American Heroes

by Oliver North

  Until there is a way for the people of this planet to power planes, trains, trucks, and automobiles with something other than petroleum, the world—not just the United States—will continue to finance the Jihad.

  Presley O'Bannon

  THE BARBARY PIRATES: 1804

  Fighting against Jihadist terrorism is by no means a new endeavor for the United States military. Within a year of being recognized as a sovereign nation, American merchant ships were being seized and their crews enslaved by Muslim pirates in the Mediterranean and off the northwest coast of Africa.

  At first, diplomats in Washington embarked on a program of appeasement, over the strenuous objections of men like Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, both foreign ambassadors at the time. Treaties were signed and tributes were paid to the government in Tripoli.

  But these attempts to buy off the terrorists failed. Despite the treaties, the "Barbary Pirates" continued to capture American vessels and their crews. When Jefferson and Adams met with the Moroccan ambassador and asked for an explanation, his answer could have been taken right from a modern-day Jihadist Web site:

  "That it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet (Mohammed), that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Musselman [Muslim] who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise."

  Incredibly, it took another eight years before the U.S. Congress authorized military action to stop the pirates. In 1794 legislation was finally passed creating the United States Navy. In 1804 during the first of two "Barbary wars" that ensued, a U.S. Marine first lieutenant named Presley O'Bannon led a daring overland raid against Tripoli—modern-day Libya—that at least temporarily stopped the piracy. From that action, the "shores of Tripoli" were immortalized in the Marine Corps hymn.

  Interestingly, neither this engagement nor the others that followed were perceived as a "war against Islam." In fact, the force led by O'Bannon was comprised of more Muslims than Marines. After the successful campaign, a Muslim sheik gave the Marine lieutenant his Mamaluke sword in a gesture of thanks. O'Bannon's memento became the model for every ceremonial sword worn by Marine officers to this very day. Notably, O'Bannon realized that the real enemy was hatred, not religion. In his Bible, he reportedly underlined the consoling words of John's Gospel (15:18): "If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you" (KJV).

  The Barbary wars gave the nascent American armed forces a reputation for courageous initiative under fire that U.S. soldiers, sailors, airmen, Coast Guardsmen, and Marines have upheld ever since. But more importantly, they still carry the tradition of being not just good but just. In the words of William McKinley, "Our flag has never waved over any community but in blessing."

  THE "LANDS OF THE PROPHET"

  The "common ground" for all Islamic radicals is hatred of the United States and Israel. Shia leaders like Iranian Ayatollah Khomeini, Sheikh Nasrallah, and "President" Ahmadinejad of Iran routinely proclaim that Israel, the "Little Satan," must be destroyed and that the United States, the "Great Satan," must be "driven from the lands of the prophet"—meaning places where Islam is or was practiced as a state religion.

  Sunni terror leaders, including Al Qaeda founder Osama bin Laden and his second-in command Ayman al-Zawahiri, have openly pledged to wage Jihad until the establishment of a new Caliphate, bounded by Casablanca in the west and Bali in the east. All who live within this borderless theocracy will be governed by Sharia law.

  Then, after a "period of peace," they proudly proclaim that Islam will spread throughout the rest of the world. According to their speeches, writings, and Web sites, the West and its "infidel" religions and cultures will be destroyed.

  Ayman al-Zawahiri

  Bin Laden has boasted that "the pious Caliphate will start from Afghanistan." Al-Zawahiri envisions a bloody struggle to reestablish the Caliphate, writing that "history would make a new turn, God willing, in the opposite direction of the United States and the world's Jewish government." Fazlur Rehman Khalil, an Al Qaeda apologist, has written, "Due to the blessings of Jihad, America's countdown has begun. It will declare defeat soon" and will be followed by a new Caliphate.

  Western political leaders and media elites appear unwilling to acknowledge the threat posed by these two repetitive themes in modern radical Islam—an Armageddon-like final battle and the call for a new globe-spanning Caliphate. The failure of the "international community" to fully support democracy in Afghanistan and Iraq, the unwillingness to challenge and disarm Hezbollah in Lebanon or to stand unified against Iranian efforts to acquire nuclear weapons place all of us—not just Israel—in great peril.

  "Due to the blessings of Jihad, America's countdown has begun. It will declare defeat soon."

  —Fazlur Rehman Khalil

  Instead of confronting radical Islam, the response in the United Nations, most of Europe, and much of the United States has been to preach "tolerance," "understanding," and "dialogue." The belief that poverty, lack of education, or inadequate economic opportunity has incited Muslim rage against the West is totally mistaken.

  There are countless poor and uneducated people around the world. The vast majority of them, if they think of America at all, don't want to kill us; they simply want to be here. Many, as we know from both legal and illegal immigration, want to come to the United States to partake in the opportunity that is every American's birthright. They have no interest in flying airplanes into buildings or putting on an exploding vest.

  WE DON'T GET IT

  When I was the U.S. government's counter-terrorism coordinator on the National Security Council staff in the 1980s, we could put a slide on the screen in the White House Situation Room that showed every terrorist organization in the world. We had highly classified "wire diagrams" of the Bader-Mienhoff Gang, the Red Army Faction, M-19, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, the Red Brigades, Black June, Black September, the Abu Nidal Organization, and the alphabet soup (MNLF, FMLN, MILF, PFLPGC)—the list was practically endless.

  We also cataloged state sponsors of terrorism: Libya, Syria, East Germany, Cuba, Nicaragua, and of course Iran. What we didn't see coming was the rise of radical Islam in a way that it would transcend national boundaries to become a global threat to our very way of life.

  Part of the problem was that we were looking at the world through Cold War lenses. I, like most Americans—and President Ronald Reagan was no exception—saw the threat of Shia Islam in Iran as secondary to the risks we faced from our most pressing adversary: the Soviet Union.

  Second, because our HUMINT (human intelligence) had been so badly debilitated in the Carter administration, we knew very little of the Ayatollah Khomeini's plans for an ascendant Shia empire that could dominate a reestablished Caliphate. Even after we verified Iranian complicity in bombing our embassy and Marine barracks in Beirut and direct involvement seizing American hostages there, no one in Washington wanted to confront the revolutionary Islamic regime in Tehran, out of fear of what the Soviets might do.

  Third, and perhaps most important, officials in ours and subsequent administrations were blind to the effect Khomeini's radical Shiite regime was having inside Sunni Islam. Though the Iranians were bled white by the 1980–88 Iran-Iraq war, radical Sunnis such as Osama bin Laden and his Wahhabi supporters in Saudi Arabia saw the rise of Shia Islam in Iran to be every bit as threatening as Soviet troops in Afghanistan, the existence of the state of Israel, or U.S. presence anywhere in the "lands of the Prophet."

  By 1990 Sunni zealots around the globe were proclaiming that the collapse of the Soviet empire was their victory. But the sudden arrival of U.S. and other "infidel" troops in Saudi Arabia—after Saddam invaded Kuwait—stunned them all. To prove themselves "worthy" of leading all Islam,
the most radical Sunnis declared Jihad against the West in general and the U.S. in particular. By the time our troops returned from Operation Desert Storm, "martyrs" were lining up for the privilege of killing infidels by killing themselves.

  Like those who came to America to kill us on 9/11, the thousands of suicide terrorists from Tel Aviv to Madrid to London to Tal Afar who have blown themselves up weren't recruited and indoctrinated by the promise of a square meal. Most of the would-be suicide killers apprehended recently in the United Kingdom had jobs. Like the nineteen hijackers who killed nearly three thousand people in the U.S. on 9/11, several had university degrees. And like the seven who blew themselves to pieces in London on July 7, 2005, they all intended to die. Understanding this is important if we are to prevail against the Jihad that has been launched against us.

  "Unfortunately, the same American culture that makes blockbuster movies like Gladiator and 300 gets squeamish when it comes to pointing out that those who are trying to destroy our way of life are, almost exclusively, radical Muslim males"

  WHAT DO THEY WANT?

  WHY DO THEY HATE US?

  Khalid Sheikh Mohammed

  Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind of 9/11 and numerous other terror plots, studied engineering in the United States. Mohammad Atta, the ringleader of the deadly attack on 9/11, lived in America for several years. All of his fellow suicide hijackers lived among us, saw us on our streets, enjoyed our "pursuit of happiness," and had ample opportunity to evaluate who we are. Yet they still hated us enough to want to die killing us. Most Americans don't understand why.

  We are practically unique on the planet Earth in wanting to be liked. We're good, decent, generous people. Twice in the last century we armed our sons and sent them around the globe to save others from brutal tyranny. Americans don't fight for gold or oil or colonial conquest; we fight for an idea—liberty. The concept that individual men and women, particularly women, should be free to make their own choices is anathema to radical Islamists.

  Those who launched the present Jihad against us don't just hate us because of our wealth and power, though both are certainly factors. Nor do they despise us solely because they perceive our society to be immoral, venal, and decadent—even though those cultural perceptions appear frequently in the rhetoric of radical Islamic writings and broadcasts. And they don't hate us just because of our support for Israel.

  If one accepts what they write and say about us—and there is no reason for us to disbelieve their repetitious, very public proclamations—they detest us for all these things, but mostly because we simply will not go away. They curse our presence in the waters they once ruled and for maintaining diplomatic, commercial, and military ties to regimes that we describe as "moderate" and that they call corrupt.

  At the heart of this twisted Jihad is a deep-seated belief among its proponents that if they can simply inflict enough pain on us, we will eventually abandon the fight and leave. That's how they defeated the Eastern Roman Empire in Constantinople, how they ultimately prevailed in holding Jerusalem during the Crusades, and how they conquered most of the Mediterranean littoral.

  With bloody carnage and armed conquest occupying such a central theme in the sacred texts and history of Islam, it should not be surprising that violence is so prevalent among those who subscribe to modern Salafism, the most intolerant strain of Islam.

  Yet despite this historical record and the bloody evidence of contemporary events, many Western political leaders still persist in describing Islam as a "religion of peace." But if Islam is a religion of peace, the facts show that it is a one-sided, uneasy peace garnered through terror and intimidation. "Peace" alone will not triumph over hatred like that which drives the Jihad. In fact, "peace" and hatred can coexist quite nicely. Today those who stand, almost alone, against the Jihadis are young American soldiers, sailors, airmen, Guardsmen, and Marines. We should thank God that they still volunteer to serve.

  In Dulab, Iraq, a Marine looks back while patroling a city street

  U.S. Marines escort captured enemy prisoners of war to a holding area in the desert of Iraq on 21 March 2003, during Operation Iraqi Freedom

  U.S. Navy Hospital Corpsman Samuel L. Blanco with Iraqi children during a patrol with Marine Regimental Combat Team 5

  NOT A RELIGIOUS WAR

  Today no modern political leader dares describe the bloody contest being waged against the West as a "religious war." But even the most pragmatic among them should be able to comprehend the stark contrast between the temporal means and ends of radical Islam and the perspectives of Jews and Christians.

  Radical Islam is propagated by teaching intolerance, hatred, and the efficacy of violence. The Judeo-Christian worldview starts with the knowledge that love conquers all—especially hate.

  The New Testament defines love's aspects clearly: "Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails" (1 Corinthians 13:4–8a NIV).

  There is nothing in the teachings, beliefs, or propaganda of radical Islam that even approximates such a description.

  Interestingly, the U.S. Army's "seven core values" embody the very qualities contained in Paul's first letter to the church he had planted in Corinth: Leadership, Duty, Respect, Selfless Service, Honor, Integrity, and Personal Courage.

  Though a warrior must often suppress other emotions on the battlefield, love is the exception—because embodied in that virtue are all the best qualities a human can possess.

  For a radical Jihadist, this fight is all about dying the right way while killing an infidel. For us, it's all about living the right way because all the dying necessary was done for us two thousand years ago on a hill called Calvary.

  2

  COUNTER-ATTACK

  "I believe in the meaning of honor and integrity. I am an action person who feels personally responsible for making any changes in this world that are in my power . . . because if I don't, no one else will."

  — Mike Spann, excerpt from his CIA application

  "The Bible says there is a time for peace and a time for war. Now is the time for war. I cannot wait to say it is now a time for peace."

  — MAJ James Brisson, Chaplain, 1-160th SOAR, 19 October 2001, Afghanistan

  FIGHTING BACK

  Within hours of the 9/11 attack, operations officers inside the Central Intelligence Agency headquarters in Langley, Virginia, and military planners at U.S. Central Command headquarters in Florida and at the heavily damaged Pentagon were working on how the U.S. could strike back against the perpetrators. Finding those responsible wasn't a problem.

  Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda terror organization proudly claimed "credit" for the vicious attack on several radical Islamic Web sites—and eventually in a videotaped interview. But getting at him proved to be a monumental task. When his "hosts," the brutal Taliban regime in Afghanistan, refused to hand him over, plans to remove the Taliban from power and dismantle Al Qaeda were put in motion.

  Less than seventy-two hours after the attack, U.S. Navy carrier battle groups, amphibious task forces with embarked Marines, and attack submarines with Tomahawk cruise missiles were on the way to the Persian Gulf. U.S. Air Force B-1 and B-52 bombers, outfitted with the newest guided munitions, were dispatched to the U.S. base on the island of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. But the greatest challenge remained: how to get adequate U.S. military force into land-locked Afghanistan.

  It was never expected that the Iranians would help, but even American "allies" in the region refused any overt assistance. The Saudis, long supporters of the Taliban regime, denied the use of their air bases to U.S. combat aircraft, even though we had rushed to defend them in 1990 when Saddam invaded Kuwait. Pakist
an was more helpful. Though Islamabad had also supported the neighboring Taliban regime, General Musharaff of Pakistan secretly agreed that U.S. forces could transit Pakistani territory to get into Afghanistan as long as U.S. forces were "invisible" and his government had "plausible deniability."

  Others in the region were more forthcoming. U.S. diplomats and military officers quietly arranged overflight rights with Turkey, winning agreement for quietly establishing U.S. air and logistic support bases in the former Soviet republics of Uzbekistan and Tajikistan. In the Persian Gulf, Bahrain, Kuwait, and Oman granted permission for U.S. forces to overtly use their soil.

  The plan adopted at U.S. Central Command—headquartered at McDill Air Force Base in Florida and endorsed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld—took all this into consideration. Less than a week after the 9/11 attack, President Bush approved the outline for an unconventional warfare operation to unseat the Taliban and destroy Al Qaeda. It would come to be called Operation Enduring Freedom.