UPDATE: I understand from a helpful commenter that this is fraught with errors... I guess that is why a blog is better than an email campaign. Emails are hard to control, and correct, once they are forwarded... Emails are natural rumor spreaders, whereas blogs are negotiable, and allow us to dialog towards the truth.
Here is a post from Raymond S. Kraft, a California lawyer, that
seems to present the "Big Picture"" in the right manner.....This is
something all (North) Americans should read!......It is a long, thorough
and invaluable document......Please retain it for future reference.....This
is definitely a "keeper."
<><>
******************
Sixty-three years ago, Nazi Germany had overrun almost all of
Europe and hammered England to the verge of bankruptcy and defeat,
and had sunk more than four hundred British ships in their convoys
between England and America for food and war materials.
Bushido Japan had overrun most of Asia, beginning in 1928, killing
millions of civilians throughout China, and impressing millions
more as slave labor.
The US was in an isolationist, pacifist, mood, and most Americans
and Congress wanted nothing to do with the European war, or the
Asian war.
Then along came Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, and in outrage
Congress unanimously declared war on Japan, and the following day
on Germany, which had not attacked us. It was a dicey thing. We had
few allies.
France was not an ally, the Vichy government of France aligned with
its German occupiers. Germany was not an ally, it was an enemy, and
Hitler intended to set up a Thousand Year Reich in Europe. Japan
was not an ally, it was intent on owning and controlling all of
Asia. Japan and Germany had long-term ideas of invading Canada
and Mexico, and then the United States over the north and south
borders, after they had settled control of Asia and Europe.
America's allies then were England, Ireland, Scotland, Canada,
Australia, and Russia, and that was about it. There were no other
countries of any size or military significance with the will and
ability to contribute much or anything to the effort to defeat
Hitler'sGermany and Japan, and prevent the global dominance of
Nazism. And we had to send millions of tons of arms, munitions, and
war supplies to Russia, England, and the Canadians, Aussies, Irish,
and Scots, because none of them could produce all they needed for
themselves.
All of Europe, from Norway to Italy, except Russia in the east, was
already under the Nazi heel.
America was not prepared for war. America had stood down most of
its military after WWI and throughout the depression, at the
outbreak of WWII there were army units training with broomsticks
over their shoulders because they didn't have guns, and cars with
"tank" painted on the doors because they didn't have tanks. And a
big chunk of our navy had just been sunk and damaged at Pearl Harbor.
Britain had already gone bankrupt, saved only by the donation of
$600 million in gold bullion in the Bank of England that was the
property of Belgium and was given by Belgium to England to carry on
the war when Belgium was overrun by Hitler - actually, Belgium
surrendered one day, because it was unable to oppose the German
invasion, and the Germans bombed Brussels into rubble the next day
anyway just to prove they could. Britain had been holding out for
two years already in the face of staggering shipping losses and the
near-decimation of its air force in the Battle of Britain, and was
saved from being overrun by Germany only because Hitler made the
mistake of thinking the Brits were a relatively minor threat that
could be dealt with later and turning his attention to Russia, at a
time when England was on the verge of collapse in the late summer
of 1940.
Russia saved America's butt by putting up a desperate fight for two
years until the US got geared up to begin hammering away at Germany.
Russia lost something like 24 million people in the sieges of
Stalingrad and Moscow, 90% of them from cold and starvation, mostly
civilians, but also more than a million soldiers. More than a million.
Had Russia surrendered, then, Hitler would have been able to focus
his entire campaign against the Brits, then America, and the Nazis
would have won that war.
Had Hitler not made that mistake and invaded England in 1940 or
1941, instead, there would have been no England for the US and the
Brits to use as a staging ground to prepare an assault on Nazi
Europe, England would not have been able to run its North African
campaign to help take a little pressure off Russia while America
geared up for battle, and today Europe would very probably be run
by the Nazis, the Third Reich, and, isolated and without any allies
(not even the Brits), the US would very probably have had to cede
Asia to the Japanese, who were basically Nazis by another name
then, and the world we live in today would be very different and
much worse. I say this to illustrate that turning points in history
are often dicey things. And we are at another one.
There is a very dangerous minority in Islam that either has, or
wants and may soon have, the ability to deliver small nuclear,
biological, or chemical weapons, almost anywhere in the world,
unless they are prevented from doing so.
France, Germany, and Russia, have been selling them weapons
technology at least as recently as 2002, as have North Korea,
Syria, and Pakistan, paid for with billions of dollars Saddam
Hussein skimmed from the "Oil For Food" program administered by the
UN with the complicity of Kofi Annan and his son.
The Jihadis, the militant Muslims, are basically Nazis in Kaffiyahs
- they believe that Islam, a radically conservative (definitely not
liberal!) form of Wahhabi Islam, should own and control the Middle
East first, then Europe, then the world, and that all who do not
bow to Allah should be killed, enslaved, or subjugated. They want
to finish the Holocaust, destroy Israel, purge the world of Jews.
This is what they say.
There is also a civil war raging in the Middle East - for the most
part not a hot war, but a war of ideas. Islam is having its
Inquisition and its Reformation today, but it is not yet known
which will win - the Inquisition, or the Reformation.
If the Inquisition wins, then the Wahhabis, the Jihadis, will
control the Middle East, and the OPEC oil, and the US, European,
and Asian economies, the techno-industrial economies, will be at
the mercy of OPEC - not an OPEC dominated by the well-educated and
rational Saudis of today, but an OPEC dominated by the Jihadis.
You want gas in your car? You want heating oil next winter? You
want jobs? You want the dollar to be worth anything? You better
hope the Jihad, the Muslim Inquisition, loses, and the Islamic
Reformation wins.
If the Reformation movement wins, that is, the moderate Muslims who
believe that Islam can respect and tolerate other religions, and
live in peace with the rest of the world, and move out of the 10th
century into the 21st, then the troubles in the Middle East will
eventually fade away, and a moderate and prosperous Middle East
will emerge.
We have to help the Reformation win, and to do that we have to
fight the Inquisition, i.e., the Wahhabi movement, the Jihad, Al
Qaeda, the Islamic terrorist movements. We have to do it somewhere.
We cannot do it nowhere. And we cannot do it everywhere at once. We
have created a focal point for the battle now at the time and place
of our choosing, in Iraq.
Not in New York, not in London, or Paris, or Berlin, but in Iraq,
where we did and are doing two very important things.
(1) We deposed Saddam Hussein. Whether Saddam Hussein was directly
involved in 9/11 or not, it is undisputed that Saddam has been
actively supporting the terrorist movement for decades. Saddam is a
terrorist.
Saddam is, or was, a weapon of mass destruction, who is responsible
for the deaths of probably more than a million Iraqis and two
million Iranians.
(2) We created a battle, a confrontation, a flash point, with
Islamic terrorism in Iraq. We have focused the battle. We are
killing bad guys there and the ones we get there we won't have to
get here, or anywhere else. We also have a good shot at creating a
democratic, peaceful Iraq, which will be a catalyst for democratic
change in the rest of the Middle East, and an outpost for a
stabilizing American military presence in theMiddle East for as
long as it is needed.
The Euros could have done this, but they didn't, and they won't. We
now know that rather than opposing the rise of the Jihad, the
French, Germans, and Russians were selling them arms - we have
found more than a million tons of weapons and munitions in Iraq. If
Iraq was not a threat to anyone, why did Saddam need a million tons
of weapons?
And Iraq was paying for French, German, and Russian arms with money
skimmed from the UN Oil For Food Program (supervised by UN
Secretary General Kofi Annan and his son) that was supposed to pay
for food, medicine, and education, for Iraqi children.
World War II, the war with the German and Japanese Nazis, really
began with a "whimper" in 1928. It did not begin with Pearl Harbor.
It began with the Japanese invasion of China. It was a war for
fourteen years before America joined it. It officially ended in
1945 - a 17 year war - and was followed by another decade of US
occupation in Germany and Japan to get those countries
reconstructed and running on their own again .. a 27 year war.
World War II cost the United States an amount equal to
approximately a full year's GDP - adjusted for inflation, equal to
about $12 trillion dollars, WWII cost America more than 400,000
killed in action, and nearly 100,000 still missing in action.
[The Iraq war has, so far, cost the US about $160 billion, which is
roughly what 9/11 cost New York. It has also cost about 2,200
American lives, which is roughly 1/2 of the 3,000 lives that the
Jihad snuffed on 9/11.] But the cost of not fighting and winning
WWII would have been unimaginably greater - a world now dominated
by German and Japanese Nazism.
Americans have a short attention span, now, conditioned I suppose
by 60 minute TV shows and 2-hour movies in which everything comes
out okay.
The real world is not like that. It is messy, uncertain,and
sometimes bloody and ugly. Always has been, and probably always
will be.
If we do this thing in Iraq successfully, it is probable that the
Reformation will ultimately prevail. Many Muslims in the Middle
East hope it will. We will be there to support it. It has begun in
some countries, Libya, for instance. And Dubai. And Saudi Arabia.
If we fail, the Inquisition will probably prevail, and terrorism
from Islam will be with us for all the foreseeable future, because
the Inquisition, or Jihad, believes they are called by Allah to
kill all the Infidels, and that death in Jihad is glorious.
The bottom line here is that we will have to deal with Islamic
terrorism until we defeat it, whenever that is. It will not go away
on its own. It will not go away if we ignore it.
If the US can create a reasonably democratic and stable Iraq, then
we have an "England" in the Middle East, a platform, from which we
can work to help modernize and moderate the Middle East. The
history of the world is the clash between the forces of relative
civility and civilization, and the barbarians clamoring at the
gates. The Iraq war is merely another battle in this ancient and
never-ending war. And now, for the first time ever, the barbarians
are about to get nuclear weapons. Unless we prevent them. Or
somebody does.
The Iraq war is expensive, and uncertain, yes. But the consequences
of not fighting it and winning it will be horrifically greater. We
have four options -
1. We can defeat the Jihad now, before it gets nuclear weapons.
2. We can fight the Jihad later, after it gets nuclear weapons
(which may be as early as next year, if Iran's progress on nuclear
weapons is what Iran claims it is).
3. We can surrender to the Jihad and accept its dominance in the
Middle East, now, in Europe in the next few years or decades, and
ultimately in America.
4. Or we can stand down now, and pick up the fight later when the
Jihad is more widespread and better armed, perhaps after the Jihad
has dominated France andGermany and maybe most of the rest of
Europe. It will be more dangerous, more expensive, and much
bloodier then.
Yes, the Jihadis say that they look forward to an Islamic America.
If you oppose this war, I hope you like the idea that your
children, or grandchildren, may live in an Islamic America under
the Mullahs and the Sharia, an America that resembles Iran today.
We can be defeatist peace-activists as anti-war types seem to be,
and concede, surrender, to the Jihad, or we can do whatever it
takes to win this war against them.
The history of the world is the history of civilizational clashes,
cultural clashes. All wars are about ideas, ideas about what
society and civilization should be like, and the most determined
always win.
Those who are willing to be the most ruthless always win. The
pacifists always lose, because the anti-pacifists kill them.
In the 20th century, it was Western democracy vs. communism, and
before that Western democracy vs. Nazism, and before that Western
democracy vs. German Imperialism. Western democracy won, three
times, but it wasn't cheap, fun, nice, easy, or quick. Indeed, the
wars against German Imperialism (WWI), Nazi Imperialism (WWII), and
communist imperialism (the 40-year Cold War that included the
Vietnam Battle, commonly called the Vietnam War, but itself a major
battle in a larger war) covered almost the entire century.
The first major war of the 21st Century is the war between Western
Judeo/Christian Civilization and Wahhabi Islam. It may last a few
more years, or most of this century. It will last until the Wahhabi
branch of Islam fades away, or gives up its ambitions for regional
and global dominance and Jihad, or until Western Civilization gives
in to the Jihad.
Senator John Kerry, in the debates and almost daily, makes 3 scary
claims:
1. We went to Iraq without enough troops.
We went with the troops the US military wanted. We went with the
troop levels General Tommy Franks asked for. We deposed Saddam in
30 days with light casualties, much lighter than we expected.
The real problem in Iraq is that we are trying to be nice - we are
trying to fight minority of the population that is Jihadi, and
trying to avoid killing the large majority that is not. We could
flatten Fallujah in minutes with a flight of B52s, or seconds with
one nuclear cruise missile - but we don't. We're trying to do brain
surgery, not amputate the patient's head. The Jihadis amputate heads.
2. We went to Iraq with too little planning.
This is a specious argument. It supposes that if we had just had
"the right plan" the war would have been easy, cheap, quick, and
clean.
That is not an option. It is a guerrilla war against a determined
enemy, and no such war ever has been or ever will be easy, cheap,
quick, and clean. This is not TV.
3. We proved ourselves incapable of governing and providing security.
This too is a specious argument. It was never our intention to
govern and provide security. It was our intention from the
beginning to do just enough to enable the Iraqis to develop a
representative government and their own military and police forces
to provide their own security, and that is happening. The US and
the Brits and other countries there have trained over 100,000 Iraqi
police and military, now, and will have trained more than 200,000
by the end of next year. We are in the process of transitioning
operational control for security back to Iraq.
It will take time. It will not go with no hitches. This is not TV.
Remember, perspective is everything, and America's schools teach
too little history for perspective to be clear, especially in the
young American mind.
The Cold war lasted from about 1947 at least until the Berlin Wall
came down in 1989. Forty-two years. Europe spent the first half of
the 19th century fighting Napoleon, and from 1870 to 1945 fighting
Germany.
World War II began in 1928, lasted 17 years, plus a ten year
occupation, and the US still has troops in Germany and Japan. World
War II resulted in the death of more than 50 million people, maybe
more than 100 million people, depending on which estimates you accept.
The US has taken a little more than 2,000 KIA in Iraq. The US took
more than 4,000 Killed in action on the morning of June 6, 1944,
the first day of the Normandy Invasion to rid Europe of Nazi
Imperialism. In WWII the US averaged 2,000 KIA a week for four
years. Most of the individual battles of WWII lost more Americans
than the entire Iraq war has done so far.
But the stakes are at least as high . . . a world dominated by
representative governments with civil rights, human rights, and
personal freedoms . or a world dominated by a radical Islamic
Wahhabi movement, by the Jihad, under the Mullahs and the Sharia
(Islamic law).
I do not understand why the American Left does not grasp this. They
favor human rights, civil rights, liberty and freedom, but
evidently not for Iraqis. In America, absolutely, but nowhere else.
300,000 Iraqi bodies in mass graves in Iraq are not our problem.
The US population is about twelve times that of Iraq, so let's
multiply 300,000 by twelve. What would you think if there were
3,600,000 American bodies in mass graves in America because of
George Bush? Would you hope for another country to help liberate
America?
"Peace Activists" always seem to demonstrate where it's safe, in
America.
Why don't we see Peace Activist demonstrating in Iran, Syria, Iraq,
Sudan, North Korea, in the places in the world that really need
peace activism the most?
The liberal mentality is supposed to favor human rights, civil
rights, democracy, multiculturalism, diversity, etc., but if the
Jihad wins, wherever the Jihad wins, it is the end of civil rights,
human rights, democracy, multiculturalism, diversity, etc.
Americans who oppose the liberation of Iraq are coming down on the
side of their own worst enemy.
If the Jihad wins, it is the death of Liberalism. Everywhere the
Jihad wins, it is the death of Liberalism. And American Liberals
just don't get it.
**************
Raymond S. Kraft is a writer and lawyer living in Northern
California. Please consider passing along copies of this to
students in high school, college and university as it contains
information about the American past that is very meaningful TODAY -
- history about America that very likely is completely unknown by
them (and their instructors, too). By being denied the facts and
truth of our history, they are at a decided disadvantage when it
comes to reasoning and thinking through the issues of today. They
are prime targets for misinformation campaigns beamed at enlisting
them in causes and beliefs that are special interest agenda driven.