Iraq is not Afghanistan

The following article by Mike Evans is based on information from the #1 New York Times bestseller, The Final Move Beyond Iraq. Please forward this to everyone on your list, and ask them to do the same.

Iraq is not Afghanistan
By MICHAEL D. EVANS

When the Mujahideen of Afghanistan defeated the Red Army, they believed this caused the collapse of the entire Soviet Union. According to their thinking, the only “evil empire” left to collapse before the Islamist extremists take over the world is the United States. They think a defeat in Iraq will accomplish the same thing regarding the US as the Russians’ defeat in Afghanistan.

Granted, there are some easy comparisons. Due to the high cost and ultimate futility of the Afghan conflict for the former Cold War superpower, Russia’s war in Afghanistan has often been referred to as the Soviet Vietnam.

As in Vietnam, Soviet soldiers often found themselves fighting civilians due to the elusive tactics of the enemy. They also repeated one of America’s classic mistakes by winning almost all of the conventional battles, but failing to control the countryside. By 1982, the Mujahideen controlled 75% of Afghanistan despite the might of the world's second most powerful military power. By mid-1987 the Soviet Union announced it was withdrawing its forces.

The easy similarities end here. In Iraq, as in Afghanistan, foreign fighters recruited from the ranks of Islamic fanatics around the world rallied to the cause. The “volunteers” flocking to Iraq, however, are recruited, supplied, and sent by Iran in an effort to undermine the nascent Iraqi democracy.

Notable among the Afghanistan volunteers was a young Saudi named Osama bin Laden, whose Arab group eventually evolved into al-Qaida. Bin Laden was so popular after the USSR defeat, it was said that if a democratic election had been held in Saudi Arabia, he would have been elected president. Many Saudis believed him to be a modern-day Salahadin, come to restore the dignity of Islam.

Another dissimilarity between the US in Iraq and the Soviets in Afghanistan is the scale of the conflicts in terms of the loss of life. In four years of combat in Iraq, some 3,500 American soldiers have died in combat. During about twice that amount of time, between December 1979 and February 1989, experts agree that at least 40,000-50,000 Soviets were killed in action, besides more than half a million wounded. The Black Tulip is what Soviet soldiers called the plane that carried their comrades’ bodies back to the Soviet Union, whose military censors gave the official losses of the Soviet armed forces as 14,453.

The Afghans, on the other hand, suffered about two million dead (mostly civilian), over five million displaced citizens, and such economic, political, and social devastation that the country’s continued survival is in doubt. For the Soviet Union, however, the war became the Kremlin’s national suicide.

The jihadists believe that a war-weary US leaving Iraq will be a victory for them, and they will have defeated the “Great Satan” the same way they defeated Russia. It would be a sign that the US is on the brink of collapse, as was the USSR.

How could a primitive country like Afghanistan cause the downfall of the then-superpower USSR? Ex-CIA Soviet Expert Anthony Arnold compares the Soviet Union with a sick old man and Afghanistan as the pebble on which this exhausted, ill man stumbled and fell. The United States might be weary of Iraq, but it’s no sick old man.

Soviet corruption is one of the fatal illnesses cited by Arnold, who noted that the price-tag for a medical exemption from Chernobyl nuclear cleaning duties in 1987 was 500 rubles – and 1,000 rubles to avoid military service in Afghanistan.

According to Arnold, the Soviet empire stood on three pillars: its military, the KGB, and the Communist Party. The Afghan War gnawed through these pillars till they could no longer bear the weight of the Soviet system.

None of the factors that exploded the myth of communism has any bearing on the reason a strong and democratic America is fighting for the survival of democracy in Iraq.

 

God-Haters Still Fighting The Final Move Beyond Iraq!

The God-haters are alive and well, and they are not going away. The #1 New York Times bestseller, The Final Move Beyond Iraq, has dropped to #667 on Amazon.com. You must not allow the God-haters to defeat us; Ahmadinejad coined the term “final solution” at a Holocaust denial conference. This Islamic revolution is spreading through Lebanon, the Palestinian Territories and Iraq, and is heading for the West. He has threatened to wipe Israel off the map, and will have 3000 centrifuges, enough to begin building an atomic bomb, in July. Ahmadinejad feels the same about Christians as he does Jews. If everyone will buy a book today, ask your friends to do the same, and pray, we can send the book back to the top.

You can combat reviews such as the one below by writing a 5-star review on the book.

Christo-Fascist Zionist Idiocy--Nice Man with No Grasp of Reality, June 27, 2007

By R D S (Oakton, VA United States) -

The author's use of "the final solution" in the title tells us a great deal. First, it tells us he is unwitting of the sad irony of using Hitler's term justifying the genocide against the Jews. Second, it tells us he is naive and not very well read (as Hilter was not well-read on the Russian winter). Finally, it tells us he has zero grasp of global reality.

I have heard from commentators on my reviews that my listing of alternative books is as valuable or more valuable than detailed criticism of those books I consider to be intellectually decrepit, so below I respectfully offer the one book from the retired US military neo-cons that set the stage for this book, and then a series of books--just a few of hundreds (see my lists for more) that this author clearly has not read and consequently has no clue.

The outline of biblical propphesies is classic Bible-thumping stupid--these are the people that do not read ANYTHING other than the Bible or the Left Behind Series, and get their foreign affairs "wisdom of the ages" from the Pat Robertson 700 Club.

Israel and the US appear to be the last two nations on the planet that still think they can force their way on 6 billion people. The Iranians are actually a major bulwalk against the idiot Arabs who are not infecting Africa, and the Iranians understand two things really well:

1) Nuking them (70B) will arouse 2 billion Muslims around the world

2) They can cut the supply line from Kuwait to Baghdad anytime, they can use Stingers to bring down any "Baghdad Airlift," and they can take out one of the carriers in confined Gulf waters with a Russian Sunburn missile (zig-zaps at 2.2 mach) and a Pakistani nuclear warhead.

Click here to write a review.

URGENT! PLEASE SEND THIS TO YOUR ENTIRE LIST AND ASK THEM TO PRAY. THIS IS A BATTLE BETWEEN DARKNESS AND LIGHT...

Dr. Mike Evans’ latest #1 New York Times bestseller, The Final Move Beyond Iraq, outlines the threat that Iran’s terror activities through its proxies, Hezbollah and HAMAS, holds for Israel, and indeed, the world.

 

Should the U.S. Provide Funds to Support Hamas?

Jimmy Carter: Stop Favoring Fatah Over Hamas (From Newsmax.com)

Former President Jimmy Carter says the U.S. should stop favoring the Fatah movement of Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas over the terrorist organization Hamas.

Addressing a conference of Irish human rights officials, Carter also said the Bush administration's refusal to accept Hamas’ 2006 election victory was "criminal."

Hamas fighters routed Fatah and seized control of the Gaza Strip last week. Abbas then dissolved the power-sharing government with Hamas and set up a Fatah-led administration to govern the West Bank.

Carter said the decision by the U.S., Israel and the European Union to reopen direct aid to the new government in the West Bank, but to deny aid to the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip, represented an "effort to divide Palestinians into two peoples,” according to the Jerusalem Post.

Your vote will be sent to President George Bush and former President Jimmy Carter.

VOTE YOUR OPINION NOW!

 

Father of the Iranian Revolution

President Jimmy Carter, whose views the Jewish people think represents your Christian faith, this week attacked America and Israel for not supporting a terrorist organization, HAMAS. Read the article below that is in the Jerusalem Post today, and is taken from my book, The Final Move Beyond Iraq. Please post a very brief comment on the “Talkback” webpage.

Jewish people worldwide need to know that Jimmy Carter does not speak for you, or for your faith.

Mike Evans


Please click here to go to the Jerusalem Post “Talkback” web page. Please add your comments to those posed.


Father of the Iranian revolution


michael d. evans, THE JERUSALEM POST Jun. 20, 2007

We just don't get it. The Left in America is screaming to high heaven that the mess we are in in Iraq and the war on terrorism has been caused by the right-wing and that George W. Bush, the so-called "dim-witted cowboy," has created the entire mess.

The truth is the entire nightmare can be traced back to the liberal democratic policies of the leftist Jimmy Carter, who created a firestorm that destabilized our greatest ally in the Muslim world, the shah of Iran, in favor of a religious fanatic, the ayatollah Khomeini.

Carter viewed Khomeini as more of a religious holy man in a grassroots revolution than a founding father of modern terrorism. Carter's ambassador to the UN, Andrew Young, said "Khomeini will eventually be hailed as a saint." Carter's Iranian ambassador, William Sullivan, said, "Khomeini is a Gandhi-like figure." Carter adviser James Bill proclaimed in a Newsweek interview on February 12, 1979, that Khomeini was not a mad mujahid, but a man of "impeccable integrity and honesty."

The shah was terrified of Carter. He told his personal confidant, "Who knows what sort of calamity he [Carter] may unleash on the world?"

Let's look at the results of Carter's misguided liberal policies: the Islamic Revolution in Iran; the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan (Carter's response was to boycott the 1980 Moscow Olympics); the birth of Osama bin Laden's terrorist organization; the Iran-Iraq War, which cost the lives of millions dead and wounded; and yes, the present war on terrorism and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

WHEN CARTER entered the political fray in 1976, America was still riding the liberal wave of anti-Vietnam War emotion. Carter asked for an in-depth report on Iran even before he assumed the reins of government and was persuaded that the shah was not fit to rule Iran. 1976 was a banner year for pacifism: Carter was elected president, Bill Clinton became attorney-general of Arkansas, and Albert Gore won a place in the Tennessee House of Representatives.

In his anti-war pacifism, Carter never got it that Khomeini, a cleric exiled to Najaf in Iraq from 1965-1978, was preparing Iran for revolution. Proclaiming "the West killed God and wants us to bury him," Khomeini's weapon of choice was not the sword but the media. Using tape cassettes smuggled by Iranian pilgrims returning from the holy city of Najaf, he fueled disdain for what he called gharbzadegi ("the plague of Western culture").

Carter pressured the shah to make what he termed human rights concessions by releasing political prisoners and relaxing press censorship. Khomeini could never have succeeded without Carter. The Islamic Revolution would have been stillborn.

Gen. Robert Huyser, Carter's military liaison to Iran, once told me in tears: "The president could have publicly condemned Khomeini and even kidnapped him and then bartered for an exchange with the [American Embassy] hostages, but the president was indignant. 'One cannot do that to a holy man,' he said."

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has donned the mantle of Ayatollah Khomeini, taken up bin Laden's call, and is fostering an Islamic apocalyptic revolution in Iraq with the intent of taking over the Middle East and the world.

Jimmy Carter became the poster boy for the ideological revolution of the 1960s in the West, hell bent on killing the soul of America. The bottom line: Carter believed then and still does now is that evil really does not exist; people are basically good; America should embrace the perpetrators and castigate the victims.

IN THE '60S it was mass rebellion after the assassinations of Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King. When humanity confronts eternity, the response is always rebellion or repentance. The same ideologues who fought to destroy the soul of America with the "God is dead" movement in the 1960s are now running the arts, the universities, the media, the State Department, Congress, and Senate, determined more then ever to kill the soul of America while the East attempts to kill the body. Carter's world view defines the core ideology of the Democratic Party.

What is going on in Iraq is no mystery to those of us who have had our fingers on the pulse of both Iran and Iraq for decades. The Iran-Iraq war was a war of ideologies. Saddam Hussein saw himself as an Arab leader who would defeat the non-Arab Persians. Khomeini saw it as an opportunity to export his Islamic Revolution across the borders to the Shi'ites in Iraq and then beyond to the Arab countries.

Throughout the war both leaders did everything possible to incite the inhabitants of each country to rebel - precisely what Iran is doing in Iraq today. Khomeini encouraged the Shi'ites across the border to remove Saddam from power and establish an Islamic republic like in Iran.

Carter's belief that every crisis can be resolved with diplomacy - and nothing but diplomacy - now permeates the Democratic Party. Unfortunately, Carter is wrong.

There are times when evil must be openly confronted and defeated.

KHOMEINI HAD the help of the PLO in Iran. They supplied weapons and terrorists to murder Iranians and incite mobs in the streets. No wonder Yasser Arafat was hailed as a friend of Khomeini after he seized control of Iran and was given the Israeli Embassy in Teheran with the PLO flag flying overhead.

The Carter administration scrambled to assure the new regime that the United States would maintain diplomatic ties with Iran. But on April 1, 1979, the greatest April Fools' joke of all time was played, as Khomeini proclaimed it the first day of the government of God.

In February 1979 Khomeini had boarded an Air France flight to return to Teheran with the blessing of Jimmy Carter. The moment he arrived, he proclaimed: "I will kick his teeth in" - referring to then prime minister, Shapour Bakhtiar, who was left in power with a US pledge of support. He was assassinated in Paris by Iranian agents in 1991.

I sat in the home of Gen. Huyser, who told me the shah feared he would lose the country if he implemented Carter's polices. Carter had no desire to see the shah remain in power. He really believed that a cleric - whose Islamist fanaticism he did not understand in the least - would be better for human rights and Iran.

He could have changed history by condemning Khomeini and getting the support of our allies to keep him out of Iran.

The writer is a New York Times best-selling author. His newest book is The Final Move Beyond Iraq. www.beyondiraq.com

Jimmy Carter: Stop Favoring Fatah Over Hamas (From Newsmax.com)

Former President Jimmy Carter says the U.S. should stop favoring the Fatah movement of Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas over the terrorist organization Hamas.

Addressing a conference of Irish human rights officials, Carter also said the Bush administration's refusal to accept Hamas’ 2006 election victory was "criminal."

Hamas fighters routed Fatah and seized control of Gaza Strip last week. Abbas then dissolved the power-sharing government with Hamas and set up a Fatah-led administration to govern the West Bank.

Carter said the decision by the U.S., Israel and the European Union to reopen direct aid to the new government in the West Bank, but to deny aid to the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip, represented an "effort to divide Palestinians into two peoples,” according to the Jerusalem Post.

 

How Soon Until A Nuclear Iran?

In an Associated Press article dated June 15, 2007, Mohamed ElBaradei, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency Commission, said that Iran “could be running close to 3,000 uranium-enriching centrifuges by the end of next month” -- a number that IAEA officials have called the point of no return in the start of a large-scale program.


ElBaradei spoke at the end of a meeting of his agency's 35-nation board, a gathering that focused on Iran's refusal to heed U.N. Security Council demands that it freeze activities that could serve to make nuclear arms and provide answers on suspicious aspects of its program.

He also urged Iran to offer a "self-imposed moratorium" on enrichment, describing it as a "good confidence-building measure" that could launch negotiations on the standoff.

But the chief Iranian envoy to the meeting asserted that his country would never suspend enrichment -- the key issue of Security Council concern.

Although they've called for a negotiated solution, the U.S. and Israel have refused to outright dismiss the possibility that they might target Iran militarily if it refuses to back down.

Should the U.S. attack Iran's atomic reactors before Iran has the atomic bomb?

Vote your Opinion now!

Your response will go to President Bush.


Sign the Petition to President Bush

Books available for sale