Unregistered
Moderator
Thats great. Now lets declare victory (if it makes us feel better) and get the heck out. Instead of defending Iraq's borders, lets use the troops to defend our own.
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.
Harry Reid had already said we had lost. Evidently Al Queda didn't get that DNC memo.
That's the official story anyway... Interesting that despite the "surge" and the fact that things are getting "better" in Iraq...2007 has been the deadliest year so far for us.
Didn't something similar happen with that buffoon Reagan? How did that turn out for the Democrat Party then?
It's a war against Al Q NOW. Since things seem to be going our way, what do you say we all try pulling together for another year or so and try to WIN it. I know that word is no longer in the democrat vocabulary (just like RUN AWAY has been changed to REDEPLOY) but we should not let them take it from us. Americans love to Win, but Democrats only win when we lose, and they know it.
But don't expect Al Q. to learn any lessons from this. We chased them out of Afghanistan in months, they only held out in Tora Bora for days, and yet they claim both of those as victories.
Just like the Alamo was a victory for Texas and the Little Bighorn was a victory for Custesr. (looks like Al Q is just as good at changing the meaning of words as the Democrats!)
Much as I hope this is true, I'm always leary of proclaiming victory when the dust has yet to settle. I'm reminded of those warnings in high school about answers to multiple-choice exam questions that include the words "always" or "never" as being usually the wrong answer.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.
If you knock over a hornet's nest, you just don't realize it was stupid to knock it over and ignore the hornets swarming around you. You deal with the consequences of your mistake or things will get worse.
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.
Really?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
Show me that debunking pleaseThe 9-11 report debunked the connections between Iraq and Al Qaeda
Show me that debunking pleaseThe 9-11 report debunked the connections between Iraq and Al Qaeda
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.
Musketeer,
Thanks for the laugh
I'll add a little to it:
Does this mean that the insurgency is in it's last throes?
Sorry to disappoint you, the Paulians and the Democrats, GoSlash, but we're not losing.
I was actually baiting you a littlebut I am pretty certain their conclusion was that AQ was not working with Iraq during the planning and execution of the 9-11 attacks.
Those sources are most likely correct, but at the behest of the Sudanese government Osama sought a working relationship with SaddamI have read in multiple places that Bin Laden did not approve of the type of Islam and secular culture Iraq was involved in, but perhaps those sources were all incorrect