It's in for a penny in for a pound time now!
By Rich Kozlovich

The Israel/Hamas/Hezbollah/Iran War, the Russo/Ukraine War, and More
By Rich Kozlovich
Let's try and get this right, no matter how many side bars are presented, this falls on Putin! He chose to attack. Having said that, while having compassion for the Ukrainian people, I don't care what happens to Ukraine as a nation.
This is a failure of Biden and his energy policies that funded this invasion, the stupidity of European leaders and their energy policies, and the stunning corruption of Ukrainian leadership who failed to proper fund arming themselves instead of funding their own bank accounts. But it was Putin who chose to make this a shooting war.
Ukraine's
government was and is corrupt, and perhaps if they were allowed to have
the election Zelenskyy prevented things might be different. Who knows,
but either way, none of this is our fault, nor is it our responsibility.
We're throwing away billions on Ukraine, none of which the Biden administration tracked, nor would they allow it to be tracked, in order to support Europe. All of which is wasted money as Europe is a doomed spent force, and we no longer have skin in that game, and yet they're quibbling over millions for Israel where we really do have skin in that game. There's where the real enemy of western civilization is in play.
Will Putin use nukes? I put this in a 60/40 "no" category as he has a lot of dissent behind the scenes, and I'm still convinced there's a von Stauffenberg contingent in his military. If he attempts to use nukes, he could be out, and survival is his primary goal now, but he still can't let loose of this insane war HE started. When Caesar fails or appears weak, he's not Caesar much longer.
However, if he does use nukes will there be a European nuclear response? I'm 100 % convinced the answer is no. Does anyone really believe Europe is willing to sacrifice Warsaw, Berlin, Paris, and London in a nuclear exchange over Ukraine?
How will this end? I've been
convinced Ukraine can't win simply because they don't have enough boots
on the ground. Many have fled, and many resent Zelenskyy and his
coterie. But Putin's coterie is so blatantly incompetent this has gone
on shockingly long, and what we're seeing is the break out for the wars of the future. Drones and lasers.
Putin and Zelenskyy should both hope Trump is elected, as I think he will find a way to resolve this, with no one being happy, which should be the goal.
Long term consequences?
Russia is toast as a world shaker. They can't even manufacture the military hardware they need as they're buying military hardware from Iran and N. Korea. The EU will collapse, Russia and China will go broke, and the world will be facing what historians call a historical end cycle, which always involved massive economic downturns and violence before a new cycle begins.
Based on history, I'm not optimistic.
Definition Leads to Clarity
Let's take a minute to review terms that are thrown around that actually end up confusing the world about who and what these politicos are, and why they make the decisions that make.
Left, right, conservatives, liberals, and socialists, all are being used a lot to define characters around the world, and that's especially true of Europe after the recent elections, which has "the left" fearing "the right" is taking over. Well, that's not exactly the way things are.
When talking about classical liberals it should be realized they no longer exist, and in fact, Republicans come closest.
Truth be told, the only political party in America that knows what it believes are the Democrats. They know they hate America, Americans, capitalism, and the Constitution. Which explains why they support terrorists, criminals, illegal migration, high taxes, burdensome regulations, and the murder of the innocent unborn.
That's the world as I see it, and it ain't pretty.
This is a presentation, with some minor changes, from four articles I wrote about China over the last four years, China Won't Attack Taiwan - Sunday, January 8, 2023. Nothing Is Ever As It Appears In China: Military Intimidation - Monday, July 26, 2021. Will China Attack Taiwan? - Sunday, June 13, 2021, and China Reset, Monday, June 22, 2020.
Remember these articles are up to four years old, and the reason I'm doing so is to lend clarity to the unending blather I see about what China's doing, will do, what the world needs to do to appease them. Much of which I find gaggable. The reality is nothing about China appears as it is. Everything is about the basics and those basics haven't gotten better for China. Currently they have Biden as a Chinese asset, but if Trump is elected China will be forced to make some major adjustments, and that may cause enough unrest China may even dump Xi.
Will China Attack Taiwan?
The Chinese military continues what appear to be preparations for a potential invasion of Taiwan, which threatens an eventuality that would force President Joe Biden to make an ugly foreign policy decision. According to the South China Morning Post, “The Chinese military has conducted an amphibious landing exercise in waters near Taiwan amid renewed tensions between Beijing and Washington.”
It makes sense that, in addition to testing missiles over Taiwanese airspace, the Chinese military would be practicing amphibious operations, given that these would be necessary to invade an island like Taiwan.
“As part of the exercise, wheeled amphibious armoured vehicles entered the dock of amphibious landing ships, which then sailed to a target sea area where the vehicles left the ship and steered towards a beach,” the Morning Post noted, based on footage provided by the Eastern Theatre Command of the People’s Liberation Army.
Additionally, China Central Television reported that “the 72nd Group Army explored the tactics of emergency loading, long-distance transport and beach assault under complicated sea situations, and boosted the troops’ amphibious combat support capabilities.” What is happening should be clear. China is emboldened.
Okay, that sounds scary. But it's all what the Soviets called "maskirovka". "The doctrine covers a broad range of measures for military deception, from camouflage to denial and deception." In this case it's also diplomatic maskirovka.
The Chinese know a few things:
This is all show. China is great at object lesson wars, such as the Sino-Indian war of 1962,
and their latest dust up with India, their challenge of Philippine
territorial waters, etc. All show, all long range intimidation. But
they've not fought a real war since Korea, and they lost massive amounts
of soldiers there. Soldiers they just threw away with their tactics.
Will
they attack Taiwan? No! There are too many negatives and few
positives for such an action, even it they were to win there would have
to be long term political and economic consequences they can't afford.
What this will do is bring more American, Japanese, Indian, Australian, forces into the area, just as Soviet outrageous claims triggered an arms race that broke the Soviets back economically, this will trigger responses they won't like and can't handle.
Putin's aggression against Ukraine must present a clear picture for China if they act as stupidly as Putin. Putin force NATO to all of a sudden grow a backbone and started preparing for more Russian aggression and two new nations, Finland and Sweden joined NATO, both of which he wanted to keep out. He clearly thought this would intimidate Europe, but it backfired. Now he's facing a far more united front against Russia. He thought his military was unstoppable, and so too did most everyone else, it wasn't. Now Russia's failures have their political and military leadership look stupid and incompetent. Because they are, and that's going to resonate against Russia for some time.
Here are my Seven rules of Geopolitics:
China Won't Attack Taiwan
First, as a practical matter, every geopolitical issue is defined by rule one. Geographics, demographics and economics. Secondly, we have to understand nothing about China is ever as it appears. We can start with the myth of Communist Hegemony in China. As Daniel Greenfield notes:
The scenes from China show that there is a spectrum of opposition from anger over financial fraud and Zero COVID to traditional calls for democracy and an end to Communist rule. I don’t believe that they will succeed, but the regime has been rattled badly. Zero COVID was to show that people would jump through any hoop and instead it showed that there is a sizable undercurrent of public anger and despite a generation of indoctrination and total media and social media censorship, outrage lurks below the surface.
China is a huge country, but the vast majority of their population, of 1.4 billion (Which is a big drop over recent years) and they live in an area no larger than the land mass East of the Mississippi River in America, and are mostly ethnic Han. The rest of China is either very mountainous or very arid, and is sparsely populated with different ethnic groups, not that productive agriculturally or industrially, and these other ethnic groups hate the Han, and view the central government as illegitimate, and that's particularly true of Tibet, which is an unending source of resistance to the Chinese Communist Party, which is stunningly corrupt.
Interestingly
many of the Han also consider the Chinese government to be
illegitimate, and the communist's handling of the economy and the covid
tyranny has enhanced that view. China's economy is a myth, and finally many geopolitical analysts are finally acknowledging that, and Xi is a true believer in Maoist economics and is driving their economy down the drain.
They're
now provoking India in the Himalayas, for reasons I fail to understand
other than they think they will intimate them into believing China will
invade India from the North if they interfere with their activity in the
South China Sea and Taiwan. They're unendingly interfering in
governments all over the world, which includes their Belt and Road Initiatives, and picking fights with Japan along with the Philippine Islands, Vietnam and other South East Asian countries involving the Spratly Islands, Paracel Islands, Scarborough Shoal, and what's being called the nine-dash line area claimed by China and rejected by the rest of the world, which China is attempting to enforce with military intimidation.
India, Japan and the Philippines are reacting to that with military initiatives of their own, especially Japan, and Taiwan is working an international lifeline via what they're calling a Parliamentary Outreach. This is not going well for China, and it appears they're shocked. Imagine that.
India gave the Dalai Lama asylum after Tibet's 1959 uprising. China decided to launch what was in reality an "object lesson war" against India in 1962. That's an important event in understanding China's military policies. They love playing the biggest baddest bully boy on the block with their "object lesson military actions". They really don't like full scale wars, and for good reason, the last one was the Korean War with America, and they took a massive beating throwing away untold thousands of young men's lives with their tactics.
China
really doesn't have the capability to extend their power much beyond
their borders, which they're working to fix that by building aircraft
carriers, with 25 year old Russian technology, and technology they've
stolen from others, and a failed economy.
For
some time we've been hearing reports the Chinese Communists are going
to invade Taiwan and are practicing amphibious invasions, they're test
launching missiles and they provocatively keep invading Taiwan's air
space playing intimidation games. Well, there are some things, no
matter the rhetoric or provocations by Xi and his government, that
represent substance over illusion.
The Chinese know a few things:
Will
they attack Taiwan? No! There are too many negatives and few
positives for such an action, even it they were to win there would have
to be long term political and economic consequences they can't afford.
What this will do is bring more American, Japanese, Indian, Australian, forces into the area, just as Soviet outrageous claims triggered an arms race that broke the Soviets back economically, this will trigger responses they won't like and can't handle.
If
Xi really had the intention of invading Taiwan, the disaster Putin
created in his attack on Ukraine is a wake up call for Xi. China has
far more troubles than Taiwan. Xi is now facing a massive outbreak of
covid in his population and the reason for that was the massive
lockdowns.
Since their society was in effect quarantined they never were able to develop herd immunity to this virus, and I think combining that with these false vaccines, that are demonstrating they seem to make those vaccinated more susceptible to the virus, Xi has a lot of internal issues. The only resistance these lockdowns created was resistance and demonstrations against Xi in at least 17 cities all around the country, and they were clearly spontaneous, which many believe was the real reason for more and tighter lockdowns, because that spontaneity has to be frightening to the CCP. More lockdowns wasn't to stop this virus, but an effort to stop demonstrations against Xi and the Chinese Communist party.
Invading Taiwan may be great rhetoric for the population in order to divert attention from Xi's failures, but it's not a reality.
Nothing Is Ever As It Appears In China: Military Intimidation
First, we have to understand that whenever you read anything about China you must see past what's written. China is a complicated country, with a long and profound history. China's culture is considered the world's oldest culture by many, and China houses a huge population, in an area about the size of everything east of the Mississippi River in the United States, and they are ethnic Han. The rest of China is sparsely populated and mostly occupied by other ethnic groups that hate the Han and consider the central government illegitimate, and the general population has grown to doubt the legitimacy of the central government as a result of all the incompetence and corruption.
The government’s one child policy has created a large male/female imbalance in the population as a result there isn’t enough women to go around. This creates serious social consequences and dissatisfaction. Pollution is terrible and the government is spending huge amounts of money to keep everyone working, including building cities that no one occupies, and the banking system has troubles the government hides.
What is clear is the Chinese leadership is striving for two things. Social and economic stability, world dominance in both and continued central control of all things in the hands of the communist leadership.
Make no mistake about it, they’re still commies, and commies are dictators, and so what do dictatorships do to distract the population from their problems? They start a war! Only this is far more problematic than it was decades ago.
So who do you start a ruckus with? Taiwan, Japan, India or the maybe the Philippines?
There
are a handful of tiny Islands off the coast of China known as the
Diaoyu in China and the Senkaku in Japan which are barren and
uninhabited. These five islands “encompass a grand total of seven
square kilometers” and were won from the Chinese in the first
Sino-Japanese war of 1895. But after 1968 the Chinese decided that they
wanted them back; after it was discovered “the islands may be sitting
on top of huge oil and gas reserves”, which China has none. A lot of
coal, but no oil, or at best very little.
This gives the Chinese a potentially legitimate gripe, especially when you consider what the Japanese did to them in WWII and were then the losers of that war. By pushing this they then bring into play far more than these islands and its potential wealth. They create a Munich Moment. The real goal of the Chinese government is to be the big dog in the South China Sea and ultimately all of South East Asia.
If they push this and win; it seriously weakens American influence, militarily and economically. The rest of the countries in the area then can be much more easily bullied into falling into line, including India and the Philippines, and of course even Australia. But all these threats and seeming preparations for military action is triggering a backlash. Taiwan is now building their own submarine, bypassing China's successful efforts blocking Taiwan's efforts to acquire one from other countries.
Taiwan is also seeking "allies" in other non-neighboring nations like Lithuania:
Taiwan will set up its first office in Europe using the name
“Taiwan,” drawing a rebuke from China and praise from the U.S. as the
island democracy seeks to strengthen its diplomatic presence around the
globe in the face of pressure from Beijing............. Taiwan’s other diplomatic outposts on the continent are under the name
of “Taipei.” “Lithuania has firmly believed in universal
values such as democracy, freedom and human rights, and is a like-mined
partner of Taiwan,”.....Taiwan and Lithuania are both at the
strategic front line to safeguard democratic and free regimes.......Lithuania has firmly believed in universal values
such as democracy, freedom and human rights, and is a like-mined partner
of Taiwan.”
The problem still remains that has been foundational of all of their problems since Mao. They’re still commies! They think like commies, they act like commies, ergo, they’re commies, and commies are now, and have always been, aggressive, unreasonable, murderous and failures at basic economics and human rights. Both of which I will address in other pieces. And they're staggeringly corrupt.
Pay attention to this whole South East Asia economic situation. There is a reason China is expanding it's navy, including air craft carriers. It's all an effort to instill an economic hegemony through Asia via military intimidation. There are serious internal and/or external events in the offing with China that will impact the whole world, and the world is taking notice and recognizing China is the world's biggest threat, and one thing all this military intimidation has done is make everyone aware of how dangerous they are, and the world is going to react.
China Reset
Recently in Canada's National Post Clive Hamilton posted the article, Time for a 'China reset,' before it's too late saying:
Under the iron rule of the Communist Party of China (CPC), the nation from which the coronavirus originated has been using the pandemic to exploit new opportunities to advance its power and influence. Distracted by the crisis at hand, we are letting it happen. Chinese and Indian troops are engaged in a face-off along their disputed border.....
China has further boosted its naval presence in the South China Sea, where in recent years it has built military facilities on islands and coral outcrops contrary to international law. It has driven Filipino fishermen off traditional fishing grounds and stopped Vietnam from exploring for oil, while making incursions into waters close to Japan. All the while, the ever-nervous......
Taiwan waits and wonders if its giant neighbour will try to take back control of the island by force. Last month, Australian Foreign Minister Marise Payne proposed an independent global inquiry into the origin of the coronavirus outbreak........
China, much like the Soviet Union, has practiced, and continues to practice masquerade diplomacy. The Soviets made outrageous claims about their military capabilities and the western intelligence agencies believed them. It was all a lie, but it triggered massive defense buildups in the west, especially the U.S., under Ronald Reagan. And they weren't ready for the consequences of their masquerade. While the left laughed and ridiculed Reagan’s Star Wars Initiative, that was the final straw that did the Soviet Union in.but Beijing angrily rebuked Australia for its impertinence, accusing it of being a “U.S. lackey.” China’s ambassador in Canberra upped the ante by threatening a Chinese boycott of Australian exports........announcing an 80 per cent tariff on barley imports and a ban on a large slice of beef sales, while also threatening coal imports.
by Guest Authors Mar 30, 2024 @ Liberty Nation News |Tags: Articles, Good Reads, Military Affairs, Opinion

By James C. Roberts
Editor’s Note: In honor of yesterday’s National Vietnam War Veterans Day, we present this article by a veteran of that conflict.
A mantra heard often in conservative circles these days is “No more endless wars.” News flash: All the wars alluded to ended – usually in American defeat or the withdrawal of American forces before the mission was completed.

(Photo credit: Getty Images)
This baleful trend began with the Vietnam War. As a Vietnam veteran myself, I am still deeply troubled by the carnage occasioned by that long and bloody conflict.
Ronald Reagan called the Vietnam War a “noble cause,” and so it was. The objective of the American commitment was to preserve an independent South Vietnam, which was under assault by the North Vietnamese, whose forces had unlimited support from the Soviet Union and Communist China. Put in context, the Vietnam conflict was a “hot” war in a larger worldwide “cold” war against communist aggression led by the Soviet Union.
Facing a presidential election in 1964, and desirous of keeping the American commitment to the war on the front pages, President Lyndon Johnson opted for a policy of gradual escalation, a disastrous decision (abetted by the craven acquiescence of US senior officers) that left 58,000 US troops dead, more than 200,000 wounded, and far greater losses for our South Vietnamese allies. The betrayal of South Vietnam led to a dozen countries falling to communism, the degradation of American military might and foreign policy resolution, and a widespread loss of respect for the armed forces that persisted until the election of Reagan 15 years later.
The Vietnam tragedy could have been avoided if LBJ had applied decisive military force early in the war, as Richard Nixon did in 1972 to bring North Vietnam to the peace table. Mining all of North Vietnam’s harbors and an unrestricted bombing of key North Vietnamese railroad lines, bridges, and important infrastructure facilities would likely have sufficed.
To quote Reagan again, after the American defeat in Vietnam:
“Let us tell those who fought in that war [Vietnam] that never again will we ask young men to fight, and possibly die, in a war our government is afraid to let them win.”
Unfortunately, most of Reagan’s successors, including his vice president, George H.W. Bush, didn’t adhere to that sound advice.
When Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in 1990 and threatened Saudi Arabia, President Bush put together an impressive coalition and a formidable military force of 500,000 who invaded Iraq and largely destroyed Saddam’s troops. Bush, unfortunately, declined to finish the job by pushing on to Baghdad and taking out Saddam Hussein, thus squandering the opportunity to occupy Iraq and reconstitute its armed forces and government. Instead, he allowed Saddam to remain in power and become an increasingly grave threat to the security of the region. This failure resulted in his son invading Iraq to remove the dictator – an action that seriously damaged his presidency.
When Afghanistan-based terrorist Osama bin Laden orchestrated an
attack on the US. on September 11, 2001, it brought Americans together
to a degree not seen since World War II. The patriotism and desire for
revenge for the atrocities inflicted were white-hot. Millions of young
Americans expressed a willingness to enlist in the military.
The new president, George W. Bush, could have called for a national mobilization and effectively occupied the country and destroyed the Taliban. Instead, Bush urged the public to go shopping and then pursued an incremental, piecemeal commitment of troops to Afghanistan without any goals or strategy.
Then, on March 20, 2003, Bush launched an invasion of Iraq with the objective of taking down the government of Saddam Hussein. While the goal was clear, there was no strategy regarding what to do next. Retired Army General David Petraeus recalls asking his superiors, “How does this game end?” and not getting a response.
The best explanation of America’s intended mission in Iraq came from Assistant Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz. Essentially, Wolfowitz predicted that, having toppled Hussein, the Iraqi people would greet US troops as liberators and then America would use revenues from oil sales to rebuild the country.
We all know how that turned out. The 150,000 troops committed were far too few to effectively secure Iraq, which led to the country dissolving into ethnic warfare. Meanwhile, American Viceroy Paul Bremer made a series of unilateral and disastrous decisions, perhaps the worst being the disbanding of the Iraqi army, leaving 500,000 young military-age males unemployed – but in possession of their weapons. Another catastrophic decision was to fire all Iraqi civil servants who had any ties, at any level, to Saddam Hussein’s Ba’ath Party. This action effectively removed most of the government workers with administrative experience.
Meanwhile, an undermanned US military force struggled to stabilize the ethnic maelstrom that consumed Iraq.
The 150,000 troops engaged in Iraq meant an even smaller number of troops available for the war in Afghanistan. To Bush’s credit, the troop surge that he ordered in Iraq (against tremendous opposition, even within his own party) and led by Gen. David Petraeus, had largely pacified the country by the last year of his presidency.

Barack Obama (Photo by Elijah Nouvelage/Getty Images)
Incoming president Barack Obama effectively squandered the hard-won gains achieved by the surge, however. The new president (with the full support of his vice president, Joe Biden) pulled all US troops out of Iraq, which resulted in the quick reversion back to disorder and the re-emergence of ISIS, the terror group that took control of large swaths of the country.
Petraeus presented Obama with a detailed plan for stabilizing Afghanistan and the number of troops needed to defeat the Taliban. After innumerable meetings in the White House Situation Room, Obama gave Petraeus less than half the number of troops he requested and then, incredibly, announced the date when those troops would start to withdraw.
One can imagine the Taliban leaders sitting around their campfires, laughing hysterically as they read the Obama strategy. The fruits of that plan were manifest in the catastrophic withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2022 – ordered and overseen by Joe Biden.
Biden appears to embody all the worst traits of presidents LBJ, both Bushes, and Obama. The Middle East and Eastern Europe are now in flames, thanks largely to Biden’s feckless malpractice.
Biden precipitated the disaster in Ukraine by showing weakness in Afghanistan and in stating that, basically, a small Russian invasion of Ukraine would not necessarily be a bad thing. When the expected invasion came, he offered to speed up Ukraine’s surrender by giving Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky an armed escort out of the country. When the Ukrainians proved to be courageous and skillful fighters who halted the invasion, Biden promised assistance for “as long as it takes”, but over the past two years has delivered aid in fits and starts and denied Ukraine the advanced equipment and aircraft that could break the stalemate and defeat the Russians.
Unsurprisingly, there has been no Biden statement to the American people on strategy or goals or any explanation of how preserving an independent Ukraine is in our national interest.
Ukraine is the latest entry on the list of “endless wars,” and Biden’s terrible record on the conflict invites that description. There are important differences, however. First, Ukrainians are a people united in their love of country and have proved their willingness to fight and die for it.
Second, the country is led by a fully functional government (unlike Iraq and Afghanistan) which has the overwhelming support of the Ukrainian people. Third, the country has a well-led military whose soldiers and sailors are battle-hardened and fierce in their determination to defeat the Russian invaders.
Fourth and finally, Ukraine (unlike Iraq, Afghanistan and, initially, South Vietnam) does not require the deployment of American troops on the ground. The Ukrainians are capable and willing to do the fighting themselves. All they are asking for is equipment and ammunition.
Of all the presidents involved in the sad history of recent military conflicts, the only exception since Reagan is Donald Trump. As president, Trump employed troops sparingly, but when he did so, he acted decisively. He ordered Secretary of Defense James Mattis to destroy ISIS and ISIS was promptly destroyed. He kept the Iranian mullahs in their box by ordering the killing of Qasem Soleimani. He kept Xi Jinping in line by employing tough sanctions on China, and he fostered peace in the Middle East by negotiating the Abraham Accords.
On Ukraine, however, Trump has been mostly silent, saying only that the Russian invasion would not have happened if he had been president – probably true – and that he would settle the conflict in 24 hours, which is an absurd prediction.
A defeated Ukraine, occupied by the Russians, would be a huge problem for America. Maintaining an independent Ukraine is in America’s self-interest. Donald Trump, speaking for the Republican Party, should place the blame for the crisis in Ukraine squarely on Joe Biden. Then he should call for a strategy of victory that expels the Russians from Ukrainian territory.
Finally, the votes are there in the US House of Representatives to pass a desperately needed aid package for Ukraine. Trump might consider urging Speaker of the House Mike Johnson to enable the bill to reach the House floor.
James C. Roberts served in the Reagan Administration from 1981-1984 and is the founder and executive chairman of Radio America, a national conservative radio network with more than 630 affiliates.
~ All opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Liberty Nation.
Read More From Guest Authors
Daniel Greenfield October 24, 2023 @ Sultan Knish Blog
(On October 23, 1983, Iranian backed terrorists carried out the bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut leading to the largest loss of life by Marines in one day since Iwo Jima. This is the 40th anniversary of that Islamic terrorist attack. What follows is a reprint of an article I wrote in 2014)
“The worst part for me is that nobody remembers,” Mark Nevells said on the anniversary of the Hezbollah bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut.
A Marine had thrown his body in front of the truck to try stop the vehicle and afterward for five days, Nevells and other Marines had dug through the rubble for the bodies of the men they had served with.
One of the first Marines on the scene heard voices coming from underneath the rubble. “Get us out. Don’t leave us.”
The
Marines lost more people that day than at any time since Iwo Jima and
the number of Americans murdered that day by a terrorist group was a
record that would stand until September 11.
In Washington, the
murder of 220 Marines and the Iranian, Ismail Ascari, who drove the
truck full of explosives that tore through their barracks, are
inconvenient truths and lost memories. And it has always been that way.
Before the attack, the NSA intercepted a message from Iranian intelligence in Tehran to the Iranian ambassador in Damascus ordering “a spectacular action against the United States Marines.”
Mohsen
Rafiqdoost, Khomeini’s bodyguard who helped found Iran’s Revolutionary
Guard and served as Minister of Revolutionary Guards during the bombing,
boasted,
“both the TNT and the ideology, which in one blast sent to hell 400
officers, NCOs, and soldiers at the Marines headquarters, were provided
by Iran.”
The Marines who died in the bombing were lucky. Another Marine did not die as quickly.
Colonel
William R. Higgins was captured by Hezbollah, the terrorist group
acting as Iran’s hand in Lebanon, and tortured for months until his body
was dumped near a mosque.
An autopsy report
found that he had been starved and had suffered multiple lethal
injuries that could have caused his death. The skin on his face had been
partially removed along with his tongue and he had also been castrated.
Fred Hof, a diplomat
who had been a friend of the murdered man, said, “I am one of a small
handful of Americans who knows the exact manner of Rich’s death. If I
were to describe it to you now – which I will not – I can guarantee that
a significant number of people in this room would become physically
ill.”
“The State Department, not the Defense Department, had the
lead. That meant diplomacy, not military might. It meant no retribution,
no retaliation, no rescue,” Robin L. Higgins, his wife, wrote.
Colonel
Higgins’ wife and daughter sued Iran for the murder and won a $355
million judgment from seized Iranian assets. The court found that,
“Although an act of cruel savagery, the mutilation of the Colonel’s body
was apparently consistent with the Islamic Guard’s fulfillment of
Iranian foreign policy.”
Like Higgins, William Francis Buckley,
the CIA station chief, was also captured and tortured for months. On
video tapes released by his Hezbollah captors, he was incoherent and his
mind had been broken by the horrors inflicted on his ravaged body and
his soul.
“They had done more than ruin his body,” CIA Director
William Casey said. “His eyes made it clear his mind had been played
with. It was horrific, medieval and barbarous”
Imad Mughniyah was
reportedly one of Buckley’s main interrogators and Iran passed along
messages offering to trade Buckley in exchange for weapons sales.
Robert
Stethem, a Navy diver, was brutally murdered when Hezbollah terrorists
took over TWA flight 847. The Iranian-backed terrorists, one of whom was
Imad Mughniyah, beat and kicked him to death.
“They were jumping
in the air and landing full force on his body. He must have had all his
ribs broken,” Uli Derickson, the stewardess, described. “I was sitting
only 15 feet away. I couldn’t listen to it. I put my fingers in my ears.
I will never forget. I could still hear. They put the mike up to his
face so his screams could be heard by the outside world.”
Stethem’s screams, like those of the other American victims of Iran, have yet to be heard in Washington.
After the bombing of the
American embassy in Beirut, the terrorist group that took credit for
the attack warned, “This is part of the Iranian revolution’s campaign
against imperialist targets throughout the world.”
It may be
tempting to dismiss all this as ancient history, but the terror never
stopped. In 1996, 19 Air Force airmen were killed in the bombing of the
Khobar Towers with another truck bomb.
“The Khobar Towers bombing was planned, funded, and sponsored by senior
leadership in the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran,” the
judgment in yet another case by victims of terrorism against Iran found.
President
Clinton responded to the Iranian act of terror with a conciliatory
message to Mohammad Khatami, another newly elected phony reformer
playing the part of the President of Iran
“The United States has
no hostile intentions towards the Islamic Republic of Iran and seeks
good relationships with your government,” Clinton wrote. “In order to
lay a sound basis for better relations between our countries, we need a
clear commitment from you that you will ensure an end to Iranian
involvement in terrorist activity.”
The Iranians rejected the
call for peace and Clinton, who had earlier told advisors, “I don’t want
any pissant half-measures”, backed down, as he usually did when
confronted with Islamic terror.
The 9/11 Commission found evidence
that the majority of the “muscle” operatives who would terrorize the
crews and passengers had “traveled into or out of Iran between October
2000 and February 2001.“ After September 11, top Al Qaeda officials fled to Iran as part of its policy of covertly allowing Al Qaeda terrorists to travel across its border without passport stamps. The key figure in the cooperation between Iran and Al Qaeda was once again Imad Mughniyah who met with and influenced Osama bin Laden.
The 1998 indictment of Al Qaeda stated that the
terrorist group had “forged alliances with the National Islamic Front
in the Sudan and with representatives of the government of Iran, and its
associated terrorist group Hezbollah, for the purpose of working
together against their perceived common enemies in the West,
particularly the United States.”
After the Israelis finally took
out Mughniyah with a bomb in his headrest, Iranian Supreme Leader Ali
Khamenei declared, “The pure blood of martyrs like Imad Mugniyah will
grow hundreds like him.”
All these horrific acts of terror took
place as a result of Jimmy Carter’s appeasement of Iran. What blood
price will be exacted for Obama’s appeasement of Iran?
Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine. Click here to subscribe to my articles. And click here to support my work with a donation. Thank you for reading.
The current conflict between the Jewish State and the Muslims of Gaza is in no small part fueled by the tenets of Islam. Islam hates Jews. It hates Christians. It hates Baha’i. It hates… come to think of it, all non-Muslims. Non-Muslim Muslim apologists beware -- you're next, even if you are too stupid and naïve to see it coming.
Islam is a cult. Cults are characterized by:
That said, there is reason to consider another factor at work in the current war in Israel – the 12th Imam...........To Read More...
October 11, 2023 By Mark C. Ross
Just as the latest invasion began in Israel, swarms of the usual suspects began protesting in front of Israeli consulates in various American cities. Some of the anti-Israeli demonstrators were themselves Jewish… being committed leftists first and Jews second. They were of particular interest to the mainstream news media. Then news of horrific atrocities being carried out by the Hamas militants began to surface.
Shooting up a harmless music festival is way too much for even woke progressives -- let alone flaunting the naked bodies of freshly murdered women. As I write, the revulsion on the Left is still lurking below the radar. But there really is no turning back. However, resistance to the sad reality of the excesses of Islamic extremism is a process early in its beginning. So far, the Taliban’s push against letting Afghan women learn how to read and write has been mostly poo-poohed… let alone the general treatment of women like dogs........To Read More....
My Take - You will notice in this article it's being pointed out until the Shah of Iran was overthrown by Khomeini and his insane followers Muslims in Europe were for the most part integrating. After the Shah's overthrow his vile hatred and call to violence spread like a cancer. And who's to blame for that? Jimmy Carter.
We’re in a war between savages and civilization. Everything else is a detail.
Some
of us woke up to that war when planes crashed into skyscrapers. Others
when we saw beheading videos spread across social media. What we saw in
Israel, Hamas terrorists raping, mutilating and defiling corpses, is
another bloody wake-up call. There will be many others.
Beyond the politics and the geopolitics, we still haven’t come to terms with what we’re fighting.
The
barbarism of murdering women and children, taking them as hostages, and
posting photos of their dead bodies to social media, is not a byproduct
of Islamic warfare, it’s the whole point.
Cruelty, beheading,
burning to death, torturing and mutilating are the essence of Islam.
This is how Islamic warfare was practiced beginning with Mohammed for
over a thousand years. It’s how it continues to be practiced, whether
it’s ISIS fighting other Muslims, Azebajani troops killing Armenians,
Hamas attacking Israelis, or Islamic terrorists plotting carnage in
Western nations.
Islam was born out of a war by barbarians
against the civilized societies of Persia and Byzantium. Despite
academic mythmaking, its vision never extended beyond rape and slavery,
its empires fell into power struggles, beginning with Sunnis and
Shiites, and its cultural and scientific accomplishments were all looted
from conquered peoples. When civilization finally toppled the Ottoman
Empire with some help from its internal barbarians, the cycle began
again.
Israel is just one front in a global war between savages
and civilization. And not all of the savages bow to Allah. There are
inner city gangs across the American hemisphere that behead and torture
their victims. And there are children of civilization that turn into
savages. Savagery is not a condition of birth: it is a choice. People
born into savagery can become civilized and those born into the highest
echelons of civilization can prey on us like the worst vicious animals.
The
question is how do civilized societies confront savagery? Do we blame
ourselves for having made the savages what they are through our
capitalism and colonialism even though they have behaved this way long
before modern western civilization amounted to anything? Or do we set
forth to reeducate them, to build modern nations for them and teach them
to become civilized?
We have sent forth our sons and daughters
to make peace with them and to educate them. Our societies opened
themselves to embrace and celebrate the virtues of the noble savage.
When we realized that we could not coexist with savages, we tried to
remake our societies to serve them. All of that has been tried and
civilization is still drowning in the violence of the savages.
The fundamental truth is that civilization and savagery are innately at war with one another.
Savages
are offended by the existence of civilization. When they see one, they
want to destroy it. There can be no peace with savages because, contrary
to Islam, peace is a condition of civilization. To have peace, you must
be civilized. Savages don’t even view peace as a value apart from the
conclusion of a successful conquest which then sets the stage for the
next one.
Civilized people develop complex mechanisms of
exchange, but savages see no reason why they shouldn’t take something or
someone if they are too weak to defend themselves. No amount of
lectures will ever convince a savage that anything other than clan
relations should prevent him from stealing a car or raping a woman if
there will be no clear consequences.
That’s because savages, unlike civilized people, have no conscience, and therefore no soul.
Islam,
unlike Judaism and Christianity, is not a religion of the soul, but
entirely of power. From its genocidal chant, “Allahu Akbar” that
proclaims the physical supremacy of Allah to all other religions through
the military victories of its followers, everything is reduced to
conquest. The truth of Islam is validated through war. When Jihadists
conquer and rape non-Muslims, they are proving that Islam is true and
that the religions of the conquered are false. That’s why ISIS Jihadists
would tell the Yazidi girls they were raping that rape brought them “closer to Allah”
Civilizations
have become too sophisticated and decadent to understand such concepts.
When faced with barbarism, they go down a dialectic rabbit hole that
explains the savages in terms of how civilized people interacted with
them. Did they hurt their feelings, overthrow their governments or draw
mean cartoons? Did capitalism leave them adrift in the world economy?
How did we fail to integrate the newest generation of immigrants with
all the welfare checks?
These sophomoric sessions are pointless. A
hyena doesn’t eat your chickens because you failed to integrate it.
That’s just what hyenas do. Man at the base state is a predator and
savages strive to be the alpha predators. Civilizations become superior
predators because they provide room for arts and sciences, because they
think about something other than how they are superior to their
neighbors and will prove it by killing their sons and raping their
daughters.
But when civilizations spend too much time thinking,
they forget that one reason they came into being was to build something
better than a state of savagery. Decadent civilizations internalize all
the criticism and their peoples endlessly quarrel and think that the
worst possible things in the world are the ones that exist among their
own people. Savages remind us otherwise.
Much like a hurricane
reminds us of the alternative to houses and famine reminds us of the
alternative to food, savages remind us of the alternative to
civilization. Unfortunately truly decadent civilizations need constant
reminders of all of these things. We have to be constantly told that
food doesn’t magically emerge from a supermarket, that houses are not
the natural state of being and that not being murdered by savages in
your home is a new way of life.
Tolerate savages, give them enough rope and they will do all of these things to you. And more.
Savagery
should not be confused with stupidity. Civilizations have been brought
down by savages and civilizations were built by savages who became
civilized. Savages are clever and cunning. They are alert to the
weaknesses of civilized people and experts at finding ways around
whatever walls and security systems that civilized people build to
protect themselves.
Civilizations that spend enough time allowing
savages to hang around will fall. Tolerating savages is actually a sign
that a civilization has turned decadent. Welcoming and advocating for
savages means that the end is nigh. Viable civilizations drive savages
away. They do it not just to protect themselves but because banishing
savages is what makes a civilization civilized.
When
civilizations forget what the difference between themselves and the
savages are, they lose their sense of right and wrong, and they can no
longer explain why savagery is wrong. When faced with the worst
imaginable crimes, they can still equivocate a case for the criminals.
Hamas
terrorists can rape and kill their victims, and defenders will rally to
explain why the issue is actually more complicated than it seems. This
happens with Islamic terrorists all the time.
Savages and
decadent civilizations have no firm concept of right and wrong.
Everything is subjectively opportunistic and there can be scenarios in
which raping a woman, killing her and then posting a photo of her body
to social media so her family can see is actually right.
That is
why civilization has to defeat savagery, without equivocation, apologies
or sympathy, not only to win, but to revive its own soul. Negotiations
and laws of war are for peer civilization. Savages offer nothing and so
are owed nothing. They keep no agreements except when it suits them.
Their word is worthless and their morality is non-existent.
A civilization that does not understand all this will learn it the hard way.
Civilizations
are built on the suppression of savagery: both internally and
externally.. When civilizations defeat savages, learning, art, science
and ideas thrive. And when civilizations allow savages to ravage them,
they lose their people, their morality and eventually their existence.
No
form of war is more sacred than that of civilization against savagery.
It is these wars that made Christianity and Judaism, not to mention all
the ideas of western civilization, as well as those of Asia and India,
possible. This is once again the defining struggle of our age.
Either civilization or the savages will prevail. Any attempt at a middle ground is suicide.
Our
grandchildren will either make great things or they will be hunted by
roaming savages like the teenage girls at a concert in Israel or those
similarly hunted in venues in Europe.
All the hopes of mankind
depend on the utter and total defeat of the savages, not just in Israel,
but in America, in Europe, in India and Asia, and around the world.
This is not the struggle of any single nation, but the crisis of
mankind. Either humanity will rise or we will fall.
Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine. Click here to subscribe to my articles. And click here to support my work with a donation. Thank you for reading.
All this stuff about Iran is mind boggling, and much of it can be placed at the feet of the three Obama terms and the EU. Iran declared war on the west the minute the Shah left and Khomeini took over, 46 years ago, and have acted in that manner at a practical level ever since. The game playing should have ended long ago when Iran made members of the American embassy hostages, but then Carter was President,not Reagan or Trump. The minute Reagan was elected the mullahs decided it was a good idea to release them, after 444 days of Carter's incompetent policies of appeasement. Keep that in mind.
The minute Iran launched all those missiles at Israel, an outright undeclared act of war, that's when the line was crossed, and Israel had every right to retaliate in any way they saw fit.
I admire Trump’s ability to get adversaries to come to the table and make agreements, the Abrahamic Accords as an example. But you cannot make agreements with people who don’t want an agreement. Neither Russia or Ukraine wants the war to end, and most certainly Iran will not give up its desire to destroy Israel and do it with nuclear tipped missiles.
Iran has been found to have been lying about their nuclear program …. imagine that,and finally someone is telling the truth in the 11th hour. Make no mistake about this. The US has the intelligence that confirms all I’ve said, and I’m convinced this had to happen because Iran's domestic and international problems are so massive they fear they’re going to be kicked out of power, making this their last chance to destroy Israel, and they will not pass it up, no matter how suicidal it may be.
Operation ‘Rising Lion' has been launched, and it only took 46 years. Now five waves of Israeli fighters carried out hundreds of missions across distances thought to be impossible without refueling, but Israel proved the to be false before. On the first day they dropped over 330 munitions on about 100 targets, including the Natanz nuclear sight, which was just one of many. The top Iranian military commander for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and a number of nuclear experts were killed. How great the damage was isn't clear, but it's being called superficial, and Iran has launched missiles and drones in response, which in the past has been largely ineffective, and the attacks by Israel continue.
I really love these Muslim leaders who spout nonsense like Iraqi Shiite leader Muqtada al-Sadr who describes this a threat to the entire region and in infringement of Iraqi airspace to get to Iran. It's interesting you're not seeing the other nations of that region worrying about a threat to them since it's Iran whose been the threat to the region, not Israel.
It's also interesting how the people of Iran are viewing this attack. Understand this is an unusual kind of war. The Israelis are not practicing mass bombing, or targeting the civilian population. Don't you find it interesting they managed on the very first day to pretty much wipe out the leadership of the Iran’s Revolutionary Guard. They've selected targets that matter, and the Iraqi people are thrilled as the Iranian government has abused their people to the extreme for decades, including murder, rape, false imprisonment, rigged trials, etc., all in order to oppress their people.
I also have to believe the Iran government is now aware there must be a lot of spies giving information to Israel, up to date information. Otherwise how could they know where to strike so accurately?
If Iran falls it would be a good time to bring justice to all the victims of Iranian terror, including their vile actions against their own population. Hunt down all these murderous thugs, and let them stand trial and explain and justify their murderous actions.
More historical background and justification on why this was inevitable, here, here, and here, and finally, I think this eight point analysis by Andrea Widburg is excellent, The situation in the Israel-Iran war is kinetic, but we can discern a few things.