# This War is for Real



## Longshot (Feb 9, 2004)

Please take the time to read the attached essay by Dr. Chong.
It is long but worth the time to read.

I had no idea who Dr. Chong is or the source, but then I did a "Google search" on the Doctor and found him to be a retired Air Force Surgeon of all things and past Commander of Wilford Hall Medical Center in San Antonio.

So he is real, is connected to Veterans affairs in California, and 
these are his thoughts. They are worth reading and thinking about!(the same Google search will direct you to some of his other thought-provoking writings.)

Subject: Muslims, terrorist and the USA. A different spin on Iraq war.

This WAR is for REAL! Dr. Vernon Chong, Major General, USAF, Retired

Tuesday, July 12, 2005

To get out of a difficulty, one usually must go through it. Our 
country is now facing the most serious threat to its existence, as we know it, &; that we have faced in your lifetime and mine (which includes WWII).

The deadly seriousness is greatly compounded by the fact that there 
are very few of us who think we can possibly lose this war and even fewer who realize what losing really means.

First, let's examine a few basics: 
1. When did the threat to us start? 
Many will say September 11, 2001. The answer as far as the United 
State is concerned is 1979, 22 years prior to September 2001, with the 
following attacks on us: 
* Iran Embassy Hostages, 1979; 
* Beirut, Lebanon Embassy 1983; 
* Beirut, Lebanon Marine Barracks 1983; 
* Lockerbie, Scotland Pan-Am flight to New York 1988; 
* First New York World Trade Center attack 1993; 
* Dhahran, Saudi Arabia Khobar Towers Military complex 1996; 
* Nairobi, Kenya US Embassy 1998; 
* Dares Salaam, Tanza nia US Embassy 1998; 
* Aden, Yemen USS Cole 2000; 
* New York World Trade Center 2001; 
* Pentagon 2001.

(Note that during the period from 1981 to 2001 there were 7,581 
terrorist attacks worldwide). 
2. Why were we attacked?

Envy of our position, our success, and our freedoms. 
The attacks happened during the administrations of Presidents Carter, 
Reagan, Bush 1, Clinton and Bush 2. We cannot fault either the 
Republicans or Democrats as there were no provocations by any of the presidents or their immediate predecessors, Presidents Ford or Carter.

3. Who were the attackers? 
In each case, the attacks on the US were carried out by Muslims.

4. What is the Muslim population of the World? 25%.

5. Isn't the Muslim Religion peaceful?

Hopefully, but that is really not material. There is no doubt that the 
predominately Christian population of Germany was peaceful, but under 
the dictatorial leadership of Hitler (who was also Christian), that made 
no difference. You either went along with the administration or you were 
eliminated. There were 5 to 6 million Christians killed by the Nazis 
for political reasons (including 7,000 Polish priests). 
(see http://www.nazis.testimony.co.uk/7-a.htm )

Thus, almost the same number of Christians were killed 
by the Nazis, as the six million holocaust Jews who were killed by 
them, and we seldom heard of anything other than the Jewish 
atrocities. Although Hitler kept the world focused on the Jews, he had no 
hesitancy about killing anyone who got in his way of exterminating the Jews or of taking over the world - German, Christian or any others.

Same with the Muslim terrorists. They focus the world on the US, but 
kill all in the way -- their own people or the Spanish, French or anyone 
else.

The point here is that just like the peaceful Germans were of no 
protection to anyone from the Nazis, no matter how many peaceful Muslims there may be, they are no protection for us from the terrorist Muslim leaders and what they are fanatically bent on doing --by their own pronouncements -- killing all of us "infidels." I don't blame the peaceful Muslims. What would you do if the choice was shut up or die?

6. So who are we at war with? 
There is no way we can honestly respond that it is anyone other than the 
Muslim terrorists. Trying to be politically correct and avoid 
verbalizing this conclusion can well be fatal. There is no wa y to win if you don't 
clearly recognize and articulate who you are fighting.

So with that background, now to the two major questions:

1. Can we lose this war?

2. What does losing really mean?

If we are to win, we must clearly answer these two pivotal questions.

We can definitely lose this war, and as anomalous as it may sound, the 
major reason we can lose is that so many of us simply do not fathom 
the answer to the second question - What does losing mean?

It would appear that a great many of us think that losing the war 
means hanging our heads, bringing the troops home and going on about our 
business, like post Vietnam. This is as far from the truth as one can get.

What losing really means is: 
We would no longer be the premier country in the world. The attacks 
will not subside, but rather will steadily increase. Remember, they want us dead, not just quiet. If they had just wanted us quiet, they would not 
have produced an increasing series of attacks against us, over the past 
18 years. 
The plan was clearly, for terrorist to attack us, until we were 
neutered and submissive to them. 
We would of course have no future support from other nations, for fear 
of reprisals and for the reason that they would see, we are impotent and 
cannot help them.

They will pick off the other non-Muslim nations, one at a time. It will 
be increasingly easier for them. They already hold Spain hostage. It 
doesn't matter whether it was right or wrong for Spain to withdraw its troops from Iraq. Spain did it because the Muslim terrorists bombed their 
train and told them to withdraw the troops. Anything else they want 
Spain to do will be done. Spain is finished.

The next will probably be France. Our one hope on France is that they 
might see the light and realize that if we don't win, they are finished 
too, in that they can't resist the Muslim terrorists without us. However, it 
may already be too late for France. France is already 20% Muslim and 
fading fast!

If we lose the war, our production, income, exports and way of life 
will all vanish as we know it. After losing, who would trade or deal with us, if they were threatened by the Muslims. If we can't stop the Muslims, how 
could anyone else?

The Muslims fully know what is riding on this war, and therefore are 
completely committed to winning, at any cost. We better know it too and 
be likewise committed to winning at any cost.

Why do I go on at such lengths about the results of losing? Simple. 
Until we recognize the costs of losing, we cannot unite and really put 100% of our thoughts and efforts into winning. And it is going to take that 100% effort to win.

So, how can we lose the war?

Again, the answer is simple. We can lose the war by "imploding." That 
is, defeating ourselves by refusing to recognize the enemy and their 
purpose, and really digging in and lending full support to the war effort If we are united, there is no way that we can lose. If we continue to be divided, there is no way that we can win!

Let me give you a few examples of how we simply don't comprehend the 
life and death seriousness of this situation.

President Bush selects Norman Mineta as Secretary of Transportation. 
Although all of the terrorist attacks were committ ed by Muslim men 
between 17 and 40 years of age, Secretary Mineta refuses to allow profiling. 
Does that sound like we are taking this thing seriously? 
This is war!! For the duration, we are going to have to give up some of the civil rights we have become accustomed to. We had better be prepared to lose some of our civil rights temporarily or we will most certainly lose all of them permanently.

And don't worry that it is a slippery slope. We gave up plenty of 
civil rights during WWII, and immediately restored them after the victory and in fact added many more since then.

Do I blame President Bush or President Clinton before him?

No, I blame us for blithely assuming we can maintain all of our 
Political Correctness, and all of our civil rights during this conflict and have a clean, lawful, honorable war. None of those words apply to war. 
Get them out of your head.

Some have gone so far in their criticism of the war and/or the 
Administration that it almost seems they would literally like to see 
us lose. I hasten to add that this isn't because they are 
disloyal. It is because they just don't recognize what losing means. 
Nevertheless, that conduct gives the impression to the enemy that we 
are divided and weakening. It concerns our friends, and it does great 
damage to our cause.

Of more recent vintage, the uproar fueled by the politicians and media 
regarding the treatment of some prisoners of war, perhaps exemplifies 
best what I am saying. We have recently had an issue, involving the 
treatment of a few Muslim prisoners of war, by a small group of our 
military police. These are the type prisoners who just a few months 
ago were throwing their own people off buildings, cutting off their hands, 
cutting out their tongues and otherwise murdering their own people just 
for disagreeing with Saddam Hussein.

And just a few years ago these same type prisoners chemically killed 
400,000 of their own people for the same reason. They are also the same type of enemy fighters, who recently were burning Americans, and dragging their charred corpses through the streets of Iraq. 
And still more recently, the same type of enemy that was and is 
providing videos to all news sources internationally, of the beheading of 
American prisoners they held.

Compare this with some of our press and politicians, who for several 
days have thought and talked about nothing else but the "humiliating" of 
some Muslim prisoners -- not bur ning them, not dragging their charred 
corpses through the streets, not beheading them, but "humiliating" them. 
Can this be for real?

The politicians and pundits have even talked of impeachment of the 
Secretary of Defense. If this doesn't show the complete lack of 
comprehension and understanding of the seriousness of the enemy we are fighting, the life and death struggle we are in and the disastrous 
results of losing this war, nothing can. 
To bring our country to a virtual political standstill over this 
prisoner issue makes us look like Nero playing his fiddle as Rome burned -- totally oblivious to what is going on in the real 
world. Neither we, nor any other country, can survive this internal 
strife. Again I say, this does not mean that some of our politicians or media people are disloyal. It simply means that they are absolutely oblivious to the magnitude, of the situation we are in and into which the Muslim terrorists have been pushing us, for many years.

Remember, the Muslim terrorists stated goal is to kill all infidels! 
That translates into ALL non-Muslims -- not just in the United State, but 
throughout the world. 
We are the last bastion of defense.

We have been criticized for many years as being 'arrogant.' That 
charge is valid in at least one respect. We are arrogant in that we believe 
that we are so good, powerful and smart, that we can win the hearts and minds of all those who attack us, and that with both hands tied behind our back, we can defeat anything bad in the world!

We can't! If we don't recognize this, our nation as we know it will 
not survive, and no other free country in the world will survive if we are 
defeated. 
And finally, name any Muslim countries throughout the world that allow 
freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of religion, freedom of 
the press, equal rights for anyone -- let alone everyone, equal status or 
any status for women, or that have been productive in 
one single way that contributes to the good of the world.

This has been a long way of saying that we must be united on this war 
or we will be equated in the history books to the self-inflicted fall of 
the Roman Empire . If, that is, the Muslim leaders will allow history 
books to be written or read.

If we don't win this war right now, keep a close eye on how the Muslims 
take over France in the next 5 years or less. They will continue to increase the Muslim population of France a nd continue to encroach little by little, on the established French traditions. The French will be 
fighting among themselves, over what should or should not be done, 
which will continue to weaken them and keep them from any united resolve. 
Doesn't that sound eerily familiar?

Democracies don't have their freedoms taken away from them by some 
external military force. Instead, they give their freedoms away, politically 
correct piece by politically correct piece.

And they are giving those freedoms away to those who have shown, 
worldwide that they abhor freedom and will not apply it to you or even to 
themselves, once they are in power.

They have universally shown that when they have taken over, they then 
start brutally killing each other over who will be the few who control the 
masses. 
Will we ever stop hearing from the politically correct, about the "peaceful Muslims"?

I close on a hopeful note, by repeating what I said above. If we are 
united, there is no way that we can lose. I hope now after the election, the factions in our country will begin to focus on the critical situation 
we are in, and will unite to save our country. It is your future we are 
talking about! Do whatever you can to preserve it.

After reading the above, we all must do this not only for ourselves, 
but our children, our grandchildren, our country and the world.

Whether Democrat or Republican, conservative or liberal and that 
include the Politicians and media of our country and the free world!

Please forward this to any you feel may want, or NEED to read it. Our 
"leaders" in Congress ought to read it, too. There are those that find 
fault w ith our country, but it is obvious to anyone 
who truly thinks through this, that we must UNITE!


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

The odd thing is because of what they believe they will kill all the liberals first. Look at what the Muslims stand for, and what the liberals do and do not stand for. Can you in your wildest dreams think you can convince a Muslim that abortion is ok. How about gay rights? Liberal blood will run in the streets.

Then we have those who complain about this war. Like Jane Fonda before them they are more dangerous than Hitler ever was. More dangerous than the Soviet Union ever hoped to be.

We will not be defeated by superior weapons, we will be defeated by stupid people within our own nation.

This guy had it right on.


----------



## boondocks (Jan 27, 2006)

Longshot, best post I'v seen on this website by far.IMO this is exactly whats gonna happen to this country(its a terrible thouhgt) but its true.This country will never win this war the way things are right now.Not because Bush is wrong,quite the contrary.The politically correct(Dems) and the like that arn't backing the president are gonna lead to this countrys downfall (wait and see).Like Bush said if you ain't for us your against us.Half this countrys on the enemys side.You people that are against this war don't know what kind of people we are up against plain and simple.We take are way of life for granted and its dwindling right befor our eyes.The Dems are to busy worrying about there political standing and to stupid to see what they are doing to the country(their tearing it apart).The Dems are just as much of a problem as the radicals themselves.


----------



## Longshot (Feb 9, 2004)

T3|-| F7U>< C4P4C41 said:


> > The odd thing is because of what they believe they will kill all the liberals first. Look at what the Muslims stand for, and what the liberals do and do not stand for. Can you in your wildest dreams think you can convince a Muslim that abortion is ok. How about gay rights? Liberal blood will run in the streets.
> 
> 
> -Are you making an allegory between yourself and Muslim extremists? If so I do see similarities.


Wow T3 that made no sense at all and has to be one of the most childish comments I've seen in a while.



> Dissent is a natural part of any way. Our founders knew it, and so do I. those who try to strip dissenters of their rights are the greatest threat to what we hold dear as Americans.


Did you even read the post. This is what the author refered to people as those that don't "recognize what losing means". This is not a Republican vs. Democrate issue but our polititians sure want to make it out as such.



> Some have gone so far in their criticism of the war and/or the
> Administration that it almost seems they would literally like to see
> us lose. I hasten to add that this isn't because they are
> disloyal. It is because they just don't recognize what losing means.


Nobody is talking about taking rights away from critics of the war, but trying to make them understand what really is at stake here. No need to try to make it sound as such.


----------



## Longshot (Feb 9, 2004)

Nice reply T3. :eyeroll:

Proves my point well.


----------



## arctic plainsman (Aug 21, 2005)

I gotta bug out of here in a sec so I gotta be quick, but I am still bothered by the "Trust the President," view point.
If you guys feel comfortable granting broad authority and power to the current Admin, how do we corral future ones?
It's true I did read quickly, so if I'm off here, a thousand apologies!


----------



## Longshot (Feb 9, 2004)

arctic plainsman said:


> I gotta bug out of here in a sec so I gotta be quick, but I am still bothered by the "Trust the President," view point.
> If you guys feel comfortable granting broad authority and power to the current Admin, how do we corral future ones?
> It's true I did read quickly, so if I'm off here, a thousand apologies!


Your not off at all arctic. I do have a question about this comment:



> President Bush selects Norman Mineta as Secretary of Transportation.
> Although all of the terrorist attacks were committ ed by Muslim men
> between 17 and 40 years of age, Secretary Mineta refuses to allow profiling.
> Does that sound like we are taking this thing seriously?
> ...


What civil rights during WWII that we gave up is he referring to? I'm not really questioning his knowledge on the issue but more of my own knowledge of the facts during that time. I do believe that all powers granted to the government during time of war and pertaining to war should have a strict time limit set.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

arctic plainsman said:


> I gotta bug out of here in a sec so I gotta be quick, but I am still bothered by the "Trust the President," view point.
> If you guys feel comfortable granting broad authority and power to the current Admin, how do we corral future ones?
> It's true I did read quickly, so if I'm off here, a thousand apologies!


I think put a sunset clause on it just like they did with the assault weapons ban.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> -Are you making an allegory between yourself and Muslim extremists? If so I do see similarities.


Our nation is built on Judeo Christian values. The Koran and Bible correspond closely until Mohamed led them off into the land of bs. Since that time they have made a Christian conservative look like a liberal extremist in comparison to Islam. In that light the people who want to appease them will be the first fools to die. 
If they will not let a woman show their face, do you think they are going to let them crawl up into the stirrups, get into docks face (you know what I mean) and say rip that little fetus out of there, I can't spend my mascara money on little Mohamed jr.


----------



## arctic plainsman (Aug 21, 2005)

Thanks Longshot,

I guess I am a little more comfortable thinking about restricting Civil rights during a war. President Lincoln certainly waived a few of them during the Civil War.

I went back and carefully read your article and don't feel the same trepidation I did when I glossed over it the first time. Thanks for posting it!

Plainsman said something the other day about distrusting all politicians, and I heartily agree. I just hate the idea of giving more power to the gov and then trying to wrestle it away from them later. I have mentioned before that I am on the City Council here in Dillingham, and the hijinks that goes on in our city gov has left a really bad taste in my mouth. Alot of it here, state wide, and nationally I think is just downright dishonest.

Back to the subject, if in fact we are at war, then I think the call should go out for more personal responsibility and vigilance. The article you posted Longshot, called for greater vigilance from our gov, but I would argue that the citizenry needs to exercise the same.


----------



## Longshot (Feb 9, 2004)

arctic plainsman said:


> Back to the subject, if in fact we are at war, then I think the call should go out for more personal responsibility and vigilance. The article you posted Longshot, called for greater vigilance from our gov, but I would argue that the citizenry needs to exercise the same.


I completely agree. Vigilance is needed at all levels.

Politicians are like diapers.  After a while they are both full of you know what and need to be changed.


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

If you look around you will see that call for more personal responsibility and vigilance has been going out for a couple years now. Look just a little closer and those that continuously put up the road blocks are also very visible. It really isn't difficult to see if you just look.


----------



## arctic plainsman (Aug 21, 2005)

I must be missing the obvious again Gohon, I don't really get your point.

If you're suggesting I shouldn't have said that we shouldn't be vigilant and responsible,... well,... ok.


----------



## arctic plainsman (Aug 21, 2005)

Nuts, I meant should, not shouldn't.


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

> If you're suggesting I shouldn't have said that we shouldn't be vigilant and responsible,... well,... ok.


I don't mean that at all but think more people should be saying it, and I encourage you to say it more often. My point is the President and others have been telling the public for the last several years that this is a real war. A war unlike any we have ever seen before and a war that will most likely go on for generations before it is completely eliminated, if ever. But, there are those that think we should just duck into a closed shell and everything will be fine and no one will bother us. At the same time and usually for their own personal gain they undermine everything that is attempted. That is foolish thinking and it is very dangerous. This war is not about Iraq but about our future, and Iraq is just one of most likely many battlefields we will face before it is over. Each victory will make the next one easier.


----------



## arctic plainsman (Aug 21, 2005)

Well said Gohon, thanks!


----------



## mr.trooper (Aug 3, 2004)

....huh?


----------

