Strongest Nation on Earth or Just Whimpering Sissies?

Can you remember a time in American history — at least in the last 75 years or so — when the United States faced a situation similar to what our nation faces today in Afghanistan? There’s no doubt foreign foes have been numerous throughout our history. But the U.S. has always found a way to take whatever measures are necessary to send those foes packing. And, exclusively, we have done so on THEIR turf.

Oh, there certainly have been “drive-by shooters” like Osama bin Laden and Hirohito and Adolph Hitler. Don’t forget, the British, after being sent packing in the 18th, century decided they’d try one more time to take on those rebellious colonialists and came back for one more taste of American musket fire. They almost succeeded and even burned the White House. But they were unsuccessful — twice. The Britts discovered something they never expected from Americans. Hirohito and Hitler saw the same thing. And it whipped them all.

But things change.

After WWII that saw two world tyrannical nations gang up on those upstart Yanks in the U.S. were each sent packing, licking their wounds. WWII was the last war we won.

We’ve since been involved in many skirmishes. We’ve found ourselves in military conflicts all around the globe. Somehow those skirmishes never turned into full-fledged wars. There was Korea, the Cuban conflict, Iraq “One” and Iraq “Two.” The U.S. sent forces to Panama, and to Central America to fight the illegal drug lords and cartels. For reasons that remain unknown, we sent thousands of young men to their deaths in that little nation in southeast Asia, Vietnam.

What changed?

After World War II, the U.S. rebuilt rapidly. Our leaders came mostly from that war and wore the banners of those victories over foes few thought we could ever defeat. The American people were proud: proud of their country, proud of NOT quitting during what seemed unwinnable battles in the Pacific while at the same time in Europe. Americans were proud of each other.

And then Politics replaced Pride and declared wars against specific foes morphed into “skirmishes” against hard to identify opponents. And what for? Not to protect the Homeland against invasion. Not to stop threats from international despots to keep those evil empires from taking over our nation. Those were in large part to prove to people around the world the glory of wars not lost were justification for refusing to engage in World War “III.”

We became known as the protectors of “lesser” populations in countries that “needed” a Big Brother to intervene for both internal and foreign critical issues. The U.S. literally became the neighborhood bully whose tactics were to simply bluster at these foes, talk louder than did they, and use past history examples of how tough we were to keep everybody else afraid to fight back.

The U.S. even turned the corner against Islamist extremists that attempted to invade our nation with philosophy, terror, and fear. When those twin towers in Manhattan fell killing 3000 Americans, that old love for “flag and country” welled up in the hearts of tens of millions of Americans who said in unison, “You can’t kill us and expect to get away with it.”

We Americans took for granted our government had continued to grow in knowledge, understanding, and military might after World War II. Oh, we learned a lot. We initiated great technological improvements in our military. We built the largest and most powerful military complex on Earth. WE became the Big Bully. But that wasn’t enough. And the REAL bullies stayed in the bushes watching and learning how they could best go after the United States.

But spending money and the accumulation of technological wonders don’t necessarily turn into success in military operations. That takes grit, hard work, effective leadership, and planning. There were no Eisehnhowers or MacArthurs or Pattons left in leadership in the U.S. military. Their replacements liked the idea of power and authority but were not really into leading their minions by example. Real military leaders quickly became rare and even nonexistent.

The rank-and-file in the military that weren’t alive in WWII didn’t understand that and just thought that was normal. The NCOs operated in the ages-long process of following orders and maintaining an atmosphere of discipline. Senior military leadership did NOT fall into that same thought process. And most of those saw politics as a new way to garner all those trappings that come to those who are allowed to step up on the political platform.


All those other smaller and less sophisticated nation’s military leaders saw how the U.S. defeated its foes in our past and began to implement the reasoning and planning that our great generals and admirals had used to win wars. Some of the despots were emboldened. New giants were created. War was changed in structure. The U.S. found itself sucked into skirmishes all over the world that never became wars and were therefore never won.

Our former military-now-political leaders decided it prudent to occupy these new upstart foreign foes’ countries to do “nation-building” under the guise of helping them to build necessary political and military infrastructure sufficient to keep invaders at bay.

Afghanistan was such a nation. It was massive in size, unsophisticated politically, but VERY Muslim. It was a haven for every type of radical Islamist group to locate, train, and launch terrorism worldwide.

The U.S. didn’t learn about Afghanistan and how resilient its people and leaders are. That was even after watching the Russians flounder there for more than a decade. The Russians withdrew and were happy to leave.

Meanwhile, the U.S. watched in horror as our twin towers fell, Islamic radicals were named as responsible, and Pres. George W. Bush felt it necessary to go to Afghanistan to find the perpetrator Osama bin Laden and to keep him and other Islamist groups from mounting new attacks against all of the Western World.

Just as the Russians learned Afghanistan is not an easy country to occupy we learned the same lesson. But it took us twenty years.


The American-nurtured Afghan military of the last 20 years that had suffered thousands of prior casualties evaporated in a few hours in the encirclement of Kabul.  Enlistees apparently calculated that their own meager chances with the premodern Taliban were still better than fighting as a dependency of the postmodern United States — despite its powerful diversity training programs.

Forces more powerful than the Taliban, in places far more strategic, will now leverage an ideologically driven but predictably incompetent administration, a woke Pentagon, and politically weaponized intelligence communities.

  • Why not, when President Joe Biden trashes both American frackers and the Saudis — only to beg the Kingdom to rush to export more of its hated oil before the U.S. midterms?
  • Why not, when Biden asks Russia’s Vladimir Putin to request that Russian-related hackers be a little less rowdy in their selection of U.S. targets?
  • And why not, when our own military jousts with the windmills of “white supremacy” as Afghans fall from U.S. military jets in fatal desperation to reach such a supposedly racist nation?

Biden keeps repeating that he was bound by former President Donald Trump’s planned withdrawal.


A mercurial Trump repeatedly demonstrated that he was willing to use air power to protect U.S. personnel and to bomb an Islamic would-be caliphate. The Taliban knew that and so struck when Trump was gone.

Biden claims he was bound by Trump’s decision to withdraw and thus cannot be blamed for his reckless operation of a predetermined departure. But all Biden has done since entering office is destroy Trump pacts, overturning past agreements on energy leases, protocols with Latin America and Mexico on border security, and pipeline contracts.

No sooner did Biden claim he was straitjacketed by Trump than he reversed course to defend not just his own withdrawal but the disastrous manner of it. Biden claims that he has no free will while insisting he would have done nothing differently if he did.

In a sane world, the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the secretary of defense would resign. We have heard for too long their careerist boasts about assigning climate change as their chief challenge. For too long they have virtue-signaled their critical race theory credentials to Congress. For too long they have bragged about rooting out alleged white supremacists from their ranks. For too long they have sparred with journalists while fighting Twitter wars and issuing cartoonish commercials attesting to their woke credentials.

In other words, they sermonized on anything and everything — except their plans to prevent a humiliating military defeat of U.S. forces and their allies.

Our intelligence and investigatory agencies are just as morally suspect. The legacy of John Brennan, James Clapper, James Comey, and Andrew McCabe has been the destruction of the reputations of the CIA, NSA, and FBI. Current and retired intelligence lackeys and careerists all wasted years promulgating Russian “collusion.” They swore Hunter Biden’s laptop was Russian “disinformation.”  They surveilled and unmasked officials and hatched adolescent plots against an elected president. All that was more important to their careers than warning of the growing threats in Afghanistan.

In the aftermath of the Afghan debacle, we must de-politicize and de-weaponize these warped agencies and incompetent institutions.

We could get a symbolic start by pulling security clearances from all retired operatives, officers, and diplomats who go on television to offer partisan analysis.

The retired and pensioned top brass should finally be held to account if they violate tenets of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. When four-star generals lecture the nation that an elected president is a Mussolini or Nazi-like but keep mum during the greatest military setback in a half-century, they should forfeit exemptions from existing military codes.

Retired officers who revolve in and out of corporate defense contractor boards and Pentagon billets should have a cooling-off period of five years before leveraging their inside knowledge of the Pentagon procurement labyrinth.

As for Biden, his team in defeat threatens the victorious Taliban with possible ostracism from global diplomacy as the price of their illiberality. We are to assume that in between executing women, the Taliban will fear losing the chance to visit the U.N. in New York.

Biden has defied a Supreme Court ruling and assumed that it was a good thing to have broken the law. Under his watch, the fate of America’s border, equal enforcement of the laws, economy, energy, safety from crime, foreign policy, and racial relations have imploded — and in seven months no less.

If Biden were a Republican, the current Democratic House would have impeached him. It would have been right to have done so.

To Download Today’s (Monday, August 23, 2021) “TNN Live!” Show, click on this link:


Palestinians Rocketing Israel Because Jews stole Palestinian land: True?

We know for certain Israel has, for four days now, sustained daily attacks through the air from Gaza. Palestinians have lobbed more than 1,000 rockets into Israel, resulting in massive damages and deaths. Israel has indeed responded. What country would not! But if one listens to the noise from the United States Leftists, it will be certain that Israel started this conflict. Further, it’s all because of Israel’s inhumane, xenophobic, and racist policies initiated decades ago when Israel stole from the Palestinians the geography known as Israel today. Examples?

Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN):Israeli airstrikes killing civilians in Gaza is an act of terrorism,” Omar tweeted in response to the news. “Palestinians deserve protection. Unlike Israel, missile defense programs, such as Iron Dome, don’t exist to protect Palestinian civilians. It’s unconscionable to not condemn these attacks on the week of Eid,” she added, referencing the Muslim holy week.

Omar continued: “Many will tell you Israel has a right to defend itself, to safety and security, but are silent on whether Palestinians have those rights too,” Omar said in a later tweet. Until we can defend the rights of Palestinians just as we do Israelis, we have no leg to stand on when it comes to justice or peace.”

We could fill up your day with quotes from World leaders from almost every country, some coming down on the side of the Palestinians, some on the side of Israel. However, it’s important to look at the facts.

The facts of this incident are simple: Palestinian rebels have lobbed more than 1300 rockets into Israel, first from Gaza, then reported on Thursday to be fired from southern Lebanon. Israel indeed retaliated for those rockets being fired into their country that killed Israelis and destroyed property. But what country does not think their doing so was justified?

These problems are NOT about this single incident. The problems within this centuries-old feud stem from the Palestinian claims against Israel that purport that Israel STOLE the land on which their country rests from the Palestinians.

Today, I’m certain we will not get to the bottom of all this. What we WILL do is give you historical and documented evidence of how this feud began, on what it is based, and let you decide the answers for yourself. In fact, we ask some of the questions AND give you the answers!

Please note that we have provided multiple hyperlinks to stories about this ongoing conflict between the two at the end of this. Additionally, numbered footnotes are added to access as desired. We encourage you to take the time to peruse this, if, for no other reason, to be able to draw a factual opinion to share as you feel it is important.

That’s a novel idea: TruthNewsNetwork gives facts so YOU can find the truth!

 Is it true that Israel stole Palestinian land?
Accusation: Israel stole Palestinian land to build a Jewish State

[the Muslim Brotherhood will] continue to view the Jews and Zionists as their first and foremost enemies … Jihad means making sacrifices in order to restore what has been stolen [Palestine]. Mohamed Badie, Supreme Leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, January 2010

The “Facts”

From the beginning of World War I, Arabs began claiming that Jews had stolen Arab land and displaced its inhabitants. In reality, 80% of the land in the region was considered “state land,” owned by the Ottoman Empire (subsequently the British). The next largest landholders were absentee landlords like the Lebanese Sursuck family, who owned most of the Jezreel Valley. In contrast, 80 % of Palestinian Arabs were impoverished peasants, semi-nomads, and Bedouins — not wealthy landowners.1

The region was severely underpopulated, which meant the Jews could avoid buying land in areas where Arabs might be displaced, which they did. They sought land that was largely uncultivated, swampy, sandy, and most importantly, without tenants, like much of the Jezreel Valley. In 1920, David Ben-Gurion expressed his concern about the Arab fellaheen (peasants), whom he viewed as “the most important asset of the native population” he said, “under no circumstances must we touch land belonging to fellahs or worked by them.” He advocated helping liberate them from their oppressors. “Only if a fellah leaves his place of settlement should we offer to buy his land, at an appropriate price.” 2

The Jews overpaid for the land they purchased

When British MP John Hope Simpson arrived in Palestine in May 1930 to report on Arab-Jewish violence and discovered the Jews were purchasing land at exorbitant rates: “They [Jews] paid high prices for the land, and in addition, they paid to certain of the occupants of those lands a considerable amount of money which they were not legally bound to pay.” 3

In 1937, the British Government published the “Peel Commission,” which found Arab complaints about Jewish land acquisition were baseless. It pointed out that “much of the land now carrying orange groves was dunes or swamp and uncultivated when purchased. There was, at the time of the earlier sales, little evidence that the owners possessed either the resources or training needed to develop the land.” Moreover, the Commission found the shortage was “due less to the amount of land acquired by Jews than to the increase in the Arab population.” The report concluded that the presence of Jews in Palestine, along with the work of the British Administration, had resulted in higher wages, an improved standard of living, and ample employment opportunities. 4

It is made quite clear to all, both by the map drawn up by the “Simpson Commission” and by another compiled by the “Peel Commission,” that the Arabs are as prodigal in selling their land as they are in useless wailing and weeping.

Transjordan’s King Abdullah, My Memoirs Completed, p88-89

Violence escalated, and Arabs continued to sell land to Jews at outrageous prices, usually for tiny tracts of arid land. “In 1944, Jews paid between $1,000 and $1,100 per acre in Palestine, mostly for arid or semi-arid land; in the same year, rich black soil in Iowa was selling for about $110 per acre.” 5

Land ownership from 1945-1947

In 1945, the British commissioned a land ownership survey in Mandatory Palestine for the “Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry on Palestine.” This survey was the research that the United Nations relied upon when suggesting how the region could be partitioned. The UN’s suggested the Jewish state would be in the area with heavy Jewish or state ownership (such as the barren Negev Desert). At the same time, the proposed Arab state was in the regions with heavy Arab ownership. The claim that Jews stole Palestinian land is factually incorrect.6

By 1947, Jewish holdings in Palestine amounted to about 463,000 acres. Approximately 45,000 of these acres were acquired from the Mandatory Government; 30,000 were bought from various churches, and 387,500 were purchased from Arabs. Analysis of land purchases from 1880 to 1948 shows that 73 percent of Jewish plots were purchased from large landowners, not poor fellahin. 7 Those who sold land included the mayors of Gaza, Jerusalem, and Jaffa. As’ad el–Shuqeiri, a Muslim religious scholar and father of PLO chairman Ahmed Shuqeiri, took Jewish money for his land. Even King Abdullah leased land to the Jews. In fact, many leaders of the Arab nationalist movement, including members of the Muslim Supreme Council, sold land to Jews. 8

Fact or fiction: Israel stole Palestinian land in the 1948 war?

As soon as Israel declared independence, eight Arab nations invaded. With the battle cry of the Grand Mufti ringing in their ears, “I declare a holy war, my Muslim brothers! Murder the Jews! Murder them all,”9 The Arab armies, with the help of Palestinian militias, attempted their genocide against the Jews.

By some miracle, the Jews repelled the invaders and, in defeating the Arab armies, and captured more land than that allotted in the UN partition. Much of this land had sizable Jewish populations and more defensible borders. Israel decided to retain this land to assure the safety of its citizens. It is this new border that most people refer to when they speak of the “Pre-67 Lines” (or the “49 Armistice Lines”).

The Arabs also captured land. The Egyptians conquered Gaza, while the Jordanians usurped the West Bank. Unlike Israel, this was not for the safety of their citizens but to increase their own territory. According to Benny Morris, the “Arab war plan changed into a multinational land grab focusing on the Arab areas of the country by the end of the war. The evolving Arab ‘plans’ failed to assign any of these whatsoever to the Palestinians or to consider their political aspirations.”10

Fact or fiction: Israel stole Palestinian Land after 1948?

While Arab leaders instructed to “strike the enemy’s settlements, turn them into dust, pave the Arab roads with the skulls of Jews,”11 their genocidal intentions were repeatedly crushed, often leaving Israel with even greater territory. Despite these gains, Israel had no intention of keeping the land — it always intended to return the land in exchange for peace.

In 1974, Israel returned territories to Syria that it had captured in 1967 and 1973. Again in 1979, they returned the entire Sinai Peninsula, a mass of land rich in oil, with Jewish settlements and three times the size of pre-67 Israel.

In September 1983, Israel withdrew from large areas of Lebanon to positions south of the Awali River. In 1985, it completed its withdrawal from Lebanon, except for a narrow security zone just north of the Israeli border. That too was abandoned, unilaterally, in 2000.

After signing peace agreements with the Palestinians and a treaty with Jordan, Israel agreed to withdraw from most of the territory in the West Bank captured from Jordan in 1967. A small area was returned to Jordan, and more than 40% was ceded to the Palestinian Authority.

Finally, in 2005, all Israeli troops and civilians were evacuated from the Gaza Strip, and the territory was turned over to the control of the Palestinian Authority. In addition, four communities in the West Bank covering an area larger than the entire Gaza Strip were also evacuated as part of the disengagement plan. As a result, Israel has now withdrawn from approximately 94% of the territory it captured in 1967.

Israel has captured territory from those that wage war against the tiny state, but each time it returns the land in a heartbeat in exchange for peace.

Fact or fiction: Israel stole Palestinian land to build settlements?

From ancient times, Jews have lived in the West Bank. The only time they did not was in recent decades when Jordan ethnically cleansed Jews from the region between 1948 to 1967. When Israel captured the territory from the Jordanians following Jordan’s attack on Israel in the combined Arab attack of 67, Israel allowed Jews to move back to some select locations.

Numerous experts in international law believe that these settlements are not illegal. Stephen Schwebel, formerly President of the “International Court of Justice,” notes that a country acting in self-defense may seize and occupy territory when necessary to protect itself. Schwebel also observes that a state may require, as a condition for its withdrawal, security measures designed to ensure its citizens are not menaced again from that territory. 12 In the seventies, Israel made thousands of its citizens homeless when it returned the Sinai Peninsula to Egypt. It did so on Egypt’s condition to make peace with the Jewish State — just as Schwebel described.

When Israel constructs its settlements, it does not requisition private land for its establishment. Housing construction is only permitted on private land where the rights of others have not been violated. The vast majority of settlements have been built in uninhabited areas, and even the handful established in or near Arab towns did not displace or steal land. In instances that settlements had been built on stolen land, the previous Arab owners took their case to the Supreme Israeli Court, which ruled the settlements needed to be dismantled.

  • The claim that Jews stole Palestinian land is a lie.
  • The UN proposal awarded Israel the land where Jewish ownership was high.
  • Jews massively overpaid for the land they acquired.
  • Israel has captured land in defensive battles but has always exchanged it for peace.
For even more information about the establishment of the nation of Israel, here are sources to reference:
  1. Moshe Aumann, Land Ownership in Palestine 1880–1948, (Jerusalem: Academic Committee on the Middle East, 1976), pp. 8–9
  2. Shabtai Teveth, Ben-Gurion and the Palestinian Arabs: From Peace to War, (London: Oxford University Press, 1985), p. 32.
  3. Hope Simpson Report, p. 51
  4. Palestine Royal Commission Report (1937)
  5. Moshe Aumann, Land Ownership in Palestine 1880–1948, (Jerusalem: Academic Committee on the Middle East, 1976), p13
  6. Spreadsheet which contains village statistic
  7.  Abraham Granott, The Land System in Palestine, (London, Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1952), p. 278
  8. Avneri, pp. 179–180, 224–225, 232–234; Porath (77), pp. 72–73; See also Hillel Cohen, Army of Shadows: Palestinian Collaboration with Zionism, 1917–1948, (Berkeley, University of California Press, 2008).
  9. Quoted in “Myths and facts 1982; a Concise Record of the Arab-Israeli Conflict, Leonard J. Davis and M. Decter, p199″
  10. Righteous Victims, Benny Morris, p221
  11. Hafez al-Assad, Prime Minister of Syria, Quoted in “Six Days of War, Michael B. Oren, p293″
  12. American Journal of International Law, (April 1970), pp. 345–46.

To Download Today’s (Friday, May 14, 2021) “TNN Live” Show, click on this link: