U.S. deaths in Afghanistan headed for another record

I originally started this as an e-mail to several military veterans I know. One of them, a retired Army officer asked me to put it out on a blog. The comments I have received won't be in the form they would have been received in so please bear with me. I have tried to put the comments in the right order and I have one more that is on another computer so I will post it tomorrow. This is lengthy, but I believe the discussion is very good and I hope you will take the time to review it.

You will find that I am "Podge" here--my nickname.

George
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If this sounds all too familiar, then why is the American public not reacting? Is it that we don't really care how many of our young men and women are sacrificed, yes I said "sacrificed", for a nation that has been the "graveyard of empires"? Or is it ignorance or apathy? We obviously believe that we can do a better job than the Russians or even the British so long ago, but at this point that does not seem to be the case. During some of their 10 year campaign, the USSR had as many as 106,000 troops deployed in Afghanistan. At that time it was thought that the USSR was the second most powerful country in the world. Yet a ragtag group managed to drive them out of their country. We are approaching those numbers. Together with coalition forces, western troop numbers stand at 87,000+ and growing.
While the Afghans continue to increase their production of opium and have elections that are fraudulent at best, they contribute few forces to fighting the insurgency. They prefer to let others do the fighting and dying for them. What's wrong with this picture?
I don't ask you to agree with me, I simply ask you to ask yourself, "What is the Hell are we doing there?" If you come up with an honest answer, please let me know. Apparently I and our civilian and military leaders don't have a clue.
George Harris

McClatchy Washington Bureau
Posted on Wed, Aug. 26, 2009
U.S. deaths in Afghanistan headed for another record
Nancy A. Youssef and Jonathan S. Landay McClatchy Newspapers
last updated: August 26, 2009 07:55:52 AM
WASHINGTON — With the deaths of four U.S. soldiers Tuesday, the U.S.-led NATO coalition in Afghanistan now has lost more troops this year than in all of 2008, and August is on track to be the deadliest month for American troops there since U.S. operations began nearly eight years ago.
The numbers reflect the rising pace of combat in Afghanistan and come at a difficult time, just as Army Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the U.S. commander in Afghanistan, is considering asking for more U.S. troops even as opinion polls show that a majority of Americans think the war in Afghanistan isn't worth the cost.
Underscoring the deteriorating situation, a massive explosion late Tuesday shook the southern city of Kandahar, leveling dozens of businesses as people were breaking the daylong fast of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.
Local officials said at least 37 civilians were killed and another 100 were injured.
Afghans also are awaiting results from the Aug. 20 presidential election as the top candidates claim the lead. A runoff will be held if no candidate wins more than 50 percent of the nationwide vote; the protracted uncertainty could lead to more violence. Partial results released Tuesday showed President Hamid Karzai running slightly ahead of his nearest competitor, with 40 percent of the counted votes.
In July, 45 U.S. troops died in Afghanistan, the highest monthly toll this year. So far in August, 40 Americans have died, many in the south, and Pentagon officials say privately that with nearly a week left in the month, they expect August to exceed July's number. Americans make up the majority of the 63 coalition troops killed so far this month; 75 coalition soldiers died in July.
In 2008, total coalition deaths were 294, 155 of whom were Americans; the 2009 total through Tuesday was 295, of whom 172 were Americans.
There are currently 63,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan.
The four Americans who died Tuesday were killed when an explosion hit a convoy in Kandahar province. U.S. officials didn't disclose the identities of the soldiers or of their unit and did not say where the convoy was precisely when it was struck.
Senior U.S. military leaders have warned that troop deaths were likely to rise as the Obama administration sent an additional 17,500 troops and 4,000 trainers to Afghanistan. Those forces began arriving in Afghanistan earlier this summer, including thousands of Marines who launched a major offensive in southern Helmand province. Roughly 6,000 of those forces are still en route.
Under McChrystal, the U.S. is expanding its presence into parts of southern Afghanistan, including Kandahar and Helmand provinces, where coalition forces have never had enough troops to displace the Taliban.
Kandahar city is the country's second-largest and the spiritual capital of the Pashtuns, the ethnic group that comprises virtually all of the Taliban. And more than 90 percent of Afghanistan poppy production comes out of Helmand.
"We are not surprised," said a senior Pentagon officer who asked for anonymity so that he could discuss the casualty figures candidly. "We knew this would happen."
The increase in casualties comes at a time that public support for the war appears to be eroding. A Washington Post-ABC News polls released last week found that for the first time, a majority of Americans don't think the war is worth fighting.
Members of Congress are expressing concerns about U.S. progress in a country known as the graveyard of empires.
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., a proponent of sending more troops to Afghanistan on Sunday called the trends in Afghanistan "very alarming and disturbing" on ABC News, while Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., a member on the Foreign Relations Committee, told his home state's Appleton Post-Crescent newspaper that he wants a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. forces.
"I think it is time we ought to start discussing a flexible timetable when people in America and Afghanistan and around the world can see where we intend and when we intend to bring our troops out," Feingold said, according to the paper.
Interviews with Afghans show that they are fed up as well. Many say they don't want help from the U.S., the Taliban or their central government; they just want to be left alone.
Haji Agha Lalai, the head of the provincial peace and reconciliation commission and a Kandahar provincial council member, visited the scene shortly after Tuesday night's bombing. In a telephone interview, he said he was told by a police officer that a large tanker truck was moving through the neighborhood when the explosion occurred.
"The houses along a 20-meter (66 foot) section of roadway were completely destroyed," he said.
The bombing happened as there are growing charges of massive fraud in the presidential election, which the U.S. and its allies had hoped would produce a stable government that would cooperate closely on the Obama administration's new strategy for defeating the Taliban-led insurgency.
Preliminary results released Tuesday by the Independent Election Commission showed that with 10 percent of polling stations counted, President Hamid Karzai was running slightly ahead of his closest challenger and former foreign minister, Abdullah Abdullah, 40.6 percent to 38.7 percent.
Just before the IEC announced the results, Abdullah intensified his charges that Karzai had used his control over the government to orchestrate a campaign of "wide-scale fraud."
Using stronger language than in previous days, Abdullah warned that he'd "not allow a big fraud to determine the outcome of the election" and would "not make deals" in return for dropping his charges, like accepting a top post in the new government.
Six other candidates issued a joint statement warning that the volume of rigging complaints had many people "seriously questioning the legitimacy and credibility of the results."
(Youssef reported from Washington and Landay reported from Kabul. McClatchy special correspondent Hashim Shukoor in Kabul contributed to this article.)

Comment from Al Alborn:

George,

You asked for opinions, here’s what I consider an honest answer. This is all publicly available information.

The CIA drove the Soviets out of Afghanistan using the Afghan’s as our surrogates (it wasn’t just the “ragtag” bunch you refer to… although they were quick studies and did learn how to fire a Stinger missile rather quickly). The introduction of Stinger Missiles (which we packed in on Mules) and other modern armaments shifted the balance of firepower by giving the Mujhahadeen a tool to knock the Soviet Hind Helicopters (their principle weapon) out of the sky. The bad news is that we pulled out without rebuilding the Country allowing the Taliban to take over. One of our “allies” during the war against the Soviets was our friend Osama. Since our operation was covert, he (and other tribal leaders) was able to claim credit for expelling the Soviets (and became a National Hero in the process). It is generally conceded that we created the conditions and armed the terrorists (there are still Stingers floating around) that lead to both attacks on the World Trade Center and our overt return to Afghanistan (to clean up the mess). Some say we should have stayed out of Afghanistan in the first place as Soviet domination of this region would have resulted in a more stable region (discounting any moral arguments). On the other hand, the Soviet Union’s loss of their war in Afghanistan was one more event that lead to the fall of the Berlin Wall (a “bright side”?)

Radical Muslims have a 100 year plan to restore the Caliphate (Muslim form of Government) globally. They would like to return to 12th Century borders in 50 years and the rest of the world by the end of this Century. Their plan is attached FYI. I think we should show this plan to more people so they understand the threat. As you have seen, they are what we call an Asymmetric threat leveraging non-traditional tactics and stateless actors to wage war. Their leadership is distributed globally; however, they generally operate out of Afghanistan. They actually are highly regarded in the Afghan & Pakistan (as well as some areas in Africa and other regions of the world) tribal regions because they provide basic social services, medical assistance, and education (such that it is) in areas the Government ignores.

To the point: our soldiers have not wasted one drop of blog in Afghanistan. They understand we can fight and win (both the war and hearts and minds) in Afghanistan now (and do what we should have done after the Soviets left) or fight in the streets of New York and Los Angeles in 50 years (or sooner, if we pull out). As someone who has spent a number of years overseas (many of them supporting special operations), I have noticed that while we are an impatient people who think in terms of months folks in Asia and the Far East tend to think in terms of decades and Centuries. There’s no good “short term fix” here. We got to get this right… and there’s a possibility that we won’t. I’d like to at least try. If you haven’t read Charlie Wilson’s War, I suggest you pick up a copy.

God bless our Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines and God Bless the United States of America… and thank you for your service to our Country, George.

Regards,


Al

Comment from Jim Zimble (VADM MC USN [Ret])

George -

I fully agree with you. Afghanistan was the Russian Vietnam ... and it appears to be ours as well. That's one country that will never achieve a true democracy; it's a collection of warring tribes in a no man's land - a tribute to feudalism. I don't think even an all-out, WWII style war effort could succeed there.

Comment from Captain Yuri Tabach, USN:

When the Soviets pulled out of Afghanistan I was a young Ensign in the U.S. Navy. When all of my brothers-in-arms were watching "Russians" crossing the bridge from Afghanistan back into the USSR, the entire brigade got up and started applauding and congratulating each other with the victory over the russkies. I did not join them in this "victory". Few days later, "well-wishers" in cheap suites showed up asking me if I was a communist since I did come from USSR. I said that I was not. Then they asked me why I was sympathetic to the soviet defeat in Afghanistan. I stated, "Now that we stopped them from bleeding out there, we will start to bleed our selves". The two brilliant protectors of our nation's safety did not get what I was saying. I was polygraphed again.

My reply to Al Alborn:

Al,

I appreciate your candor and the information. As near as I can count, the World Islamic Mission is in at least 21 countries around the world. The World Islamic Mission--One Ummah One Vision claims their goal is "the promotion of peace, love and understanding amongst all people", I believe there are few but Muslims who really believe this. IMHO,"all people" means all people who are believers--Christian, Jews and all other religions are excluded.

I know from conversations with you that you did work that not many of us knew about and I know of at least one other on this list who did similar things. But I diverge from your idea that young Americans dying in Afghanistan or Iraq or anywhere else in that area is going to prevent fighting, "in the streets of New York and Los Angeles in 50 years (or sooner, if we pull out). To stop Islam from growing would require that we destroy Islam and that isn't going to happen. We have to find a way to peacefully bring world religions together, which no one seems to have been able to do for at least 5,000 years. Short of that, we and the rest of the non-Islamic world have to maintain eternal vigilance.

The World Islamic Mission says it wants to extend, "a hand of love and brotherhood to all seekers of truth." Beware of the extended hand, it may well hold a sword to remove your head if you are not a "seeker of truth"; i.e. a believer in the, " prophetic traditions of God's final Messenger - Muhammad (peace be upon him)and the promotion of the pure teachings of Islam based on The Holy Qur'an." Killing a few here and there will not do the trick.
- How many young Americans have to die before peace is achieved?
--58,000 killed in Vietnam did not stop the advance of communism in that country. Will it take 58,000 more dead in
Iraq/Afghanistan before we figure out what we are doing is not the answer?
- How will we know when peace is achieved?
- Who do we make peace with?
- Who is in charge?
- Do we fight in every country where the World Islamic Mission is ensconced?

I, too say God Bless our Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines and God Bless America and our Allies. Thank you and all the folks on this list for your self-sacrifice and duty to our great Nation.

V Rspy,

George

NOTE: Several quotes are from the World Islamic Mission website.

Comment from Dennis McGann, CDR MSC USN (Ret)

found the entire exchange interesting. I deleted all of the address information, as well as your last names (leaving just George & Al) and forwarded it to a couple of work friends for their observations, which I will probably share, protecting their identities similarly.

Both are young (mid-30s) and both have been here for quite some time. One is a Jordanian degreed EE (UIC, and been here at least since his undergraduate days), the other a Palestinian whose education is unknown, but who is hard-working, quite successful (in the same business as I and the Jordanian -- Telecommunications), very intelligent, and very articulate. Neither is what I would term a radical, in any sense, but both have at one time or another expressed concern about paths we have taken as a country (mostly back in the GWB days, during which there was much about which to be concerned -- lately I think we've all been too busy in this volatile economic environment to allow for deep philosophical geo-political discussions).

Comment from Al Alborn:

Splendid! I would love to hear their opinion (although I have a few friends from that part of the world… and their response tends to be rather consistent).

Regards


Al

Comment from Al Alborn:

George,

Thank you for your thoughtful response.

There are Muslims, Christians, and Jews who resort to violence to advance their particular set of beliefs. I (like most rational people) do not believe their particular religions. In this case, I am not talking about Muslims in general sense. I know those of the Muslim faith to be peace loving people with values similar to mine. I am talking about Islamic Militants who misquote and misuse the Quaran for their own purposes (just as the Bible and perhaps the Torah has and continues to be misused.) What makes this war unique is the fact that we are not fighting a state (ergo, the term Stateless actors), we are fighting an idea. In today’s smaller world where people are connected virtually by the internet, we are fighting a new kind of war of ideas.

Trying to “stop Islam” is not what this is about (and certainly not a worthy goal). Trying to “stop Islamic Radicals” specifically (since they are a clear and present danger to the homeland) and terrorists in general is (what this about).

As for your questions, I won’t be so presumptuous as to attempt to answer them. I do know that “doing nothing” is not an option… and I would rather take the fight to them than wait for them to come here.

I’m familiar with both wars. This isn’t Viet Nam.

Regards,


Al

My reply to Al Alborn:

Al--

First, let me tell you about the astute Ensign. Yuri Tabach is now an O-6 and a Navy Foreign Area Specialist. Before he did this, he was a pharmacy officer in the Navy Medical Service Corps. He is wise beyond his years and has seen many things during his military career. He has spent a bunch of years overseas and I suspect is read in on more things than he will ever admit. He also happens to be a Russian Jew and has seen and suffered at the hands of anti-Semites.
I realize that a generalization about those of the Islamic faith is patently wrong and I know that many have been killed in the name of God, Yaweh, or whatever name you want to assign to a Supreme Being. But I might be on safe ground to say that Muslims have been the worst of the lot. When they were conquering most of the known world, a lot of folks who were not “true believers” or would not convert to Islam went on to their greater reward. Even today, otherwise “peaceful” Muslims destroy their own , using Sharia to support their mayhem—Saudi Wahabists are perhaps the best example.
I know there are peaceful Muslims, but I them to be a bit disingenuous since I don’t see or hear them condemning what the Islamic Militants are doing. I will live and let live and I do have Muslim friends, but I sometimes find it difficult to be fully comfortable about the general intentions of Islam.
In an article released by the Associated Press today:
“The top U.S. commander in Afghanistan released his new counterinsurgency strategy Thursday, telling troops that the supply of militants is "effectively endless" and that U.S. and NATO forces need to see the country through the eyes of its villagers.
Gen. Stanley McChrystal said troops "must change the way that we think, act and operate." McChrystal hopes to install a new approach to counterinsurgency where troops will make the safety of villagers the top priority, above killing an endless supply of militants.
"An insurgency cannot be defeated by attrition; its supply of fighters, and even leadership, is effectively endless," the new guidelines said.
When U.S. and NATO troops battle a group of 10 militants and kill two of them, the relatives of the two dead insurgents will want revenge and will likely join the insurgency, the guidelines say, spelling out the formula: "10 minus 2 equals 20 (or more) rather than 8."
"This is part of the reason why eight years of individually successful kinetic actions have resulted in more violence," McChrystal said.
He called on troops to think of how they would expect a foreign army to operate in their home countries, "among your families and your children, and act accordingly," to try to win over the Afghan population.”
I would say that General McChrystal has perhaps begun to unravel the Gordian Knot. As I previously noted, not one of our military leaders today has ever witnessed a victorious ending to a real war. How could we expect them to know what the end of this one would look like? Nor would I expect any of us to be able to answer the questions I have posed because I don’t think there are any answers. Winston Churchill once said of the USSR, “It is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma”. I believe that is the situation we find ourselves in when it comes to our actions in Iraq and Afghanistan. Maybe when they have killed 50,000 or 60,000 of our finest, we will figure it out. And I continue to irrigate the soils of the Middle East with American blood. There are many variations on this theme, but Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.
"There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty." -- John Adams, 1772
I, too, am familiar with this war, with Vietnam, with Korea and to a limited extent World War II. I have held the dying in my arms, I have seen the light go out of their eyes and I have smelled their blood and the smell of death. I know war—I’ve looked it in the face and smelled its fetid breath.
God bless our military folks and our Nation.

Comment by Al Alborn:

George,

Actually, I am familiar with Capt Tabach’ work. I read an article of his in (I think it was) the Foreign Service Officer’s magazine on terrorism a couple of years ago… good stuff.

I believe this war will be won in the marketplace, not the battlefield. When Afghans have jobs, schools, and the right to buy and sell what they want (Adam Smith et.al.) they will join the industrialized world and there will be peace. If you want examples, just look at the Marshall Plan in Europe and McArthur in Japan. We consider it ridiculous to contemplate these powers (the EU or Japan) using war to resolve differences. We need to bring third world nations into this circle. Right now, the only jobs available to young Afghans are those offered by the Islamic Fundamentalists. Most of the people we are fighting are just like the folks we send to fight… young men and women who need a job. I’m a “swords to plowshares” person these days; however, it takes both.

For a reading list, I would suggest Dr. Tom Barnett’s The Pentagon’s new Map (and his subsequent books). Take a look at Petraeus’ strategy (and he put McChrystal in place because he understands this strategy while his predecessor did not) and you will find he tends to agree with Barnett (as do many in this town).

You really need to start a blog, George.

Regards,


Al

I have received two comments from a long time friend, CDR Bill Silva--

truly wish our civilian and military leaders would call what is going on by it's proper names - murder and mayhem. This is not an insurgency, so counterinsurgency is the wrong military solution. We will never defeat murders with a "hearts and minds" programs. They didn't work in a realinsurgency (Vietnam), why to we think they will work now? We laughingly define craziness as, "Doing the same thing over and over, expecting different results" - folks, all this fancy military jargon and operations are crazy!. Murder in all countries of the world is illegal, yet the world stands by and tolerates it because it is carried out by non-state players. The world is a single place and there must be higher order laws to deal with world wide criminal behavior. What is taking place is not within the purview of the Geneva Conventions, yet we spend inordinate amounts of time playing games with the future. We must protect their rights and ensure that we act civilized - horseshit!!!!! The only inalienable right we should recognize for terrorists and their supporters is their right to die! Telling someone holding a gun to your head that their behavior is intolerable is about as useful talking to a rock.

What we are facing has nothing to do with patriotism and honor; is is solely an act of survival at its lowest level. As far as "most" of the terrorists being Muslim, that is a fact, however that fact is surrounded by a number of important factors. Muslims make up the largest single religious group of poor and down trodden in the world - making them easy targets for terror leaders. Sitting at the right had of Allah is probably the only good thing they can see in their future. For the terrorists, Muslims are easy pickings. Ah, you say that the terror leaders are Muslims. They are no more Muslims than I am. They are murderer's, plain and simple, who have found a ready source of fighters whoare easily dupped into dying for Allah. Everything about terrorism violates the very tenets of the Muslim faith. I think sometimes we allow our penchant for sterotypical thinking to cloud our vision. George raise some good historical points about the history of a minority within the Muslim faith, but we must also remember non-Muslim action taken in the name of Christianity (Crusades) are no different.

If we continue to distrust our neighbors because they are different and associate them with the acts of a few, then we do a true disservice to those who have died for the preservation of freedom. Our own Constitution tells us that man is created with certain inalienable rights; life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness - I don't recall reading anywhere that these rights apply only people of a certain faith. Western civilizations continued grouping of terrorists and Muslims does nothing more than widen the aritificual gap that already exists and provides the terrorists with the very propoganda that drives their recruiting apparatus.

As warriors, we are chided to "know our enemy." Maybe in our quest for the fast life, it has become more appealing to accomplish this by grouping the enemy into large, discernable groups - I suspect that Sun Tzu would be turning over in his grave with this interpretation of this element of the Art of War. It's kind of ironic that when Hitler and his allies attempted to encapsulate the world under the Nazi banner that we didn't determine that all germans and Japanese were warmongers.

We tread in a place of great peril when we allow ourselves to fall prey to notion that terrorism is a by product of Muslim or any other religion, political group, or the like. The risk we run is that same we face in our personal lives. If, as a parent, I continually tell my child that he is no good and will never amount to anything, he will begin to believe me and act out accordingly - why would we think it would be any different if we used this same strategy with a group of people.

Terrorism is not a religion, anymore than rape is lovemaking. Terrorism is a learned behavior embraced by a group of people; people without the slightest respect for others outside of their circle. If we are to win this war on terrorism, then we must learn to segregate terrorists from all other forms of life, groups, etc.

Bill

And this is the second, albeit no less passionate--

George:
Terrorism is a blight that we as a civilized world have not and will likely not come to grips with anytime soon. You are certainly aware of my experience in this area and I know you know that I am not a supporter of war (even though I spent 35 years going back) iwthout a cause. The problem is that we are not fighting a war, we are fighting an ideology. As Al said, the terrorists (I will not pay them the respect of calling them militants - they are flat out murderers who have not respect for life; theirs or yours). have (and have had for a number of years) a well thought out and executed 100 year plan to return to the past, when Mohammed walked the earth, when all in the area was a series of Caliphates ruled by Caliphs. Mohammed saw this as an anchor on thier ceivilization and one holding them back from advancing, hence the Quaran. Not unlike western christianity, the breakdown started when man placed themselves in a superior role that Allah and started creating the Sharias (Muslim religions law). As a student of cultures and religions, the Sharias in no way follow the teachings nor the word of Mohammed, much like western religion doesn't really follow the words of Christ.

The terrorists (regardless of religion) has stepped away from their core and are waging a war neither based in fact nor the dogma of the (fill in the religion) faith.

Shocking as the following may sound, it is the only answer to dealing with terrorists - total eradication (men, women and children). As harsh and cruel as this may sound, facts are facts. Terrorist women give birth to terrorists, kill a terrorist parent and you have guaranteed terrorist children. We will never satisfactorily deal with terrorism using rules other than theirs and it is not pure foolsihness if we and the rest of the world think we can rehabilitate terrorists. It would be easier to teach a fish to breath air than it is to rehabilitate murders of this sort. We must begin to look on terrorists as we have the viruses and bacteria that affect our bodies. The only diseases that medical science has been successful with is those that were completely eradicated. Look at the number of years society believed that Small Pox was a disease of history, and then we found out that there were still strains being kept within the military industrial complex. Not only were there strains of Small Pox alive and well, there were man made mutant strains (super Small Pox). Funny thing, we also have "super" terrorists as well. There should be an international force whose sole job is to hunt down and eliminate terrorists and there should be international law that makes terrorism punishable by instant death - no reprieve. If one is a terrorist or supports terrorist actions in any way we can introduce them to our new reality show named "Meet Your Maker!" I have had many say, but how do really know they are a terrorist - I believe you taught me that if it hade webbed feet, quacked and waddled, it was most likely a duck. We have the technology and capability to track each of everyone of these clowns, but we hold back use of them for fear of international and, even worse, national criticism from bleeding hearts. This is not an environmental exercise were we are trying to protect a species or our rain forests - it is an all out battle for the very life of civilization as we know it - pure and simple. As you are fully aware, I've done a "little" duck hunting and I never shot anything but ducks - never the stray goose or pheasant. Our operators frequently have to operate on rumors since we are unable to provide them with true intelligence. The Israelis are the only ones with the guts to do what's right and stand willing to be criticised by the rest of the world. These people make Hitler and others like him look like Mary Poppins. Their planning and actions are precise and they do not and will not waiver from their plan until we remove the breath from their lungs.

It's time for the world to wake up and make a decision as to whether or not we will tolerate this form of mass murder. Unfortuneately, we are sending the wrong people to fight them, in fact are first error IS to fight them. We target them and erase them - international law be damned, but we do it correctly and we don't lie to the citizens of any country. The idea of dying in a Jihad will suddently lose it's appeal to many when they see their fellow terrorists turning up on the street, in alley ways, were ever, with a nice clean .22 caliber orifice in their head. It's amazing how suddenly many will lose their ardor for their cause - world domination! This isn't a field exercise; it is the future we face if we don't act decisively and without hesitation. We are not dealing with people "pressed" into service to defend their country, we are dealing with murderer's - no quarter should be asked and none given.

I, like you, hate that our young men and women are over in Afghanistan and other foreign shores dying trying to fight a war that is so horribly mismanaged. It even makes me sicker when our so-called military leaders are willing to sacrifice our young servicememers for "acts of torture" to save a governments face. we have to quit trying to fight fire with squirt guns - we will never put out any flames in this fashion, we will merely send good young men and women to an early grave - which we seem to be getting better at each time we engage in conventional warfare against unconventional riff raff. Maybe the time has come when we need to re-evaluate our pompous and arrogant atitude as a government and inititate swift and without mercy - let their God provide their mercy when they reach their final destination. As a nation we are playing right into their hands by permitting them to use their greatest weapon - time! They will simply out wait us because they know that the world has no stomache for a protracted engagement. The terrorists are not in this for the short haul, they are committed to fight as long as necessary to achieve their goals.

The UN needs to get off their collective asses and make the tough decision; the terrorists or our son's, daughters, husbands, wifes, etc. There is no room on this planet for two civilizations to flourish. As I said above, terrorism should be an international crime punishable by death - no ifs, ands, or buts. The worlds Special Operation's Forces have the skills, ways, and means to carry out the mission. I have lost a number of brother SEALs in this war because they were not permitted to perform their duties - there's a reaon why we have no Social Work billets in Special Ops. And lest those of you who do not know me think I supported GWB and boys actions, you have sorely misread me. Terrorims is a world problem and the people of the world must participate in this campaign. GWB and boys mistake was to keep our actions quiet and lie to the American people. The people must be brought into this fight, they must be told the truth about the risks they face from inaction. Our government kept quiet their actions and we have progresed very little because of that. As distasteful as terrorist eradication may be, the people of the world must be told the truth and kept informed. The time for negotiations have lapsed, now we must reposess the goods of those who haven't been making their payments on time. It only takes one voice to start the necessary ball rolling - but no one has the guts to take the first step; we either walk or we fall. We are running out of time and the more we waste discussing and debating the required actions, the higher the price we will pay.

George you know I love you dearly, but this time, you are asking the wrong question - how many of our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines must die before we realize we are in the wrong war. My friend, this is the only war worth waging as its outcome will determine the future of this planet. We spend hours debating global warming and pollution - great philosophical causes. If we don't eradicate terrorims, the planet will not last long enough for all these "green" issues to become relevant. Before we devote all of our time to a "green" environment, we must first expereince a "red" environment. I'm thelast of the mohicans in my family, but I have friends around the world who are trying to bring up the next generation - without the correct action, the next generation may be nothing more than a distant dream.

The world's battle cry must; "Death to terrorists and all who aid and abet them!" No more bleeding heart, sociological rhetoric or the word society will become another idea whose definition is no longer applicable.

Imagine what this would read like if I was passionate about my feelings.

R/Bill