December 28, 2012, - 11:11 am

Stormin’ Norman’s Mixed Record on the Middle East, Israel – Gen. H. Norman Schwarzkopf, Jr., RIP

By Debbie Schlussel

Retired General Norman Schwarzkopf, Jr., who died yesterday at age 78, was definitely a patriot who served America with honor and valor in battle (including courageously risking his life in Vietnam), and he deserves tremendous credit and kudos for that. But on the Middle East, particularly Israel, his record was mixed and swung both ways, and it should be noted.


When the David Petraeus-Paula Broadwell-Jill Khawam Kelley scandal hit the news (remember that?), I wrote about the fact that Islamic terrorists, including Islamic Jihad founder and chief, Sami Al-Arian, taught our nation’s top generals at Central Command at MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, Florida, and successfully poisoned them against Israel and in favor of Arabism. I mentioned General Schwarzkopf and the fact that he made some statements about Israel that made him a popular guy in Arab and Muslim circles.

While I couldn’t find a lot of the General’s statements on Israel online–this was before the internet, after all, he did spout the usual conventional baloney that the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is the root of all of our problems in the Middle East. And, as we’re seeing today more than ever, it is no such thing. Despite idiotic claims of celebrated empty suits like Slobbert Spencer (who said it on FOX News), Israel has nothing to do with the ascendancy of radicals in Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Syria, and so on. Schwarzkopf’s statement about the Palestinian issue being the key problem in the Mid-East and how it must be solved was celebrated and repeated over and over by James Zogby, the anti-Israel, pro-Hezbollah/HAMAS chief of the Arab American Institute, in columns all over the world. Although I believe it was distorted, after having read the original statement, as quoted by the Los Angeles Times:

The most important factor to stability and peace in the Middle East is the resolution of the Palestinian question. I’d never go into what that solution should be. I’ll leave that to the diplomats. But this is the major impediment to peace.

In Schwarzkopf’s 1992 book, “It Doesn’t Take a Hero : The Autobiography of General H. Norman Schwarzkopf,” Schwarzkopf expressed relief that Israel wasn’t included in Central Command (CENTCOM) with the other Middle Eastern countries, and, instead, remains in European Command (EUCOM), because he didn’t want to offend the Arabs, a dhimmi attitude that is the reason the Arabs respect us less and less:

European Command also kept Israel, which from my viewpoint was a help: I’d have had difficulty impressing the Arabs with Central Command’s grasp of geopolitical nuance if one of the stops on my itinerary had been Tel Aviv.

And his dhimmi attitude was wrongheaded. He actually thought the Arabs would like us if only we were nice to them:

The world predicted, “Oh my goodness, culturally the Americans are really going to step in it over there. There’re going to be drunken soldiers rolling around inside the souk [DS: Arabic for market].” It hasn’t happened. The fact that we have culturally respected this area cannot be ignored in the Arab world.”

We don’t want to win the war and lose the peace. We have designed our campaign to take this into account. I think when all the evidence comes out–that we did not target civilians, that our intentions were exactly what we stated all along, that we respected regional cultural sensitivities–I think this will stand us in good stead in the Arab world.

But, as we know, in fact, the Arab world couldn’t care less that we “culturally respected” them in the Gulf War or that we continue to pander and do it even all over American soil to date. They demand that because they know we will give them that. And, then, they laugh at us and hate us more, respecting us far less. None of this stood us nor will ever stand us “in good stead” in the Arab world. Not even close.

Moreover, Schwarzkopf, during the Gulf War, repeatedly made negative comments about Israel responding to the Scud missiles falling all over the country. In fact, Israel didn’t respond, per Bush and Schwarzkopf’s demands, even though it was clearly under attack. And, yet, Schwarzkopf, in an undated PBS interview, belittled the dangers of the Scuds to Israel and its citizens. He even mocked the Jews by saying that the only people who died were those who couldn’t figure out how to put a gas mask on correctly. He never learned the lesson that appeasement never works. It only creates an ever-growing appetite.

Q: Getting to the scuds. You got a message, you say in your book, from your Operations Officer about Israeli intentions on the Saturday morning. The first day no scuds, and then the second night they fired the scuds. And it was saying there were Israeli fighters and so on.

Schwarzkopf: The message we got was that there was an Israeli aircraft, in the air, prepared to attack into western Iraq.

That caused me considerable concern on two fronts. The first being that the Arabs had made it very clear from the first day we arrived over there, that any involvement on the part of Israel would make their position almost untenable…Secondly… of course, I had aircraft in the air over there. We had aircraft in the air. Chuck Horner’s aircraft were there. And there’s a deconfliction that has to take place with another force of aircraft entering into that area, flying around, could have created a great great difficulty with regard to fratricide and I was very very concerned about deconflicting this area.

Thirdly, quite frankly, there was nothing that the Israelis could’ve done that we weren’t already doing, and so therefore it would’ve been really a futile gesture which could’ve caused the coalition to become unglued and all for something that was already being done.

Q: Tell me about the difference in the approach between Washington and yours…

Schwarzkopf: Washington’s approach to the scuds was purely a political approach. My approach was purely a military approach.

Washington was very concerned about the pressure that was being brought to bear within Israel as a result of the scuds landing on Israel. And the fact that, if we couldn’t convince the Israelis we were doing everything that could possibly be done to stop the scuds, that they would intervene, with subsequent impact on the coalition.

I would confess to you that my position was quite different and that’s that number one, no one in Israel was ever killed by a scud missile. They did have some people die as a result of putting their gas masks on wrong. But no one was ever killed as a result of scud missiles.

Secondly, many many of the scud missiles were landing way outside of the towns. So as a military weapon it was, it was almost totally ineffective. It had no military significance and, by diverting as much air power as we were being required to divert, in kind of chasing this needle in a haystack, which is what the mobile scuds turned out to be, we weren’t being very successful, every time we thought we were being successful we’d find out subsequently we weren’t being very successful.

So we were diverting huge amounts of aircraft which could be contributing to the overall campaign plan. As a result the campaign plan was being prolonged because we weren’t accomplishing on the time schedule we’d planned to accomplish, because of this diversion.

Please don’t misunderstand me. I clearly understand the pressures that were on Washington and why they were doing it. . . .

Q: With regard to the scuds, there was a remark you made….

Schwarzkopf: The remark I made has been incorrectly quoted. It’s been attributed to me that I said that “… I was in more danger in a lightning storm in southern Georgia, than I was in the scud attack in Tel Aviv.”

That is absolutely incorrect. What I said is I was under more danger from a lightning attack in southern Georgia than I would have been in the streets of Saudi Arabia …… it was not Tel Aviv at all.

But the point was that the scud was purely a random act, a missile that was launched in the air, it was not aimed, there was no guidance system to it whatsoever, it kind of fell to earth and, and where it happened to land was a question of fate… more than it was a deliberate blow.

Unfortunately if you’ve ever been in southern Georgia on the beaches in a lightning storm, if you’re out there you’re in great great danger, and you can be killed very very quickly.

Uder a scud attack quite frankly,–and if it weren’t for that one unfortunate incident where the warhead fell on one of our sleeping quarters—the casualties from the scud would have been extremely low.

So, and as I say, no one in Israel was ever killed by a scud missile attack. So that’s what I meant when I made that comment.

Translation: Schwarzkopf wanted Israel to sit on its hands and do nothing while the “harmless” (in his mind) Scuds fell on Israel (because of his war to protect Kuwait from Saddam Hussein), and he didn’t want to divert any resources to stop the Scuds, but the Jewish pressures on Washington made him do it. Oh, and the only reason anyone died was because those stupid Jews can’t figure out a gas mask.

Reality check: in fact, some Jews were killed in Israel from the Scuds, none of them because of improper gas mask usage. Three were killed in Ramat Gan on January 22, 1991, and a fourth was killed in Tel Aviv on January 25, 1991.

But, then, Schwarzkopf–in a paid appearance speaking to Miami Beach Jews–made some very starkly pro-Israel statements at some point after the Gulf War. They are recounted in a column by the late scholar, philanthropist, and columnist Manfred R. Lehmann, an acquaintance of my late father’s (the two of them were avid bibliophiles, Orthodox Jews, and supporters of Israel). I don’t know the date of Schwarzkopf’s comments, as the article is undated, but it would have been prior to Lehmann’s death at the end of May 1997. I’m not sure if Schwarzkopf was just speaking to the audience that paid him well to “dance” for them. Or if he really meant it, but I think the comments bear consideration. Here are some of excerpts from Lehmann’s recounting:

About Israel he had this to say: “I admire Israel because she is a democracy; I admire Israel because I love the underdog, I always loved the underdog, and as a military man I cannot help but admire Israel’s military successes. But let me tell you I that I have never admired Israel more than I did during Operation Desert Storm because Israel had 40 reasons to enter the war—that is how many Scuds were fired at Israel. Sometimes it is said that Israel does not have the interest of the world at heart, and only has its own interest at heart, but this is not true. The Desert War proved the opposite: Israel was under tremendous pressure to enter the war, but for the good of everyone in the Coalition, Israel showed great forbearance for the common good, and because of that I am convinced today that we have the greatest opportunity today for peace, greater than at any time in my lifetime.”

He singled out one of Israel’s famous military inventions for special praise: the pilotless small planes, the VUA, which the American Army is using for aerial surveillance. He told us that the plane was so successful that in some cases Iraqi troops surrendered to the pilotless plane! . . .

On the question of the Golan Heights, General Schwarzkopf made the most significant political statement for the benefit of Israel, and I quote his words: “If I were in charge of the Golan Heights, I would only argue from a position of strength.

I would not consider giving them up unless I had absolutely satisfactory assurances that the security of my country is protected. I would make that determination entirely on the basis of very, very strong assurances.” He implied, of course, that such assurances cannot be expected from either Syrians nor any other power!

So, did Norman Schwarzkopf “get it” on the Middle East. The answer is mixed. But, based on his comments, he wasn’t the Israel-hater the Arabs and Muslims pretended he was. Not even close. But he definitely was a dhimmi in some respects.

But his incredible feats on the battlefield in service to America are legion:

His chestful of medals included three Silver and three BronzeStars for valor and two Purple Hearts for Vietnam wounds.

In Vietnam, he won a reputation as an officer who would put his life on the line to protect his troops. In one particularly deadly fight on the Batangan Peninsula, Schwarzkopf led his men through a minefield, in part by having the mines marked with shaving cream.

He served America long and well and won the Gulf War (though it wasn’t a hard one to win), with the mission quickly accomplished and very few American soldiers’ lives lost. And he was an American patriot who spent his career dedicated to keeping America safe. For that, he deserves to be remembered well.

General Norman Schwarzkopf, Rest In Peace.

Related Posts with Thumbnails
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

108 Responses

Well, let me re-title his book after reading your article:

“[Good Thing]It Doesn’t Take a Hero:
The Autobiography of General H. Norman Schwarzkopf”

His talk is inexcusable in the eyes of God.

As goes Israel, so goes the World... on December 28, 2012 at 11:48 am

    We can only hope that Gen. Guderian was right when he stated, “The future will surely triumph over the perpetual yesterday.”

    Happy New Year.

    herbster on December 29, 2012 at 7:30 am

Aas always, thank you, Debbie. I was not one of those to jump on the Schwarzkopf band wagon that “he fought a war” … no. He stayed in the back and coordinated the planning. HR McMasters and others like him actually fought – remember him? His nine tank platoon of Abrams M1as crested a rise in the terrain at a good clip only to discover they’d driven directly into a a sand trap of 80 Republican Guard tanks waiting for them.

As McMasters and his troop put the hammer down and blew right past them. He and his men killed every Iraqi tank, most of those while shooting on the run, and shooting “backwards”. The Abrams were past the trap before the Iraqis could respond and gun crews in the Abrams swiveled their gyro-stabilized guns and fired over the rear deck of their tanks as they continued headlong at full speed. That’s …. fighting.

And they were Reservists.

Planning, while critical, is not fighting. Being out where you can get killed is fighting.

As to Norman, I never heard him say the right things about Israel. I DID hear him say he didn’t want to upset the Arabs for which he earned the Stupid Medal in my book.

jack on December 28, 2012 at 12:05 pm

One way Schwarzkopf demonstrated his “respect” for the local culture was by allowing the Saudis to expose troops to the “richness” of Islam. A number of troops indeed converted to Islam, a few even putting their military skills to aid those fighting against the US, as discussed in the book “Jihad Joe”.

Raymond in DC on December 28, 2012 at 12:23 pm

    In fact, some of our GIs married and brought bomb breeding muzzies as wives.


    As goes... So goes... on December 28, 2012 at 9:41 pm

One more thing: What was Israel’s reward for it’s “forbearance” in not responding to those Scuds? It was pressured to attend the Madrid Conference, which helped revive the fortunes of Arafat, now calling shots from off-stage, which led to the Oslo Accords. We all know how well that’s turned out.

Raymond in DC on December 28, 2012 at 12:31 pm


    If Israel had acted against Iraq, the international coalition (which – sadly – was a critical part of the war effort’s success) would have collapsed. The fact that you demand to be “compensated” for INACTION (and by an ally that was trying to defend you indirectly) is just beyond sick.

    S tatu S! on December 29, 2012 at 7:23 am

General Norman Schwarzkopf, RIP!!!

Infidel on December 28, 2012 at 12:46 pm

RIP General Schwarzkopf

One thing many people also forget about his service is it was because of him that Kuwait is now free and that Saudi Arabia is a US Ally (because of his negotiations with them that allowed US bases there and other Gulf Countries). This is why we will be able to respond quickly to Iran and protect the flow of oil and the Arab allies.

RIP again Sir – you were a true american Patriot

George A. on December 28, 2012 at 12:56 pm

    Respond quickly to Iran?!?

    Little Al on December 28, 2012 at 4:23 pm

      Yeah, you read that right Little Al. Some peeps (who don’t think I know what I am talking about) prolly thought I was too harsh to George A-Hole in a previous post but I remember the rotten Libs who spew garbage here and when they disseminate Liberal lies…even when others forget.

      He won’t answer you either. That would give you the opportunity to make swiss cheese of his argument.

      Skunky on December 28, 2012 at 6:03 pm

      Hey Little Al,

      By having our bases in the mid east gulf region (particularly the Navy’s 5th Fleet in Bahrain) if Iran decides to attack any of the Arab nations in the region, block the hormuz strait, or attack US interests we can respond rapidly by being there. Hope that clears up some of the confusion bud.

      George A. on December 29, 2012 at 7:56 am

        We are pandering to Islam, look at where our “bases” are. The only reason we have bases in these shitty little desert countries is so they can get money from us. You are very narrow minded if you think a base in Bahrain, or Qatar will do anything to secure the Straights of Hormuz. The only elements we have at those bases are US Navy and Coast Guard, neither of which can do anything to stop a closure of the Straights. The only way we will ever be able to stop Islam is to stop foreign dependence of oil, and stop all the BS MOOOOOOOOSlim immigration.

        Me on December 30, 2012 at 3:18 pm

    Whether Kuwait is free or not is a matter of complete indifference to me.

    lexi on December 28, 2012 at 6:06 pm

      Yeah, Lexi, you’re mistaken if you think I give a flying f- about any muzzie country.

      You’re talking to my hand.

      As goes... So goes... on December 28, 2012 at 9:45 pm

    I guess it depends on your definition of “free”. Kuwait has sharia law and they hate America. That’s what we get in return for saving their worthless asses.

    Shwartzkopf was heroic during Vietnam for sure. But I cannot respect anyone who is pro-islam. And frankly it turns out that it wasn’t such a good thing that we saved kuwait and saudi arabia.

    It’s refreshing that Debbie gives us the whole story instead of the usual conservative praise of Shwartzkopf.

    Laura on December 28, 2012 at 6:57 pm


    You don’t know what you’re talking about. Saudi Arabia is not an ally of the US and Kuwait is certainly not free.

    Scott on December 28, 2012 at 10:14 pm

the gates of hell welcome norman…and await bush sr….blood of hundreds of thousands men women and children on their hands

sam on December 28, 2012 at 12:57 pm

    LOL, Samir. You mean like the lakes and lakes of blood flowing in Syria from Mooooslim on Moooslim heinous war crimes?

    As I see it Moooooslims have NO credibility when it comes to whinging about blood of children on their hands.

    When the Moooslims are not acting humanely to their fellow Mooooslims they are not acting humanely to non-Mooslims. Making them sociopathic war-pigs no matter who is in the mix.

    Stick that in your dirty beard and eat it (with bacon grease!), Samir!

    Skunky on December 28, 2012 at 1:13 pm

Very interesting, indeed. It goes to show some things are more complex than a black or white answer. I didn’t know enough about GS and I certainly don’t want to be like the Conservatives (who, like me, really don’t know much about GS) and blindly praise him up and down. He’s more complex than that, I see.

And the way I see it, it seems like the Mooooslims of the ME are always messing up things with their backwards ways and inherent bigotry and legion jealousy and envy (of Israel). I wish more people could see that. I see it pretty clearly but it is really frustrating me more than anything these days.

“We don’t want to win the war and lose the peace. We have designed our campaign to take this into account. I think when all the evidence comes out–that we did not target civilians, that our intentions were exactly what we stated all along, that we respected regional cultural sensitivities–I think this will stand us in good stead in the Arab world.”

That paragraph is frustrating. Looks like USA is NOWHERE CLOSE to figuring out his statement above is wrong. And we are prolly more pandering now than we were then. I am weary of waiting for people to wake up (and yeah, my statement IS meant to be absurd…if I am weary with the little I know (but what I do know is absolute) how must experts like DS and others feel? It makes me angry.

“…we weren’t being very successful, every time we thought we were being successful we’d find out subsequently we weren’t being very successful.”

That sentence can sum up ALL of our military work in the ME and the Mooooslims. I can’t see how things will improve anytime soon when a bottom-line is not even understood in our highest offices of the Government, let alone even entertained.

RIP General Norman Schwartzkopf. When I think about your time in the media spotlight I remember how lost I was and how little I knew at the time.

Skunky on December 28, 2012 at 1:04 pm

First, we had no business fighting for Kuwait. We were fighting for one billionaire dictator against another billionaire dictator. While our boys were fighting so that the Sheiks of Kuwait could maintain their solid gold bathroom fixtures, the sons of the sheiks and Kuwaiti wealthy were partying in Egyptian nightclubs(boy is that ending).

After the war, the leader of Kuwait, showing true Arab gratitude, said, that the it was Kuwaitis, not American troops, who drove Iraqis out of Kuwait.

All we did, with the help of General Dumbkoff, was strengthen the Arab/Islamic hand in the world, and promote Islam. Israel ended up being forced into a bad peace bargain, that weakened Israel forever.

We fought for James Baker and then President Bush’s oil buddies, primarily the Kuwaitis and the Saudis. May they all burn in hell.

Dumbkoff did serve in Vietnam, but he was no more a hero than anyone who was not the son of a big shot. He was no hero in Kuwait, a well compensated general. He served the Arab interests well. As to his statements before a Jewish audience, well, he was compensated just like any other $20 whore. His true sentiments were shown by his earlier statements, and his lies about Israeli casualties.

Jonathan E. Grant on December 28, 2012 at 1:38 pm

    Thank you Jon. You’re one of the few here who is standing for Israel wholeheartedly and not giving Dumbkopf a mixed send off which is what I was trying to say about Debbie. If she felt he deserves respect, I hope she’s changed her mind but if she did, then she should save her criticisms for later, it’s not critical info. However, now that I read the complete article, I say “let ‘er rip” (pun intended) he didn’t deserve a kind word, least of all from a Jew or Israel lover.

    I think some of the people here, like Skunky, don’t realize they are straddling the fence and that you just can’t do that with Israel because if you give an inch, the Muzzies will take a mile.

    I wonder when the coverup of Dumbkopf’s role in the Patraeus affair will be exposed. That Tampastan elite crowd is too close knit for him to have been out of that loop totally.

    Italkit on December 29, 2012 at 11:10 am

      Italkit, I have NEVER, EVER straddled the fence when it comes to Israel and the disgusting Mooooooslims. And you can’t point it out where I ever DID.

      I ACTUALLY read the whole column before I commented, unlike you. The truth is I did not know much about GS. I was going by DS’ column. And I trust her writing more than any other.

      Never, not ONCE in my life have I EVER sides with Mooooslims against Israel. And after all I have learned HERE I am NOT afraid to say what I think of Mooooslims. And when we had a rabid but dumb one here, I was one of the few who went toe-to-toe with her and I did NOT equivocate.

      You can check out my Twitters account if you wanna see how one-sided I indeed am on the Moooooslim conflict (and it’s NOT with them). (Not linked to this message but it’s linked to any message with my proper avatar).

      Spit out your beef with me, Italkit. I’ve been asking you for sometime now what it is and you never answer. And setting up false narratives is NOT gonna help alleviate your issue with me.

      skunky on December 29, 2012 at 3:06 pm

        I don’t have an issue with you, Skunky. You’re right, I should have read this one more thoroughly first. However, I didn’t say you are straddling the fence with Muslims but you seem to share DS’s mixed sentiments on the General, unlike Jon Grant who is one of the few I saw last night who came out wholeheartedly against him because of his position on Israel.
        My point was, I believe you are sincere about Israel but don’t you realize by giving Swartzkopf any credit as a leader in Desert Storm and otherwise, you are giving him credibility on Israel and the entire Middle East? That’s why I said you don’t realize you are fence sitting, at least on this one.

        If I have any issue with you, Skunky, it’s not your opinions themselves, even when we disagree but it’s the way you present them. I think you diminish your own intelligence and insight. And FTR, Debbie does the same. Do you really think potty mouth impresses the people who count?

        Italkit on December 30, 2012 at 2:36 am

          Italkit, I was NOT giving him credit for Desert Storm, I was giving him his due credit for his service BEFORE that. I think I was clear I didn’t know much about him and I have no clue why you would think I would (knowing my stances on the ME) give him credit there.

          I know you have an issue with how I present myself but that is too bad. I don’t ever see you coming in to defend someone else on this blog. I will do that for others but mostly for myself. I am capable. More than…

          It’s part of my personality. You can feel as you wish. Doesn’t bother me. I will be the me I want to be. If it effects peeps perception of me I don’t care. I care more about the truth and doing the right thing. And if I can fight back with strength I always do.

          skunky on December 30, 2012 at 10:00 am


    Let’s not forget that this POS general agreed to let the defeated Iraqis keep their helicopters–including the heavily armed ones. Some “no fly” zone…

    Just one more “hero” coming out of an era in which we were so desperate for them. Indeed, history will not be very kind to Reagan for the same reason, once people are able to see more clearly.

    Red Ryder on December 30, 2012 at 6:18 pm

Kind of like the politicians. Occasionally makes pro-Israel speeches when the occasion suits him, but his actions are clearly against Israel and favor the Arab reactionaries (a charitable description.)

Little Al on December 28, 2012 at 2:21 pm

Thanks Deb for the article! I am often lead to explore a bit further. I am not convinced of your interpretations of the General’s sentiments. He was a couragous soldier that served his country admirably.

On the scud missile casualties I came across the following (link to follow):

“Of the 74 Israelis who died in cases listed as attack-related, all but six died of heart problems blamed on war-related stress, according to the National Insurance Institute………In the Gulf War, only two deaths were considered directly related to damage from Iraqi Scud missiles or shrapnel resulting from attempts to shoot them down with U.S. Patriot missiles. The National Insurance Institute said four people suffocated from improper use of gas masks.”

Visteo on December 28, 2012 at 2:33 pm

I was in the Gulf for the first war. I consider him a good leader. However, now his soul is in God’s hands. Only he and God know whether his other-than-earthly home is Heaven or Hell. Anyone else who claims is smoking dope, like Sam and As goes Israel, so goes the World above. Forgiveness for all – just as Jesus taught.

Happy New Year to all.

Bob on December 28, 2012 at 2:38 pm

    Hey, Boob, Jesus didn’t teach unconditional forgiveness. Do you misquote everything? Or, are you Baptist?

    Jesus taught forgiveness through confession and repentance. If you have any other questions on Christianity, I am here for you.

    As goes... So goes... on December 28, 2012 at 9:52 pm

      No, I am not a “Baptist”. I am a sinner who has confessed, repented, and accepted the only true gift of eternal life thru the blood of Jesus. I am quite certain you are not a biblical scholar, so anything you would “teach” is quite open to misinterpretation (see Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson). I’ll do quite well with my pastor and church. Thank you for your kind offer. Happy New Year.

      Bob D. on December 29, 2012 at 11:28 am


        There you go…

        You ASSUME I am not a Biblical scholar…

        Think again… Bozo!

        As goes, so goes ... on December 29, 2012 at 10:15 pm

you would think that schwarzkopf and petraeus would have learned a lesson about winning hearts and minds from viet nam because the vietnamese alway saw us as round eyed barbarians with big noses.all they need to do is read any part of the koran and you would know that muzzies are savage humans who are only pleased when you are dead.RIP general

bruce on December 28, 2012 at 2:39 pm


    Well said. You’re joining the ranks of Skunky!!

    As goes... So goes... on December 28, 2012 at 9:55 pm

In charity towards the deceased though, I guess there is another possibility. Possibly he felt compelled to follow the GHWB party line while BB were in power, and thought better of it afterwards.

Little Al on December 28, 2012 at 4:25 pm

Ever since Roosevelt, who received a ton of jewelry from King Saud, we have fallen all over ourselves to kiss the sandy butts of the Arabs. Truman was the exception, and he had to buck George Marshall, Admiral Forrestal, and a number of other anti-Semitic blue bloods. And for what? Oil? We had then and we have now enough energy in North America to keep our lights on and our factories running. If the Department of Energy had done its job, we would be much more efficient at production and efficiency of use.

Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states would have been taken over by the Soviets had we not intervened. The family of Saud would have been overthrown years ago if not for us. Much of the Muddle East would have been enslaved under harsher regimes, if not for us. We, and the Brits, developed the oil fields under the Arabs’ filthy feet. We owe them nothing. They owe us everything, and yet, we act as if we are beholden to them because they sell us oil that our companies and our technology got out of the ground for them.

I wish there were politicians who were not on the take and rise up and throw off the shackles of these sheep humpers. Genderal Dumbkoff was just another pawn in the domination of America by Arab oil interests.

Jonathan E. Grant on December 28, 2012 at 4:42 pm

    Well said Jonathan.

    Laura on December 28, 2012 at 7:15 pm

    JE.G: “We owe them nothing. They owe us everything.”

    My uncle, who served in WWII received a pension from the British even though he wasn’t a citizen, just for fighting on their side.
    What the F… did Kuwait do for our soldiers to pay them back?..!
    “We owe them nothing. They owe us everything” is a major understatement, and that goes back 5+ decades as far as I’m concerned.

    theShadow on December 28, 2012 at 11:50 pm

      Saudi Arabia and Kuwait offered to give a sizable payment to US soldiers who fought in Desert Storm. The US government told them not to do it and instead to give that money to the US to partially recompense the cost of the war. I am Jewish, fought in Desert Storm and am not a fan of the Muslims and there dhimmitude of other religions. I think it was Kuwait and Saudi Arabia though seriously flawed nations were better than letting Saddam take over most of the middle east. The war established US credibility that we were willing to fight and could kick ass if needed. Things done after the war for political purposes did come back to bite the US in the rear

      Ken on December 29, 2012 at 3:13 am

    I likes me some Jonathan Grant. Cogent and informed.

    jack on December 29, 2012 at 11:38 am

General Norman Schwarzkopf may not have been prefect, but to just single him out is outrageous …. You in the least should have contrasted the issue at had with current US Military Leaders . What you have just done serves no purpose what so ever . And in the final analysis these kind of articles will only turn people against Israel .

Stephen Hughes on December 28, 2012 at 4:59 pm

    Stephen Hughes it seems you ALREADY have turned against Israel. Why obfuscate?

    And DS did NOT “single him out” (???) She told the truth that not only she knows but also what is fact and what everyone else is NOT reporting. You’re not gonna get back-bencher crap here…even if you want it.

    What, was she supposed to blog “One of the good ones” like many who DON’T know all the facts or what the hell they are talking about? Many come here to learn. Guess you’re too arrogant and bias to want to do that. I have more respect for those who know things rather than the perfunctory “He was a good one” palaver when they know barely more than I do about GS.

    Skunky on December 28, 2012 at 5:42 pm

    Stephen Hughes,

    Single him out? Are you nuts? BALLS!

    NS used his position to advance himself. He capitalized on his notoriety. That is CHEAP AND LOW CLASS.

    NS had a lot of class, all of it low. So, BALLS TO YOU!

    As goes... So goes... on December 28, 2012 at 10:02 pm

Quite frankly, I’m deeply saddened to see that racist blogs are still floating around on the net. Debbie, why do you harbor so much hatred for individuals of a certain ethnicity? You’re clearly biased in favour of Israel and Jews; and there’s nothing wrong with that. However, why must that entail a blinding animosity against Muslims – or any race for that matter?

Zak on December 28, 2012 at 6:44 pm

    Why do muslims have a blinding animosity toward Jews?

    Laura on December 28, 2012 at 7:00 pm

    Hey Zak, you asked…

    “Debbie, why do you harbor so much hatred for individuals of a certain ethnicity? … why must that entail a blinding animosity against Muslims…”

    Zak on December 28, 2012 at 6:44 pm

    Zak, if you ACTUALLY READ DS’ columns maybe you would not have to ask such a dumb question like a drooling retardo dhimmi.

    READ HER COLUMNS and perhaps your dumb rhetorical question would be answered AND your eyes would wake up from their sleepy haze.

    Wake up. Read the columns. Don’t ask stupid questions if you can’t read her columns (that answer the questions you stupidly ask!).

    Oh, if you’re a Moooooslim then forget what I said. You’re a lost cause and nothing can help you. And NOBODY cares what you think if you’re a Moooooslim. We learned from the columns you don’t read.

    Skunky on December 28, 2012 at 7:23 pm

    Muslims aren’t a race Zak. They are many races from white to black and everything in between. Islam is a political ideology and one can be against that bigoted, supremacist ideology for many reasons.

    Karen on December 28, 2012 at 7:56 pm

    Zak: Let me quote the GREAT Colonel Tom Kratman, Esq. (Former Director of the Army War College’s Instruction in Law of War): “Islam is NOT a Race.” It is a totalitarian ideology with a minor religious element which comprises less than 1/3 of the major writings. (Debbie, feel free to correct me on the percentage—I deliberately aimed higher than I thout it was)

    You wanna know what’s going to happen if our current policies continue and Debbie is ignored? Read my friend Tom’s “Caliphate.” Or read some of his more current books, some of them featuring a certain commenter on this blogsite as a character.

    Schwarzkopf did an excellent job keeping casualties in Gulf War I low. Regarding politics, most Generals, as Harry S. Truman noted, are idiots.

    Debbie’s take: spot on, as usual.

    Occam's Tool on December 28, 2012 at 9:45 pm

“European Command also kept Israel, which from my viewpoint was a help: I’d have had difficulty impressing the Arabs with Central Command’s grasp of geopolitical nuance if one of the stops on my itinerary had been Tel Aviv”.
He apparently didn’t recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

Laura on December 28, 2012 at 6:59 pm

Why should American troops ever be sent to save muslims? I really wish saddam would have overrun kuwait and saudi arabia.

Laura on December 28, 2012 at 7:03 pm

U.S. civil war..675,000 dead judeo christian americans died for democracy and freedom….rejecting the slavery endorsed in the bible….30 million judeo christians died for democracy in wwl wwll….millions of jews were killed in christian europe before they were given a place…the 60,000 killed in the arab spring pales in comparison but we are saddened by each and every loss of life..muslim and non muslim

sam on December 28, 2012 at 8:41 pm

israel kept quiet during persian gulf war l….but were rewarded handsomely for its standing down….the u.s. military industrial complex needs a war every 10 yrs…president eisenhower ‘the greatest threat to american security is the military industrial complex’….once the troops leave afghan in 2014…the drumbeats of another war will begin….9/11 truther…thanx

sam on December 28, 2012 at 8:48 pm

Oh, gawd, Sam again.

Why don’t you get a job?

Your lies are boring.

You’re not amusing.

As goes... So goes... on December 28, 2012 at 10:06 pm

There are so many bad things about that whole Desert Shield/Desert Storm war that it’s hard to list them all, but I’ll list a few of them.

Kuwait and Saudi Arabia were and are still scummy dictatorships unworthy of the loss of a single American soldier’s life.

Despite Bush’s lies, OIL OIL OIL was the ONLY reason we were there.

Saudi Arabia played the US for fools by playing “hard to get” before Desert Shield. Bush almost begged the Saudis to allow our troops to be stationed there. And after the actual war (Desert Storm) started, American Christian and Jewish soldiers had to hide their religion, lest they offend the saintly Saudis.

Despite the fact we were routing the Iraqis, Bush called for a ceasefire BEFORE the Iraqis. Incredible. And Bush also ****ed up by not finishing the job and getting rid of Saddam.

One of the reasons given for not finishing the job was Iran, yet that failure to finish the job gave Iran 12 years to build up its country and military, and we ended up going back there 12 years later.

Bush promptly stabbed Israel in the back after the war.

The Miami Jews should have told Schwartzkopf to stick his praise for Israel up his fat ass.

Scott on December 28, 2012 at 10:59 pm

The whole alleged Arab “coalition” was strictly a PR bullshit stunt, nothing more.

The US and to lesser extent Britain and Western Europe supplied all the equipment and almost all the military personel.

What the coalition actually accomplished was to pump up Arab egos, and also isolate Israel from the US and the West. The result of that was increased Arab standing in the West, and pressure put on Israel after the war to surrender to Palestinian terrorists.

Scott on December 28, 2012 at 11:17 pm

The only thing missing from these comments is the favorite phrase of the islamo/communists in our country, “Winning hearts and minds.” The purpose of going to war is to Win, period. That used to be the objective. Today, under our present leadership, (Or should I say, lack of leadership) both political and military, our military is used as a social service organization – a peace corps in uniform. Our current rules of engagement prevent victory, or anything close. Build schools and give out candy to children and the 7th century animals will love you. Ignore and denigrate the one country in the Middle East that has a cultural and (Genuine) religious history. When disasters strike anywhere in the world, Israel is one of the first countries to send aid ie. the fully equipped mobile hospital including doctors – sent IMMEDIATELY to Japan after the tsunami. I must have missed hearing about the aid sent from Qatar, Tunisia, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, etc. But I digress. While reading this superb D.S. article and the comments, I was taken by the continual historic pressure, from us on Israel NOT to respond to military encroachment upon their land. I fear that if we are hit, and hit hard by those who hate us, our response will be…….blame America first, second and third. Our response will be a non-response. With our current political “Leadership,” and the toadys at present as the Joint Chiefs, we are in serious trouble. R