SwiftVets.com

[BC]

[Rich]

A few of the votes I changed were voting against Bush on account of the Iraqi invasion. I calmly reminded them of all of Saddams violations of the cease fire agreements, the violations of the numerous UN resolutions, the attempt to kill an ex-President, the shooting at coalition airplanes, the refusal to allow the inspectors to do their job, the continues obstruction of the inspectors..................and on and on I went.

You know what a few of the votes said to me after I laid all that out? They said, "Oh yeah Rich, I had forgotton about all that". You see this flagrantly liberal/leftist/flagburning International media monster doesnt allow people to remember. And if a military attack isnt at the very least a "last option" then what is the point of even making a stand against a tyrant? I spent a long stretch under arms in that region too and I hate seeing those kids over there but what choice do we have?

Anyway its the fence sitters we have to concentrate on. Lets face it, for the hardcore Kerry people "their Johnny" can burn a flag, share a lunch with Janey, Koffi,Saddam, and the Ayotollahs, take a bomb building class, and walk on stage wearing a dress and they would still vote for him. We have to concentrate on the "silent America". I have found this link to be an outstanding, evenly balanced, source on the current mideast situation http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/ I use it when I want to inform people on the frightening world situation we cant allow Johnny to get involved with.

"7", and yes Im counting, and yes Im not finished. These boat guys have me motivated................................Rich
_________________
"Freedom" is never "free"

[GiveMeFreedom]

[Rich]

""""""""
Rich, is there any story in particular that you recommend, or just this sight in general? Thanks![/quote]

Yeah this one most of all, "thanks Bill Klinton" http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/knew/view/
and http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/search/view/
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/kim/view/
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/sleeper/view/
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/iraq/view/
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/khadr/view/
and the Al Qaeda supplied attack in Somalia http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/ambush/view/
and http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/beyond/view/

And lets not forget my favorite two-timing,backstabbing,terrorists............the Saudis http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/saudi/

And keep in mind that this is not only a lot of info to digest, and "Frontline" is a true "Documentary", but also, its not all "Pro-Bush" by any account. And balanced reporting should never be partisan to begin with. These shows are a good starting point for someone to learn just how terrible a world situation were in and how we cannot allow someone like "Johnny" into the whitehouse. Of them all watch the first "The man who Knew" as soon as you can...enjoy.......................Rich
_________________
"Freedom" is never "free"

[Ohio Voter]

I wish you would go to the newsgroup I frequent. They are mean and hard nosed. And I am not informed enough to convince them of anything. They just hammer me with being stupid. But when I asked for help in here the post was removed. So guess I can't tell ya where it is.

[Rich]

[mj_brutus]

[frankzzz]

Ohio Voter, click on the email box at the bottom of this post and email me the URL of that group and I’ll try to make some time to enter that debate.

If nothing else, it sounds like they could use a few anti-Kerry posters over there to help balance things out.

[rb325th]

[FireDog53]

Interesting article in historical context. Makes a lot sense and can change minds.

Lessons for Iraq from Gen. Washington, Major Andre, and Adolf Hitler
Written by John Armor
Sunday, September 21, 2003


More than a month ago, I laid down a marker in a column that no one could competently report on the ongoing story of the occupation of Iraq without reviewing the closest similar situation in American history, the occupation of Germany. Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld has mentioned this comparison several times in detail in his press conferences since then. Former Secretary of State Kissinger has mentioned the same in several recent interviews in the national press.

But all of the reporters present on all of those occasions have reacted to the subject like deer in headlights. Neither they nor any other national reporters have cracked a book or researched the facts on this comparison. So I have done it myself.

How much effort did it take? One call to the Pentagon Press Office to state my question. One call to their outside research office that specializes in military history. A couple clicks on the website of the Government Press Office to order the definitive history of the German occupation. And then a week reading the fascinating, information-packed, turgidly written book, The U.S. Army in the Occupation of Germany 1944-1946 by Dr. Earl Ziemke, published by the Center for Military History, United States Army, 1990. (This is the fourth and latest edition.)

On the main points, this history confirmed what I wrote in my prior column: The population of the American Zone in Germany, including its part of Berlin, was slightly smaller than the current population of Iraq. The number of occupation troops authorized for Germany was slightly larger than the number in Iraq. The number of attacks on American troops in Germany was slightly less than in Iraq, but close. Some attacks were isolated; some were organized. In addition, there were acts of sabotage in Germany, as in Iraq, and also assassination attacks on German “collaborators” with the Americans, as in Iraq. In both nations, some of the attackers were not natives.

(Total American troops in Europe on V-E Day was about 3.2 million, most of them in Germany. However, many of these were slated for immediate return to the United States and demobilization, based on a point system for length of service and other factors. Most of the rest were slated for transfer to the Pacific, where the war was continuing. Only a small number were assigned to the occupation of Germany. The others were transferred out as soon as transport and logistics could be arranged.)

In Germany, the destruction of homes, businesses, the economy and the society were greater than in Iraq due to the more extensive fighting in the war and especially to the carpet bombing that preceded the invasion of Germany. The reconstruction of Germany back to a fully functional society – both economic and political – therefore took longer than it will in Iraq. The task was not largely completed in Germany for four years, whereas in Iraq it should take about two years.

Reading this history makes clear that the recent French demand that the Americans “turn Iraq back to the Iraqis in a month” is brass-plated hypocrisy of the highest order. But it also demonstrates that questions from the American reporters whether the job in Iraq is almost completed, or might be completed in a year or so, is akin to fractious children in the back seat on a long-distance trip, querulously repeating “Are we there yet?”

As I said to the American press in my prior column, ''Do your d*mned homework.'' Now that I've done that homework from a farmhouse on a mountain at the end of a half-mile gravel road, I add this comment to the American press: ''You have the nerve to call yourselves reporters?'' The effort was easy. And the conclusions are obvious.

One of the fascinating sidebar stories in Dr. Ziemke’s definitive book was the multi-year fight between the Department of War (now called Defense) and the Department of State over what should be the basic American policy toward occupied Germany. This took place in a series of memoranda to President Roosevelt and later President Truman, with hard fights clause-by-clause over what policies the President would set.

Early on, the official policy of America was to ''do nothing concerning the reconstruction'' of Germany's economy and society. This was to be left only to the Germans themselves, regardless of their lack of money, equipment, homes, factories or shops. It took two years for the United States to recognize that its own self interest demanded a functional Germany back on its feet as a bulwark against the Soviet buildup in Eastern Europe. And the American policy was changed to helping the Germans reconstruct their nation, effectively and quickly.

A similar realization came more quickly concerning Japan, which we occupied without firing a shot on the main islands once the Japanese surrendered unconditionally after the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. General Douglas MacArthur, in charge of the occupation of Japan, recognized that the house-by-house fighting that had been avoided by Japan's surrender could yet break out, if he could not assure minimal levels of housing and food for the Japanese populace. He sent a famous telegram in the fall of 1945 to Washington that said, “Send me food, or send me bullets.”

In short, the policy disputes between the Departments of State and War concerning the occupation of Germany made the current disputes between State and Defense look minor, like the question of whether to serve red wine with fish. In addition, as Dr. Ziemke points out, there were policy disputes between elements in the American Army with different assignments. The operating units on the ground in Germany were often at direct cross purposes with the special units belatedly organized to go in and sponsor ''nation-building'' as we now call it.

There were more than 20,000 military trials conducted during the occupation of Germany. The vast bulk of these were trials of American military personal for fraternization violations or assorted forms of theft, including currency manipulations. Dr. Ziemke provided the back-up statistics for both areas.

During about six months the currency remissions from American soldiers back to the United States exceeded by millions of dollars the gross pay received by those soldiers. This was attributed to self-reported ''gambling winnings,'' but in fact was due to black market sales and currency manipulations between German marks, occupation marks, and the dollar. On the fraternization issue, the reported cases of venereal diseases steadily increased, directly tracking the Army's gradual relaxation of fraternization policies.

In terms of getting control of the German population and restoring that nation to minimal functions, the much smaller number of military trials which involved German civilians and attackers and saboteurs from other nations, offers a more instructive parallel to Iraq. And that brings us to the example of General George Washington and British Major John Andre.

Major Andre was captured behind American lines in civilian clothes, and when searched was found with documents describing the intended betrayal of the garrison of West Point by General Benedict Arnold. General Washington accorded Major Andre a military trial (then sometimes called a ''drum head'' trial) and he was sentenced to death. Washington offered to British General Clinton an exchange of Andre for Arnold, who had fled to British lines when his perfidy was discovered. Clinton refused the exchange. Andre was hung by the neck until dead on October 2, 1780.

The relevance of this to both Germany and Iraq is this: Andre was tried and executed under the Law of War, which was well established centuries before the United States came into existence. The continued validity of the Law of War, even under the U.S. Constitution, was recognized by the Supreme Court in 1942 in Ex Parte Quirin. In Quirin the Court held unanimously that eight German saboteurs who had entered the U.S. from two submarines off the coast could be so tried, without resort to the Bill of Rights or other provisions of the Constitution except war powers. Six of those eight were hanged; two were convicted and their sentences carried out even though they claimed to be American citizens (one clearly was an American, born in Chicago.)

The same power was used in the occupation of Germany. Of those given military trials and then executed in Germany, some were Germans but others were fighters against the occupation who came from other nations. A similar problem has arisen in Iraq. Most of those fighting against the occupation are Iraqis. But some of those captured with weapons, explosives, and plans for the use of such articles, are citizens of other nations.

At present, the Americans in Iraq are simply taking into custody those that survive firefights in such circumstances. If the example of Germany is used, as approved by the Supreme Court, such ''illegal combatants'' could be given military trials and executed. This would send a clear message to Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia – the three primary sources of the non-Iraqi attackers – that they would do well to guard their own borders and keep their own people at home, if they do not want to see them executed in Iraq.

Note: these military trials of low-level attackers was entirely separate from the elaborate War Crimes trials for top leaders of Germany. The same distinction between low-level attackers and leaders can and should apply in Iraq for the same reasons.

The last example from Iraq is provided by Der Fuhrer Adolf Hitler. Hitler killed himself in his bunker in Berlin, just before it fell to the Russians in May, 1945. His survivors burned his body and that of Eva Braun to inhibit identification. Forensics were not what they are today, and the Russians were not fully cooperative with the investigation.

It was not until September, 1945, that an investigation by a British officer concluded that Hitler was definitely dead. But most Germans still believed that he was still alive. Both organized and unorganized resistance continued in his name. General Eisenhower remained under a standing Order to ''capture Adolf Hitler.'' Rumors of where Hitler might be hiding were investigated as far away as Bavaria and Argentina.

The principal difference between most Germans’ continued belief that Hitler was still alive and possibly still leading the resistance and similar beliefs about Saddam Hussein in Iraq is the invention of videotape. The editing capacities available to anyone with two tape decks and a supply of electricity make it possible to ''keep the leader in place'' regardless of his current biological status or availability. (The same, of course, also applies to Osama bin Laden.)

In December, 1945, an attempted capture of a high-ranking Nazi by the Americans failed, but in the false bottom of his suitcase were found original documents from Hitler's bunker including Hitler's Will, drafted the day of his suicide. That finally settled the issue, even for the Germans.

The other example from Hitler for Iraq concerned the de-Nazification of Germany. The original American policy was to remove all Nazi party members from every position of authority in any respect. Not just police, administration and schools, but banks, businesses and any other leadership position. Over time, this policy was relaxed, because the Americans found that they could not operate the factories, power plants, etc., without using some of the ''mere party members'' of the Nazis.

The same difficult situation is presented in Iraq. The de-Ba’athification of Iraq must, of course, capture or kill all Iraqi leaders of the Ba’ath Party. Whether any ''mere members'' of the Ba’ath Party should be employed in any functional capacities in the reconstruction of Iraq is a problem that has not yet been resolved.

A fair reading of the history of the American occupation of Germany leads to the conclusion that America is about two years ahead of the pace of achievement, month by month, in Iraq as compared to Germany. Of course there is the minor distinction that the American media, led by the New York Times, were not snapping at the heels of General Eisenhower and his staff and soldiers as they carried out their mission in 1945-46. (The only criticisms by the American press concerned limited de-Nazification, not the ''failure'' of the entire mission.) Nor were there packs of candidates of the opposing party, then the Republicans, attacking President Truman for his ''failure'' in Germany as they campaigned for the presidential election of 1948.

In short, the major drawbacks to the American occupation in Iraq are not in Iraq. Compared to the one close example, Germany, the major defects of the Iraqi occupation are only in the pages of the American press and in the stump speeches of assorted badly-informed American candidates for President.

I strongly recommend Dr. Ziemke’s book to all those who apparently do not have a clue about how long, difficult, and sometimes dangerous the work of reconstructing a defeated nation really is. Facts are useful things, but only to those few who bother to search them out and then have the capacity to understand what they read. We shall see how large (or small) the group of reporters and candidates who do that, turns out to be.

John Armor, also known as Congressman Billybob, is an author and columnist on politics and history. He currently has an exploratory committee and is considering a run for Congress in North Carolina. His website is at: www.ArmorforCongress.com
_________________
Viet Nam vet and PROUD!

[NYCnative]

Here is some more ammunition.. Sound like N Korea and the Clinton Administartion?

LONDON, August 31 (IranMania.com) - John Kerry, Democratic White House hopeful would offer Iran a "great bargain" over its controversial nuclear program if he were to win the presidency, Kerry's vice presidential running mate, John Edwards, said in a newspaper interview published Monday.

According to AFP, under Kerry's proposal, Washington would lift its objections over Tehran's construction of nuclear power plants for civilian use if Iran agreed to abandon its efforts to keep nuclear fuel that can be used to make weapons, Edwards told The Washington Post.

If the Islamic republic rejected the terms of Kerry's offer, the United States would consider it a confirmation of Tehran's nuclear bomb ambitions, he said. The United States would call on European allies to impose heavy sanctions on Iran if it failed to comply.

"If we are engaging with Iranians in an effort to reach this great bargain, and in fact this is a bluff that they are trying to develop nuclear weapons capability, then we know that our European friends will stand with us," he told the Post.

Kerry's approach is a shift from President George W. Bush's policy. The two candidates will face off in the November 2 election.

The Republican president's administration opposes the activation of Iran's power plant in the Gulf port of Bushehr, which Tehran says is being built exclusively for civilian purposes.

Washington believes Iran, one of the world's largest oil suppliers, has no need for nuclear energy and accuses Tehran of hiding a nuclear weapons development program under the guise of a civilian atomic energy program.
_________________
"From time to time, the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots." -- Thomas Jefferson

"Proclaim Liberty throughout All the land unto All the Inhabitants Thereof." -Inscription on the Liberty Bell

[Tom Poole]

[JimT]

I ran across the following quotes on the net. I think it would be great to insert into a discussion about not voting for Kerry.

If Kerry wins we are France.

Or even better.

If Kerry wins are we France?

Neither really makes any sense. They can be taken many different ways. And the second one is really funny to me.

They are very simple and make one think. They bounce around your mind for couple of days.
_________________
CAP Marine

[directorblue]

I had a close friend email me a note with all of his friends cc'ed. It said something to the effect:

"I've never voted before in an election, but after reading your blog I'm so pi$$ed off at Kerry and the Democratic leadership that I'm voting in this election for George Bush. I encourage all of you to read the blog and make up your own minds."

I felt great after receiving that. Of course, a few libs complained, but they can pound sand.
_________________
http://directorblue.blogspot.com - click for various missives on the folly of John Kerry's candidacy.

[Rich]

Way to be fellas I hear the sound of those thundering jump boots getting louder and louder. What say we kick it in overdrive in the coming weeks and not only beat this guy but embarrass the heck out of him and the ketchup queen?.............Rich
_________________
"Freedom" is never "free"