Wow! This certainly puts things in perspective.


[i]This is one of the most profound articles that I have ever read about this Presidency, this era, and this so-called war. Everything this gentleman says makes sense to me. No matter your politics, you owe it to yourself to read and pass on so we all are informed of what's going on in our world!

Another assessment of where the US stands in relation to the Middle East problems, this one is from the guy who had his finger on the nuclear trigger for three years as head of our defense and response complex buried under Cheyenne Mountain at Colorado Springs. He was the only person who could initiate a nuclear attack after advising the sitting president of a missile launch by our enemies and our need to respond. No political or civilian type in the US had more knowledge about day to day military actions around the world.
Everyone should find quiet time to read this. As far as I am concerned, it is exactly the direction we should go and the consequences of not doing so are well thought out.

John R. ; (Jack) Farrington Major General, USAF (Retired)

Middle East Imperative BY: JIM CASH, Brig. Gen., USAF, Ret.

I wrote recently about the war in Iraq and the larger war against radical Islam, eliciting a number of responses. Let me try and put this conflict in proper perspective.

Understand; the current battle we are engaged in is much bigger than just Iraq. What happens in the next year will affect this country and how our kids and grand kids live throughout their lifetime, and beyond. Radical Islam has been attacking the West since the seventh century. They have been defeated in the past and decimated to the point of taking hundreds of years to recover. But they can never be totally defeated. Their birth rates are so far beyond civilized world rates, that in time they recover and attempt to dominate again.

There are eight terror-sponsoring countries that make up the grand threat to the West. Two, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan just need firm pressure from the West to make major reforms. They need to decide who they are really going to support and commit to that support. That answer is simple. They both will support who they think will hang in there until the end, and win. We are not sending very good signals in that direction right now, thanks to the Democrats.

The other six, Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Syria, North Korea and Libya will require regime change or a major policy shift.
Now, let's look more closely.

Afghanistan and Iraq have both had regime changes, but are being fueled by outsiders from Syria and Iran. We have scared Gaddafi's pants off, and he has given up his quest for nuclear weapons, so I don't think Libya is now a threat.

North Korea (the non-Islamic threat) can be handled diplomatically by buying them off. They are starving. That leaves Syria and Iran. Syria is like a frightened puppy. Without the support of Iran they will join the stronger side. So where does that leave us? Sooner, or later, we are going to be forced to confront Iran, and it better be before they gain nuclear capability.

In 1989 I served as a Command Director inside the Cheyenne Mountain complex located in Colorado Springs, Colorado for almost three years. My job there was to observe (through classified means) every missile shot anywhere in the world and assess if it was a threat to the US or Canada. If any shot was threatening to either nation I had only minutes to advise the President, as he had only minutes to respond.

I watched Iran and Iraq shoot missiles at each other every day, and all day long, for months. They killed hundreds of thousands of their people. Know why? They were fighting for control of the Middle East and that enormous oil supply.

At that time, they were preoccupied with their internal problems and could care less about toppling the west. Oil prices were fairly stable and we could not see an immediate threat.

 

This summer I dealt with this issue quite a bit and anyone who thinks that this issue is just going to go away over night or disappear if we just quit tomorrow is gravelly mistaken. There have been many decisions that both parties have made which I think were mistakes, but ultimately I believe we need to finish what problem we are facing now because it will not go away on its own. We are going to have difficult times in the future, that is for sure. A lot of our problems have been due to a lack of foresight on our part, the rest is due to being vain and selfish. What defines character though is trials and overcoming them. As time has passed, I see less and less character being developed in people and if it gets anyless, something is going to give. As much as I don't want to see our country go through a serious challenge, it might take that to help us regain our character.

I think my generation needs a challenge to help us be a whole lot less selfish and childish. I think this could be the defining time to say whether my generation has the potential to define themselves in a good light or decides to give into the temptation to do nothing. They need to prove that they have the capacity to contribute at least half of what the depression era gave during their challenge. What disturbs me is when I hear people in my generation who essenially have never done anything productive in their lives pass judgement on the depression generation for a few things that they don't like about how they executed WWII. These people lack the capability to understand what world they grew up in and fail to understand how to successfully execute a war like that. It isn't by doing it the way that some of these phony movies protray were if we just sit down and talk everything will be perfect and we will all sing kumbya together. The error in this thinking is they fail to understand what mad men want and what extent they will go for world domination. They don't want peace, they want absolute control.

What people need to understand is that 9/11 was not the first attack, it was the point when our country half-way opened one eye. We had multiple issues with terrorism before this. There were attacks all through the 90s, some attacks against our military during the 80s, issues like the Iran hostage crisis in the 70s, potential ties between assissins during the 60s, etc. We need to realize that what we are involved in is serious and we need to take it more seriously.

 

Amen to that. Thanks for sharing and I agree. I am very much afraid of who our next presidential candidate might be.

 

Party candidate or next president?

 

Both because I am not sure who to vote for and once they are voted in, for what they might do.

 

I think we have some time left. Two of the three candidates that I really don't care for on one side that at one time appeared invincible now look as though they may not make it. Some of the candidates that I saw as the lesser of the evils (since we are talking about politicans afterall) are starting to take off. I think our choices will be better than what we thought we were going to have earlier this year.

 

Good reading and what I hear from most people in the know. Militant Muslims have an agenda and it has not changed since Mohammad walked and talked. SO I feel they will continue in this direction. Being poor or rich does not seem to phase what they have set for their direction. If we don't wake up and smell the Camel... it may be too late!

 

I vote for Ron Paul (a true Libertarian), even though he doesn't have much of a chance he is the truest to the US Constitution, maybe Jimmy L. Cash, Brig. Gen., USAF, Ret. should actually read the Constitution, by reading his article I believe he has not.
I also encourage everyone to read the US Constitution, it is amazing to see that the fathers of it had the forsight they did, it is a true inspiration to not just the U.S.A. but the entire world.

 

I'm conservative and the front runners in the Rep. party well... they are not. But we do have some that are coming on and are gaining some momentum. I'm sorry , but I can't vote the worst of 2 evils. The Rep. party has to put a conservative in or I really can't see myself voting for someone who isn't a moral conservative. My vote is cast on moral issues. The line of conservative and liberal is murky after that and they stray back and forth between the middle. But I do want to support the military and without them we are in a bad way. I hope for my voting sake that the picture gets clearer as we approch the most important election of our existance as a nation. Believe me... we need strong leadership.

 

Constitutional conservative, fiscal conservative, strong military, social moderate and shrinking the government. As far as morals or religion go, I want no atheist, and I want a person who can maintain a commitment to his family/spouse, and a person who has never welched on any oath.

I don't intend to throw my votes away again. The first vote I ever cast was Papa Bush. My second was Perot....I was trying to make a statement....unless I'm sure the person I vote for is going to get it done...I'm not "making a statement". When one does this, we end up with a congress like we have now....if one were to do this for the presidential election, one would do well to acclimate one's self to the sound of President Hilary Clinton, and that individual should understand they contributed to it as much as anyone else who voted for a non-viable candidate or voted for the shrew herself.

The GOP needs reform, direction and a backbone. But a Democratic Congress and Executive Branch to try to wake them up is analogous to swatting a fly off this country's forehead with an ax.

Of course these are the types of conversations I'd be more inclined to have at www.sweetness-light.com. Probably one of the better of the genre. Provides insight.