Please to remember that the US is a proud country with unlimited military resources to back it.

Even with idiots at present running the show, it has the Rockefellers and Morgans behind it, proving there is unlimited finance.

So follow the strongest, follow the Big League. But not for old me, I'd rather be an activist my knowledge of history telling how it all takes time, like with the Roman Empire ruling for nearly a thousand years, but with idiot leaders returning to Rome one day to find a Germanic low-life sitting on the throne.

Let's hope the US learns the lesson quicker.

Yes, it's definitely all about propaganda.

But how on earth does one compete with Islamists in that regard?

Muslims have been so brainwashed (just take a look at the MEMRITV site for a glimpse of what their current affairs topics are - bashing women, killing infidels, and 9/11 conspiracies, not to mention an alternate universe version of Mickey 'the jihadi' Mouse) that Islamists gain by beheading infidels, and showing US soldiers strung up on bridges.

Think about what kind of people can watch that with glee.

The vast majority have been bred to be racist, intolerant, infidel-phobes.

Such crimes sell like hotcakes all across the Muslim world, so it's the common man that we're dealing with here.

Does anyone think that the west would gain propaganda by showing our soldiers killing Taliban?

Of course not, civilised cultures hate killing and only do it out of neccessity.

Even when those wife-beating, heroin selling 'capitalist pigs' (think about it: a one product economy with a totally inelastic good being sold to inflict misery) deserve it.

In Iran, the public gather and cheer as 15yr old girls, 'adulters' were told (likely raped) are hung from cranes.

Unfortunately, we will never win hearts and minds of people so damaged.

But we don't need to.

Islamists need to be 'cwushed', as Yaron Brook would say. They can't be reasoned with.

One can't do this by explaining the superiority of reason, of rationality, of enlightenment values - they are too far gone.

We must obliterate any Islamist sentiment, confront the barbarism of Islamic supremacism head on.

Muslims have enough conspiracy theories, imagined hurts and childish vendettas to last them for the next billion years.

Leaving Iraq will achieve very little in the propaganda wars.

In fact, as far as the hard core Islamists are concerned, "defeat" in Iraq will encourage them to attack us more. It's already been shown that America's perceived reluctance to strike back decisively after terrorists attacks in the 1990s, such as the attack on the USS Cole, encouraged them to go for bigger targets and ultimately paved the way for September 11.

It's seductive to think leaving Iraq will improve matters. It won't. As the infantile rantings over Salman Rushdie's knighthood show, Muslims don't need much of an excuse to hate us.

To the article author, Part I.

"Until its troops are removed from Iraq, the US will not benefit in the propaganda war from the sympathy of the majority of world Muslims who do not support attacks on civilians". Are you kidding. Most of the killing now is from one Muslim faction on another Muslim faction. The only civilians the US kill are those in the crowded market places that cowardly insurgents fire from. And in regards to Muslims killing civilians: the insurgents are Muslim and they deliberately kill as many civilians as they can, and these things are documented by the UN and Amnesty International and the Red Cross. They want to destroy mosques and churches. Also, what kind of freedom fighters kill and try to run out of town, people who have lived in the country as long as them but because they are Christain they are scum to them.

Look, to spell it out for a one year old, Iraqis themselves (and all Muslims for that matter) are implicitly aware of who their enemies and friends are, and it is something of the opposite to what you claim. If an invading army of Japanese in WWII or perhaps even Turks back in the Ottomon days were to occupy the streets of Australia, do you really think that you would let your kids go up to the soldiers and ask them for sweets? Would you, as part of an insurgency, shoot at them from crowded areas and store your weapons and bases in crowded areas knowing, and deliberately incorporating it as a tactic, that the enemy will not want to harm any civilians if possible as they apparently are not their enemy? Wouldn't instead you fully expect the invading army, who after all are all the wicked things under the sun apparently, to want to kill your women and children, or at least be bothered very little by the prospect?

To the article author Part II.

In Israel this week, there are thousands of Palestinians from Gaza piled up on Israels borders trying to get in and away from the madness of war. But wait a minute, aren't the Israelis murdering overlords who would like to see them suffer? Wouldn't you expect that these Gazans would be piled up on the Egyptian borders instead? Ever asked yourself why many insurgents shoot from mosques or why Hezbolla use hospitals and schools as bases? I know why: because 9 times out of 10 the US army will not shoot at a mosque for fear of offending Muslims. Ever asked yourself why the tens of thousands of Palestinian refugees who fled the original war forty odd years ago are still in camps in the Arab nations and only being fed and given medicine and education from the West, and why Muslims who live in not only Western nations but also in Israel have a much, much higher living standard (with decent access to medical and education) than in any Muslim nation? The Jordanians, Lebanese and Egyptians think so little of these Palestinians that they are not even allowed to buy land, aren't allowed most jobs if they are allowed out of the camps at all. And it isn't like in Western nations where they are out in a few months if they are honest and tell us their real details; these guys have been there for forty or more years - generations.

So, the US will probably never win the hearts and minds of the Muslim world given that they can't overcome the indoctrination of their culture that perpetually "others" and "occidentalizes" the US and the West in general, so much so that their hate simply blinds them from accepting us as their friends, and it blinds them from seeing their own leaders and much of their own cultures as their enemy. As I mentioned above, this is implicitly revealed in their behavious towards us and our armies.

I don't think there is a historical precendent to an invading nation winning hearts and mind of the invaded.

Winning hearts and minds is an uphill battle now. SH is gone along with the baath regime. With a weak govt in the helm, someone have to take responsibility for the civil war, civilian casualties and the chaos. Rebuilding a bridge or a power station (which we destroyed in the first place) will not cut it. Propaganda can't fight propaganda, only actions can.

The failure of the US to win over public support in South Vietnam during that conflict with its Winning Hearts and Minds Operations (bearing the unfortunate acronym WHAMO) in a nation without the ethno/religious divides of Iraq certainly does not bode well for its chance of success today. It’s certainly a tall order to present themselves as the good guys in Iraq to people who have lost everything. It harks back again to Vietnam with the often quoted justification by a US Army Colonel regarding the pulverizing of the city of My Tho during the Tet Offensive 1968: "We had to destroy the town to save it".
Will the US destroy Iraq to "save" it? With all the talk of breaking it up into Sunni, Shia, and Kurd mini-states, it is a possibility that may by a reality.

Grn: "It's already been shown that America's perceived reluctance to strike back decisively after terrorists attacks in the 1990s, such as the attack on the USS Cole, encouraged them to go for bigger targets and ultimately paved the way for September 11."

Grn, this is so simple as to be misleading. Where has it been "shown."

What strike back could be effective? If it's against Islamist governments, then I can't help but wonder if that would be any deterrent to terrorist action - especially given that failed states without government are more likely to provide sanctuary for terrorist activities.

If you're suggesting more of a police operation rather than an invasion, I hardly see how that in any ways would support actions of Iraq or Afghanistan - it suggests that both were the incorrect way to react.

I like this article - no preaching from the left or right, just a pretty sobering analysis of history.

You could start by reading the 911 Commission report.

Invading Afghanistan was a no brainer, as the Americans would say.

The illegitimate, brutal theocratic regime that was ruling Afghanistan was harboring a terrorist organisation, which planned and trained for the 911 attacks on its soil.

Overthrowing that regime was the moral thing to do. You can argue over how competently it was executed. But I don't see how anyone can seriously argue it shouldn't have been attempted.

The BBC and the ABC have shown time and time again that they are prepared to take up the propaganda war. They have been hijacked by the left who loathe the freedoms that the West have enjoyed for a long time. They champion their anti Christian causes and then have the nerve to turn villians into victims. Their bias against Israels right to exist is obvious to anyone who has listened in over a period of time. Israel is often painted as the terroist while suicide bombers daily kill innocent people. None of the left want to go and live in Islamic or socialist run countries but they seem to champion their cause.

grn seems to be similar to the Muslims he mocks as being brainwashed. Don't you understand that both sides brainwash their people? When left to their own devices, in one on one situations, an equilibrium is usually found. The 1914 Christmas Truce is an example, where soldiers, ordinary men on both sides, stopped shooting long enough to celebrate Christmas, exchange food, cigarettes and so forth. They realised that they were just like each other, fighting a war they both thought was right. The truce didn't happen in the following years because the brass made sure that fraternisation was punished as treason, with the penalty of death in wartime, and the war had totally changed in character by 1916. But it really scared the brass. What if the soldiers refused to fight?

When you see the enemy in such simplistic, brutal, inhuman terms, its much easier to kill him and bomb his god-damn home! Where HIS family lives! Funny, isn't that why HE'S the enemy? Because he bombs our homes? Would you resist an occupying army or would you collaborate?Why do you think YOU were shown those images of beheadings and hangings? Most Muslims are just ordinary people. "Walk a mile in another man's moccasins."

There are fanatics and deceivers on both sides. "An eye for an eye just leaves the whole world blind"

The Seppos are not losing the hearts and minds. They have already lost them. You can't go on killing, maiming, torturing, murdering, bombing, and raping the people your supposed to be saving, and expect their support.

"The question is, who ought to make that decision? The Congress or the commanders? And as you know, my position is clear -- I'm a commander guy." --George W. Bush

"I like to tell people when the final history is written on Iraq, it will look like just a comma because there is -- my point is, there's a strong will for democracy." --George W. Bush, interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer, Sept. 24, 2006

"The solution to Iraq -- an Iraq that can govern itself, sustain itself and defend itself -- is more than a military mission. Precisely the reason why I sent more troops into Baghdad." --George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., April 3, 2007

"I'm a strong proponent of the restoration of the wetlands, for a lot of reasons. There's a practical reason, though, when it comes to hurricanes: The stronger the wetlands, the more likely the damage of the hurricane." --George W. Bush, New Orleans, March 1, 2007

"Make no mistake about it, I understand how tough it is, sir. I talk to families who die." --George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Dec. 7, 2006

You just have to ponder at the Bushisms. He is nothing like Hitler, and Bin Laden's mob are not who you think. They were never Bush's enemy.

Hitler had a vision that his people found inspiring and exciting. Yes, it was driven by hate, but there was a vision. Bush had no vision at all. He actually axed the levy-bank repairs a year before Katrina. What vision? Also, Hitler's voice was charismatic and had an enchanting resonance to it. It was absolute and polished. Bush never had charisma and his speaches were, well, foolish to say the least.

I'm no fan of Hitler, I'm simply commenting about propaganda and communication effectiveness.

The reality is Rumsfeld and Cheney ran the whole Iraq campaign and Bush just played the fool. On that level, he was a genius.

It is hard to handle 2 threads in one, yes America has lost the battle for hearts and minds.
Yes Islamist are far far worse, I hope America finds a leader after the idiotic Bush.
But not one of the current list of cartoon characters so far running comes close to that.
The world needs Al Gore to run.
And Islamists? the heart of training for these hate filled idiots seems to be Pakistan, a great site for an inland sea.

How could they possibly replace such a genius like George W Bush who acts so dumb.

The secret is out. They've been grooming him already.

Dax Flame will be replacing George W Bush as the next Republican President. Yes, his own script writer. Dax Flame for President. Thats write, Dax Flame or Bernice Bouche III.

See the next George W Bush protege. Notice who similar he is to the current president. We'll never know the difference.

Except of course that Dax is more human.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAGdk-pn7I8&mode=related&search=

I think they lost hearts and minds the moment innocent men, women and children began being killed indiscriminately by US forces on invasion. If a tank rolled into your town or city here in Australia and started shelling and bombing the city to ruins to target 'militants' and suspects, I think all Australians would be united in rejection of the invasion and following occupation. This includes torturing and raping by in front of your family by said forces (see Abu Ghraib and other news stories). A late one I've come across:

http://abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/06/18/1954193.htm
Rape Video
"The ex-general, who retired in January, spoke of other, undisclosed material on the Abu Ghraib abuse, including descriptions of the sexual humiliation of a father with his son, who were both detainees.
He also told the magazine he saw "a video of a male American soldier in uniform sodomising a female detainee," adding the video was never made public or mentioned in any court or in public."

That could be any one of us. Luckily our own troops have extremely principled standards, as far as I'm aware. I don't know how Americans can keep thinking themselves morally superior to everyone else. They certainly and demonstrably, are far from it.

Bush may not have a vision, but his backroom staff who direct him certainly do.

That vision is of the entire planet being westernised, so we no longer have to give money to backward, incompetant, savage cultures who refuse to adopt civilisation.

Oh they love our western technology, some nations even have the hide to think they can have our nuclear weapons, so ignorant given they wouldn't even have electricity yet if not for the ingenuity of the civilised west.

Colonialism ended too soon. We need to occupy the backward, racist, tribal, middle-east, in Soviet style - brutal, cruel ways, as it's all they understand.

We need to bomb Iran today, Syria tomorrow, and Saudi Arabia - the head of the 'McJihad', the day after.

Isn't it funny that Palestinians are running to Israel for sanctuary? I never want to hear a smug leftist say they treat them bad again. One doesn't want refuge in a nation that is your enemy. I would kill myself before I had to live in a backward Islamic nation, they obviously think the same because anyone who can wants to live in the civilised Christian west.

God I wish I was President. I truly, truly do.

The world would then deal with the Islamist threat once and for all.

And it would be over.

For good.

Leftist idiots. What kind of fools you are. What sort of victims would run to the hospital of their enemies? This is what Palestinians do. They run to Israel for help.

Wake up. Israel should be armed to the teeth and take revenge for all the times they were invaded by Arab states.

What’s this about capturing their hearts and minds?

Seems just another phase of colonialism, killing inferiors or driving them into the gutter, as the Americans have done with the Redsins and us with the Aborigines. Not surprising that they want to fight-back and seemingly prefer one of their own in charge of Iraq, even if a murderous dictator.

Leave them alone and let them be, to be sure is far from a modern phrase, and certainly conflicts, if the Old Testament is true, with when our forebears were told by God to do away with those who occupied the original Promised Land.
However, using modern reasoning the Old Testament if true seems more like a gradual ethical learning process. As if God our Father was learning too, and so eventually we have the Ten Commandments, and a Great Ethical Awakening in the New Testament with the young Jesus and the Sermon on the Mount.

Thus we now have the two schools of thought in our later Christianity following the Sermon on the Mount and the death of Christ on the Cross - hardheaded survival politics really taking over with the later intervention of the Roman Emperor Constantine.

But something Constantine forgot was that the Christianity of the young Jesus had forbade stealing another’s territory, so hardheaded pressure much later on the Church forced it to forge a fake document called the Donation of Constantine, which allowed the Church to follow the deadly principle of the Roman occupation of another’s territory, as our Church has allowed since.

To be sure greed in the shape of power is forcing the issue much rather than decent democracy in the Middle East, and the never you know, even in Iran, as was spoken by a Justice of the Peace lady, Iran is quite capable of finding its own democracy.

Maybe such forethought is far better than having democracy forced on them on the end of a missile, similar to on the end of a bayonet as it used to be.

Never really worked, and never will.

Wake up, Benjamin, those Palestinians you are talking about are only the Fatah who have already made a deal with the Israelis, as well as with the Americans, Condy Rice ready there talking about freedom, yet still on the same old neo-Con plot to carry out what you yourself wish for, regime change for any nation that does not follow Pax Americana.

Pleased to remember that China is now no US puppet state, with an angry former Soviet, still with 16, 000 nuclear warheads to America's 8000.

With your wishful back to front reasoning, matey, won't be any need to worry about global warming, our globe will be hotted up enough, anyhow.