|
|
|
Cowards in Congress and on Main Street
The abject cowards in Congress who voted for a date-certain pullout from Iraq are going to have blood on their hands one day, and it is my fervent hope that they will face criminal charges for guaranteeing the next, even more horrific 9/11. Of course, they won't be held accountable. These days, you can literally get away with murder. That's what the cut-and-run crowd is doing. By refusing to recognize that Iraq is but one campaign in the greater clash between Western Civilization and unreformed, radical Islam, they are setting the stage for the equivalent of a new Afghanistan under the Taliban--a democracy-free-zone where rag-headed baby killers can plot and plan the next big attack on the United States. By revealing all our secret intelligence intercept programs and undermining our rendition program and the terrorist prison at Guantanamo, they are condemning you and me, or our children and grandchildren, to death. Yes, death. By doing everything they can just to win the next election--damn national security, even in wartime--they are selling out their country and its citizens. In today's politically correct, decadent, Euro-weak America, it is not even acceptable to call a spade a spade. Even conservative commentators twist themselves into Gordian Knots to avoid using the "AA" word, as in anti-American, or the "T" word, as in traitor, in characterizing members of our government who want America to lose this vital battle. But that is what they are. Mark this down, people. Unless the president gets tough and takes out Iran and puts the world on notice that another attack on America will result in nuclear Armageddon for the Irans and Syrias and North Koreas of this world, thousands, if not millions of Americans are at grave risk of being slaughtered. There WILL BE another 9/11. And this time, it may be thermonuclear. Those sniveling un-American cowards on the left who hate George W. Bush more than they hate the terrorists or love the United States are doing their level best to tie his hands and undermine every weapon he has against people who want to saw your babies' heads off! What is it that you don't understand? Go to the internet and type in Daniel Pearl or any of the other victims of the terrorists' butchery and watch the videos. Listen to the screams of people having their heads sawn from their bodies. Look at the blood. Listen to the perverted calls for Allah's blessing on these barbaric acts. Then tell me that George Bush is Hitler and Dick Cheney is Satan and the Administration is out of control. The people who ought to be out of control are the surviving relatives of the next 9/11, who, when their loved ones' bodies are smoking on the ground in a million tiny pieces of charred flesh, ought to storm Capitol Hill with pitchforks and torches and drag out the Frankenstein monsters posing as Senators and Congressmen and deliver some old fashioned justice. The men and women fighting and dying in Iraq and Afghanistan or serving on the front lines in Korea, or on military bases--active, reserve and National Guard--around the world deserve far better than the worthless bunch of Senators and Congressmen who are Hell bent on selling them out. And they deserve far better than the foolish, impatient, selfish, mind-numbed citizenry who elected those fools. Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and their ilk aren't worthy enough to lick dogshit off an infantryman's boots. And there are a lot of Americans who are just as craven. If this bunch had been around during the American Revolution, we'd all be drinking tea and eating crumpets. If they'd been in charge during the Civil War, we'd all be slaveowners, drinking mint juleps on the veranda. And if they'd been running things in World War II, we'd all be speaking German and drinking schnapps toasts to the Final Solution for a race that once existed known as the Jews. I honestly don't understand any of this madness. I am thoroughly disgusted with the left, the Congress, the media and the public. You are going to reap what you have sewn and you are not going to like it. But, oh, boy, will you deserve it when some Jihadist comes banging on your door with a grenade in his hand. |
|
Contributed by Shane Briscoe on March 28, 2007 at 05:21 PM in , , , , | | | |
|
|
|
Far Worse Commentary than Coulter's Gets a Pass
Ann Coulter's controversial comments about presidental wannabe John Edwards were imprecise at best. Instead of calling him a fag (most newspapers won't even print the word), she should have described Edwards for what he is: an ambulance-chasing pretty boy who made millions taking advantage of America's broken judicial system yet pretends to be one of the little guys. Remember, in the debate with Vice President Cheney, it was Edwards who first brought up Cheney's daughter's sexual orientation in a low blow that the media aided and abetted the Democrats in spinning as though it wasn't the most outrageous, despicable thing imaginable. Gays I know also claimed not to be offended by Edwards' gutter attack, which Kerry promptly repeated in his debate with President Bush. Far worse things are routinely said by the left, with little or no reaction in the media and in Democrat circles. Leftists and elected Democrats (leftists posing as mere liberals posing as moderates) have wished for the Vice President's death from a blood clot, the assassination of President Bush, called American troops Genghis Khan, Nazis and babykillers, and thrown around the N-word (not the one you are thinking of, but the other one, "Nazi")... oh, wait, Democrat Sen. KKK Byrd did use the BIG N word. Yet they get a pass. Shame on you, Ann. You should have been more precise. |
|
Contributed by Shane Briscoe on March 6, 2007 at 05:25 PM in | | | |
|
Libby Jury Convicted the Wrong Perps
The Libby conviction in the Valerie Plame case is a travesty. He never initiated the "leak," she was never "under cover," and her husband lied about everything in the Niger yellowcake story. What should have been investigated were the elements in the CIA, including Plame, who tried to undermine the policies of the duly elected president in wartime. That is Bush's fault for not doing so. The fact that Wilson was not required to sign a non-disclosure statement on his activities is further evidence of a plot within the CIA to discredit the president's policies. This affair is reminiscent of the spin that turned loser Al Gore's cherrypicking "recount" with Democrats intuiting people's intent, which was nothing more than a slow-motion attempted coup, into a "stolen election." But then, to use a comparison the Democrats are so prone to do (yet cry foul when used against them), if you follow the Hitler logic and repeat the Big Lie often enough, people start to believe you. Bush helped by not engaging until the Democrats had already falsely defined him. That's why a lie should never go unchallenged. What we need in this country is a UCMJ for the CIA and State Department to ensure that civil servants follow the policies of the elected president. Plame's and Wilson's conduct, along with their CIA helpers and enablers would have landed a soldier undermining the commander in chief in jail. What's also needed is for Fitzgerald to be investigated for his role in this witch hunt. The true leaker, Armitage, gets off Scott free, as does the liar, Wilson, and the underminers, Plame and her CIA cohorts. Libby deserves not just a pardon but complete vindication. That is not likely to come from this increasingly skittish administration. Too bad. |
|
Contributed by Shane Briscoe on March 6, 2007 at 05:12 PM in | | | |
|
|
|
Mark My Words
We are going to blow this thing. The demonizing Democrats who care only about trashing Bush in hopes of recapturing the White House (no matter what the national security implications); the weak, whiny, cojone-less Republicans who are deserting the Bush ship like rats (because all they care about is reelection, too); the too-little, too-late, communication-tone-deaf White House itself; and the short-attention-span, history-illiterate, instant-gratification-numbed American people are about to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in Iraq. And that is going to set us back tremendously in World War III, which is what we're in the opening stages of, a war pitting modern Western Civilization against un-reformed, Old Testament, Medieval Islam. At a time when we should be decapitating Iran and Syria, destroying their military and their defense infrastructure and eliminating as best we can Iran's nuclear weapons program, we are capitulating to a bunch of terrorist religious fanatics. At a time when Iran and Syria are killing American troops and innocent Iraqis with their IEDs and saboteurs, we are reading, with a straight face, the Iran Study Group's incredibly foolish recommendation that we negotiate with those countries in an effort to achieve peace and stability in Iraq. As I have said so many times that I now sound like a broken record, we are going to pay and pay dearly for this folly. How many Americans will have to die in the next 9/11, and I believe in the bottom of my soul that one is much more likely now that we are folding like a pup tent in a hurricane, before we get serious and realize that this is literally a life and death struggle for all of our people? Who will be held accountable when a blinding flash goes off in an American city and tens of thousands, if not millions of Americans are vaporized? Will anybody be tossed in jail for betraying our nation to the crazies? But that will just be closing the barn door after the horses have all escaped. The damage will be done. There will be blood on the hands of cowardly Americans of every political stripe, from the White House, through the halls of Congress, splattering both parties, all the Bush-hating leftists and the craven, rudderless Republicans, and onto the feckless American people. Shame on you all! The wolf is at our door and all we can do is sing "Kumbaya." |
|
Contributed by Shane Briscoe on January 17, 2007 at 06:03 PM in | | | |
|
|
|
Tolerance for CAIR, Muslim Activists Must End
Debra Burlingame, sister of the pilot whose hijacked airliner crashed into the Pentagon on 9/11, has a masterpiece of an editorial in today's Wall Street Journal (available at the following link: ). The piece, "On a Wing and a Prayer" rightly skewers the group of six bearded Imams who put on a terrorist performance in Minneapolis International Airport and aboard U.S. Airways Flight 300, shouting "Allahu Akbar!" and then engaging in such suspicious behavior as switching from their assigned seats to those favored by the 9/11 terrorists, asking for seat belt extensions that could be used as weapons and talking loudly and provocatively in Arabic about U.S. involvement in the war on terror, bin Laden and Saddam. Now CAIR, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (a jihadist front group), and the Muslim American Society are talking about suing the airline and pressing for laws to "protect" Muslims from airline security rules. We have been very tolerant of Muslims in this country. Women walk freely in headscarves, mosques in U.S. cities go unmolested, and Americans genuinely try not to hold all Muslims accountable for the terrorists' actions. But tolerance does not equate to stupidity. Groups like the Imams who disrupted that flight should be barred from flying forever and charged with a crime for intentionally disrupting an airline flight by acting like terrorists. CAIR should be thoroughly investigated by the FBI and regularly rousted for its anti-American, pro-Islamofascist leanings. All Muslim groups should be looked upon with suspicion and all Arabs and Muslims should be profiled, not just in transportation activities, but whenever and wherever they exhibit potentially threatening behavior. This policy should remain effect for the duration of the War on Terror. The Federal Government should immediately end the ridiculous policy of random searches of obviously American babies and grandmothers that must be endured at airports and start screening those who best fit the profile of a terrorist. If a loyal American can be arrested for cracking a joke about hijacking at an airport or aboard a plane, people such as these Imams should be subjected to the same harsh treatment, if not worse. Our tolerance should have limits. There's a war on, remember? |
|
Contributed by Shane Briscoe on December 6, 2006 at 05:06 PM in | | | |
|
Fatal Flaws in Baker's Iraq Study Group Report
I read quickly through the Iraq Study Group's report (available on CNN) and noted some fatal flaws, not the least of which is the contention that the conflict cannot be resolved through military means. The problem is that we haven't resorted to military means in the classic sense of the term. We have been tentative, politically correct and far too worried about breaking things and killing people. As Sherman said, "War is Hell." The enemy, and that includes al Qaeda, Sunni die-hards, Shiite militia death squads and recalcitrant "leaders" on the one hand, and Iran and Syria on the other, have not been subjected to enough Hell on Earth to get them to bend to our will. Another flaw is the emphasis on diplomacy to elicit certain behavior from Iran and Syria. The report suggests a lot of goals but offers not even the slightest clue as to how to achieve them. Iran and Syria have shown themselves to be absolutely impervious to diplomatic initiatives, whether they be aimed at halting Iran's nuclear program or its very explicit views on the destruction of Israel or the tendency of both Iran and Syria to meddle in Lebanon's affairs, from assassinating politicians to hijacking the government through Hezbollah. What makes Baker and his study group think that because we ask nicely, Iran and Syria are suddenly going to become part of the solution rather than part of the problem? Diplomacy that is not backed by credible military force is worse than useless; it is counterproductive. Iran, in particular, has shown itself to be particularly recalcitrant when dealing with western diplomats. And remember; that nation is the number one supporter of terror in the world today. They view both us and the Israelis as the Great Satan. What makes us think they will do anything to further the interests of their greatest enemies? The biggest single flaw in the entire report, however, is its focus on Iraq and, to a lesser extent, Afghanistan as separate and distinct wars instead of mere campaigns in the overall war against Islamic terrorism. There are far larger things at stake here than how to wind down our operations in Iraq. The biggest issue of our age--and possibly our children's and grandchildren's ages--is defeating the jihadist menace that is threatening all of Western Civilization. The goal should be unconditional surrender of the Islamofascists. The way to achieve that goal is through vigorous, brutal, successful military operations that leave no room for the enemy to regroup to fight another day. In other words, the goal should be victory. |
|
Contributed by Shane Briscoe on December 6, 2006 at 03:41 PM in | | |
|
|
|
Since When Does it Matter Whether a War is Civil?
All the debate over whether the violence in Iraq constitutes a "civil war" is a bunch of irrelevant clap-trap. The looney left and various pundits and current and former government officials are trying to make the argument that we should not be in the middle of a civil war, as though there is something fundamentally wrong with the notion. Well, need I remind them that Bosnia was engulfed in civil war when we intervened and that Darfur--the current darling of the "intervention-on-humanitarian-grounds" crowd--is beset by regional civil war? When it comes to U.S. intervention, the question should not be whether a civil war exists, but whether intervention is in our national interest. Clearly, it is in our national interest to head off another 9/11. By allowing Afghanistan to become thoroughly radicalized after the Soviets left, we set the stage for the Taliban to provide sanctuary for Osama bin Laden so he could plan and direct the attacks on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon. Preemption in Afghanistan might have prevented 9/11. Equally clear (to all but the Democrats, Cindy Sheehan and various second-guessers) is that preventing Iraq from becoming a new Afghanistan was and is in our national interest. And crystal clear to all but the none-so-blind-as-those-who-choose-not-to-see bunch is the fact that stopping terrorist Iran from becoming the power broker in the Middle East is decidedly in our national interest (the Baker Commission notwithstanding). The question of whether Iraq is in the midst of a civil war is a red herring. It diverts attention from the issue of our age: The ongoing clash between modernity and medievalism; the culture of life and the culture of death; Western Civilization and unreformed radical Islam. |
|
Contributed by Shane Briscoe on November 30, 2006 at 10:01 AM in | | | |
|
|
|
Anti-Semitism is Alive and Well
A couple of weeks back I got into a discussion with a "man," and I use the term loosely, at a bar. He had completely bought into the Democrat-Leftist Media canard that the War on Terrorism--not just Iraq, but the entire concept of confronting radical Islam--is wrong. He was looking at the world through rose colored glasses that unfortunately had had black tape placed across the lenses. In other words, he could see nothing. He took Osama bin Laden at his word: that the only reason he was fighting America was our presence in the Middle East and our support for Israel. The fact that bin Laden had murdered 3,000 innocent civilians on 9/11 apparently did not affect this man's opinion of the terrorist and his propagandizing. Then, he launched into what has now become an all-too-familiar refrain: We are on the wrong side in the Middle East because the Jews are running America. We are mere puppets to the big-nosed, greedy, money-grubbing Jews who have destroyed our country and are destroying the world. In other words, it is the same old argument put forth by the Nazis, with all the ugly racial stereotypes. Only nowadays, it seems to be okay in polite company, as long as you don't make direct reference to big noses, greed and money-grubbing. No, you have to be a bit more subtle than that. Not too subtle, mind you, but just a bit more. However, the core belief, that Jews are somehow evil manipulators, remains the same as that which underpinned the Nazi philosophy. What is disgusting is how many people are jumping onto this racist bandwagon and how blythely they voice their bigotry in public. I have never before witnessed in my nearly 60 years on Earth a more blatant Jew-bating time than that which exists today. One might ask why, but the answer is fairly obvious. The leftists are so morally bankrupt that they seek a villain to divert attention from the fact that they are simply gutless cowards who are too decadent to even defend themselves. Just like the French, who won't even protect Paris from maurading Muslim teenagers. They are safe in directing their ire toward the Jews, because Jews don't commit terrorist acts against Jew-baiters. But Islamic fascists do. Until Jews start cutting off the heads of Western apologists for Islam, the cowards will continue to spew their anti-Semitic bile. Americans don't go around murdering blithering idiots either, so the leftists feel free in condemning the United States and comparing its leaders and soldiers to Nazis. The coward class is afraid of Muslims but feels it can lie about America and Israel and Jewish puppetmasters with impunity. Perhaps we should issue these leftists brown shirts and Nazi armbands, so we'll at least be able to recognize them for what they are. And now we have supposedly serious world leaders, like former Secretary of State James Baker, taking people like Iran's Nazi president seriously. It is a strange, strange world indeed. But it doesn't mean we should accept bigotry. We must confront it whenever and wherever it raises its ugly head. People like the so-called "man" I met in that bar are probably not worth the breath it takes to argue with them, but their anti-Semitic remarks should be addressed as such, right there on the spot. I am thinking of ordering a bunch of Swastika armbands to carry around so I can simply present them to the bigots when they start running their mouths. |
|
Contributed by Shane Briscoe on November 29, 2006 at 10:40 AM in | | | |
|
|
|
A Neville Chamberlain Moment
Some of us have been saying that this is 1938 all over again, alluding to the irresistible buildup to World War II and the striking parallels that exist today. According to news reports from Pravda on the Hudson, The New York Times, it now appears that the Baker Commission is about to sign the equivalent of a new Munich Accord, only this time we are negotiating with both Hitler (Iran's Ahmadinejad) and Mussolini (Syria's Assad). The results will be at least equally disastrous. If President Bush goes for this sham, he is no better than Neville Chamberlain. Despite the recent U.S. election results (and the misinterpretation by both Republicans and Democrats that the power shift was a mandate for withdrawal from Iraq), most Americans simply want a winning strategy, rather than more of the same. They do not wish to "redeploy." They want to win, decisively so. If the news reports are correct (and Baker has a history of Arabist leanings), we will be exhibiting great weakness at a time when strength and resolve are called for. Negotiating with Iran and Syria to effect a solution in Iraq will only guarantee a more radical Middle East, reinforcing the power of the most anti-American, anti-Israeli, Hitler-like regime in the world today. It will achieve exactly what we sought to prevent in launching the Iraq campaign of the greater War on Islamic Terrorism: A unified, radical Islamic powerhouse led by the greatest exporter of terror on Earth: Iran. This is the very same regime that continues to advocate annihilation of the Jews, a Final Solution that, unlike the Nazi's below-the-radar plan is being openly and repeatedly advocated by Iran's Ahmadinejad. Any appeasement of these modern-day fascists will only embolden the enemy, making future, more horrific 9/11s all but certain for both Israel and the United States (not to mention the rest of Western Civilization) and sealing the fate of our grandchildren and perhaps our great-grandchildren as combatants in a clash of civilizations greater than anything in the entire history of the world. Who will be our Winston Churchill, our Franklin Delano Roosevelt, in this time of great peril? Who will have the wisdom to recognize that total defeat of the enemy (including breaking the will of Islamic civilians around the world) is the only option if we hope to prevail in this War of All Wars? Who will have the courage to acknowledge that we must kill the enemy by the thousands, destroy the Wahabbists, execute radical Islamic clerics, systematically torture captured terrorists to extract vital information before sending them to early graves, and perhaps at some point even obliterate their holiest of shrines in order to achieve absolute victory? The answer at this point is, sadly, nobody. President Bush's failure to pursue a winning strategy and fully engage our citizenry in the pursuit of victory, the Democrats' cynical undermining of America's war effort just to win an election, the American people's short-sighted cowardice, and Europe's decadent surrender once again have all combined to guarantee that it will now take a new, greater, more horrible 9/11 to mobilize the will to undertake all-out war to defeat the Islamic hordes. The blood of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands or even millions of Americans--and the resultant genocide of much of the billion-plus Islamic World--is now on all our hands. A nuclear war in the Middle East, starting between Israel and Iran, is now all but inevitable and the fallout (both literal and figurative) will most assuredly reach our own shores. We are going to cut and run and the war that could have been won outright with a take-no-prisoners approach will continue to rage for another 50 or 100 years. The Baker Commission's fig leaf will, like Neville Chamberlain's "peace in our time" Munich Accord, lead to horrific global warfare on a scale never before seen in human history. What is needed today is a Patton or a Sherman, but sadly, we are getting a Chamberlain. How in God's name can we be so blind to the glaringly obvious lessons of history? When will we ever learn? |
|
Contributed by Shane Briscoe on November 27, 2006 at 10:40 AM in | | | |
|
|
|
Republicans, Democrats, the People and a Pox on All
For the Republicans Republicans are mainly to blame for their stinging defeat in the off-year election and here are the principal reasons why: 1. Bush didn’t do his job as leader of the party and allowed the Democrats to define him without response until it was too late; 2. Republicans didn’t act like leaders and despite having both houses of Congress and the presidency, were rolled by the more aggressive, more cohesive, integrity-less Democrats on everything from defining the war to appointing judges; 3. There were too many RINOS (although Lincoln Chaffee’s defeat means one less) and the party did not enforce discipline (Bush was at fault for backing that traitor Specter, who promptly stabbed him in the back); 4. Republicans did a lousy job of policing their house and were tentative at best in highlighting Democrat misdeeds (remember the flap over the FBI search of that crook Jefferson of Louisiana’s offices in which even REPUBLICANS protested?). They also did a lousy job of defending their own (Tom DeLay, against whom all charges have been dropped now), including the president; 5. Republicans forgot their base on immigration and spending and just having backbone, and the base deserted them (I voted straight party ticket but no longer will give a DIME to the RNC because they routinely support RINOs); 6. We need new party leaders. Trent Lott was an idiot; Denny Hastert is out of touch with reality (and even had the temerity to jump on the anti-oil-company bandwagon when gasoline prices were high, pandering to people’s misconceptions); 7. McCain and Lindsay Graham and John Warner and others deserted their party and were foolish mavericks who played right into the Democrats’ hands; 8. The War is being fought like Vietnam (we are much too timid, much too kind, not nearly brutal enough and we allow Iran and Syria to be one BIG Ho Chi Minh Trail without any consequences for their actions, which are killing American soldiers daily. The good news is bad: Democrats have no plan and despite all the rhetoric of having elected CONSERVATIVE Democrats, most will bow to the party’s iron discipline and we will end up losing Iraq and having another, bigger 9/11. The good news part of this is that the next 9/11 will surely galvanize the American People to fight this war with all the ruthlessness it deserves. The other good news is that the bloodletting occurred in an off-year election; the Republicans have two years now to revamp the party and get their act together to prevent Hillary from capturing the White House. Hillary would be a disaster because she is basically a dishonest, ruthless, ambitious, self-aggrandizing person who is far more liberal, far more Nanny State oriented than her husband. The really bad news is that the Republicans probably lack the vision to understand that this was not about being partisan as much as it was about being a bunch of weak-kneed, non-ideological boobs. You have to stand for something and they stand for nothing. For the Democrats Democrats, be careful what you wish for because you might just get it. And you did. But before you crow and start planning the impeachment of President Bush and a pullout from Iraq, you'd better consider a few sobering thoughts: 1. Do you really want to pull out of Iraq and cut our intelligence gathering capabilities in a world full of Muslim terrorists who want to saw our heads off? Do you really think that the American people will forgive you if another 9/11 occurs on YOUR watch after you've gutted our offensive operations? Do you really want us to lose this war? Are you prepared for Iraq to become the next Afghanistan and Iran the next North Korea? 2. Do you really think the left should direct the course of your party and that this will be a winning strategy? How much was dissatisfaction over the War in Iraq attributable to the cut and run crowd versus those of us who want us to take the gloves off and pursue the enemy more ruthlessly? 3. Are you going to bog the country down in further hate Bush efforts for the next two years or are you going to keep your eye on the ball when it comes to the most serious threat facing this country since World War II? 4. What, exactly, is your plan for Iraq? "We can do better" is not a plan. 5. Is politics of personal destruction and the big lie (Bush lied, thousands died) really a winning political strategy over the long term or are Americans getting sick of negative politics? 6. Will the supposedly conservative Democrats you got elected to Congress adhere to the party line, no matter how foolish that line is for America's security, or are they likely to ally with Rebublicans and Sen. Lieberman on the War? I think you are probably safe on this one, as your party discipline is ruthlessly enforced. 7. What will happen to the economy when you start raising taxes and will the people notice? For the American People Well, you voiced your dissatisfaction and now we all must live with the consequences for at least the next two years: 1. Do you think you'll be safer now? 2. Are you going to hold the Democrats accountable for the actions they take on Iraq and the greater issue of Islamic terrorism and on the economy? Are you even going to pay attention? 3. Are you going to continue to be manipulated by panderers on both sides of the aisle, or are you going to start thinking for yourselves? 4. Are you prepared to pay higher taxes and for the econmy that will result? 5. Are you prepared for a newer, bigger 9/11? |
|
Contributed by Shane Briscoe on November 8, 2006 at 01:32 PM in | | | |
|
|
|
October Surprise.
Down to the wire, the October Surprise was unleashed upon the Democrats yesterday. Surprisingly it wasn’t launched by the Republicans, but instead the liberal’s very own “useful idiot” John Kerry. "You know, education - if you make the most of it - you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq," With that comment the Old War Dogs are pleased to make known their own 11th hour October surprise: The Old War Dogs Forum is now open for membership at This site was to be announced next week, but in light of Kerry’s comment and the importance of next week’s elections we hope you will visit what promises to be an exciting place for discourse on the issues of the day. Participation does require registration, so don’t be shy. |
|
Contributed by The Gray Dog on October 31, 2006 at 07:57 PM in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | | | |
|
|
|
Something Needs to Change in Iraq
Something needs to change in Iraq. Not cut and run, but we need to rectify some big mistakes that are now apparent in hindsight. For one thing, we need to take a step back on the form and makeup of the present government there. It is weak and has not done a good job of shouldering the responsibility of fighting the terrorists or even marginalizing the various sectarian militias. We were the victors on the battlefield, and we should have taken a cue from World War II in the Pacific and appointed a MacArthur-like figure (Rudi Giuliani?) to draft a constitution that would have imposed separation of church and state upon the country, Islamists be damned. Even at the risk of embarrassment or increased religious violence, we should insist on making this change, no matter what the current government there says. Nothing is going to change in Iraq or the greater Islamic world until they separate church and state. Sharia law is an undemocratic relic of the past. In light of the insurgency and sectarian violence, we should declare martial law in Iraq and require that all arms be turned in to the government. Anyone unauthorized to possess a weapon would be considered a terrorist and subjec to the death penalty. This was the biggest mistake made in the immediate aftermath of the war and should be addressed now. Iran and Syria need to be put on notice that any arms shipments, fighters or other activities that harm American troops or destabilize Iraq will be met with overwhelming force directed against their countires. And we should back up that threat with major airstrikes at a time of our choosing. We should take off the gloves and allow our troops much greater latitude in conducting operations. The problem is, right now, the Iraqis fear the insurgents and militias more than they fear us. We have better weapons and much more destructive power at our disposal and we should use them. The same goes for striking fear into the hearts of Iranian and Syrian leaders and mullahs. We need to be lethal, brutal and forceful. There is still time to save this. The alternative is a much more dangerous world. |
|
Contributed by Shane Briscoe on October 26, 2006 at 04:35 PM in | | | |
|
|
|
North Korean Nukes
There are a lot of lessons to be gained from paying close attention to North Korea and its nuclear program. First, and perhaps least obvious, is how the Clintonistas persist in their unabashed efforts to rewrite history so that fact becomes fiction and fiction fact. Clinton's deal with North Korea aided and abetted the rogue nation in developing nuclear weapons and delivery systems while receiving money and other incentives from the West. He was hoodwinked, pure and simple, and that is why we find ourselves in the position we are in today. It is one thing not to learn from our mistakes, but quite another to fabricate a counter story that more conveniently fits one's political leanings, even at the risk of harming national security. But such is the state of the Democrats. Second, North Korea is the perfect metaphor for what is occurring right now in Iran. Diplomacy is routinely rebuffed by the Iranians as they stall for time, all the while going full steam ahead in developing and fielding their own nuclear weapons, which they have promised to use on Israel. The West fails to recognize that endless diplomacy is but thinly disguised appeasement, and that diplomacy without the credible (and I mean CREDIBLE) backstop of military force is worse than useless. It is self-defeating. Under no circumstances can Iran be permitted to develop nuclear weapons capability. Such would leave the world a much more dangerous place, with the United States and Israel the prime targets of Iranian aggression (either directly or indirectly, through terrorist proxies) and the Middle East a cauldron of Islamic radicalism, with no good options for the West to pursue. North Korea must not be permitted to go one step further in its development and fielding of nuclear weapons. That country already is exporting arms and delivery systems as virtually its only source of cash. Iranian and Syrian scientists are in direct touch with their counterparts in North Korea and reports are that they have even observed the North Korean tests. The only way to stop North Korea is with force and that becomes extremely problematic with South Korea and Japan just a short missile lob away. China, North Korea's neighbor to the north, makes an armed response even more complicated. But stop them we must. That the situation is so difficult today should serve as a blatantly obvious reminder of why we cannot afford to allow Iran to press forward even one more step. While North Korea may have a handful of nuclear devices, its program is still in its infancy, and the United States possesses a huge arsenal of nuclear weapons that could render North Korea (or Iran, for that matter) a wasteland of radioactive slag. That should be our ace in the hole for dealing with these dangerous regimes. It would also send a message to other would be terrorist nations and nuclear aspirants that they had better not tread down the same path. Sure, we can go with sanctions first, but North Korea is such a basket case that its people are already starving and the government still doesn't care, so how likely are sanctions to have any effect? As for Iran, they can hurt us as bad or worse than we can hurt them, by interrupting global oil supplies and stepping up the insurgency that is already killing American troops in Iraq. As long as both countries are allowed to do as they please without consequences, they will not only continue with their nuclear programs, but will be emboldened. The West is increasingly decadent and impotent, with no one to blame but itself. If we are to survive, we must understand that you don't compromise with or negotiate with evil. Evil is evil, in all that it implies, meaning that any pledges made are simply lies designed to gain further advantage. As we should have learned from Hitler, Stalin, Tojo and Pol Pot, evil must in all cases be confronted and destroyed. |
|
Contributed by Shane Briscoe on October 10, 2006 at 08:43 AM in | | | |
|
|
|
Be Careful What You Wish For
The latest polls are suggesting that the Democrats' strategy of rewriting history to define President Bush and the United States as the villains in the War on Terror is working. Thanks in large part to their completely dishonest representation of a national intelligence estimate that would seem (until you read the full context) to indicate that the war is creating more jihadists, and thanks to their cynical use of pedophile Florida Republican Foley's forced resignation to unfairly tar the Republican Party, the Party of No looks to be on the verge of recapturing the House and Senate. If that happens, the knives will come out. They will attempt to crucify President Bush for fulfilling his oath of office in protecting and defending the United States. They will cut and run from Iraq. They will turn the War on Terror back into a police matter, meaning we will switch from offense to pure defense, and more innocent Americans will die. Iran will surely achieve its goal of getting nuclear weapons on the Democrats' watch, just as North Korea did the last time they were in power. The "culture of corruption" that the Democrats are so quick to put off on Republicans will only grow as the enablers of Clinton's peccadilloes and illegal fund raising and smear politics with no plan of action take over and abuse the system to lock in future gains for their party, at great expense to the nation and individual liberty. They will raise your taxes and the economy will suffer (but they'll lie about it to make the opposite appear to be true, just as they have about Bush and Iraq). In other words, there will be trying times ahead for all of us. Look for successful terrorist attacks on Americans at home and abroad as the appeasers prove once again that weakness in the face of naked aggression only leads to more naked aggression. And more deaths of innocents. Republicans have made an absolute mess of the PR end of things. President Bush allowed the Democrat lies about him and his administration to go unchecked until gullible Americans began to believe them. Republicans in Congress have acted like a minority, rather than the majority, with dissension and backbiting taking the place of the Party Discipline the Democrats enforce so well. Freedom of speech will continue to suffer at the hands of the P.C. Police. Recruitment for the Armed Forces will drop like a rock after the military is once again sold out and spat upon by the Party of Jimmy Carter (who wrecked U.S. intelligence capability, stripped down the military, almost lost the Cold War and set up the current wave of terrorism by not standing up to the Iranians when they attacked the U.S. Embassy and seized its staff, holding them until President Reagan and his big stick came to power) and Michael Moore (the America-hating fat buffoon who specializes in the rankest of propaganda). Were it not for the fact that the stakes are so high (the very survival of the United States and Western Civilization), this would be almost funny. But it is not funny. The stakes are sky high. And foolish, gullible Americans are about to make the biggest mistake since the founding of this republic. After the Democrats have made a thorough mess of things (assuming they are unsuccessful at rigging future elections and laws to favor themselves by giving the vote to illegal aliens and convicted felons, among other things), perhaps saner heads will prevail and we will go back to electing people who actually care about the future of this country. Perhaps Republicans in the House and Senate will gain a clue as to what it takes to lead. But it all may be too late. Here's a prediction: Americans are going to die, thanks to the Democrats. You can bet on it. And our culture will slip more and more toward the decadence that is so prevalent in Europe. But we are going to die in droves at the hands of Muslim terrorists. That will be the Democrats' legacy. |
|
Contributed by Shane Briscoe on October 6, 2006 at 09:18 AM in | | | |
|
|
|
Pedophile Lies
Florida Republican Congressman Mark Foley, the pedophile homosexual who resigned after sexually explicit text messages between him and a Congressional page, deserved to go. And deserves to be prosecuted. But that is just the tip of the iceberg. Evidence is mounting that Democrat operatives had knowledge of the situation for quite some time and sat on it so it would break as an October surprises right before the elections. There are ample connections between the players at a Soros-funded hit squad CREW and Democrat Members of Congress, plus indications of altered e-mails, that suggest Foley's exposure was orchestrated by Democrats hoping to tip the election and embarrass Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert into resigning. If Democrats did know about Foley's disgusting predilections and kept quite in order to hurt Republicans, then they are complicit in the pedophilia in that they let it go on until the time was opportune for them politically. If such is the case, then CREW and its Democrat allies deserve to be prosecuted just as much as Foley. This whole thing stinks to high heaven because it is so very in keeping with Democrat slash-and-burn politics. The George Allen imbroglio, accusing him of using offensive racial descriptions, including the infamous "N" word more than 30 years ago, is another case in point. The Dems tried to do the same to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas (remember?) using Anita Hill as their shill. The Democrats efforts to create scandals out of thin air or take real scandals and use them to take down innocent people are very transparent. Will they stick? That depends on the American people. Republicans in Congress already have shown their spinelessness in criticizing the Speaker. But we all knew this crop of Republicans couldn't lead its way out of a paper bag, so we shouldn't be at all surprised. The real issues in this election are the War on Islamic Terror and who is going to protect us best by actually having a plan and aggressively pursuing it. The Democrats, who have already betrayed our troops fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, are trying to divert attention from the fact that they haven't a clue on what to do, other than trump up scandals. Foley is just a sick sideshow. Let's hope that the American people are as smart as I think them to be, and see through the lies and manipulation... then punish the liars along with pedophile Foley. This election and the aftermath--how we deal with terrorism--are far too important to be hijacked by one pervert and a bunch of lying hypocrites. |
|
Contributed by Shane Briscoe on October 5, 2006 at 04:08 PM in , | | | |
|
|
|
What's Good for the Goose
The apparently leftist publisher of The Miami Herald has resigned after receiving heat from readers over his decision to fire some reporters of its sister Spanish-language publication for accepting money from the government to provide commentary for anti-Castro broadcasts. Good riddance. Why is it that leftist journalists (and editors and publishers) can act as the propaganda wing for the Democrat cut-and-runners by reporting only the anti-U.S. side of the story and refusing to cover pro-American, pro-Bush Administration stories, but the minute a conservative, anti-Communist reporter makes his views known it is a scandal or unethical or not up to journalistic "standards". Remember after 9/11 when certain TV news executives at the major networks (and even at FOX) told reporters they couldn't wear American flag lapel pins on the air? Well, the FOX boys said, "screw you, we're Americans first," but the rest of the pro-terrorist media promptly removed their flags. They are hardly Americans anyway. They consider themselves citizens of the world, I guess, even though no other country has the press freedom ours does. Well, I am an American first. Everything else, including my profession with a multinational corporation, comes second or further down the list. Journalists think they are something special, but to me, the bulk of them are just whores for the Democrats. Yes, whores... only I respect true prostitutes more, because at least they are honest about what they do. The bulk of the so-called mainstream news media in America are flatly against everything this country--and their profession--stands for. They have no honor, no sense of fairness, no balance, no integrity. Take anything you read, see or hear produced by these people with a TON of salt. A mere grain isn't nearly enough. It is not as though there aren't multiple examples of media misconduct to tell you that there is smoke and there is FIRE, from Jason Blair to Dan Rather and all the other news manufacturing scandals that have hit the leftist media in recent years to the less obvious, but equally whoreish pattern of behavior where they simply ignore anything that doesn't fit their neat view of how the world should be, from Saddam's documented dealings with al Qaeda dating to the first World Trade Center bombing, through the Gloria Alread's Boys and Girls Club scandal in which the organization, located in The New York Times' backyard, gave public funds to bail out leftist Air America radio. The Times, predictably, did not cover the story. We probably shouldn't monkey with the First Amendment, even though the news media of today have made a travesty of honest reporting. But conservatives--Americans--should shun those media outlets who lie and cheat by canceling subscriptions, refusing to watch leftist news anchors (Katie Couric, watch your ratings continue to plummet) and, as is the case in Miami, holding leftist editors' feet to the fire, until they burn out. |
|
Contributed by Shane Briscoe on October 4, 2006 at 05:07 PM in | | | |
|
|
|
Bowing to Terrorists Only Leads to More Terror
In yet another capitulation to Islamofascist terrorists, a Berlin opera house has pulled the plug on its production of Idomeneo because it features a scene with the severed heads of Jesus, Buddha, Poseidon and... you guessed it, Mohamed. The opera house censored itself to avoid the security risk that depicting Mohamed would entail. It is a replay of the cowardly reaction to Muslim violence over the Mohamed cartoons by much of the Western Press establishment, coming on the heels of the Pope's apology for supposedly defaming Islam by linking it to violence. But, remember, Islam is a religion of peace. If you don't believe it, they will teach you a lesson by calling for your assassination. When is the West going to learn? You cannot compromise with evil, and Islam, in its present state as interpreted by a large segment of its adherents, is evil. It advocates the worst human behavior: murder; mistreatment of women (who are but cattle in the eyes of righteous Muslims); absolute intolerance; censorship; fascism. This is Nazism with a religious face. And that is the most dangerous of combinations. In order to win this fight to the death, we must come to realize that the enemy is pure evil. And we must stand firm at every front. Any capitulation to the Islamofascists is a defeat for the West. We already are undercutting ourselves and shoring up the terrorists by placing the mantle of political correctness over our entire strategy for dealing with the threat. So, instead of profiling the people who are doing the killing, we search grandmothers and Christian babies at airports and require Americans with impeccable credentials to subject themselves to humiliating searches and restrictions on their personal freedom. We are prohibited from painting the enemy in unflattering terms, such as "rag head," at a time when jingoism would serve a useful purpose in firing up our citizens to pursue what must become a war of annihilation against the terrorists and those who would assist them (Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, North Korea are at the top of that list). We accept the vilest of racial/religious stereotyping when it is aimed at Jews, but balk at the slightest hint of criticism of the religion of Jihad, the cult of death. And roughly half of our population would rather concoct nut-case theories of the Bush Administration's complicity with the perpetrators of 9/11 and rewrite history (as Clinton and the Democrats are so good at doing) than face up to the tremendous challenge at hand: Destroying a dangerous movement that would incinerate the entire United States and everyone in it given half a chance. Slowly, and not so surely, the discourse is changing within the Bush Administration to acknowledge that we are not fighting some nameless, non-ideological foe, but specifically Islamic terrorists and an Islamic movement that is bound and determined to convert or destroy all infidels, including Islamic "infidels" who do not ascribe to the perverted, Medieval tenets of the Wahhabist sect. We need to take off the gloves, both physically in terms of the degree of violence and seriousness with which we fight this war militarily, and verbally, in how we describe the enemy and his twisted beliefs. We need to hate the enemy enough to utterly destroy him, and that will not happen as long as we wring our hands in self-deluding political correctness. The enemy is a bunch of wild-eyed, brutal, utterly immoral, throat-cutting rag heads who adhere to a fascist belief system disguising itself as religion. The appeasers, and that includes all Democrats except newly independent Joe Lieberman, are playing right into their hands. As soon as we recognize these fact and speak the truth, we will start winning this most necesssary of wars. |
|
Contributed by Shane Briscoe on September 28, 2006 at 09:37 AM in , | | | |
|
|
|
Honor a Military Man or Woman
American men and women are fighting the terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan and we owe them our support and encouragement. I, for one, do not believe you can support the troops but not the war, not their mission. It is a liberal lie from the same folks who are trying to keep the ROTC and recruiters off campus and are willing to intimidate military representatives if that is what it takes. For the rest of us, those who understand we are in a fight to the death with radical Islamic fascists who would just as soon saw off our heads as look at us... we need to show our troops we support them. Here are a few suggestions how: * Adopt a military unit or an individual soldier in Iraq or Afghanistan. Ask around and you will find someone who is either related to or knows someone in the combat zone. Get the trooper's address and send him or her a thankyou letter and ask if he or she would be willing to be the recipient of items for the unit. Anything from books to goodies is appreciated and it shows the soldiers you care. Entire companies can organize soldier drives. My company has done several, with the employees buying items from Sam's and other big stores and the company paying the shipping charges. * If you see a military person in uniform or someone with a GI haircut, ask if they are active duty and then thank them with a handshake or a pat on the back. At airports, you will see soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines in uniform. Take the time to thank them in public. Start a round of applause for them. Offer to buy the trooper a drink or lunch. But don't let them pass you by without a warm thank you. It means a lot, yet costs so little. * If you spot a trooper in a restaurant, call the waiter over and pay the trooper's tab. I prefer to do it anonymously, as it is as though anybody and everybody is thanking the military person. Plus, you avoid any awkward thank yous coming from someone who has given so much. Often, if you do this, the restaurant will want to split the tab with you, which is fine, because you are passing it along and generating more support for our troops. (I do the same for police and firemen.) * If you are on an airplane that is overbooked, or are sitting in first class and there are miltary men and women on the flight, offer your seat to them. They've earned it. * If you have special concert or other event tickets or gift certificates, consider calling your local VA hospital and inquiring if they have a program that can get the items to wounded soldiers. See if there are any programs in your area that help wounded veterans or simply visit them. Contribute to one or more of the many charities that benefit wounded warriors or help send the children of those killed in action attend college. * If you know of a young man or woman recently discharged from the service (it doesn't matter if it they are regulars, reservists or National Guard), help them get a job and get reintroduced to civilian society. Treat them as the heroes they are. Honor our troops and honor their mission. They are protecting us from the barbarians and the least we can do is show them we care. |
|
Contributed by Shane Briscoe on September 21, 2006 at 03:38 PM in , | | | |
|
Pat Robertson Was Right
Televangelist Pat Robertson caused a stir some months back when he suggested assassinating Venezuela's Hugo Chavez. Well, he's not looking so crazy after all these days. Chavez wants to be the new Castro, only he could be more dangerous because: a) he's nuts; b) he has oil wealth; and c) he's cozying up with Islamofascists. He'd better watch where he treads. I'm hoping we take down Iran before Bush leaves office. If that happens, Hugo will be hanging out there all alone. Perhaps his people will eventually tire of his antics and toss him on the ash heap of history. Or perhaps we will do something to undermine his regime. My guess is we won't allow him to continue down this path indefinitely. Keep sniffing for the Fire and Brimstone, Hugo. You will encounter them soon enough. |
|
Contributed by Shane Briscoe on September 21, 2006 at 03:17 PM in | | | |
|
|
|
The Tide May Be Turning, But...
Recent polls show an apparent shift back toward President Bush and Republicans as people do a gut check as to which political party is going to protect them better against Islamofascist terrorists. It's about time, if it is true, as the Democrats have offered absolutely nothing other than the hollow, "We can do better" mantra they apply to every subject, including the most serious conflict facing Western Civilization in its long and storied history. But there are a few black sheep straying from the flock that need to be brought back in line. Senators McCain, Graham, Warner and a handful of the usual RINO suspects, including Lincoln Chafee, whose butt was saved once again by the Republican Party he so blithely deserts on just about ever issue, are opposing the administration's desire for unity and clarity in responding to the recent Supreme Court Decision effectively granting Geneva Convention protection to captured terrorists. It was a horrible Supreme Court decision, but the justices did leave an out if Congress would better define the rules of treatment. The President wants an unambiguous detailing of what is permitted and what is not, so as to protect future interrogators from War Crimes liability. It is a perfectly sane course he is following, as we deal with an enemy that has the will and the potential to cause death or grievous injury to hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of Americans. Yet, the renegade Senators, aided and abetted by Mr. Passive-Aggressive Colin Powell, want to leave the definition of degrading treatment open to interpretation. That puts our fighting men and women, as well as CIA operatives charged with heading off terrorist attacks and dismantling al Qaeda and its lookalikes, at considerable risk. The Geneva Convention clearly applies to lawful combatants, which the terrorists are not. Moreover, neither the terrorists, nor the Iranians or anyone else in the militant Muslim world, actually follow the convention. We have all seen or heard about the horrific decapitations and mutilation of reporters, civilians and U.S. military personnel who have fallen into the hands of the terrorists. Iran most certainly did not follow the rules of conflict when it seized the American hostages from our embassy in Tehran, and Saddam surely did not follow its precepts when Jessica Lynch and other prisoners of war were systematically abused by his regime. McCain and his fellow travelers are weakening our ability to fight the War on Terror and protect Americans at home and abroad and should be taken to the woodshed by right-thinking Americans. One hopes that their political careers will be destroyed by their foolishness. Whatever their motivations, they are flat wrong. Americans should be prepared to blame this cabal, along with the Democrats, if and when a terrorist attack does occur. Contrary to what some may think, this is war and war is hell. People are killed, buildings destroyed, prisoners captured. When the other side refuses to follow even the most basic rules of warfare, they abrogate any expectation of humane treatment by our forces. The Supreme Court decision was wrong. The Democrats are wrong to make this a sticking point, and McCain, Powell, et. al., are wrong for blocking attempts to clarify the issue. If Republicans really do want to remain in power after the coming election, the mavericks had better get it through their heads that the American people first and foremost want to be protected from terrorist attacks and are willing to go a long way to ensure that planned actions are interdicted before they can be executed. If that means summarily executing terrorists or torturing vital information out of them, then so be it. It is only the leftists and those Republicans who stand for nothing but their own personal reelection who don't understand that. The whole issue of how aggressively we pursue this war and how harshly we treat the enemy, both captured and in the field ought to be the main driver in November. Run from Bush at your own peril. You cannot hide from the American people. And we are MUCH smarter (and tougher) than you think. |
|
Contributed by Shane Briscoe on September 19, 2006 at 11:41 AM in | | | |
|
|
|
Winning the War--Post 9/11
I have been out of pocket and off the blog for a while dealing with some personal problems, but I couldn't let the anniversary of 9/11 pass without commenting about why I have such strong feelings for fighting and winning the War on Terror and such disdain for the leftists and Democrats who are undermining it. Five years ago this morning, someone came into my office and told me a plane had hit the World Trade Center and asked me to turn on my TV. I did and shortly thereafter watched as the second plane hit the second tower. I recognized the United colors immediately, and a chill went down my spine; you see, my eldest daughter Julie is a flight attendant for United and at the time was stationed in Newark. I immediately called her cell phone and got... voice mail. I had company issues to deal with--informing our employees, meeting with other members of management to discuss whether to shut down the office for the day (we didn't) -- so I called Julie's husband and told him to get to a TV, call Julie and keep on calling till he reached her, then call me back. It took several anxious, prayerful hours to learn that Julie was okay, grounded on the West Coast. It was only later that we realized Julie had been a crew member of United Flight 93 all that summer until being transferred to another route two weeks prior to 9/11. That was the airliner on which the passengers stood up to the terrorists, the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania. I and my family know full well just how close to the bone this war is. These Islamofascists will kill anybody to achieve their ends, starting with Americans and Israelis. None of us, none of our families, is safe. We have to win this war if we wish to continue to exist, not just as a nation, but as living individuals. I don't think we are pursuing the war with all the seriousness and ruthlessness it deserves for such a monumental life and death struggle. America's left and virtually the entire Democrat Party view this war as little more than a springboard for getting back in power. Therefore, they will do anything and everything they can to undermine this president, undermine our military and undermine the hearts and minds of the American people in order to better position themselves to recapture Congress and the White House. They are despicable and I have no tolerance for them whatsoever. If I had it in my power, I would find a way to strip them of citizenship and cast them off our shores. As it is, I tell the dissenters, "I hope you and your family are killed by terrorists." That rattles them and shocks them and moves them to say, "What a terrible thing to wish upon a fellow human being!" To which I reply, "That is exactly what you are wishing upon me and my family, so it only seems fair that you suffer that fate first." There are a lot of lies circulating around America these days, not to mention around the world. Willful fabrications such as the "Bush Lied, Thousands Died" line that the left and the Democrats sling with impunity. Lies such as the great canard, "I support the troops but not the war." Anybody with half a brain knows that such a sentiment is absolute B.S. If you doubt me, look at all the slips among leftist cowards holding high elective office--people such as Senators Kerry and Durbin and Congressman Murtha--comparing American soldiers to Genghis Khan and Nazis and convicting them of war crimes before an investigation is even under way. They do not support the troops any more than they support the war. They are craven liars and cowards, unfit to lick the boots of the lowest ranking infantryman. I am disgusted with our country for ever having elected such dishonorable excuses for human beings and disgusted with the people who follow them. I am disgusted with our so-called allies, the French, the Germans and yes, even much of the British people, who will turn tail and run as soon as Tony Blair is out of office. I am disgusted with our new "friends" the Russians and our would-be "friends" the Chinese for using the rise of Islamofascism as a lever against the United States, even though they dig their own graves in doing so, for the Islamofascist menace poses a threat to them as well as to us. I am disgusted with the Saudi pigs who accept our protection, yet are completely intolerant of our religions and our customs and who fund and educate in the ways of evil current and future terrorists. I am disgusted with Muslims in general, who speak from both sides of their mouths and practice a religion whose very teachings promote violence and intolerance. I am disgusted with the news media, who now view themselves as citizens of the word instead of Americans, maintaining what they call "objectivity" that is throughly biased against our nation and toward those who would murder us. I am disgusted with Israel, which snatched defeat from the jaws of victory in Lebanon recently, and with the United States for bowing to international pressure instead of openly joining Israel in stamping out not just Hezbollah, but Syria and Iran as well. I am disgusted with the United Nations, the world's most useless organization, where a bunch of Third World dictators call the shots, and we help pay for their anti-American, anti-Israeli activities. And I am pretty disgusted with this president, who started off on the right foot but allowed the liars on the left free rein in defining his administration in the most negative of terms, to the point we have now reached, where the Party of the Big Lie now stands a good chance of recapturing at least one house of Congress and eventually even the presidency. I am disgusted with American secular leftist Jews, approximately 80 percent of whom are allied with the Democrats and the anti-Israeli crowd, who refuse to see the parallels between today and 1938 and appear all to willing to get into line in front of the gas chamber barely 60 years after their parents' and grandparents' generations were almost exterminated. And I am disgusted with the American people, who are so obsessed with short-term gratification and creature comforts that they blame their own country for fighting back against animals who want to kill us all. I think we need to take the gloves off. We should torture, maim and kill anybody who takes up the Islamofascist cause. We should make their sponsor states and their families pay for their evil deeds. We should use some of the billions of dollars in weaponry people like me have gladly paid their taxes for, including nuclear weapons, if necessary, in order to beat the enemy into a bloody pulp and force their unconditional surrender. And we should excise once and for all the political correctness that has us searching American grandmothers instead of Middle Eastern men of terrorist age and that prevents us from carpet bombing insurgent havens such as Fallujah or nuclear facilities and government infrastructure in Iran out of existence. In short, we need to soundly defeat this enemy and force a reformation to his religion while we still possess superior weapons and while all one-billion Muslims in the world are not openly against us. Peace through strength is the the only option. Out-terrorizing the terrorists and their supporters is the only strategy that makes any sense. Our lives, our futures, our country and Western Civilization itself are at risk. If we remain weak and decadent, we will all perish. Evil will win. A light will go out in the world. If we fight to win, with everything at our disposal--EVERYTHING--we will vanquish our evil foe. There are no in-betweens, no compromises, no shades of gray at stake here. Everything is in stark black and white. Our anger should be white hot, our resolve unshakable and our application of force overwhelming. That is the only lesson of 9/11. |
|
Contributed by Shane Briscoe on September 11, 2006 at 02:35 PM in , , , | | | |
|
|
|
Iran Plays "Rope-a-Dope... Again
So Iran has finally given its answer to the UN Security Council on the incentives package it was offered to suspend its nuclear program: "We'll talk about it." It's Muhammad Ali's old "rope-a-dope" strategy all over again. Let your opponent do all the work as you sucker him in and string him along until he is worn out and you deliver the knockout blow. They've been leading the UN and the U.S. around like a lamb on its way to the slaughterhouse for months and months now, only Iran's slaughterhouse involves nuclear weapons and they are making progress toward a bomb fast, unless they already have one. The time for talking is past. But with the decadent Euros unable to muster the courage to do anything about a threat that puts them in the line of fire first; and the Chinese, Russians and French playing global chess against the United States, and Israel with a timid Prime Minister who blinked when Hezbollah and its UN allies said stop the fighting, and our own President becoming increasingly timid in the face of the upcoming election with Democrats waving the white flag of surrender, I am afraid Iran will win this campaign of the War on Terror. Everyone is simply kicking the can down the road for someone else to handle, putting all of us at extreme risk. This will end very badly for Western Civilization. |
|
Contributed by Shane Briscoe on August 22, 2006 at 05:01 PM in | | | |
|
|
|
Big Loss in Third Major War on Terror Campaign
Afghanistan, Iraq and now Lebanon. Thus far, these are the three big campaigns in the overall War on Terror. Democrats and left-wing media pundits insist on separating the three into separate wars, but such thinking only confuses the fact that World War III is already under way. Afghanistan was a success, although Taliban remnants, supported by the usual suspects--Iran, Syria and al Qaeda--continue to operate, though on a much smaller scale. Iraq was an unqualified military success, but Washington's relative timidity in the face of Democrat and UN pressure has emboldened the terrorists and Shiite militias and enabled Iran and Syria to ship in IEDs and other weapons and military/political "advisers" with impunity. Lebanon was a the first big defeat for the forces of Western Civilization, with Israel committing too little, too late, and then backing off as the worldwide apologists for Islamofascism beat the drums for premature withdrawal. Moreover, Washington missed a golden opportunity to join with Israel to ensure that not only Hezbollah, but Iran and Syria go down for the count. The Israeli government will likely be thrown out, and deservedly so. Unlike in our own country, there are plenty of tough minded sheriffs in Israel to get that nation back on the right path. The problem with America is that, hesitant though he may be, President Bush remains the strongest proponent for pursuing the War on Terror, and he cannot run again. As in the First and Second World Wars, there will be occasional setbacks in World War III. Our only viable option is to learn from those setbacks, get tougher and drive on toward victory. Simply put, Islamofascism must be utterly and completely destroyed. The cost of terrorism needs to be so high that no one dare employ the tactic. Such were the lessons of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. The left argues that killing terrorists only begets more terrorists, but that is simply not true. Killing terrorists in a half-assed, timid, politically correct manner (with no civilian collateral damage) does indeed create more terrorists, for that is what we are witnessing now. But overwhelming force, applied with brutal efficiency to tell the enemy that resistance is futile has always worked in warfare. Germany was bombed into near-oblivion during World War II. Thousands of civilians were killed in massive bombing runs. The entire German economy was wrecked. The Wermacht was pounded into submission. The Russians retaliated for their loss of 20 million people by raping, pillaging and murdering German soldiers and civilians alike. It was not pretty. This is not to say that American soldiers should go around wantonly murdering and raping civilians, but neither should we be second-guessing and restricting them to the point where they hesitate to pull the trigger when deadly force is called for. That should have been the lesson of Vietnam. There should be no more Fallujahs. If an enemy controlled city does not submit to our power, we should give its citizens a time limit to get out of town along predetermined routes, where all would be subject to rigorous searches and suspicious persons (including virtually all men of combat age) detained in prison until they can be further sorted out. Then, when the deadline has passed, the entire city should be leveled. There should be no more Shiite or Sunni militias. Any time masked gunmen gather for demonstrations, they should be taken out with missles or bombs. And we need to go after their leaders as well. The overwhelming power of America's military must be brought to bear sufficiently so that the enemy gets the idea that our power is, in fact, overwhelming. Iran must be made to pay for inciting violence across the globe. We already know that the IEDs that are killing and maiming American soldiers are manufactured in Iran and smuggled across the border into Iraq. A price must be paid for these acts of war, and until we exact that price, the murders and mutilations will only continue. Iranian forces were actively involved in the rocket and missile atacks on Israel. Hezbollah is but an Iranian irregular militia. I am certain that if we could only connect the dots, the Iranians would be shown to have had a hand in planning or funding the aborted terrorist action against civilian airliners flying between Great Britain and the United States. They are at war with us and we refuse to recognize the obvious. The ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah is the worst of all possible outcomes (save a complete military rout of Israel) for the larger War on Terror. The enemy rightly claims to have achieved a strategic victory, and that victory is due solely to Israeli and U.S. timidity. The next time hostilities break out, the enemy will only be stronger. The lessons of this temporary setback ought to be clear:
Ultimately, I have confidence that we will win this thing, but it is going to take a lot more pain and a lot more deaths before we give it the seriousness it deserves. |
|
Contributed by Shane Briscoe on August 19, 2006 at 11:59 AM in , , , , , , , | | | |
|
|
|
Some Inconvenient Truths
With apologies to Al Gore (not really), here are some "inconvenient truths" with respect to the situation in the Middle East and the overall War on Terror: 1. Iran has no need of nuclear energy. It has all the oil it could possibly use, and then some. The only rationale for acquiring nuclear energy and especially enrichment facilities is to provide the world's number-one terrorist-supporting state with nuclear weapons. This must be avoided at all costs. At ALL costs. 2. Negotiating with Iran serves no useful purpose. They are stalling for time so they, like North Korea before them, can field nuclear weapons. Time is on their side, not ours. 3. The United Nations is worthless. But we all knew that. Moreover, the organization has cast its sympathies with Hezbollah, Iran and the enemies of the United States. Remember the Oil for Food Scandal. The UN already had a presence along the Israeli-Lebanese border and all it did was provide Hezbollah cover for its unprecedented build up and its kidnapping of Israeli soldiers. Don't even bother with the UN. 4. Old Europe is worthless. They have no stomach for military action of any kind. Hell, the French won't even defend Paris against marauding Muslim teenagers. They will not be at our side when needed, even thought they themselves would be at more immediate risk of Iranian nuclear blackmail, given their proximity. We need to cut off the Euros and go this thing alone... with our only real ally that is willing to put boots--and bombs--on the ground: Israel. 5. Numbers three and four above mean that diplomacy won't work. That leaves the military option as our only choice. That, or wait around until Iran gets nukes and uses them on us or provides them to one of their terrorist surrogates to do so. With Israel in the fray already and the Muslim world--including Iraq--siding against the United States, we have nothing more to lose and everything to gain from allying openly with Israel and striking a decisive blow against the Islamofascists. Iran and Syria must be taken out of the equation. 6. The United States has a lot on its plate already, with our military strained over Iraq deployments. All the more reason to side with a battle-tested, tough ally now, while the fight is already on. Strained though we may be, we must be prepared to pay any price to defend our nation against all but certain nuclear blackmail from Iran and, in my view, the eventual certainty of an Iranian supplied nuke going off in an American city. Call up all the reserves, if we must. Revive the draft, even. Risk impeachment of President Bush. ANY price is acceptable other than the alternative. All the politicians--Republicans, Democrats, tough guys like Newt Gingrich--avoid this inescapable bottom line. The time for nuance and innuendo is past. We know what we need to do. Now, we must do it. 7. The Arab Street is overrated. We outgun them and could, if we wish, destroy the entire Middle East with a massive nuclear strike. We must remember that we hold the strong cards. Iran and Syria must fall, along with their Hezbollah surrogates. Then, we will have to turn our attention toward the spiritual and philosophical center of all Islamic terror: Saudi Arabia. The Saudis still fuel the fires of radical Islam with their madrassas and textbooks, which are paragons of intolerance. They must change, one way or the other. 8. Accomplishing the above will send a strong message to North Korea: Get your act together now or face the same medicine. The War on Terror could last 50 or 100 years or it could be over in 5 or 10, if we are but willing to take these necessary steps. Our future depends upon it. |
|
Contributed by Shane Briscoe on August 10, 2006 at 01:30 PM in , , , , | | | |
|
|
|
Benedict Arnold: American Hero
There is a special place in Hell for those who served in the military, yet use their veteran's status as a platform for dishonoring the men and women who daily put their lives on the line to defend the nation during the War on Terror. And that place, currently the abode of Benedict Arnold, will one day be inhabited by the likes of John Kerry and John Murtha. John Kerry used his self-aborted tour of duty in Vietnam as a springboard for his political career, first running for office as a (self) decorated combat veteran and then, when that didn't work, morphing into a "Winter Soldier," who joined with phony veterans who never served in the military, much less in Vietnam, in spreading lies about those who honorably did their duty in a war they were not allowed to win. Being anti-Vietnam became his ticket to Washington. He is a despicable excuse for a human being. Kerry being largely irrelevant these days, the mantle of Benedict Arnold was picked up and shouldered by John Murtha, the poster child for term limits. This partisan hack is currently the most visible in a long line of Democrat standard bearers who think that a stint in the military inoculates them and their party against any criticism when it comes to their views on the war. As the voters have shown thus far, this tactic has not worked. In fact, it has often backfired. One reason is that some of their opinions are so off the wall or ill advised as to be ridiculous, a case in point being Murtha's suggestion that troops in Iraq redeploy to Okinawa. (Not that the leftist media would ever actually analyze and comment upon such a monumentally stupid suggestion.) All this is not to suggest that having a difference of opinion over how to fight the war is unpatriotic, as long as that difference of opinion is based upon fact instead of partisan political posturing and as long as the motive is to win this war, as opposed to undermining or running away from it. And, equally important, as long as the critics do not abuse the troops as so many protestors (Kerry, prominently among them) did during Vietnam. That is where Kerry and Murtha have earned their own Yellow Badge of Cowardice in the current conflict. Kerry, in comparing our troops to Genghis Khan and Islamofascist terrorists, and Murtha in branding Marines as murderers even before an investigation into the events in Haditha is under way. Others, such as Sen. Dick Durbin and Democrat Party Leader "Howling" Howard Dean, have compared our troops to Nazis, but my despicability meter on them registers slightly better than it does for Kerry and Murtha, who dishonor the uniform in which they served. I, for one, am sick and tired of those liars who claim to support the troops while undermining the war in which those troops are so bravely fighting, bleeding and dying. And when those liars cynically use their miltary stint as a resume burnisher, well, as I said, there is a special place in Hell. Linking to the latest |
|
Contributed by Shane Briscoe on August 5, 2006 at 01:31 PM in , , , | | | |
|
|
|
War is Hell
A "Best of Old War Dogs" featured post. The webmaster is using a bogus timestamp to keep this post near the top of the blog for a while. Please scroll down for newer posts. This item was originally posted 2006.07.31.14:00. "War is Hell." The quote is attributable to Gen. William Tecumseh Sherman and is as apropos today as it has been throughout history. What has changed, unfortunately, is us. Though as a society with graphic movies, video games and such, not to mention all the violent criminals among us (thanks to bleeding-heart judges), one would think we'd become desensitized to war, as well. But then, that wouldn't fit with the leftist media agenda. There is violence, and then there is VIOLENCE, and I guess it depends on your political perspective which is acceptable and which is not. Take the current conflict between Israel and Hezbollah, for instance. While Israel initially got a pass from the leftist world press and even some Arab countries worried about Iran's muscle flexing, now, the worm has turned and everyone is beginning to bemoan all the Lebanese civilian casualties. Everyone except me. The Lebanese are in this mess precisely because they either lacked the will or the organization to prevent their once-beautiful, diverse country from being hijacked by terrorist thugs, much as greater Islam has been hijacked. They have allowed their society to go to the dogs; in this case Hezbollah and Syria; and now, as a result, Lebanese civilians are dying. Too bad. If anything, this sad state of affairs should be considered a lesson in self-defense, for if the Lebanese had fought their oppressive neighbors from day one, Hezbollah might not have such a stranglehold on the country, both politically and militarily, today. The Lebanese people are no longer innocent bystanders to global political and military events; they are active participants. Well, make that passive participants for many of those poor, unfortunate souls, but participants none the less. Which brings me to another quote, from Edmund Burke: "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." The Lebanese stood by and did nothign while their country was first torn asunder and then taken over by terrorists. Now, they reap the whirlwind. Israel, on the other hand, understands the philosophy behind both quotes. Israel is doing the only thing it can, and God bless George W. Bush for dragging out the "diplomacy" that certainly is not called for in this case. There are some situations to which pure military action is the only sane response, and this is one of them. It would be far better for Israel, and the United States, and the Lebanese, for that matter, and the world at large, if this conflict were allowed to proceed along its present course. It would be better if it were to escalate, with Syria and Iran being drawn out to the point where their participation (something that has been occurring all along) becomes open and public. It would be far better if the United States recognized that timing is everything and that it is now high time for us to take down Iran and the rest of the supporters of terrorism around the world. May the war continue. May Hezbollah and their Lebanese enablers see the cost of their folly. May Israel, with the help of the United States, prevail. This is just as much our fight as it is theirs, and just as much Western Civilization's fight as it is ours, only Western Civilization is corrupt and decadent, and therefore weak. War IS Hell. Civilians will die, but in this case, at least, the "collateral damage" is necessary. *** Linking to the latest |
|
Contributed by Shane Briscoe on August 4, 2006 at 01:30 PM in , | | | |
|
|
|
Mel Gibson and the Jews
I don't claim to know much about Mel Gibson's opinions on Jews, other than what the news media have reported concerning his recent drunken tirade, for which he has apologized. What I do know is that once again, the leftist media has gleefully latched onto this story as what in their view is yet another example of a conservative with feet of clay. This is the same media that routinely forgives Hollywood glitterati for abusing every substance known to man. It's the same media that elevates actors with a high school education to the status of important global pundits... as long as their view fits into the left's neat little world view, regardless of the facts. And this is the very same media that vilifies Israel, fawns over Democrats who undermine the War on Terror (and our troops) for purely political reasons, and portrays murdering Islamofascists as legitimate folk heroes. All this comes at a time when anti-Semitism is more pervasive, even in polite conversation, than at any time in my 57 years. If the media are indeed controlled and owned by Jews, then it is by Jews with a death wish. I write this not to defend Mel Gibson, only to point out what is so glaringly obvious: the huge double standard that has corrupted the news media to the point where their credibility to a large portion of the American populace (about 50 percent if the red state-blue state split is accurate) is less than zero. |
|
Contributed by Shane Briscoe on August 3, 2006 at 08:38 AM in | | | |
|
|
|
NCOs are GOD!
A "Best of Old War Dogs" featured post. The webmaster is using a bogus timestamp to keep this post near the top of the blog for a while. Please scroll down for newer posts. This item was originally posted 2006.07.20.09:33. This is my first official self-written post on Old War Dogs and I have to explain something: I am not an Old War Dog. I am old, yes. Not ancient at 57, but no longer a young pup, by any means. I am a dog, yes, according to my wife and friends, at times. But as for the war part, well, all you have to do is check out my profile and you will see that the only piece of fruit salad up there is the National Defense Service Medal, or what we used to call the "I was alive in '65" medal. I often joke to people that I am the ultimate Vietnam draft dodger: I sat out the war at West Point and when I graduated, Vietnam was winding down and I never got tapped to go. It was therefore an honor (and I shouldn't be surprised at the welcoming attitude of my brothers in arms, but I always am) to be invited to become an Old War Dog. I see that I am not the only former officer on the blog list, but I was first turned on to Old War Dogs by the great Russ Vaughn, as well as through the kindness of Bill Faith, two old NCOs. I note that most of the Old War Dogs are former NCOs, so I thought that as my first act of duty, I needed to expound on one of life's trueisms: NCOs are GOD! I don't mean to be blasphemous in that assertion. I am sure that the Good Lord will be honored that I attribute some of his omnipotence to NCOs. They are good company. As I note in my bio, I grew up in the Army, where I was taught such common courtesies as answering the phone in our quarters with, "Briscoe residence, Shane speaking." I was also taught, through observation of my Father and his interactions and just watching what went on on Army Posts around the world, that NCOs rule! I learned that lesson anew when, as a freshly minted Second Lieutenant just out of West Point, I was introduced to my first Platoon Sergeant, Heywood E. Smith, at Ft. Carson, Colorado, in the fall of 1971. "You're in luck," I was told by the outgoing Platoon Leader. "You have the best Platoon Sergeant in the United States Army." When I met Sgt. Smith in the orderly room of my tank company, the first words out of my mouth were, "I know you! I was on your tank as a cadet at West Point when we visited Ft. Knox!" And so it was. The Army, you learn over time, is a big family and you tend to run into the same people over the years within that family. Well, I wasn't all that lucky at first, for the Company First Sergeant had come down on orders for another tour in Vietnam and Sgt. Smith had been selected to serve in his place, meaning that an E-6 in the unit, a charming scam artist, was to be my acting Platoon Sergeant until a new "Top" sergeant could be found to relieve Sgt. Smith of his company-level duties. That transition lasted a month or so, as I recall. "Top" never made it back to Vietnam, as we were winding down our involvement there and Armor units were no longer in demand, so he shipped back to our unit and Sgt. Smith was mine again. Or better said, I was his. I had learned a number of bad habits under his temporary replacement, one of which was to believe every excuse I heard from my soldiers for missing work ("My wife has to go to the hospital." "I have a court date." "I have some family problems to take care of." etc.) One day shortly after taking back his old job, Sgt. Smith pulled me aside. "Sir, there is something we need to talk about," he said as he called off to a private area. "You command the platoon; I run it. That means if someone needs to get off work, he comes to me. It means when the barracks are being prepared for inspection, you need to stay out of there, as you only distract the men. You come in with the Captain and if it things are not in order, then you have my ass for it. Oh, and by the way, you ought to get a haircut." I had to admire the man. In a few short sentences, he'd set me straight. He did it with firmness and respect. I took his advice to heart, even to the point of getting a haircut (we pushed those things in those days). I decided to listen and learn at Sgt. Smith's feet. What he taught me was LEADERSHIP. A career in the military was not for me, as it turned out, but the leadership skills Sgt. Smith taught me have been a blessing throughout my life, in dealing with family, friends and co-workers in the civilian world. It is not really something I learned at West Point; indeed, in my day, there were many negative lessons taught at the Academy, including motivation by intimidation. They were trying to break you down and teach you to first learn how to follow orders before you could give them, and that was understandable, but some of the hazing (since done away with) taught exactly the wrong lessons for dealing with soldiers. Sgt. Smith set me straight. First, he taught me to love my troops. Take care of them, look out for them, protect and defend them, RESPECT them and they will return your faith a thousand times. Set the example. The soldiers need to know you are willing to roll up your sleeves and do anything they do. You will get your hands dirty. You will work hard. You know exactly what they are experiencing because you have been there, done that. This doesn't mean you are to become their big buddy. It doesn't mean you will neglect your duties as an officer and commander. It doesn't mean you won't expect your orders in a combat situation where time is of the essence to be followed to the letter and without question. It means you are one of them. You will do what it takes to protect them and get the mission accomplished; whatever it takes. You are not better than they are; you are one of them. You just happen to be the commander. Look out for their welfare and they will look out for yours. We had a slush fund Sgt. Smith had started to which I gave $10 a month, he gave $5, and the troops kicked in $1 apiece. It was to be used as a fund for emergency leave, in case a soldier's parent died and he was flat broke. That sort of thing. The only stipulation was that money from the fund be paid back over time, plus a dollar. Every now and then, when the fund got too big, we would buy a bunch of beer and have a platoon party. That fund was one of the best morale builders I have ever encountered. It was caring for your troops personified. Caring for your troops in Sgt. Smith's outfit also meant never giving an Article 15, the Army's non-judicial punishment for relatively minor infractions. "We don't give Article 15s in this platoon," Sgt. Smith would say. "It just messes up their pay and gets them in a deeper hole to dig out of. I will take care of disciplinary problems in my own way." That way was polishing the barracks floor by hand, with a handkerchief. It worked just about all the time. When it didn't, the recalcitrant soldier might be invited to step outside and take it up directly with Sgt. Smith. I never saw someone take him up on it and would pity the poor fool who did. Sgt. Smith was stocky. Sgt. Smith was tough. Sgt. Smith also convinced me that our platoon should be the refuge of soldiers in trouble. They could join us, have their past completely wiped clean and be given a new start in Army life. They would have to obey orders and perform, but if they did, they would be treated as any other member of our unit. I can honestly say that we took on a number of people who'd been dismissed as among the worst excuses for soldiers and turned them into productive people. Only one person didn't adapt, and we got rid of him through administrative channels. We didn't foist him off on some other platoon; we got him discharged from the Army. If all this sounds like a touchy-feely Army, it wasn't. Sgt. Smith was tough but fair and I learned to be the same. There is nothing wrong with loving your troops. There are many different leadership styles, from intimidation and coercion to the kind of positive leadership Sgt. Smith embodied. They all work to one degree or another, but the most effective of the long term is the Smith Method. After a couple of moves at Ft. Carson, I ended up in another unit, with another Platoon Sergeant. Sgt. Smith had retired by then, but we still kept in touch. This new Platoon Sergeant was a crusty old veteran who knew his stuff, but he had an alcohol problem that sometimes got the better of him. One day, he had a run-in with the Battalion Sergeant Major (Sergeants Major are GOD with more stripes than you have ever seen, plus a big star in the middle). My Platoon Sergeant was at fault and alcohol was involved. I learned he was going to be disciplined by the Battalion Commander, one of the truly good senior officers I ran into during my time in the service. The discipline would involve being busted in rank, relieved of duty and, at his age, having his career ruined. What would Sgt. Smith have done in a situation like this, I asked myself. The answer was clear and unambiguous. I tracked down our Colonel on the middle of the golf course and pleaded with him to give my Platoon Sergeant another chance and hold me responsible if it didn't work out. Far from being angry at me for interrupting his golf game, this fine officer, Lieutenant Colonel Fitzmorris, granted my wish. My Platoon Sergeant didn't disappoint. He didn't know it, but he had Sgt. Smith to thank for his salvation. I also remember from growing up that the two people my Father, a career officer, was closest to were two of his NCOs. One is unfortunately deceased now, but the other is living the good life in Hawaii and his family and mine stay in touch. This turned out to be a rambling note on leadership, but I cannot think of a better way to illustrate what good leadership is than telling the story of Sgt. Smith and my Father and what they taught me about it. The Army today is obviously full of good leaders and great NCOs, because you can see it in the character of our troops. Today, as in my day, NCOs rule! There is one more thing to keep in mind about military leadership, and it is the essence of this essay and something I learned at the feet of Sgt. Smith: There is no greater honor or privilege in life than leading a group of soldiers who may be dependent upon you in combat--to complete the mission and bring them home safely. Sgt. Smith did me and our platoon the honor of saying he would have taken us into combat anywhere, anytime. The feeling is mutual, Sgt. Smith. The feeling is mutual. *** Webmaster's note; Russ Vaughn replies . |
|
Contributed by Shane Briscoe on July 31, 2006 at 01:00 PM in , , | | | |
|
|
|
Taps for a Warrior
Frederick M. Burr, USA, retired, passed away today at 2:55 p.m. Mountain Time at age 91. He was my father-in-law.
He became acquainted with the Army while traveling as a very young man when he visited an uncle who was on Gen. MacArthur's staff in the Philippines. When World War II broke out, he joined Patton's Army, serving as a sergeant on the staff of his Regimental Combat Team Commander in Europe. After the war, he became a Warrant Officer in Military Intelligence; in that capacity, he served in Vietnam, bracketed in his wartime tour by two stepsons, also in the Army. He later served with the U.S. Embassy in Bucharest, Romania, in the early 1970s. CW4 Burr interviewed returning POWs from Vietnam and continued to serve in the Army until he was well-past retirement age, having been granted special dispensation due to his intelligence skills and knowledge. When he did retire, he held the distinction of being the oldest, longest serving Warrant Officer in the U.S. Army. After retiring from the Army, he remained active in military and veterans affairs and national security organizations and even accomplished something he never had time for as a younger man--he finished college.
A couple of years ago, Fred joined my wife and my Father (along with a friend and my brother) on a trip to Washington, D.C., to see the new World War II Memorial. It was a gift my wife and I gave both our Dads, since both were World War II-Korea-Vietnam Veterans. We also visited the memorials from those two wars. For the occasion, we outfitted both Dads in caps conveying their triple-war service, and it was great to watch all their fellow veterans, young and old, as well as active duty personnel and civilians, come up to thank them for their service.
Fred was a proud man, an old school gentleman and as loyal an American patriot as anyone who ever lived. He lived a good, long life and will be fondly remembered by his large family and many friends. The nation and all of us who live in freedom, owe him a tremendous debt of gratitude.
I salute you, Fred. It was an honor to be your son-in law. Rest in peace. You've certainly earned it.
|
|
Contributed by Shane Briscoe on July 20, 2006 at 04:42 PM in | | | |
|
One Good Lesson We Can Learn from the French
The French are easy to make fun of, especially these days when they can't even work up the courage to defend Paras from marauding Muslim teenagers, much less a Nazi blitzkrieg.
Like many Americans since the French betrayed us over the War in Iraq, I won't visit their miserable little country and I no longer buy French products. No wine, no cheese, no... well, they really don't have much to offer besides those two items, which is another sign of French irrelevance.
But there is one thing the French do deserve credit for, and we ought to emulate them in this regard: shaving the heads of collaborators.
After World War II, the French went about collecting all the women (I'm not sure about the men, but knowing the French, they probably were too afraid to tackle a man--even a fellow Frenchman--so they concentrated on the girls instead) who slept with or otherwise collaborated with their German occupiers (wait a minute... didn't all French women sleep with the Nazis?). The French vigilante squads probably roughed up the collaborators a bit. Then they shaved their heads as a mark of shame.
One of these days, we are going to get serious about the War on Terror. One of these days, we are going to start kicking ass and taking names, fighting with a ruthlessness that only comes from the gut when you realize that your entire civilization and way of life--as well as your life itself and your mortal remains--are at risk. I fear that such a day will come, but sadly, only after another 9/11 occurs. We just didn't seem to get it the first time, but the day a nuclear, chemical or biological weapon goes off in a U.S. city and thousands, or tens of thousands, or even millions of our fellow citizens are murdered, we'll surely get the message that it is time to take the gloves off. Then woe betide the terrorists and their allies.
I don't want to see another 9/11 happen. But then, that is what separates me from the Democrats, the Bush-haters and, oh, yes, the French. I would rather go for it now, kill all the terrorists and their supporters and sympathizers today, torture captured terrorists into revealing everything there is to know about their operations before dispatching them to their just reward, where 71 virgins who all look like Helen Thomas are eagerly awaiting their arrival. But I am afraid there will be another 9/11.
After the gloves do come off and we realize we are in a fight to the death with one of the most vile, evil adversaries we have ever faced, public opinion should have shifted enough so that we might be ready to deal with our own collaborators, French style.
It will be time to start shaving heads, only Americans will do the men as well as the women. First, we can start with the Dixie Chicks, then Linda Ronstadt, Alec Baldwin, Sean Penn, Howard Dean, Cindy Sheehan, Dan Rather, Mary Mapes, John Kerry, Jimmy Carter, editors of The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times and other so-called mainstream media personalities... and the list goes on. I would spare Helen Thomas, only because I don't think the world just couldn't take her any uglier. As for Michael Moore, I'd give the special treatment, shaving his head even... at neck level, Muslim style.
Many of these American-hating fifth columnists have already seen their livelihoods dry up and their reputations turn sour as people react to their treasonous ways. Good. That's a start. But when the real day of reckoning comes, there needs to be a badge of shame for all the world to see, and shaved heads really fit the bill.
The day is coming. Until then, my fellow patriots, keep your clippers handy.
|
|
Contributed by Shane Briscoe on July 20, 2006 at 01:53 PM in | | | |