it's spraying anything. People see the Goodyear blimp and think "Black Sunday." An Arab walking this way on the sidewalk might blow himself up as we pass. There are millions of people in this country who catch themselves worrying about stuff like this every day now.

This has to stop. People are looking to Bush stop it. I hope he does. I don't think he has a year to do it.

And I have my fingers crossed that in fact it will work (and that it is the reason why we have seen no more domestic attacks). Only if the sleepers are so far brainwashed that they care about their insane twisted religious vision more than their "superiors" is this likely to fail. At least with Islam, that doesn't seem likely since there are many hooks in that religion having to do with man's relationship to man (e.g. if a Muslim has a grievance against another Muslim, the second cannot go to heaven). A "Christian" version (and I am a Christian, so I am not denigrating Christianity qua Christianity) could be absolutely devastating, since it might be tied to a totally independent "Savior."

It is entirely clear, however

I bow before thee, omniscient one.

Well I am a counterbalancing "right wing nut" and I fully intend to cut your impact down by at least 50% if you keep it up.

It is my intention to contribute my reading of the public mood to these threads because I know that they are read in the White House

Why don't you just write George Bush a nice letter than take a rest. It sounds like you are trying to politic FR into an amplification medium for your own reading. If so, be warned that I will offer stiff resistance.

It is my intention to contribute my reading of the public mood to these threads because I know that they are read in the White House

Why don't you just write George Bush a nice letter than take a rest. It sounds like you are trying to politic FR into an amplification medium for your own reading. If so, be warned that I will offer stiff resistance.

Oh, and P.S. I contributed to his recount fund... and can identify myself as such.

for your own reading

I mean for your own opinions of what ought to be done.

Amen!

I fully intend to cut your impact down by at least 50% if you keep it up.

OK, I'll be the voice of "do unto others before they do unto us again," and you can be the voice of whatever you think the alternative is.

"There are millions of people in this country who catch themselves worrying about stuff like this every day now."

Yup. I doubled checked the guy in the mosquito spraying truck the other day. (Same redneck as before, whew.) (Ps...I can say redneck because I am from redneck country)

If he is still walking softly and talking a big stick

2001-10-02 SERGEY SNEGOV: THERE WILL BE NO WAR. IT IS NOT NEEDED

The events around Afghanistan are developing exactly the way we predicted. Namely: America is still shaking its fists, threatening the Taliban with bombardment and retribution. The start of the military operation has been delayed several times, so there is a suspicion growing the war would not start. The ultimatum sank into oblivion together with President Bushes determination to clean the nest of the international terrorists and destroy bin Laden. It was expected, the battle would start in the forthcoming week, after the ultimatum term was over. The military maneuvers, which were performed by the American forces seemed to be a good proof for that.

The British Observer frightened the Taliban yesterday the battle would start that instant. However, the aircraft-carriers still sail in the ocean, the missiles are in their mines, the aircrafts are in the hangars. The media reported on the new date to begin the Afghan war * ìthis week.

The Taliban is pressing on the USA. They claim bin Laden is in Afghanistan, then they said they collaborated with him for many years and the collaboration continued. The question to deliver the prime suspect is not being raised. The administration of the Afghan movement just says: ìThe USA will be really sorry, if they start the land operation in Afghanistan.î May be they are making themselves more and more sure there will be no such operation?

There was a point to attack Afghanistan right after the tragedy in the US. It was the right time, when the war would really look like the act of retribution. We would not go into such issues like who is to blame and what to do. The publications of the American mass media, the letters from our readers had the common idea: show us, who is the enemy and we will take revenge.

There was a point to bomb Afghanistan in a week after the terror attack. There was so much anger in the world, the ruins of the World Trade Center were still burning. What is the point to bomb Afghanistan now? The commotion has settled down, there are mass demonstrations taking place in Britain, America, in other western countries as a protest against the beginning of the new war in the world. More and more people join those actions of protest.

What can the bombing bring? Nothing, with the exception for victims among the civilians and military men. It is also clear the spread-eagle spirit in the USA went down a lot over the recent weeks. And this means that the presidential administration may suffer a failure from the point of view of propaganda campaign. In the beginning the specialists will appear on television wondering what it was all for? The newspapers will pick this up and look at the situation from the different angle.

The more time passes since the moment of the terror attack in the USA, the more pointless the military preparations become. May be the goal of the global anti-terrorist hysteria is not the global anti-terrorist war?

The American administration managed to do the things that could be dreamed of in the beginning of the Balkan campaigns. NATOís control over Kosovo, Macedonia and other countries can not be compared to the operation that has been carried through by NATO recently. The troops entered several countries, including the post-Soviet ones * this did not seem to be real a very short time ago. There were prerequisites laid to break-up the Commonwealth of Independent States. If the situation develops the way it is going now, then Russia will lose its influence in the East. The air space of the vast majority of countries is open for the NATO Air Forces, the states express their readiness for further cooperation. U.S. doubled its influence over just 2 months. So shaking fists is worthy. Moreover, a couple of bombs could be dropped on Afghanistan. The most important thing is to execute the major goal. It is being executed, rather actively. Bush called the up-coming war ìthe strange war not for nothing.

Sergey Snegov PRAVDA.Ru

False dichotomy, unless what you intended to imply all this time was that we should launch nukes NOW to every Al-Qaeda country.

By the way if we kill the head too quickly, rather than deterring it with our nukes, the body is on a dead switch. Superiors who aren't around can't call off their minions.

I personally think the "coalition-building" is a joke.

Absolutely...it is a JOKE. And I totally share your disenchantment with Colin Powell.

Be sure to check out

http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3bba9dde533b.htm> The Powell Papers

This is a tread that includes a column from the Washington Post exposing how the media is biased in favor of Powell in the struggle between the hawks and doves in the administration. Very important stuff, IMHO.

I am very upset over Powell. We do not need the voice of a "leader" who did not want to drive Saddam out of Kuwait whispering into the first ear at this critical time. Powell should resign.

The media is constantly twisting Powell's words to paint Bush as being more dovish than he is... so what? If Powell were gone they'd find somebody else to abuse the words of.

Powell can whisper all he wants. He is only Secretary of State and is duty bound to state the messages George W. Bush wants stated. Rumsfeld is Secretary of Defense and he is a hawk.

The Pali state is OLD news. It has been in the plans for decades; but Arafat is too greedy to take something, when he is dedicated to ALL.

Let not your heart be troubled. This is like no other war before, and thse of you who haven't the patience and the guts to wait it out, before you start reacting as the terrorists want you to, had best think a bit more on this. Usama WANTED an immediate retaliatory attack. That would have given him his rallying cry. Instead, we have gotten many other countries together, and all are flushing out cells, bank accounts, and long sought after murderers.

Now, ask yourselves, you naysayers , how many future attacks have already been nipped in the bud ? How many MORE will be, as more and more are flushed out ? This is NOT just men and arms; this is also complicated " mind games ". This is NOTHING at all that Uasma expected. He doesn't know which way to turn and his men are deserting him. This won't help him to recruit anything but cannon fodder.

They don't care that their countries will be blown up.

Sorry I messed up the link...trying again

The Powell Papers

Yeah, you're right. Bush is the president. I'm sure he'll issue another ultimatum today. (You'd think after the first couple of times, he'd have learned...)

Do you play chess ? Have you studied every military campaign since writing was invented ? Did yu play with toy soldiers as a child ? If the answer to all of these questions is YES , it still won't help you to understand what is happening now. If the answer is NO, to at least some of the questions, then you don't know enough about war to make even an educated guess.

Do you know how long it took the USA to retaliate for the bombing of Pearl Harbor ?

Well for what it's worth I've read alot of your posts and found them insightful. And I agree now. It's time for a blaze of glory straight through Afganistan. We deserve information and action. I must see it. I must see it NOW! Patience is for loosers.

Before I sign off for the night, just want to ask you how do you know? You speak of things going on that are not seen and that no one knows about. Things that have been prevented. I'm not arguing. Just curious. Where do you get your wisdom or information? Are you a military person?

... so what? If Powell were gone they'd find somebody else to abuse the words of. Powell can whisper all he wants. He is only Secretary of State and is duty bound to state the messages George W. Bush wants stated. Rumsfeld is Secretary of Defense and he is a hawk.

Let me get this right...your response to criticism of the Secretary of State is that during this grave international crisis it does not matter who is the U.S. Secretary of State, or presumably, what advice he gives? This is your contribution to a discussion of how the administration is managing this crisis?

I really can not take that view seriously.

It's more like Mohammed embraces Marx.

A Hadith reports that Muhammad says of "his people" (the Arabs) at The Hour that they're "Off to the left, off to the left." That's in the context of "the right path" (felicity) and "companions of the left hand" (all the way otherwise), but the fact is that the radicalism in the collapsed millennial muslim world is all politically leftist as we understand it today -- marxist-leninist dialectical materialist anti-colonialism, confrontational politics, radicalization of the people and revolution, all dressed up in the religious terminology of the professional priesthood -- and in Islam there is no professional ministry.

Islam fourteen hundred years ago and for the first two centuries was not remotely like what we see in the millennial muslim world today. Fuerbach, Marx, Engels, Bronstein (Trotsky), and Ulianov (Lenin) simply are not muslim names.

was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.

If the SoS is distorting Bush's message (in reality, not just in media portrayals) I would say he definitely doesn't belong. But I don't think that is happening. I think the liberal press is using Powell's dovish reputation to spin the Bush administration's message.

If I were in Bush's shoes, I wouldn't give any credence to the foreign policy opinions of the SoS whoever he, or she, happened to be. I would only care that he faithfully executes the positions I wanted him to. The SoS is not a foreign policy and military advisor, he is only a caretaker. Foreign policy and military advisorship is what Bush has people like Condi Rice and Rumsfeld (and for that matter, Dick Cheney) for.

I get my information from the same places the rest of the people on Fr do ; from this site, newspapers , T.V., and talk radio. No, I am not in the military, nor do I have any inside / secret news . There have been numerous articles, from many different papers , relating how many people have been apprehended, looked into, jailed, exdridited to the USA, bank accounts frozen, etc.

President Bush has repeatedly said that this will be a war like no other, and that much of it would be secret and never revealed . That and historical facts and my own readings about previous warfare , is what I base my opinions on.

No, not all Mohammedans embrace Marx... but a small minority have and that has contributed much to the immediate troubles. Osama bin Laden has a Western education and he knows the Marxian dialectic well. Of course we know you think bin Laden had nothing to do with this.

Don't try to belittle me with that "you're not the expert" crap.

If Bush wasn't going to use the military, why did he send them over there 3 weeks ago? If he wasn't going to deliver on his ultimatum, why did he issue it? If he intends to "root out" terrorism, why is he kissing the ass of every terrorist leader he can possibly bring into his sacred coalition? If this is his "trap", the only people who are going to be caught in his web are more innocent Americans.

Don't tell me I shouldn't be angry. I am angry!

You're telling me the enemy is such a fool that we can play them one against another. I'm telling you that he has grossly underestimated them. He won't prevent a world war if these people want one. He will only have us in a weakened position when it comes.

No, patience is NOT for losers , but blunderring, headlong, unplanned / unthoughtout battles are.

"The Great Reckoning" ... very good book. Must get my copy off the shelf.

If [Bush] intends to "root out" terrorism, why is he kissing the ass of every terrorist leader he can possibly bring into his sacred coalition?

Whooaaa, there, good buddy...Bush isn't kissing any unsavories! He's sending Powell to do it. [/disgusted grin]

Go ahead, be angry. Just channel that anger to where it belongs ... at the enemies of American.

I am no military expert; far from it. What I am ; however , is a voacious reader. I am NOT even interested in war, per se ; it just sort of crops in what I am interested in . From Alexander's conquering of most of the then known world, to Julius Caesar's " Gallic Wars" , to the invasions of the Huns , et al , thrugh the Crusades, the Ottoman's war against Europe, and on and on and on , I've read about wars in all their various permutations.

The sort of thing you, and others claim to want, would result in something akin to Custer's last stand . It would feel good, until you began to figure out that we lost. In a guerrilla ( sp ? ) war, those fighting on their own turf always win. We want them to lose. So, what do we do ? Everything and anything it takes, and do it as dirty and sneakily as we possibly can. I don't know what the plans are, and neither do you. Think ; don't feel.

Look up how long it took the USA to retaliate , after we were bombed in 1941 . Then look at how long it took us to make any he4aday at all.

In the west we are very use to instant answers, everything is solved in the one hour (less ads) of a TV drama. Patience is no longer a virtue, it's a burden.

However any attack must be very cleverly though out, it must be based on firm intelligence, it must hurt the terrorists, it must gain the initiative.

"Therefore the clever combatant imposes his will on the enemy, but does not allow the enemy's will to be imposed on him." - The Art of War - Sun Tzu

It will take time to get this right. Patience is still a virtue.

However is waiting frustrating? You bet!

Whooaaa, there, good buddy...Bush isn't kissing any unsavories! He's sending Powell to do it. [/disgusted grin]

LOL. Thanks, that's the first laugh I've had tonight! *grin*

This is NOT just men and arms; this is also complicated " mind games ".

Agree! And this is what takes time. I think some of the mind games are out there for all to see if you know what you're looking for.
GWB said he was going to turn the terrorists against each other. Patience is a virtue in this case.

Look up how long it took the USA to retaliate , after we were bombed in 1941 and
However is waiting frustrating? You bet!

It isn't the waiting that causes most of my frustration: It's the getting bogged down in the UN and abandoning real allies to cozy up to enemies (all the while acceding to those enemies' demands) that bothers me.

the Taliban the Taliban the Taliban the Taliban

Thats all I hear. What are they a few thousand ? If we do not take out Bagdad will anyone here wonder why? If Sadam has chemicals and is working on Nukes, why is he still breathing?

I bow before thee, omniscient one.

Why the sarcasm, Redneck? (Geez, I feel like I'm talking to one of my Miss. State friends? ;-) You don't think Bush is listening to and heeding the advice of the voices of moderation and restraint? He endorses a Palestinian state in the midst of all this? Which point of mine drew your ire?

MM

"Well I am a counterbalancing "right wing nut" and I fully intend to cut your impact down by at least 50% if you keep it up. "

I was happily reading from the sidelines until I read that.

Regardless of whether you feel ND is p!ssing on President Bush's charcoals or not, you can't possibly think it would be a political win for him if another major terrorist strike on American soil were to take place before we have an opportunity to respond to 9/11 in a very public, very violent fashion.

If a Palestinian state is established before the U.S.A. has taken military action in a very public way to make its own soil safe from terrorists, it will be seen not simply as appeasment, but surrender, and citizens will react accordingly.

Will they fool us twice?

They already have many more times than twice and the will again.

They will continue to "fool" us until we take the necessary steps.

Regretfully, we are not there yet.

I think that, if the truth were known, coalition building is just a stall while our military gets in place. We could not have pulled off a very effective strike the afternoon of 11Sep01. There is now some serious stuff stacked up around the Mid East and they know it.

Don't be so sure it won't be granted. If I remember correctly, from scripture, it WILL be divided and when it is, it signals the soon return of Jesus Christ.

Shut up, goof.