Al Q has it's back broken in Iraq. ZERO Al Q control in Baghdad!!

B

Bruxley

New member
The city of Baghdad is now CLEAR of Al Q. Al Q as a whole is fractured and now FLEEING Iraq. WE have caused THEM to run off. The effects of that will run deep in that culture. They no longer can claim to be 'strong' or 'courageous' for standing up to the US. They can no longer claim that their mere ability to continue fighting is evidence of the righteousness of the cause.

Imagine that a few short months ago just suggesting that any progress was happening in Iraq provoked fierce ridicule. Now not recognizing how well it's going is only done by those that are ignorant or politically blinded by partisan hate.

If this continues very much longer the bitter admission that Bush was right to be so consistent and steadfast in the courage of his convictions.

"Bush was right".......sounds about as tough to swallow as "Progress in Iraq" was a few months ago.

Couple that new fact with "Republicans fight for the United States while Democrats fight Republicans" being the tone of the general election.

Didn't something similar happen with that buffoon Reagan? How did that turn out for the Democrat Party then?

And TODAY Pelosi announces that troop withdraws on the DEMOCRATS schedule be conditional to appropriations. Dig that hole Nancy.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/08/world/middleeast/08iraq.html?ref=middleeast

I used a New York Times link because reporting it was detectably painful for them. You can almost feel the pain the author was experiencing in the tone of the article.
 
Harry and Nancy have spouted enough irrelevant and insubstantive comments that a genuine valid statement would be summarily dismissed at this point. They are now permanently marginalized.
 
Another positive sign...

Christians, Muslims erect cross in Baghdad
http://blogs.knoxnews.com/knx/silence/archives/2007/11/christians_musl.shtml
Christians, Muslims erect cross in Baghdad

Michael Yon emails: "I photographed men and women, both Christians and Muslims, placing a cross atop the St. John's Church in Baghdad. They had taken the cross from storage and a man washed it before carrying it up to the dome. A Muslim man had invited the American soldiers from 'Chosen' Company 2-12 Cavalry to the church, where I videotaped as Muslims and Christians worked and rejoiced at the reopening of St John's, an occasion all viewed as a sign of hope. The Iraqis asked me to convey a message of thanks to the American people. 'Thank you, thank you,' the people were saying. One man said, 'Thank you for peace.' Another man, a Muslim, said 'All the people, all the people in Iraq, Muslim and Christian, is brother.' The men and women were holding bells, and for the first time in memory freedom rang over the ravaged land between two rivers.
Click to expand...
 
<Quote from deleted post>

So..if they are "gone" then it is simply a case of the status quo being restored.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Al-Qaeda does not seem to be the type to give in or dissipate so quickly. Assuming that what is being reported is actually the situation on the ground, it strikes me that Al-Qaeda has simply moved to a less hostile area. Makes sense. If most of an occupying army is concentrated in small area looking for me, you can bet that I would move somewhere else.

The real question is what will happen when US Soldiers LEAVE. We won't know until they do, but given the level of fanaticism involved and the hate that has been growing since the start of the Iraq war, I see Al-Qaeda reappearing quickly once the the US leaves
 
There were no Al Qaeda in Iraq 5 years ago when we started the war, and there are no Al Qaeda in Iraq now. I don't see how you can misconstrue this as some kind of victory for us. We have simply fixed (hopefully) a problem that we created when we invaded. Its nice to Saddam out of power, but he has been out for years.

Do you think that the fact Al Qaeda is out of Iraq means we will be pulling our troops out soon?

Al Qaeda is just going to pop itself up somewhere else, probably much closer to home next time.
 
Yet they cannot find people from the State Department to go without being orderred or threatenned with firing (which is justified).
 
I used a New York Times link because reporting it was detectably painful for them.
Click to expand...
It also gives lot more credibility to the story

Without interference from foreign interlopers Iraq can concentrate more on rebuilding
 
There were no Al Qaeda in Iraq 5 years ago when we started the war, and there are no Al Qaeda in Iraq now. I don't see how you can misconstrue this as some kind of victory for us. We have simply fixed (hopefully) a problem that we created when we invaded. Its nice to Saddam out of power, but he has been out for years.
Click to expand...

Huh? There were NO AQ in Iraq before the war? I must have missed that memo somewhere.

Some people just have such a problem admitting that things are better...and CONTINUE to get better. Sure there will be days where soldiers are involved in firefights, IED explosions, etc. but I think anyone can clearly see progress in Iraq.

This is not about Bush being right, wrong, or in between, whether or not we should be there or not, we are and we are winning an uphill battle.

Great post Brux!!!
 
Yes, unlike the United States government, Saddam Hussein was very successful at keeping Al Queda out of his country.

Where have YOU been for the last seven years?????

"There will be days"?????? Again, where have you been??? Perhaps someday we might be able to say that there "will be days" WITHOUT an attack..but right now there is not a single day that doesn't have hundreds of attacks.
 
And that would be their business
Click to expand...

I agree completely.

Huh? There were NO AQ in Iraq before the war?
Click to expand...


I will stand by my statement. There was no Al Qaeda in Iraq prior to our involvement there. In fact, Al Qaeda considered Saddam's secular regime as an enemy and an afront to Islam. Al Qaeda did not arrive in Iraq in any significant numbers until after we arrived. They came there only because of our presence. Otherwise, they could not have cared less about Iraq. If you believe that Saddam and Al Qaeda were allies then you have simply fallen for Bush propaganda.
 
I find it incredible that, seven years after the invasion of Iraq, some people still buy the lies that the government told to justify it's actions. Lies that have been disproven time and time again.
 
If you believe that Saddam and Al Qaeda were allies then you have simply fallen for Bush propaganda.
Click to expand...
Or have read the 9/11 commission report that confirms that there was at least an attempt by Osama to get Saddam to allow training camps
Or have read the Iraqi captain's comments on the training camps that were established in Iraq

Or in general have not fallen into the trap of relying on mainstream media to spoon feed information that we can then pick and choose as it fits our argument
 
Of course, if you read that same 9-11 Commission report it also confirms that Saddam Hussein would have nothing to do with Al Queda.
 
The 9-11 report debunked the connections between Iraq and Al Qaeda. Contact between Iraqis and Al Qaeda does not constitute an alliance.

Do you dispute that the Al Qaeda presence in Iraq increased tremendously after our occupation?
 
Actually, the Iraq situation has bee steadily improving all year. Last month, US deaths were the lowest that they have been since March 2006.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top