A MESSAGE TO CONSERVATIVES WHO VOTE,
ALL CONSERVATIVES, REGARDLESS OF PARTY!
U.S. PULLOUT IS NOT WHAT SHOULD CONCERN US!
WHAT MUST CONCERN US IS WHO IS THE PRESIDENT,
WHEN THE NEXT MAJOR MIDDLE EAST WAR COMES IN!
OUR TROOPS WILL COME HOME NO MATTER WHO WINS,
LONG BEFORE A MIDDLE EAST WAR CAN POSSIBLY BEGIN!
Our troops will be pulled out of Iraq as soon as possible, regardless of whether Obama, Clinton, or McCain is elected. And whenever they are pulled out, Iraq will hate us and Israel even more than it did before, and latch on to Iran and Syria like a tick on a hound dog. Iraq will quickly become one of the ten horns in Daniel 7 and a willing part of the Arab coalition that drives Israel into the Negev Wilderness, where she will remain for three and one-half prophetic years.
Daniel 7:24,25 – And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings. [25] And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.
Revelation 12:6 – And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.
Whoever wins the White House, US troops will quit Iraq anyway just as soon as possible. As you know from numerous blogs, I was in favor of us going in, destroying the Iraqi war machine, and then pulling out just as soon as we captured or killed Saddam Hussein. Our Archives make that quite clear, as the following old blog attests. I hope you will read the article by Peter Graff which follows it. I agree with it and hope you will carefully consider it. I beg you to read it. I am first sending you my very long blog which you read at the beginning of this month. It is very long, but will be helpful in leading you to understand Peter Graff’s fine article, which follows it, and WHY I AM ASKING CONSERVATIVES TO VOTE IN NOVEMBER.
Begin Blog of April 2, 2008
THERE WAS, AND IS, NO OTHER WAY!
April 2nd, 2008
THERE WAS, AND IS, NO OTHER WAY!
April 2, 2008
http://www.tribulationperiod.com/
It was absolutely necessary for the West to get rid of Saddam Hussein, but it was not necessary for us to stay in Iraqi to establish a democratic government made up of Kurds in the North, Iraqis in the Central zone, and Shiites in the South. Why? – Because it is an impossibility which simply cannot be done no matter how many troops you put there or how long they stay.
Archive Prophecy Update Number 80A, which follows, made it clear I believed it absolutely essential to replace Saddam Hussein, and I never believed otherwise. The two Archive Updates that follow 80A, 114C, and 170B detail the reasons why Kurds, Shiites, and Sunnis will not be able to have a stable government until the Second Advent.
The May 5, 2004 Update is as valid today as it was the day it was issued. I have always believed what the first President Bush did was correct, namely, blow the Iraqi Army to Hades, but don’t go in to homestead and establish a Democratic government to replace it. I have advocated from the start, go in, stay long enough to eliminate the ungodly Saddam Hussein, then get out, and let the Kurds, Shiites, and Sunni slug it out for whatever type of government or governments came out of the conflict.
Once we were bound and determined to establish a democratic form of government that we thought would last, and determined to stay in Iraq come Hell or high water, I have supported the troops there and prayed for their survival, and will continue to do so. Now that we have spent so much time there, I am not in favor of an immediate pullout, which might cost us greater loss of by a disorderly withdrawal, than would we would be likely to sustain if we did not stay long enough to establish a greater degree of stability in the Iraqi forces we have trained.
The IHT Article, which follows our three Archive Prophecy Updates, is well worth the read.
Begin Archive Prophecy Update 80A
SPECIAL PROPHECY UPDATE NUMBER 80A
August 11, 2002
SADDAM HUSSEIN – THE MIDDLE EAST WILD CARD!
WHY THE U.S. IS DETERMINED TO REPLACE HIM!
The United States has reason to be concerned about Saddam Hussein, not because of his military genius, or because he has a great army, for he has neither. The reason that we, and all the rest of the world should be concerned about him, is because of his complete disregard for any human life, including his family and the people of his nation. One of the Roman Emperors once said of King Herod of Judea that he would rather be one of his dogs than one of his sons. Saddam has the same characteristics. The other Islamic leaders have sufficient intelligence to restrain themselves when it is obvious they are going to lose everything if they fail to do so. But Saddam is not only cold, heartless, and cruel, but he is also a crazy madman who makes decisions regardless of the consequences in his mad daydream of becoming the modern Saladin of the Middle East. His illusions of grandeur envision himself as being one who, like Saladin, can unite the Sunni and Shiite Muslins and thus become the Sultan of a vast domain that stretches eastward from Morocco to India. His recreation of a model city like Babylon at its old site was a mere reflection of the man’s belief he is destined to be as great as Mohammad. Do I think he could be the antichrist? No! But I can assure you he would like to fly to the heights the Bible predicts for antichrist before his Armageddon demise. The antichrist will be smooth as silk and more slippery than a greased pig. Saddam Hussein reveals far too much outside, of what exists inside, to be a man we could identify as antichrist.
As an analyst I love predictability – that is what bothers me so much about Saddam. The only thing predictable about him is his unpredictability and I would love to see the end of his regime for this reason. None of the other Islamic nations would launch any missiles carrying biological, chemical, or nuclear warheads. Why? They know that Israel has some 300 Jericho missiles in Negev silos that can support chemical, biological, and nuclear warheads, but they also know that Israel will not launch them against them unless they first launch against them. They have enough sense and compassion that they don’t want to see the people of their nations and their families wiped out. But that is not the case with Saddam. He is just fanatical enough to launch first against Israel, with no regard for the consequences. That is why Israel struck from the air to destroy his ability to produce an atomic bomb in his first nuclear facility.
Begin Archive Prophecy Update 114C
SPECIAL PROPHECY UPDATE NUMBER 114C
April 7, 2003
Iraq – A Biblical Land of Conquerors and Confusion
The post Saddam government’s character and temperament cannot be expected to maintain a personality that manifests a long-term gratitude for Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Its history dictates that initial expressions of thanksgiving must slowly, but surely, return to the standard Islamic attitude toward the big devil United States, and the little devil Israel.
It will never degenerate to the Saddam regime madness, but Iraq will be among the 10 nations that attack Israel some three and on-half years before the final battle of Armageddon.
The new civilian government, which will eventually be installed, will have a violent mixture of the intermingled blood of
the 12 sons of Ishmael (the first son of Abraham), the six sons of Keturah by Abraham, and the two sons of Lot (Abraham’s nephew). The first post flood population in the Iraq area was ruled by Noah’s great grandson, Nimrod, who the son of Cush, the son of Ham.
Asshur, the grandson of Shem, the son of Noah, peopled the northern part. So, in this area you have the intermingled blood of the descendants of all the aforementioned ancestors. As a matter of fact, the word translated as “mingled” in Daniel 2:43 is “Arab.” The seed of all these ancestors has certainly been “mingled” in the production of offspring, but they have not been able to cleave together continuously except under the control of a very strong leader, and then only for a relatively short period of time. The great Assyrian warrior kings of 800 to 600 B.C., followed by the great Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar, and the famous Kurd Saladin from northern Iraq, who united the mingled tribes to drive the crusaders out of Jerusalem in 1187, have shown that only a strong-willed ruler can unite them, and then only for a specific purpose of conquest, which is invariably followed by a period of empire decay as the cleavage of many different bloodlines crumbles. The coming antichrist will be able to unite them for a while, but in the end they will break apart. He will be like Nimrod in character.
Daniel 11:36 – And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done.
Daniel 2:42,43 – And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken. [43] And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay.
I have always taught that I believed the antichrist would come out of Syria (See Prophecy Updates 62,63,64,65,66,67,68, and 69), but I have repeatedly stated that I am only certain he will come out of the old Assyrian empire, which would include Lebanon, extreme southeastern Turkey, and northern Iraq. So I will be watching very carefully to see if someone from northern Iraq becomes the President of Iraq. It will take a really strong, and extremely clever, ruler to unite the Sunni, Shiite, and Kurdish factions across Iraq.
The 10 toes and 10 horns of Daniel are the same 10 horns of John’s first and second beasts. They are not European nations, and the antichrist is not a European. He is the Assyrian of Micah’s fifth chapter, and the 10 toes and 10 horns are basically mingled (Arab) descendants of Abraham, who practice the Islamic faith – a faith that would be the worship of a strange god unknown to Abraham. The division of the vast riches of the Iraqi oil fields among the different ethnic groups within Iraq would most certainly gain him a loyal following among all the Islamic clerics.
Daniel 11:37,38 – Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify himself above all. [38] But in his estate shall he honour the God of forces: and a god whom his fathers knew not shall he honour with gold, and silver, and with precious stones, and pleasant things. [39] Thus shall he do in the most strong holds with a strange god, whom he shall acknowledge and increase with glory: and he shall cause them to rule over many, and shall divide the land for gain.
Daniel 7:24 – And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.
Revelation 17:12,13 – And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast. [13] These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast.
So, Lord willing, I will be paying very close attention to the interplay between the new Iraqi government, Syria, and Iran. This is going to be a very interesting scenario.
SPECIAL PROPHECY UPDATE NUMBER 170B
May 5, 2004
A Democratic Government Cannot Stand in Iraq!
I was 100 percent in favor of invading Iraq and ending the reign of Saddam the Butcher, and 100 percent in the corner of those who wanted to see the Baath Party out of power, but I have consistently been 100 percent in favor of NOT trying to establish a democratic type of government like ours because such a government would only stand for a few months after U.S. troops pulled out, and the cost of American lives would not be worth the price. IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO ESTABLISH A DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT IN IRAQ THAT WILL LAST – IT WOULD ONLY LAST AS LONG AS A LARGE AMERICAN ARMY WAS IN PLACE TO ENFORCE IT, AND AMERICANS WILL CONTINUE TO DIE IN HIT-AND-RUN ATTACKS WHILE THEY REMAIN TO MAINTAIN SUCH A GOVERNMENT.
I could have gotten out of fighting in Vietnam, but I chose to go. I did not go because I believed we could win the war and establish a non-corrupt regime in the southern half of the country. I went because I believed it was essential to stopping the spread of communism to other countries in the Far East. The support the Soviet Union poured into Vietnam and Afghanistan broke the financial back of the communist monster, which led to the breakup of the Soviet Union, and its demise as one of two great world powers. I believe it was absolutely essential that we go into Afghanistan. Its unbelievable mountainous terrain and deep sheltered valleys made it the perfect terrain for a Taliban government to be the breadbasket of terror led by Osama bin Laden. And we simply could not eliminate the numerous terror camp training facilities and headquarters with missiles and air strikes, no matter how sophisticated the state of our technical expertise was at that time. And, for that reason, I am still in favor for troops to be maintained there in order to prevent a reoccurrence of the same scenario. Iraq is a flat land compared to Afghanistan, and, once we had deposed Saddam and crushed his regime, I knew we had the advantage of destroying any threat that arose against our interests in the region with missiles and air strikes following our withdrawal. I am 100 percent in favor of the worldwide war on terrorism, but 100 percent in opposition to attempting to form a democratic form of government in Iraq like ours in this generation. Sure, I wish it were possible, it is an idealistic, noble daydream, but we are fighting Islamic windmills with toothpicks, and the price in blood we are paying for it cannot be justified by a final result that will be marked by failure to see it fulfilled.
The real problem in Iraq began in 1932, the year I was born. Iraq was also born that year as the first of the League of Nations mandate states. So, after 1932, Iraq was formally independent. There was still, of course, a large measure of British influence and power there, but it was certainly independent earlier than any of the other Arab states. The British were largely responsible for the impossible attempt to merge together four major contentious groups into one state, the Shiite, the Sunni, the Kurds, and the Assyrians. It would have been far better to have four countries with separate borders than to attempt to put four wildcats into a sack and call the sack a state. And there are many other smaller groups of ethnic wildcats that also were placed in the sack. It was inevitable that a government would eventually come into existence that would be held together by absolute force of a dictator. It is most unfortunate that the dictator who finally grabbed power was Saddam. Most dictators are happy to rule their own country with an iron hand, but Saddam had illusions of grandeur to be the great Islamic messiah who would even exceed the greatness of Saladin the Kurd and, in the end, be ruler over all of the Arab world. The only real solution to the problem, generated in 1932, is to establish governmental borders that separate the four major ethnic groups, and let each group internally fight it out as to the kind of government they want. After the dust has settled you may only have two or three states continuing to fight each other for dominance, but they will be fighting each other rather than the United States and Israel.
The continuous argument I have heard echo across the world’s political scenario from before Operation Desert Storm through Operation Iraqi Freedom is this – DO NOT DISTURB THE STABILITY OF THE REGION! And everyone seems to agree on how important it is to NOT disturb it! I totally disagree!
I was hoping we would go in, get rid of Saddam, his henchmen, and his Baath Party, then pull out as quickly as possible, and let all hell break loose between the Sunnis, Shiites, Kurds, and many other ethnic groups that make up Iraq. They would not be able to concentrate on how much they hate us and Israel, because they
would be too busy hating each other. Then, after the smoke and killing ended in a truce, Iraq would probably be splintered into three separate countries, Kurdistan dominated by Turkey, Sunnistan dominated by Syria, and Shiitestan as a part of Iran.
As far as I am concerned, the more instability, political turmoil, and confusion we see among all of the nations of Islam, the better off the United States (the big Satan as we are called) and Israel (the little Satan) will be in the world’s fickle climate. If I thought there was any possibility of actually installing a democratic type of government in Iraq, then I would say it
would be worth the price we are paying in American blood to do so, but it is a futile pipedream, no matter how noble it may seem to those who favor it. I have been a supporter of both father and son Bush in their presidencies. I do continue to admire them both, and will vote for the son in November. However, I do not agree with the idea of attempting to establish a democracy in the midst of Islam because it is impossible – admirable, but beyond the scope of possibility in this generation.
We need to get out and let them slug it out among themselves. In any case, whatever happens, Iraq will be one of the tens associated with Daniel 2 & 7, and Revelation 13 and 17. The Lamb King of the soon coming Kingdom foretold in Revelation 17:14 is the King of the Kingdom found in Daniel 2:44 and 7:27, and he is the only one who can bring lasting peace and stability to the Middle East under a theocracy.
The Old Roman Empire had a large southern flank that, at one time, included all of what we know as the Islamic nations stretching from Morocco to Iran, which number more than the ten required to choose from as being the toes or horns in Daniel and Revelation.
Daniel 2:42,44 – And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken. [44] And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.
Daniel 7:24-27 – And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings. [25] And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time. [26] But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end. [27] And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him.
Revelation 13:1 – And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.
Revelation 17:12-14 – And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast. [13] These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast. [14] These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.
End Archive Prophecy Update 170B, May 5, 2004
PLEASE TAKE THE TIME TO CONSIDER THIS ARTICLE AND VOTE FOR THE CANDIDATE YOU BELIEVE WOULD BE BEST TO HAVE IN OFFICE WHEN THE FINAL WAR OF THE GENTILE AGE BEGINS! I WANT TO SEE AN INDIVIDUAL
IN THE OFFICE OF PRESIDENT WHO KNOWS WARS ARE AT TIMES NEEDED AND HOW TO CONDUCT ONE.
PETER GRAFF KNOWS WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT!
Begin Article from Dawn the Internet via World News
Whoever wins White House, US troops will quit Iraq anyway
April 19, 2008
By Peter Graff
BAGHDAD: Democratic candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama say they want to withdraw US troops from Iraq as soon as possible. Republican John McCain says he will keep them there as long as necessary.
On the ground in Iraq, it may make little difference.
“They’re not that far apart in reality, whatever they say,” Gerd Nonneman, professor of Middle East politics at Britain’s University of Exeter, said of the three candidates.
“All want to look to a withdrawal and don’t see a long-term US commitment beyond the normal kind of assistance agreements that the US has with lots of countries around the world.”
Those who might be most threatened by a quick US pullout would be Iraq’ s US-backed leader
s. But they say they aren’t alarmed by the prospect of a Democrat in the White House.
“Whoever will be in the White House, there will be an adjustment of the strategy, a modification, but not a revolutionary change or a complete departure from what has been invested here,” Foreign Minister Hoshiyar Zebari said.Troop strength “will be decided by field commanders, it will be a condition-driven process, not electioneering promises”.
Iraqis are even prepared to accept Obama’s timetable for withdrawal the most explicit with a pledge to remove all but a small counter-terrorism force by mid-2010 provided it takes place gradually, said government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh.
“If the withdrawal is organized and agreed upon, then it will not represent any problem,” Dabbagh said.
Numbers going down: US force numbers are already going down, and are unlikely ever to return to the level of the past year’s “surge” of extra troops. The US Army and Marines are at breaking point. Washington now has 160,000 troops in Iraq, which will fall to 140,000 by July when five of the 20 combat brigades go home.
The US commander, General David Petraeus, has said he will only begin looking at further reductions in September.
Even after the surge forces go home, that will still leave 15 combat brigades in Iraq, plus 2-3 in Afghanistan. Military experts say to provide adequate training and rest for soldiers, Washington needs to cut the Iraq mission down to about 12.
“Regardless of the strategy or who’s in office, we’re going to get out, just driven by the conditions of the military,” retired Maj-Gen Robert Scales, former commandant of the Army War college, told the Senate in Washington this month.
“The only point of contention is how precipitous that withdrawal is going to be.”
The US military plan in Iraq has always been to gradually turn over territory to Iraqi forces, pulling US troops back to an “overwatch” role, where they can provide advisers, backup and air support but are not involved in day-to-day patrols.
Half of Iraq’s 18 provinces have been turned over, including the Shia south and Kurdish north where the US footprint was always small. In Sunni Arab areas, where US forces are most active, commanders say they want to press on with transfers.
Anbar, once the most violent province in Iraq, could soon become the first mainly Sunni Arab province handed to Iraqis.
The chief of staff for US forces in Baghdad said this week that commanders hope to transfer control of the capital itself to Iraqis within about a year.
Limits of mission: Although much of Iraq is less violent than a year ago, there are plenty of risks over the 10 months before the new US commander in chief takes office. Local elections on Oct 1 are expected to spark violence while Kurds and Arabs could fight for control of the disputed northern oil city of Kirkuk.
From the second half of 2007, US commanders were able to paint an encouraging picture, with charts showing a steep drop in violence, especially in sectarian killings.
But the past several weeks saw a reversal in that trend after a government crackdown on Shia militias in the lawless southern city of Basra unleashed an uprising that spread throughout the south and Baghdad.
The worst fighting in nearly a year thrust the war back to the heart of the US presidential debate and raised questions about how quickly American forces could withdraw.
The initial outcome hardly looked good for the Iraqi forces, who failed to dislodge fighters from the streets. Petraeus told Congress the operation’s planning was “not satisfactory”. Iraq fired 1,300 soldiers and police for refusing to fight.
But if the fighting exposed weaknesses in Iraq’s forces, it also demonstrated how US and Iraqi leaders envision US troops acting in their future, smaller “overwatch” role.
The fighting took place mostly in south, far from where the bulk of US troops are deployed.
US participation was limited largely to special forces teams and combat air support. The main western ground force in the south, 4,000 British troops near Basra, did little but set up a few checkpoints and fire some artillery.
Even in Baghdad, where US ground units redeployed to the outskirts of Shia dominated areas like Sadr City, Iraqi units went in first, a major change from operations in previous years.US commanders say the Iraqis achieved important logistical milestones, rapidly dispatching 6,600 extra troops to Basra in an operation that would have been unthinkable a year ago.
Still, no one is more cautious about predicting that US forces could safely and quickly leave Iraq than the commanders themselves. Obama’s timetable is beyond their planning horizon.
“Sixteen, eighteen months from now nobody is going to project out that far,” said a senior US military official in Baghdad. “People who tend to look out too far with regards to Iraq tend to be surprised, and not in a good way.”—Reuters
End of Article
PLEASE DON’T SET ON YOUR DUFF AND NOT VOTE!
FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making Fsuch material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more detailed information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
You may use material originated by this site. However, if you wish to use any quoted copyrighted material from this site, which did not originate at this site, for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner from which we extracted it.