So...in order to stir things up a bit... I'd like some help in having the audience explain this to me.
I saw this article in USA Today today. Let me reprint the first paragraph in its entirety:
BAGHDAD (AP) — A new video by al-Qaeda's deputy leader Thursday left no doubt about what the terror network claims is at stake in Iraq — describing it as a centerpiece of its anti-American fight and insisting the Iraqi insurgency is under its direct leadership.
OK - so can we review things here?
1) Al-Qaeda is the enemy, correct?
2) Al-Qaeda is declaring that Iraq is the centerpiece of the anti-American fight and a lot is "at stake".
3) Our government has declared essentially the same thing- Iraq the center of the War on Terrorism.
So -
if our enemy and our country has said that Iraq is the center of the war, then why are so many politicians calling for a withdrawal?
Those of you who advocate a pullout - how would a withdrawal NOT be seen as an embarrassing defeat to the US?
(PS - I also need some explanation on how to title this post. For some reason, blogger won't let me put a title in the text bar.....)
4 comments:
It's apples and oranges.
Al Quaeda is saying that Iraq is the center of terrorism NOW because we are over there and have now become the biggest recruiting tool Osama and his cronies have had since day one.
The Bush administration made the Iraq/Al Quaeda link argument as a basis for going into Iraq in the first place. If the Al Quaeda leader is correct that Iraq is now the center on the war on terrorism, it's because we made it so. It's the ultimate self-fulfilling prophecy.
I never thought we should have gone into Iraq in the first place, but I think you and I would agree that an immediate withdrawal would be catastrophic. But surely you can't think we can stay in Iraq in perpetuity? And if not, then we need to become comfortable with the fact that we are going to have to get out of there without achieving all the purported goals and targets of the Bush administration.
Further support that we should make that country into a parking lot. Why have we not done this yet. If it is so important to win this war, then lets start dropping bombs. The entire world hates us right now, including the Iragis, so why not? Bush's approval rating might actually go up.
Our society has become such pussies.
Neil:
But this is the "flypaper" strategy that was talked about in 2004 or so - draw the terrorists to Iraq, fight them there (instead of elsewhere, including the US).
So al-Qaeda has gone along with the plan - and now they are there.
And we're supposed to abanodon ship now? Now that al-Qaeda is (mostly) all in one area?
(I'm not suggesting you believe this, as you said as much - but serious politicans are).
I do think that there is some room, however, between "immediate withdrawal" and "staying in perpetuity". Bush never said this was going to be easy (Mission Accomplished notwithstanding). I did expect us to be there 5-10 years, maybe longer, if we wanted to do this right. Bush certainly has failed on the PR aspect of this war, not clearly telling the people what sacrifices need to be made and what timeframe we are looking at.
(is that politically motivated? I'm afraid so....but after he beat Kerry, he should have been more forthcoming).
So yes, I believe we can hit our goals - but it will take a few more years. And no one on either side of the aisle is saying this out loud.
And Derek - WHO exactly are you goign to bomb? With bombing, you will kill innocent people - and (rightly or wrongly) have the rest of the world hating us even more for that. How would you handle that PR? Send Barbra Streisand to the UN?
I'm so happy that the British nor the US had that attitude during WW2. Yes, you will have people hate us. But they will fear us, which is more important.
What you have right now is a group of people who hate us, but don't respect us since we can't get anything done.
Post a Comment