By John Roberts, February 1, 2007

What a difference an election makes.  The new U.S. Congress was sworn into office this month.  They promised the first 100 days of their term would bring about the type of change the majority of voters want.  At the top of the list of things to change is the course of the war in Iraq.

But before they could act the President did what many believed he would never do.  Bush flip flopped on nearly every "unchangeable" policy relating to the war in Iraq.

What does that tell you about the lack of character of this President?  Is this the same man that promised to stay the course and do the right thing even if it was unpopular with the majority?  The President said he is a man of his convictions.  If staying the course was the right thing to do on November 7th, why change that policy within days of losing control of Congress. 

Shameless and disgusting!

For years two thirds of the American public and 99.9 percent of the rest of the world have pleaded with the President to stop playing politics and get off the current road to disaster in Iraq.  But like a stubborn, spoiled, arrogant, egotistical blockhead the President and Vice President rebuffed all calls for change and gleefully thumbed their noses at us.  "I am the Decider," he said.

I am afraid not.  We the people are the deciders, and last November we proved it.  They thought they had the political capital to spend on what ever they wanted without accountability.  They thought wrong.  Our job is half done and in 2008 we will finish cleaning up the mess in Washington.

I remember watching a Republican National Convention one year.  The speaker was making a point of how many times the Democrats changed their positions on issues.  One by one he would sound them out.  And after each reference the delegates would break out into a chant, "Flip Flop, Flip Flop."  They were really getting into it, and really having a good time making fun of the other party.  A Republican at the time, I was embarrassed to see my party acting so childish.  

I wonder how those Republicans would feel if the Democrats played the same silly game in 2008:

• Prior to the elections Bush said that Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfield was doing a great job.
• After the elections Bush fired Rumsfield.

Flip Flop, Flip Flop!

• Prior to the elections Bush said the war was going well and we were winning "despite poor reporting by the liberal media."
• After the elections Bush has admitted the current strategy is not working.

Flip Flop, Flip Flop!

• Prior to the elections Bush said we don't need more troops.
• After the elections Bush called for an escalation of U.S. troop levels.

Flip Flop, Flip Flop!

• Prior to the elections Bush said Iraq had WMD's.
• After the elections Bush finally admitted Iraq had none.

Flip Flop, Flip Flop!

• Prior to the elections Bush said Iraq was training terrorists.
• After the elections Bush says we can't leave Iraq because it would become a base for training terrorists.

Flip Flop, Flip Flop!

• Prior to the elections Bush said Americans can stand down and come home when we train 300,000 Iraqi soldiers.
• After the elections Bush called for imbedding more U.S. troops with Iraqis units instead.

Flip Flop, Flip Flop!

• Prior to the elections Bush said democracy in Iraq would bring stability to the region.
• After the elections Bush says "success" in Iraq hinges on Iraq's President and Prime Minister turning on the Mahdi Militia and Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, the critical swing votes that brought them to power.

Flip Flop, Flip Flop!

• Prior to the elections Bush denied Iraq was engulfed in a civil war.
• After the elections Bush admitted Iraq is degrading into a civil war.

Flip Flop, Flip Flop!

• Prior to the elections Bush said we can win if we only "stay the course."
• After the elections Bush says we can only win if we change our course.

Flip Flop, Flip Flop!

• Prior to his elections, to get the Christian vote, candidate Bush displayed "his Christianity" like a strutting Peacock.
• After he was elected Bush confessed that he actually believes in Universalism. And we also have learned that Karl Rove, Bush's right hand man and a Mormon, thinks evangelical and fundamentalist Christians are kooks, and openly makes fun of them in the White House.

Flip Flop, Flip Flop!

Why the change in Iraq after four years of demanding we stay the course?  In a word, the elections, and that is why I say the man has no conscious.  Bush has changed direction in Iraq because the word on Capital Hill is the new Congress will shortly push ahead with investigations into Bush and the war, gas prices, internment camps, torture and the rest of the Neoconservative evil works of the past six years.

And out of this we will finally get some answers, the truth this time.  Which is Bush, Cheney, and the Neoconservative controlled Congress have been acting outside the confines of the law running their own dictatorship while at the same time transferring the wealth of this nation from the taxpayers into their own pockets and private corporate interests.

With trials and investigations gearing up you can expect a run on paper shredding machines and collective amnesia in Washington D.C. for the next few years.  But don't take it too seriously.  Bush will pardon his cronies before leaving office.

The good news is the Neoconservatives that hijacked the Republican Party are finished.  And so is the Bush dynasty.  Notice we don't hear any more talk of Jeb Bush running for President in 2008?  And George's legacy will be very easy to sum up. 

This Bush administration is the most incompetent and corrupt government in the history of the United States.  And no where is that fact proven more evident than in the war in Iraq.  Bush is the only President in the history of the United States to conducted a pre-emptive attack and occupation of a sovereign nation.  Not only was the rational and justification for the war proven to be deceptive lies, but this administration knew they were using lies to justify the war.  To call it a "mistake" is more than an understatement.  This is an abuse of power and treason against the citizens of this nation.

What are the consequences and ramifications of pulling out of Iraq now?  All positive, so you can stop being manipulated by Bush's scare tactics.  A lot of lives will be saved and the money being wasted over there is needed back here at home where it belongs.  Our government still has not provided our emergency responders with radios and communication systems so that the various organizations can talk to each other.  Why?  There is no money for security here at home because it's all being thrown away on pro-Iranian Muslims and greedy contractors in Iraq.  

I could give hundreds of examples of how our security is suffering here at home because of the war.  But that aside, the positive moral and ethical reasons alone for getting out of Iraq far outweigh any risks or potential negative consequences.

As far as the new plan, twenty thousand more troops will not change a thing in Baghdad or the course of the war.  I know it, you know it, and they knew it.  It would take hundreds of thousands more troops to make any difference at all.

The escalation is more smoke and mirrors, a setup.  Bush is looking for another fall guy to take the blame for Iraq before the 2008 elections.  With Rummy gone they have set their sights on finding another patsy.  It looks like they have chosen the Iraqi Prime Minister.  I would not be surprised to hear Bush has started pulling out of Iraq, especially if he is forced to put the cost of the war on budget.  But you can bet Bush will not take the blame.  He will say he did all he can, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki did not uphold his part of the new plan.

People follow very predictable behavioral patterns.  With Bush his pattern is to surround himself with people that are expected to take a fall for Bush and his surrogate brain Karl Rove.  The only problem is the Neocon Reich has crumbled and the rats are leaving the sinking ship as fast as they can.

That is why Nouri is going on record right now saying Bush has not upheld his part of the agreement to supply the Iraqi military with the proper weapons to fight the war.  And it also looks like Lewis "Scooter" Libby has refused to take the fall for his old boss as well.

Notice how quickly Saddam was hung for incarcerating and torturing people that tried to overthrow his government.  Are not Bush and Cheney incarcerating and torturing people trying to overthrow the current government?  Did they not use the very same prison and torture chambers as Saddam?  Worse still Bush and Cheney have gone to great lengths to cover up what they are doing.  When Saddam does this it is a crime, when Bush and Cheney do it they say it is a necessary for the war on terror.  What is the difference?  Bush has forced through legislation to try and avoid prosecution.  Saddam was not offered the same way out.  Isn't that relative and selective morality and a hypocritical double standard?

And people wonder why the world has turned against Bush and the United States.

John's Take

Bush and the Neoconservatives have committed the unforgivable crime of using the tragic events of 9/11 and the war in Iraq for personal and political gain.  The idea that we are fighting over there so we do not fight over here is just silly.

This so called war on terrorism is a phony war, a pretext for implementing a secret agenda.  Terrorism is not a high threat against the United States.  More people die from cancer every single day.  Spending a trillion dollars because of nineteen "DEAD" Muslim terrorists armed with box cutters is the mother of all knee-jerk overreactions.  It’s the equivalent of burning down your house and your neighbors just because you found a couple dozen ants in your kitchen.

I forgot, there is one 9/11 terrorists still on the loose.  Interesting, he is a man that was once on the CIA payroll, like Saddam.  Bush flew his family out of the U.S. and let the man escape to Pakistan when our troops had him surrounded in Tora Bora.  And how come no one is asking why we moved our bases out of Saudi Arabia and into Iraq.  Moving our troops out of Saudi is one of Laden's demands.

Is Bush even looking for Laden?  Do you really think Bush wants to catch him?  As long as there is a Boogy Man running around Bush can use the fear factor to manipulate people and plunder the U.S. treasury.

The war in Iraq is also a phony war.  There is no doubt that Iraq was not a threat to the U.S. or anyone else.  The truth no one wants to admit is the majority of Iraqis were better off under the Saddam as cruel and evil as he was than they are now.  People forget that Iraq was only months away from having UN sanctions lifted before Bush invaded.  That would have paved the way for many positive changes for Iraqis.  Baghdad only gets 12 hours of electricity today.  Before the war they had 24 hours.  How would you like to live under those conditions?

So what secret agenda am I talking about?

Back in 1997 the Neoconservatives established an organization called "The Project for the New American Century."  Its members are a virtual who's who of people that would later become Bush's cabinet and advisors; Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle, Libby, Rice, Rove.  The purpose of the PNAC organization was to formulate a plan for implementing long term radical changes in America and the world.  These changes were intended to bring about long term control by the Republican Party, open up opportunities for big oil and business, and extend America's dominance over the rest of the world as far into the future as possible.

The PNAC think tank laid out the foreign policy component of this Bush-Cheney hidden agenda in a document called "Rebuilding American's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century."  If you get a chance you definitely should read this document.  In it you will find that setting up U.S. bases in Iraq was an integral part of their plan as far back as 2000, as was democratic elections in Lebanon and Palestine.  But when the majority of people in a country support terrorism democratic elections will only bring terrorists to power.  Evidently that kind of common sense is too far over the heads of the Neocons at the PNAC.

The scary part of the plan is that it clearly states some catastrophic and catalyzing event like "a new Pearl Harbor" would be needed to get this plan implemented in an acceptable time period.  Now you understand why this administration did nothing when the FBI and others informed them an attack with hijacked airlines was coming.  The plan also explains why Bush did nothing to prepare for Katrina.  They needed these "Pearl Harbors" to bring in an "Imperial Presidency," which means a scared public that would willingly allow Bush and Cheney to walk all over the Constitution to implement the PNAC plan.

The bottom line is the plan was flawed and for the most part has not worked. The phony war on terrorism and in Iraq has brought about just the opposite result of what they expected.  America's dominance in the world has been eroded.  And democratic elections in Palestine and Lebanon have brought terrorists organizations to power.  The only part of the secret Bush-Cheney PNAC plan that has worked is the part relating to helping Saudi controlled OPEC raise the price of oil, generating record profits for big business and big oil, sending American jobs south of the border and over seas, raiding the treasury, building back up the national dept, and taking away our Constitutional rights and freedom.

No one can deny that there is a Saudi connection to 9/11 and the war in Iraq.  The truth is Bush and his Saudi Arabian allies did not want Saddam to begin the massive reconstruction of Iraq's oil infrastructure which was schedule to begin as soon as the UN sanctions were lifted.  This would have added millions of barrels a day to the world oil supply.  That would have derailed Bush/Saudi plans to raise the price of oil through the roof during his term in office – the real mission accomplished.

And there is no question that forcing democracy upon Iraq was an idiotic plan.  It's not in their national consciousness.  Iraqis hate the Greek idea of democracy and for three thousand years they have fought against it.  These people are not interested in democracy.  Each faction wants total control.  Remove the strong hand and you get civil war.

Notice Bush blames everything wrong in Iraq on the Sunnis.  That is because Bush and the Neocons are basically using U.S. troops to fight a civil war for the Shiites and Kurds.  And you can't have free elections in a country under occupation by a foreign power.  Are the Sunnis fighting back?  Of course, what do you expect them to do?  Bush wants this civil war to go on forever so he can keep our bases in Iraq forever.  That was part of the PNAC agenda.

And the sad truth is this war has made America less safe.  While we have been preoccupied with invading a nation that can't even defend itself, North Korea has tested a bomb, and Iran is very close to the same.  Talk about bringing matches to a fire.  But realize, all this is part of their plan.  They view a nuclear North Korea and an Iran with nukes as more "Pearl Harbors" they can use to get their agenda implemented.

Most of us can't relate to all of this or even understand why anyone would go to these lengths to implement some kind of secret agenda.  But keep in mind these people are not like us.  The rich and powerful sit around and spend all their time thinking about how to get even more money and power.  That is the only thing that drives them.  That is why Christ said it is easier for a camel to get through the eye of a needle than a rich man to get to heaven.

Christ also said you can know someone or something by the fruit it produces.  Good trees produce good fruit, and trees that don't produce fruit or produce bad fruit need to be cut down.  What has the Bush Presidency produced?

Let me give you an example you probably haven't heard.  Before the war Iraq was a secular nation.  Today Iraq is under Sharia, Islamic law.  That means it is a crime punishable by death for an Iraqi Muslim to convert to Christianity.

Iraq has one of the oldest Christian churches in the world.  Before the war there were almost a million Christians in Iraq.  Today those numbers have been cut in half as Christians flee the country as fast as they can.

Remember Munir Redfa?  He is the Iraqi Christian that defected to Israel in 1966 with a Russian made MiG-21.  The MiG was later given to the U.S. for testing.  The knowledge gained from this proved invaluable.  What a way to repay the Christian community in Iraq.  Bush has taken away their freedom of worship and installed Islamic law.

While Bush goes to all lengths to protect Muslims and their Mosques, the Iraqi Christian community has been left defenseless against Sunni and Shiit attacks.  In the North the Muslims are pressuring Christians to convert to Islam in exchange for safety from the Kurds.  The net effect of this war has been a death sentence on Christianity and the Church in Iraq.

By now everyone should be aware that this Iraq war has dragged on longer than WWI, longer than WWII, and longer than the Korean conflict.  In fact the Iraq war is now the third longest conflict in U.S. history, trailing only the Revolution and Vietnam.

The monetary cost of the war is well on its way to the trillion dollar mark. The real cost to our economy is immeasurable.  Prior to the war the U.S. was paying down the national debt with the excess revenue from four straight surplus budgets, thanks to the previous administration.  Today we are seeing record deficits and the national debt has almost doubled.  And every business sector is struggling but big oil.  No surprise there with two oil men in the White House.

The human cost of the war has also been staggering.  The numbers of dead U.S. troops has reached three thousand.  Add to that figure an unknown number of private contractors and over a hundred thousand Iraqis.  And also tens of thousands of our youth are now learning how to get by with prosthetics and disabilitating injuries.

All this suffering and sacrifice, not to win a war or defeat terrorism, but so the PNAC and Bush and Cheney can get richer and more powerful.

And most alarming about all this are polls showing one third of the American public continues to support Bush and the war, many of those claiming to be conservative and Christian.

Open your eyes people.

By John Roberts, September 1, 2006

Shortly before dawn on August 28th, 2003, an M1A1 Abrams tank on routine patrol in Baghdad was hit by "something" that crippled and knocked the 69-ton premier battle tank out of action.

The incident sparked the curiosity of Army officials, arms manufacturers, and tank crews around the world.  The M1A1 is very well armored and a tough nut to crack with conventional anti-tank weapons.  Consequently, it's not often that you hear of an Abrams lost in combat to enemy fire, especially not in a third world country like Iraq.

A lot of people were very puzzled and curious to identify what killed this Abrams.  But curiosity turned to concern after experts examined the tank.  The damage was incompatible with any known anti-tank projectile.

The mystery round struck the side of the tank, punching a pencil size hole through the skirt and penetrating the turret well continuing into the crew compartment, where it passed through the gunner's seatback, grazed the kidney area of the gunner's flak jacket and finally came to rest after boring a hole 1½ to 2 inches deep in the hull on the far side of the tank.

"It's a real strange impact," according to one source who has worked both as a tank designer and as an anti-tank weapons engineer.  There is very little sign of the distinctive damaged called spalling.

The four-man crew suffered only minor injuries.  The tank commander received "minor shrapnel wounds to the legs and arms and the gunner got some in his arm" as a result of the attack.

A technical representative who examined the tank in Baghdad wrote this in his report, "The unit is very anxious to have this 'SOMETHING' identified.  It seems clear that a penetrator of a yellow molten metal is what caused the damage, but what weapon fires such a round and precisely what sort of round is it?  The bad guys are using something unknown and the guys facing it want very much to know what it is and how they can defend themselves."

"Can someone tell us?  If not, can we get an expert on foreign munitions over here to examine this vehicle before repairs are begun?  Please respond quickly."

Well, its been three years and "the guys" (tank crews) are still waiting for an answer.  If the U.S. government does know what happened here they are not telling.  And no wonder.  This damage was definitely not caused by any known RPG. 

A projectile would need to travel at a very high rate of speed, way beyond that of current anti-tank weapons, to make this pencil size hole nearly clean through an Abrams tank without a lot of spalling.

It is hard to say for sure since I am no expert in this area, but the damage looks to me like the work of some type of charged particle or rail gun.  And that would explain why the Pentagon is remaining so tight lipped on this incident.

My guess is this was the work of some type of new experimental weapon of German, Russian or French origin.  Perhaps someone wanted to see how it would work against an American tank in a live fire environment.  Afterwards, it was most likely destroyed or taken out of Iraq under cover with foreign diplomats to keep it from falling into U.S. hands.

Sounds far out, but actually this stuff goes on all the time.  However, the public is usually kept in the dark about it.

A live battlefield is the best testing ground for new weapons.  You can bet the U.S. is testing out everything we can in Iraq and Afghanistan.  So it is only common sense that the other major world powers would also take every opportunity to field test a few of their X weapons.

The suggestion that our so called allies like Germany, France and Russia might be conducting experimental weapons testing against U.S. troops in Iraq should not shock anyone.  They did the very same thing during the first war in Iraq.

There is a very interesting fact in the public domain concerning the first Gulf.  It hasn't been well publicized because it is a bit embarrassing for the U.S. led coalition.  Following Iraq's invasion of Kuwait Saddam immediately set about seeding the coastal shallow water with mines and armed frogmen.  These defensive measures caught the Allies completely off guard.  The U.S. did not posses any shallow water mine detection and disposal equipment at that time. 

And when the U.S. Navy Seals and Special Forces went in to probe the shoreline for a potential coalition landing they were shocked by what they found and caught totally unprepared for underwater combat.  All plans for a beach landing to retake Kuwaiti were called off.

Since that time the U.S. Navy has spent a considerable amount of time, effort, and money developing a "brown water" capability. 

But the point is Iraq could not on its own have uncovered such a weakness and exploited it to the extent which they obviously did.  They needed help.  And that help came in the form of undercover advisors and equipment from nations like Germany, France and Russia.

What knocked out this M1A1 Abrams tank back in 2003?  Can't say for sure, but this much I do know, whatever it is it has the potential to wreak havoc on the battlefield.  And the fact is this unidentified threat remains today.

Someone has developed and tested a new super high velocity projectile which easily bored through our main battle tank's armor. 

And they accomplished this task in a way that allowed them to avoid detection from an array of sophisticated U.S. sensors and surveillance systems deployed on the ground and in the air over Baghdad.  Which suggests the weapon was fired at long range.

The ability to stand off at an extreme range and punch a pencil size hole into anything you could fix a line of sight on could render armor vehicles, helicopters, UAVs and even most types of aircraft and ships totally useless. 

A weapon of this type would certainly level the playing field.  It would negate many advantages the U.S. currently has in our arsenal over our enemies.

Taken as a single unexplainable incident this story could simply pass without much concern.  But in truth, this is just one of many disturbing revelations regarding our military to emerge during the past fifteen years or so. 

For example, last month the pentagon announced plans to put Cheyenne Mountain on standby.  Why?  Two reasons were given.  First, they said "best intelligence leads us to believe a missile attack is very unlikely."  Secondly, the commanders of both NORAD and Northcom have their headquarters at Peterson, and they "can't be in two places at one time."

This second explanation is a veiled reference to certain events that transpired on 9/11 at Cheyenne Mountain.  During the 9/11 attacks, the NORAD commander at the time, Air Force General Ralph Eberhart, was caught shuttling from headquarters at Peterson to the Cheyenne Mountain command post and couldn't receive telephone calls as senior officials weighed how to respond.  But most importantly, he arrived too late to get in to his own command.

You see, at the first sign of any national crisis Cheyenne Mountain goes into lock down mode as required by standard operating procedures.  On 9/11 the NORAD commander was missing in action because he was literally locked out of his own command when the massive blast doors were closed before he could transfer from Peterson.  Once the doors are shut they can not be opened for a specified period of time.

With no one on site at Cheyenne with the authority to step up and make a decision NORAD had no choice but to stand down and do nothing while the terrorists plowed the hijacked airliners into the Twin Towers and Pentagon.

Call me crazy but the logical solution would be to keep the commander at Cheyenne Mountain.  The only possible reason for moving the NORAD, Northcom and the Air Force Space Command out is because someone else wants to use the facility.  And that someone is our politicians.

It looks like Cheyenne Mountain has been designated as a "second seat" for the U.S. government in the event of a major biological or nuclear crisis.  Cheyenne is built in a mountain of solid granite, making it the only impregnable site in the United States where one could literally sit out a major crisis for months or even years if need be in complete safety from any current threat.

Obviously there is not enough room at Cheyenne to house both key government officials and the current military commands.  If the plan is for Cheyenne Mountain to be put into a standby mode where it could be fired up in less than an hour then it definitely looks like this is the place our politicians plan to sit out a protracted crisis.

As far as the argument that Cheyenne is being shut down because there is no longer a threat, I simple don't buy it.  If that were true then why are our politicians making plans to kick the military out so they can move into the Mountain in the event of a major crisis?

What about the comment that "best intelligence leads us to believe a missile attack is very unlikely?"  By "best intelligence" they are referring to the same incompetent agencies that failed to nab the 9/11 hijackers and mistakenly caused a war by claiming Iraq had WMDs?

Just last month the Russian President held a press conference in which he bragged that Russia had developed a new ICBM which could strike the U.S. with impunity.  North Korea and Pakistan have recently gone nuclear, with Iran on the verge.  Intercontinental ballistic missiles are proliferating around the globe into the hands of nations that are very anti-Semitic and anti-American.  And these people are very open about there desire to see Israel, America and the West wiped off the face of the globe.  Without a doubt the missile threat still exists.

Then there is the little known threat sitting just a mile or two off our coastline.  Millions of Americans go the beach every year to enjoy the sun and surf.  And they are totally oblivious to the fact that just a few thousand yards from where they are laying out on a beach towel sit hundreds of nuclear tipped cruise missiles on the ocean's floor.  Russia has publicly acknowledged that during the cold war they seeded our continental shelf (a dept of 500 to 2,000 feet) with nuclear missiles which they can launch via a satellite laser.

To counter this threat the Navy Seals procured a deep diving suit from the Canadians that allow them to dive 2,000 feet to look for the missiles.  Prior to this new suit our divers would need to decompress for as much as 30 days on a return trip up from that great depth.

Then there is the news out of the Pentagon that military recruiting has already reached a crisis mode.  The youth has finally wised up.  They want to defend America, but no one wants to join the Army, Guard or Reserves if it means being sent to Iraq to die for Muslims that hate America.

And those already in the service are not reenlisting; they are getting out as fast as they can.  No wonder, they are fed up with what is going on over there.  Our government pays Iraqis outrageous salaries, like 100 or 150 thousand a year, to do mundane jobs like fill sand bags with sand.  While at the same time they pay our soldiers peanuts to stand guard over them.

To get their numbers up the government has decided to lower entry standards.  If you are forty-two, pot bellied, no high school diploma, only minor convictions on your police record and only a minor drug problem you will be good enough under the new lower standards.

And if that doesn't do the trick they have a backup plan which will offer citizenship to illegal aliens in exchange for military service.  "Service guarantees citizenship," sounds like a line put out by the fascist government in the movie Starship Troopers!

The solution is to double military salaries across the board and not lower standards. That would fix the problem in a minute.  Anyone that risks their lives for our country should be properly compensated and not treated like cannon fodder.

John's Take

Undoubtedly, the U.S. still possesses the most powerful Naval, Ground, and Air Forces in the world.  And there is no question that even our enemies would prefer to go to war with the high-tech weapons in the U.S. arsenal.  But that advantage slips away the further we move from conventional WWII style warfare.  And that is the situation we are in today with non-linear battlefronts in countries hostile to the Americans.

The U.S. military is very will prepared to fight a conventional war, but we no longer live in conventional times. 

And despite all this talk about a war on terrorism, the truth is America's might is being used today primarily to fight wars for the interests of corporations, Big Oil and Islam, Israel's enemy.  We saw that in Bosnia, Afghanistan, and now Iraq.  Our help and support has not changed the hearts of these people.  They still hate Americans and they still want to drive the Jews into the sea.

On this issue prophecy is very clear; help Israel's enemies and God will turn against you.  And that is why America is going down fast.

The biggest threat against U.S. security is not from weapons but our own incompetence, bad decision making, and leadership that has only an outward appearance of Godliness; on the inside it's corrupt, lacks a conscious, and is burdened with sin. 

Perhaps part of the blame is in the low standards we set for our leaders.  It is very politically correct today to bestow honor and accolades upon people that frankly do not deserve it.

When the Bible speaks of "the right men at the right time, chosen by God to lead" God gives us examples like we find in 2 Samuel Chapter 23.

The valiant men that served David really puts things into perspective.  Adino single handedly killed eight hundred men at one time.  Eleazar took on the Philistines by himself and fought so long and hard that his hand stuck to his sword.  Shammah defended a hilltop against a Philistine troop.  Abishai lifted up his spear against three hundred men and killed them.

Those were the days of real men.  Chief among them was Kind David, a giant slayer, a man after God's own heart.  These were not paper lions.  Their accomplishments under the heat of battle speak for themselves.  They earned respect and their position of authority through great acts of valor.

Therein is the problem facing our generation, there is a complete void of real leadership.  We idolize and lift up people simply because they share our same political viewpoints and not because they have a proven track record of success.  All of the key positions in our government agencies are filled by political appointments.  This is a formula for disaster.

How can our Commander In Chief's relate to soldiers in wartime when his qualifications do not include any combat or war experience?  And authorizing the use of torture, is that something Jesus would condone, something a real Christian would do?  No wonder world opinion has turned agains us!

And his top advisor's qualifications or lack thereof generate even more skepticism; he is a Mormon with only a High School education.  It is very disheartening to think that we would allow the chief architect for most U.S. policy to be a man with no college education, that believes wearing "magic underwear" can protect you from evil, and who believes God is walking around an imaginary planet called "Kolab" with innumerable wives.

We don't have a man's man in power.  We have a rich man's son in power.  In fact, we have more millionaires in our government today than at any other time in the history of our nation. 

In order to lead you need to communicate.  The man at the top can't even get through a single sentence without tripping all over his tongue.  I am not being cruel, just embarrassed as an American every time I watch him give a speech.

The current administrations reminds me of the Peter Sellers movie Being There.  It's a story about how Chancy Gardner, a gardener, a lovable "wise fool" becomes President.  Remove the term "wise" and that pretty much sums up the leadership during the nineties.  Remove "lovable and wise" and you have the good description of the current lot. 

In the movie Chancy spoke in very simple terms, which gave the impression he was summing up very deep thoughts in a way that was very simple for others to understand.  But in the end, he really was talking about gardening all the time. 

When our leader says he wants to "get all the people in the neighborhood" together to take a "looksy" at the problems in the Middle East it sounds like he is planning a barbeque for friends back at the ranch.

In today's complex world a "C" average and High School education is more than enough for some jobs, but not running a Super Power.  You can't put cheerleaders and waterboys in positions of leadership and expect to stay on top. 

If you can't understand that simple message then please do us all a favor and go back to watching "My Name Is Earl" and stay out of the voting booth.  You are doing more harm than good.

The outcome of any war is most often decided in favor of the side that has the better leadership.  That was true in the days of swords and shields and it is still true today.

You can have an advantage in every aspect of warfare, from a qualitative and quantitative superiority in weaponry and manpower to a great battle plan on paper.  But once the first shot is fired the difference between winning and loosing often comes down to a single critical decision a commander makes in the heat of battle under the duress of war.

In ancient times leaders served in a dual capacity as heads of empires and kingdoms and also commander in chief of their armies.  Pharaoh, Caesar, Alexander the Great and King David took personal charge of their armies.  They took their place at the front lines and led their troops into battle.

There are obvious reasons for this.  Telecommunications did not exist in those days so actually being present at a battle was the only way a commander could give real time orders to his officers.

But more important than this is something that is not so obvious, in a word, accountability.  When a commander fought right along his troops everyone knew they were in it together.  And it was very inspiring for troops to see their commander taking the same risk as the common foot soldier.

George Washington rode into battle with his army and so did General Patton.  I mention this because these men were truly irreplaceable, yet they led from the front and shared the risk.

It's hard to respect our Commander In Chief, Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff when I see them sneak into Baghdad under the cover of darkness and stay just long enough for a photo shoot before they hightail it out of Iraq.  And you can count on one finger the number of politicians on Capital Hill that have their children fighting on the ground in Iraq.

No risk, no accountability, no passion, no real leadership.  The only way to fix the problem would be to throw the current lot out of office and start from scratch.

PRE-2006 MILITARY NEWS ARCHIVE