The war in which we are today engaged didn't start on September 11, 2001. It actually started exactly a quarter of a century ago.

It just took us over two decades to realize it.

A shining example of Carter's failed legacy.

I thought it was the other way around:

http://www.daneshjoo.org/generalnews/article/publish/article_9114.shtml

(Via IMAO)

Actually it goes back further than that - at least as far back as the 1976 Munich Olympics massacre. Most of the culprits were killed, but a few were apprehended, only to be released according to the demands of hijackers who nabbed a Lufthansa airliner over Turkey in October that year. Alleged mastermind Mohammed Daoud Oudeh, aka Abu Daoud, is in hiding and alive to this day. It wasn't America's war then, but it set the stage for the cycle of terrorist appeasement that would eventually fall into our laps.

Actually, this reaches directly back to May 23, 1844 when the Holy One, promised by Jesus of Nazareth, came as Jesus had promised.

He was recognized and adored by ordinary people, hated by Muslim clergy, reviled, given a mock trial, beaten with the bastinado til His feet bled, imprisoned and eventually hung by the wrists and shot to death. Twice. July 9, 1850.

When humanity chose to listen to clergy and ignore the Holy Intermediary of God, we set the stage for those clergy leading some of us to a vile parody of religion, killing and maiming in the name of God, calling it 'religion'.

And America was singled out by the Son of the Glory of God; who marked America as a beautiful, strong and decent land of hope for all humankind; when he came to America for 9 months, circa 1921; after a lifetime of exile and imprisonment with his father, the Glory of God.

When Muslims learn of His coming in 1260 AH (time, times and half-a-time) they'll convert en masse around the world. The Muslim-extremist danger facing humankind will have been defused.

Christians can help, by pretending that Jesus told the truth about the Holy One coming May 23, 1844 instead of mouthing the 'damnable heresy' of 'scoffing and denying our Lord who redeems us' has returned. (II Peter 2:1)

Don't forget Sirhan Sirhan. His act of Islamic militance back in 1968 claimed the life of American presidential candidate, Robert Kennedy.

Quote: "a botched rescue attempt in which eight U.S. military personnel died when a helicopter collided with a support aircraft over the Iranian desert."

This implies that there was a midair collision. Actually the c-130 was already parked on the highway staging area and one of last Pavelow coming in for a landing to drop off rescue operatives clipped the parked transport with its rotor and flipped over.

The good thing that came out of this botched operation is that the military realized that they needed to invest a lot more training in art of flying at night with NODS.

As for middle east attitudes I like Patton:

"It seems to me a certainty that the fatalistic teachings of Mohammed and the utter degradation of the Arab women are the outstanding causes for the arrested development of the Arab. He is exactly as he was around the year 700, while we have been developing."

This sounds like kids in the school yard arguing about who started the fight. No one seems to be making attempts to end it in any meaningful way. Simply bombing Afganistan, Iraq and I presume Iran soon, is no more a solution than allowing the fight to continue longer.

No one seems to be making attempts to end it in any meaningful way.

Of course we are. One ends it by winning.

Simply bombing Afganistan, Iraq and I presume Iran soon, is no more a solution than allowing the fight to continue longer.

Since that's not our policy, I fail to see your point. Do you have one?

2004 - 1805 >> 25.

The one crystal clear thing is that the Middle East has a longer memory than we do. (Or their speechwriters do anyway.)

Al, associating North Africa's Barbary pirates with recent Islamic terrorism is a far stretch. They were pirates - many of them AWOL from colonial navies - in search of ships, booty and sea labor.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Barbary_War

However, the lesson of American military might persuading rogue states is a good example to take from the Barbary Wars.

Simply bombing Afganistan, Iraq and I presume Iran soon, is no more a solution than allowing the fight to continue longer.

"Simply bombing" was the Clinton approach to Serbia, dude. W's approach to Afghanistan and Iraq involves putting 150,000 boots on the ground to do things like rebuild roads or redirect Saddam's booty to his people's actual benefit.

I think this part is interesting:

"Iran freed the hostages to coincide with the inauguration of Carter's rival Ronald Reagan and political analysts say it has tended to favour Republican administrations due to the perception that they are more open to making deals than Democrats."

Seems to me that the Democrats have been saying "let's negotiate" more than the republicans. Hmmm.

Dan DeLong

Has it ever occurred to you to study history, and find out what happened back then with the shah and why the Iranians would have a reason to hate USA? Or are they just like that for fun?

Or one can read about Chile and Pinochet.

I've read that Iran prefers American republicans, because the democrats have been unconveniently interested in human rights issues...

Iran let the hostages go as soon as Reagan was inaugurated, because they sensed he wouldn't just keep on negotiating.

Has it ever occurred to you to study history, and find out what happened back then with the shah and why the Iranians would have a reason to hate USA?

Would it be your opinion that having a reason to hate the USA is sufficient justification for taking random Americans hostage?