Fighting for God in Afghanistan

[SenyorJim]

'the natural man cannot receive things of the spirit'
proof positive the matrix is alive and well
Been to Israel a couple of times- super place and the greatest little nation on the earth

[sky's the limit]

Rumsfeld 'Bible texts' criticised


Former US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has been accused of using quotes from the Bible in his briefings to George W Bush during the Iraq War.

The quotes were placed on the cover of the briefings alongside images of US soldiers, GQ magazine has reported.

President Bush was criticised for using the word "crusade" to describe the US "war on terror".

Critics said he risked giving Muslims the impression that the war was a clash between Christianity and Islam.

Defence department staff were privately worried, GQ reports, that if the briefings with biblical quotes on them had ever been made public, the fallout would have been "as bad as [the revelations of prisoner abuse at] Abu Ghraib".

One Muslim member of staff was offended by the quotations, GQ reveals.

Soldiers at prayer

But other former officials doubt that Mr Bush saw the briefings very regularly, and say that Mr Rumsfeld was unlikely to have "tolerated" having the quotes on the briefings for very long, the New York Times reports.

The decision to put the biblical quotations on the cover pages was taken by Maj Gen Glen Shaffer, a director for intelligence serving both Mr Rumsfeld and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, according to GQ.

The use of the quotations has been criticised by some US commentators.

"If these official daily collages of Crusade-like messaging and war imagery had been leaked, they would have reinforced the Muslim world's apocalyptic fear that America was waging a religious war," wrote Frank Rich in the New York Times.

Mr Rumsfeld was "taking a risk with national security," he added.

One cover page featured pictures of US soldiers at prayer and US tanks in Iraq, underneath a passage from the Book of Isaiah: "Their arrows are sharp, all their bows are strung; their horses' hoofs seem like flint, their chariot wheels are like a whirlwind."

Another briefing showed a picture of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein beneath a quotation from the First Epistle of Peter: "It is God's will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men."

US MEDIA REACTION TO RUMSFELD'S USE OF BIBLICAL QUOTES


I wonder what's worse: a defense secretary who puts Old Testament quotes on progress updates on an invasion of a Muslim country or a defense secretary who thinks this will add to his president's knowledge and expertise.

The Atlantic Monthly's Andrew Sullivan questions Mr Rumsfeld's wisdom and judgement.



Proof that Don Rumsfeld was actually a closet crusader? No, more like proof that Rumsfeld tried to speak Bush's language in the early days of the war to give him strength as the first casualties were taken.

"Allahpundit", writing at Hotair.com, takes a more sympathetic view of the former Defence Secretary.



Who could possibly think that something like this could make people think that we were on a crusade against Islam?

"Hilzoy", of Obsidian Wings, thinks the Bible quotations could have inflamed Islamic opinion.



He was cynically playing the religious angle to seduce and manipulate a president who frequently quoted the Bible. But the secretary's actions were not just oily; he was also taking a risk with national security. If these official daily collages of Crusade-like messaging and war imagery had been leaked, they would have reinforced the Muslim world's apocalyptic fear that America was waging a religious war.

New York Times columnist Frank Rich does not mince his words in his assessment of the Defence Secretary.

[SenyorJim]

Hi LH
well, the beginning of wisdom is to fear God so heres a few answers here but they should be read in context which means delving into the 3500 year old record and realizing that the muslim religion is more recent and plagarises the revered Jews' Torah and Christians old testament for the Mohammedans own end like most cults



[quote="LH"]Would one of you wise people please tell me where I would find in either the Holy Bible or the Koran that they promote wars and the taking of human life?

Book of Joshuah where the children of israel were commanded to take the city and destroy it totally [reason: they had about 400 years warning [ remember sodom and Gomorrah totally wiped for their depraved gay activity] except for Lot and his family, and because Jericho was a corrupt town squatting on land promised to the children of Abraham and did not surrender {sorta like the palestinian problem} .]

Koran hate and kill quotes: http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/koran.html


Where might I find that a Sunni Muslim believes the exact same thing as a Shiite Muslim?
same book - same hate

Where might I find in the Holy Bible that it states that a Roman Catholic believes in and is exactly the same kind if Christain as a Baptist?
dont think you will: Christ said call no man your Father
He also said 'you must be born again
and the greatest of you will be the servant of all


Would I find that Jesus Christ is recognized in the Koran as well as the Holy Bible?
here
"O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion: Nor say of Allah aught but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) an apostle of Allah, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in Allah and His apostles. Say not "Trinity" : desist: it will be better for you: for Allah is one Allah. Glory be to Him: (far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is Allah as a Disposer of affairs." (Koran, Surah 4:171, Women)
He is recognized but His deity is denied.


Would I find Joseph and Mary mentioned at all in the Koran also?

''As you can see, there is no reference to anybody here called Joseph. If there had been a husband to Maryam before she gave birth to Baby Jesus, the claim of a miraculous birth for Jesus would have been suspect. The Qur’an does not say that Mary was married and to a husband called Joseph before she gave birth to Jesus. Whereas the Bible does say that Mary had “a husband” (or at any rate one who was “espoused to her”) when the Holy Ghost “overshadowed” her to make her conceive “the Son of God”. 'snip
so their conclusions are obviously inaccurate according to the more substantuated Bible record


It might do all some good to re-read those postings before mine and I believe they'd understand the real reason for the wars of Man.........IGNORANCE...........because boy 'o boy is it ever demonstrated by most of the crap that I read above. Suggest strongly that people go down to their local public library and take-out a copy of The Koran........THEN speak. I'd suggest most are in for a very steep learning curve concerning that book.
the Bible says in the book of James that wars proceed from men's lust for power
1
From whence [come] wars and fightings among you? [come they] not hence, [even] from your lusts that war in your members?

4 : 2
Ye lust and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not.

4 : 3
Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume [it] upon your lusts.

4 : 4
Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.

Lastly, don't blame religion for the acts their religious leaders promoted. Many Catholic Popes have much to answer for in that regard, BUT don't blame the religion that they supposedly represented. There re many Canadians who are still racist against all manner of peoples, BUT they don't speak for me.......I'll speak for myself......and don't judge all Canadians based on the diarrhea that spews from their mouths. My father went off to fight WW2 in Europe and came home on furlough to see the sign 'RESTRICTED' in many Winnipeg store windows......INCLUDING Eaton's. RESTRICTED? What was that about? RESTRICTED meant that 'Jews need not apply....we ain't hiring them'. EATON'S maintained that Canadawide policy until 1961 and last time I checked that was one of the reasons that many Canadians died on European soil for. Oh yes.....and my father didn't go to war because he was drafted or because anyone from any church or wearing any kind of robes told or encouraged him to go. He didn't go 'For King and country either'. He went because for 10 years of the Depression on the Canadian prairies he and the family didn't have a pot to piss in financially (like 10's of thousands of others). It was free clothing, three free meals a day, a regular paycheque and it was supposed to be all over in about 6 months anyway.

Didnt one of our esteemed canadian ouigey board Prime Ministers say' one Jew is too many ' when they were trying to escape Hitler's killing machine?

What you want to do is get all the Osama Bin Laden's and Jerry Falwell's of this world, together with all the other 'nut cases' that use religion for their wars and put them all out in some desert with all the weapons they want and let them do all the fighting. Lastly, I believe in religion and God, but I sure as Hell don't have much use or faith in most of His Ministers who 'supposedly' speak in His name.[/quo

Christ said He did not come to bring peace but a sword among individuals - although He is the Prince of peace and will rule this planet righteously some day but He is the Great Divider for those who put their faith in His promises.

Most hirelings have no idea of what God is doing and that counts for most 'Christians ' as well who endorse the warm fuzzy bs from the pulpit
and totally ignore the fact that
Salvation is of the Jews !
and God [ Jesus or Jeshuah] is Jewish!!
...but then he said also : you must be born again
But this world is a matrix and the natural man cannot receive the things of the spirit but he can wrangle
so a bit of food for thought and heres a good research link if you want to go deeper by . Missler, a navy flier I think
http://www.firefighters.org/html/library.cfm
yrs
Jim

[SenyorJim]

Well Lincoln quoted the Bible too but he didnt have to be politically correct
..and the world dominion Muslims are already inflamed anyway so whats the big sweat I wonder


[quote="sky's the limit"]
Rumsfeld 'Bible texts' criticised


Former US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has been accused of using quotes from the Bible in his briefings to George W Bush during the Iraq War.

[LH]

Both Rumsfeld and Bush were taught the from the Old Testament and very little from the New Testament. This is not a new revelation at all as the very Constitution of the US is based on the Old Testament. This anyone learns if they take American history at a University in the US. It's 'brushed-over' or not mentioned at all in other Universities, but oozes and eminates from every piece of American Doctrine, including the Monroe Doctrine. The Israelis have that in common with the Americans also because they do not recognize Jesus Christ as The Messiah and still await his coming. They therefore have many beliefs in common with those who follow the Old Testament, but since they don't recognize Christ as the Messiah, then there is therefore no teachings to comprise the New Testament. So it's 'an eye for an eye' and don't look for anything called 'forgiveness' until you're dead........then we'll forgive you....maybe.

Ergo, any Bible quotes coming from the mouthes of Cheney or Bush is almost always Old Testament. Doesn't change the diarrhea that they espouse, but perhaps explains where the quotes are coming from and why.

[SenyorJim]

Well, its the same Jesus and Holy Spirit who wrote the 'Old Testament' as wrote the New Testament- they dovetail nicely and if folks misquote the Book they will have to deal with the author.
The Pilgrim Fathers escaped persecution from Britain and found it here too but their God is still alive and well and shows Himself strong in those who walk and not just talk in His ways.
I admire the American constitution and those who espouse it and wish them well in the troubled waters they and ourselves now find themselves.
sj

Both Rumsfeld and Bush were taught the from the Old Testament and very little from the New Testament. This is not a new revelation at all as the very Constitution of the US is based on the Old Testament. This anyone learns if they take American history at a University in the US. It's 'brushed-over' or not mentioned at all in other Universities, but oozes and eminates from every piece of American Doctrine, including the Monroe Doctrine. The Israelis have that in common with the Americans also because they do not recognize Jesus Christ as The Messiah and still await his coming. They therefore have many beliefs in common with those who follow the Old Testament, but since they don't recognize Christ as the Messiah, then there is therefore no teachings to comprise the New Testament. So it's 'an eye for an eye' and don't look for anything called 'forgiveness' until you're dead........then we'll forgive you....maybe.

Ergo, any Bible quotes coming from the mouthes of Cheney or Bush is almost always Old Testament. Doesn't change the diarrhea that they espouse, but perhaps explains where the quotes are coming from and why.

[sky's the limit]

One day, everyone will figure out "god," or any of his variants, is little more than a fairy tail. Perhaps then people will stop killing each other so readily.... On second thought, probably not - they'll just figure out something else to justify it with.

stl

[SenyorJim]

aw
sour grapes sky
He's around
but it takes some effort you know
http://www.firefighters.org/html/library.cfm

One day, everyone will figure out "god," or any of his variants, is little more than a fairy tail. Perhaps then people will stop killing each other so readily.... On second thought, probably not - they'll just figure out something else to justify it with.

stl

[sky's the limit]

Sorry Jim.

It's just a story.

stl

[SenyorJim]

Couldn't agree with you less stl,
It's an historical record with many confirmed prophecies that proves it the only supernatural book on the planet who's originator must be supernatural- but most folks are not comfortable, and understandably so, with that kind of challenge.
Of the many twisted bibles out there I find the Ryrie Study Bible [NAS] the most reliable and trusted translation if one were to leap the fable barrier . Not at all like the NIV [ new inaccurate version]
yrs
Jim

Sorry Jim.

It's just a story.

stl

[sky's the limit]

Couldn't agree with you less stl,

Ok.

I'm really not going to get into it with you, there are a number of threads you can dig up on that topic.

stl

[SenyorJim]

no prob here stl
its a Gorgon's knot for those with no sword anyway
yrs

[sky's the limit]

no prob here stl
its a Gorgon's knot for those with no sword anyway
yrs

Little do you know... I AM the next ruler of Asia.... Your knot is no good here!

Think we've hijacked this one far enough?

stl

[sky's the limit]

Military burns unsolicited Bibles sent to Afghanistan


(CNN) -- Military personnel threw away, and ultimately burned, confiscated Bibles that were printed in the two most common Afghan languages amid concern they would be used to try to convert Afghans, a Defense Department spokesman said Tuesday.
Afghan workers enter a walkway on March 3, 2009, at Bagram Air Base, Afghanistan.

Afghan workers enter a walkway on March 3, 2009, at Bagram Air Base, Afghanistan.

The unsolicited Bibles sent by a church in the United States were confiscated about a year ago at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan because military rules forbid troops of any religion from proselytizing while deployed there, Lt. Col. Mark Wright said.

Such religious outreach can endanger American troops and civilians in the devoutly Muslim nation, Wright said.

"The decision was made that it was a 'force protection' measure to throw them away, because, if they did get out, it could be perceived by Afghans that the U.S. government or the U.S. military was trying to convert Muslims," Wright told CNN on Tuesday.

Troops at posts in war zones are required to burn their trash, Wright said.

The Bibles were written in the languages Pashto and Dari.

This decision came to light recently, after the Al Jazeera English network aired video of a group prayer service and chapel sermon that a reporter said suggested U.S. troops were being encouraged to spread Christianity.
Don't Miss

The military denied that earlier this month, saying much in the video was taken out of context.

"This was irresponsible and dangerous journalism sensationalizing year-old footage of a religious service for U.S. soldiers on a U.S. base and inferring that troops are evangelizing to Afghans," Col. Gregory Julian said.

The military says a soldier at Bagram received the Bibles and didn't realize he wasn't allowed to hand them out. In the Al Jazeera video, which shows the Bibles at the prayer service, an unnamed soldier says members of his church raised money for them.

The chaplain later corrected the soldier and confiscated the Bibles, Wright said.

Military officers considered sending the Bibles back to the church, he said, but they worried the church would turn around and send them to another organization in Afghanistan -- giving the impression that they had been distributed by the U.S. government.

That could lead to violence against troops or U.S. civilians, Wright said.

Al Jazeera English, a Qatar-based international news service, said its reporters tried to get a response from military officials for its story but were unable to do so.

The U.S. military air base at Bagram is home to thousands of troops from all branches of the U.S. military. The vast majority of the troops do not leave the base and are in various support roles for U.S. troops across Afghanistan.

[LH]

I come at this subject from a different perspective and experience altogether. Both of those were gained in 26 months of hard combat. I served and fought with many races and many religious beliefs. Amongst those numbers I served also with many who believed in nothing and did so for a wide variety of reasons. One thing did unite them all though and that arrived when they had been very seriously wounded and knew or felt strongly that they were going to die. Even though they had esposed vigourously and loudly just how much they didn't believe in any God, at tht moment they wanted just ONE thing. They would ask, cry-out, beg and or scream for that person. They wanted some Padre or "man of cloth', of ANY colour and ANY race to read some Holy Scripture verses to them before they died and they all preferred the 23rd Psalm. If, during their previous lives they had no use for 'niggers', 'dagos' or 'chinks' , that was all forgotten at that moment They wanted 'a man of the cloth' from any Christian religion and they didn't give a Damn what colour he was or what Christian religion he represented.......also including Judaism. This applied to all and I often laughed to myself years after that most human beings are really the same way. They may trumpet loud and wide that they believe in absolutely nothing, BUT when the mement comes that they truly believe that they are going to die, they aren't stupid either. They want to 'hedge their bets' , so having some words read to them from the Holy Bible as they pass away is very comforting to them. Best to 'cover your bets both ways' unless you've died before.

[2R]

Why is it that when Aliens traverse the cosmos from way out there on their travels .After mastering the complexities of interstellar travel.They do not set up camp at any of the worlds seven wonders like the pyramids /eifel tower/or outside some of the more beautiful natural sites ?
Why do they end up probing some drunk/crackhead/ trailer dwellers ass ?

Why would the creator of the cosmos need Humanity ,just one small genetic mistake away from monkies to fight her wars ?


If god wants you dead ,she will send a flood or plague or famine or bolt of lighting.No need for you to kill and think you are doing her work or get involved in a jihad/crusade .

Gods will ,will be done


Deas Volent

[NWONT]

On many Sunday mornings I have walked on many Caribbean islands. The doors and windows of all the churches are wide open to allow the warm breezes to pass through. When all those Caribbean people start to sing those hymns, I'm sure that I saw some of those churches floating slightly off the ground. The honesty, sharing, respect for each other and unwavering love of their god is reflected in the way they raise their voices. There is never even a hint of animosity or intolerance in their meetings. These people are truley religious. Even though I consider myself a nonbeliever I can't but help but feel a deep respect for these fine people. If all religions in the world conducted themselves in this manner the entire world would be the garden of Eden. Instead we have the opinions posted above about how to interpret each different " holy book " to find a passage that condones attacking and killing those with a different book.

[pilotbzh]

I hate all religion including mine, there a way to control idiots, make them believe books are the holly fucking crap..... written by men to control men.... time changes... holy books didn't they a more obsolete than the first universal encyclopedia....


there is a god....and he doesn't like your religion....warchip nobody... be good, have fun, no need to follow 2000 years hold or more guidances..... He'll tell you what make sense if your a good guy (or girl).

Time for another holly funcking beer...

[Dash-Ate]

How about that. For 7 years a bunch of guys living in the desert have outwitted the entire Western military complex. Believable??

UN wants ‘flood of drugs’ in Afghanistan to devalue opium

Jon Boone
London Guardian
Tuesday, May 26, 2009

United Nations officials in Afghanistan are attempting to create a “flood of drugs” in the country intended to destroy the value of opium and force poppy farmers to switch to legal crops such as wheat.

After the failure to destroy fields of the scarlet flowers in Afghanistan’s volatile south, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime says the answer is to stop the drugs from leaving the country in the first place.

“Manual eradication is incompetent and inefficient,” UNODC chief Antonio Maria Costa said during a visit to the western Afghan province of Herat. “So we want to see more efforts to stop the flow of drugs across Afghanistan’s borders and the hitting of high-value targets to create a market disruption.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/un-wants-fl ... opium.html

[LH]

Dash-Ate ------- ain't nothing amazing about that at all. There once was an outfit in France during WW2 called the Maquis. They did the same thing and more to the German Army controlling their country. Ditto for Marshal Tito in Yugoslavia at the same time. Mao Tse Tung knew something about that also, long before he had uniforms or Generals.

Any 'conventional' army will not do well against an 'irregular' army. They donm't operate by the same rules and one can be identified by their uniforms and the other cannot, just for starters. The Americans beat the best and largest Army in the world doing exactly the same thing to gain their independence. Ditto for Vietnam where I served, UNLESS the North Vietnamese Army came out 'to play'. When they did, they were so thorughly beaten that they didn't come out anymore. It was all left up to the 'irregular' units to do the fighting. They'd hit, fight awhile and then disappear into the countryside and/or population. Once the American Army started to have units that operated the same way, then those 'irregulars' didn't want to play so much anymore because they couldn't withstand the losses.

I'd suggest very strongly that what is reported on by the Press is what they see and are told about. It's WHAT they don't see, don't know about and are never told about by the Armies in Afghanistan that holds the real story. The CAF have had units skulking around the hills of Afghanistan for years now and I'd suggest that the Taliban are much more afraid of them than any of our troopers in some troop transports. One will slit your throat in the darkness while you are relieving yourself and vanish into the night while their other peers don't operate that way. They'll also remove your head with a well-placed shot from over a kilometer away while your feeding your face at noon time.

Are we winning? Of course we're not. That's been tried before by the largest and best army in the world of it's day amd carried on for well over 100 years.....the British Army.Many a Hollywood movie was made about fights and battles between the British and the native population in the Kyber Pass.......and that ain't some part of Alabama either.The Russians tried the same thing and we know the result. Now we are in there and we believe that we will eradicate them from using their #1 crop for survival. Sure we will. Just you watch us. I'll suggest to you that the last person's military that ever controlled that part of the world was the army of Alexander the Great. If Canadian troops are going to die for something, then I'd personally like it to be for something that they have a chance of winning. On a daily basis?.......maybe, but overall.....forget it. Bring our Forces home, tell the UN to 'stick it' and at least pay their last bill for our services which is still owing, Like the gentlemen we are, we never mention such things in public because it's just not us. We belong to NATO, but if it weren't for the Americans and a contingent of Brits, it's us who did all the fighting. Last time the family checked, it has five close relatives buried in Eurpean Military Cemetaries trying to free their sorry butts over the years, but this time the European members have 'conditions' about how much help they'd extend towards us in combating the Taliban. I don't recall any such conditions when the CAF was sent to fight in Europe during WW2.

[bmc]

I believe in God. She's black, you know.

[Dash-Ate]

The American Way Of War
By Fred Reed
6-27-9

Being a military thinker of the profoundest sort, I offer the following manual of martial affairs for nations yearning to copy the American way of war. Read it carefully. Great clarity will result. The steps limned below will facilitate disaster without imposing the burden of reinventing it. The Pentagon may print copies for distribution.

(1) Underestimate the enemy. Fortunately this is easy when a technologically advanced power prepares to attack an underdeveloped nation. Its enemy's citizens will readily be seen as gadgetless, primitive, probably genetically stupid, and hardly worth the attention of a real military.

(2) Avoid learning anything about the enemy ­ his culture, religion, language, history, or response to past invasions. These things don't matter since the enemy is gadgetless, primitive, and probably genetically stupid. Anyway, knowledge would only make the enlisted ranks restive, and confuse the officer corps.

Blank ignorance of the language is especially desirable (as well as virtually guaranteed). For one thing, it will allow your troops to be seen as brutal invaders having nothing in common with the population; this helps in winning hearts and minds. For another, it will allow English-speaking officials of the puppet government to vet such information about the country as they permit you to have.

(3) Explain the invasion to the American public in simple moral terms suitable for middle-school children at an evangelical summer camp: We are bombing cities to bring the gift of democracy and American values, or to defeat some vague but frightening evil, perhaps lurking under the bed, or to get rid of a bad dictator no longer of service to us, or to bring freedom and prosperity to any survivors. (This doesn't work in Europe, which is honestly imperialistic.) The public can then feel a sense of unappreciated virtue when the primitives resist. Sententious moralism should always trump reason.

(4) A misunderstanding of military reality helps. Besides, comprehension would only lead to depression. As Napoleon said, or may have, in war the moral is to the material as three is to one, which implies that unpleasant facts should be played down in favor of cultivating a cheerful attitude. Most especially, it should not be noted that a few tens of thousands of determined, probably genetically-stupid primitives with small arms can tie down a cheerful force however gaudily armed.

Pay no attention to tactics, which are boring. It should never enter your mind that in this sort of war, if you don't win, you lose; if the enemy doesn't lose, he wins. Think about something else. Above all, do not understand that the enemy's target is not you, but public opinion at home. You don't need to remember this, as the enemy will remember it for you.

(5) Do not forget that a military's reason for existence is to close with the enemy and destroy him. An army is not in the social-services business. Do not let the mission be impeded by touchy-feely considerations. If you have to kill seventeen children to get a sniper, so be it. The enemy must realize that you mean business. Ignore cultural traits, which are of concern only to idealistic civilians. Grope the enemy's women. High-profile rapes are a good idea as they teach respect. It is better to be feared than loved. Be sure the embassy has a helipad.

(6) Intellectual insularity should be a primary goal, as it avoids distraction. This salubrious condition can be achieved by having officers read Tom Clancy instead of history. In military discourse it also helps to encourage the use of phrases like "force multiplier" and "multi-dimensional warfare," as these increase confidence without meaning anything.

Remember that doctrine and optimism should always outweigh history and common sense. Discourage colonels and above from reading about similar campaigns fought by other armies, as this might lead to nagging doubts, conceivably even to thought. Encourage the belief that other countries have lost wars by being inferior to the United States. "The French lost in Viet Nam? What else would you expect from the French? Never happen to us."

Some military philosophers favor actually removing from military libraries books on what happened to the French in Viet Nam, the Americans in Viet Nam, the Russians in Afghanistan, the Americans in Afghanistan (a work in progress), the French in Algeria, the Americans in Iraq (also in progress), the Israelis in Lebanon the first time, the Israelis in Lebanon the last time, the Americans in Lebanon 1983, the Americans in Somalia the first time, and so on. However, the best thinkers hold that it doesn't matter what books are in military libraries, as only those on stirring victories will be checked out.

(7) Keep up to date with the latest nostrums and silver bullets. Organize your military as a lean, mean, high-tech force characterized by lightning mobility, enormous firepower, and extraordinary unsuitability for the kind of wars it will actually have to fight. Flacks from the PR department of Lockheed will help in this. Recognize that an advanced fighter plane costing two hundred million dollars, invisible to radar, employing dazzling electronic countermeasures, and able to cruise at supersonic speed, is exactly the thing for fighting a rifleman in a basement in Baghdad. Such aircraft are crucial force multipliers in multi-dimensional warfare. Anyway, Al Quaeda might field an advanced air force at any moment. It pays to be ready.

(8) It is a good idea to bracket your exposure. Be ready for wars past and future, but not present. The Pentagon does this well. Note that the current military, an advanced version of the WWII force, is ready should the Imperial Japanese Navy return. It also has phenomenally advanced weaponry in the pipeline to take on a space-age enemy, perhaps from Mars, should one appear. It is only the present for which the US is not prepared.

(9) View things in a large context. People who have little comprehension of the military tend to focus exclusively on winning wars, missing the greater importance of the Pentagon as an economic flywheel. Jobs are more important than wars fought in bush-world countries. An American military ought to think of Americans first. This is simple patriotism. It is essential to spend as much money as possible on advanced weapons that have no current use, and none in sight, but produce jobs in congressional districts. Good examples are the F-22 fighter, the F-35, the Airborne Laser, the V-22, and the ABM.

(10) Insist that the US military never loses wars. Instead, it is betrayed, stabbed in the back, and brought low by treason. For example, argue furiously that the US didn't lose in Viet Nam, but won gloriously; the withdrawal was due to the treachery of Democrats, Jews, hippies, the press, most of the military, and a majority of the general population, all of whom were traitors. This avoids the unpleasantness of learning anything from defeat. Further, it facilitates a focus on controlling the press, who are the real enemy, along with the Democrats and the general population.

(11) Avoid institutional memory. Not having lost of course means that there is nothing to remember. Instead, read stirring novels and cultivate a cheerful, can-do attitude unintimidated by primitives in sand-lot countries, who are probably genetically stupid.

(12) Do it all again next time

[LH]

Mister Fred Reed SIR;

I am a Canadian of duel citizenship with the United States and served in their Army in Vietnam during that war. Having been there in combat and also being a Canadian who wasn't then and isn't now, brainwashed about anything American, allow me to share some unbiased information with you. If you have that experience in Vietnam with some American, Greek, Australian, Indian or Republic of South Korean military Force, please PM me your regimenetal number and country that you served with. If you didn't, then now learn why God gave Man TWO eyes and ONE mouth.......and LEARN. We'll start with some question. Are you aware of all the other countries who had troops in the Vietnam War? Are you aware that Canada made $5B+ off of the Vietnam War for every year it lasted? Are you aware that the Canadian Embassy in Saigon, led by Ambassador Chester A. Ronning, did espionage for the USAF to pinpoint bombing sites in North Vietnam......AND with the full knowledge and approval of the Canadian government?

The Vietnam War was started by POLITICIANS from SIX different and sovereign countries. They also formed an organization that was a carbon-copy of NATO and for the same reasons........to prevent the spread of Communism because at one time in this world, that was not a laughable reason. Those countries sent troops into Vietnam because of SEATO. The American military was ORDERED there by their POLITICIANS whether they liked it or not. They endured political bullshit of the highest degree from Da Nang in 1965 until their pull-out in April of 1972......also ORDERED by POLITICIANS. They could fight to a certain line and then not pass over that line.....also ORDERED by POLITICIANS. The enemy they were fighting had no such rules to abide by at all.......ditto for that also. The enemy's regular army came 'out to play' on many occasions and was soundly beaten EVERY time......politicians not involved because they don't have to fight.....their asses are too old. NOT ONCE did the American politicians heed any of the advice of their military leaders and if they'd done so, there wouldn't have been a Vietnam war with any US Military involved. The politicians knew that, but do you believe any Canadian politician has ever paid heed to what some Canadian military General has to say? They know better of course. Any person who has ran their own car dealership and then been elected knows more than a General in the Canadian Army.

So you run down all of the American wars, Canadian wars and basically the rst of the world and see how many wars were thought of, started by and ordered-up by some military commander. Doesn't work that way sir. Unless you are referring to some military dictatorship they don't run governments. They are there to take orders and nopt argue about those orders. So the Pentagon didn't order up America's involvement in WW1, WW2, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan or a sundry of central American conflicts...........it was the US Congress. That Congress is made up of a House of Reprsentatives and a Senate and representing the Republican and Democratic Parties. The third part of that govenment is the President's Office. He can do as he please in mosr regards, with or without the approval of Congress. At that point in time, if they don't approve of his actions, EVERYTHING comes to a halt and whatever it is that they didn't approve of ceases at that point. THe Pentagon IS NOT any part of those three ruling Offices of American government NOR hve they EVER been.

So if you are going to smear shit around about a military organization that you've never been part of, at least take the time to THINK. The American military and the same for our military, do nothing, go nowhere and spend no monies without the orders of the political bosses of their country being behind those actions. Other than that, you have no fear of being consulted by the 'inner sanctum' opf the Pentagon about their military thinking or preparedness. Their political bosses are left to do that for political reasons and they have a dislike for frankness and truth.....just like our own. Unfortunately, you'll just have to be satisfied with the bullshit eminating from the mouthes of folks like George Bush, Dick Cheney, Bill Riley from FOX News and David Margolis, the CBC's resident 'expert' on things 'military'. PLEASE don't attempt to educate yourself about any military either by doing so using the media.

Sorry to surprise you Fred, but everything you've just stated about the American military you could use to describe the Canadian military........AND it would be just as inaccurate. Just to remind you too. The CAF didn't decide to support America in Iraq at the beginning or later-on go into Afghanistan at the whim of the CDS in Ottawa. They were ORDERED to do so by their political bosses, who were begged to do so by the UN Secretary-General in a publicly televised media event and in support of that 'morally-corrupt' organization in New York. Sorry, but the tail doesn't shake the dog this side of the border either and they don't share much about themselves with you and I either.