June 16th, 2006 4:00 am
After the death of islamonutjob, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, troops found documents indicating the leader of al-Qaida in Iraq was losing confidence in their ability to be successful.
The situation and conditions of the resistance in Iraq have reached a point that requires a review of the events and of the work being done inside Iraq. Such a study is needed in order to show the best means to accomplish the required goals, especially that the forces of the National Guard have succeeded in forming an enormous shield protecting the American forces and have reduced substantially the losses that were solely suffered by the American forces. This is in addition to the role, played by the Shi’a (the leadership and masses) by supporting the occupation, working to defeat the resistance and by informing on its elements.
As an overall picture, time has been an element in affecting negatively the forces of the occupying countries, due to the losses they sustain economically in human lives, which are increasing with time. However, here in Iraq, time is now beginning to be of service to the American forces and harmful to the resistance for the following reasons:
1. By allowing the American forces to form the forces of the National Guard, to reinforce them and enable them to undertake military operations against the resistance.
2. By undertaking massive arrest operations, invading regions that have an impact on the resistance, and hence causing the resistance to lose many of its elements.
3. By undertaking a media campaign against the resistance resulting in weakening its influence inside the country and presenting its work as harmful to the population rather than being beneficial to the population.
4. By tightening the resistance’s financial outlets, restricting its moral options and by confiscating its ammunition and weapons.
5. By creating a big division among the ranks of the resistance and jeopardizing its attack operations, it has weakened its influence and internal support of its elements, thus resulting in a decline of the resistance’s assaults.
6. By allowing an increase in the number of countries and elements supporting the occupation or at least allowing to become neutral in their stand toward us in contrast to their previous stand or refusal of the occupation.
7. By taking advantage of the resistance’s mistakes and magnifying them in order to misinform.
But despite the terrorists documents of despair, John Murtha is there, right on cue, to boost the terrorists’ morale.
“We’re not making progress,” said Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.), a Marine Corps veteran who has emerged as his party’s leading opponent of the war.
Murtha then joined 189 of his Democrat colleagues to vote against a resolution that would “declare that the United States will prevail in the Global War on Terror.”
(Isn’t it ironic that good news for America coincides with bad news for Democrats? Isn’t it also ironic that it’s almost impossible to distinguish between Democrats’ and terrorists’ view of who’s winning the war on terror? It’s not a coincidence.)
So, terrorists, have no fear, some in America want you to know that, despite your own lack of confidence, all is not lost.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Texas Rainmaker is proudly powered by WordPress
Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).
Graphics by: Margolis Media Works | Style by: Lisa Sabin - E.Webscapes
[…] Texas Rainmaker says the new leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq is actually in the US. […]
Pingback by basil's blog » Blog Archive » Notes and a Picnic 2006-06-16 — 4:57 am
How do you come up with such brilliant stuff at 4 a.m.??
Comment by newFan — 6:46 am
Great post. Does anyone know which 3 Republicans voted NO?
Comment by David — 7:03 am
Very interesting…though who actually takes Murtha seriously anymore?
Comment by The Gentle Cricket — 7:21 am
Explain to me, please, both the practicality and the morality of ordering our forces to “stay the course” in a country whose leaders have told insurgents that they need suffer no penalty for killing or wounding U.S. soldiers.
Comment by Lex — 7:57 am
So us locking ourselves up in the green zone or our new permanent bases (50000 troops for years to come)is victory to you. Please by all means let me get a fund together and send you to explore outside the walls without armed backup.
Comment by madmatt — 8:10 am
“So us locking ourselves up in the green zone or our new permanent bases (50000 troops for years to come)is victory to you.”
How long before we withdrew troops from Germany? What? They’re still there? I guess we should retroactively deem WWII a failure and quagmire too?
Comment by Texas Rainmaker — 8:26 am
Lex,
Amnesty is not uncommon in a post war regime. Or when when men lay down their arms.
Abe Lincoln had a few words on the subject.
Comment by M. Simon — 8:29 am
BTW Murtha is in trouble over Haditha:
Comment by M. Simon — 8:33 am
Yeah, but we’re not in a post-war regime over there.
Comment by Lex — 8:34 am
Unlawful Command Influence.
Comment by M. Simon — 8:35 am
10. Lex,
I suppose the second phrase would be operative then.
Probably the sentence I wrote was too long for good reading comprehension. My apologies.
Comment by M. Simon — 8:39 am
“Great post. Does anyone know which 3 Republicans voted NO?”
Walter Jones (NC)
Jim Leach (IA)
Ron Paul (TX)
Comment by Texas Rainmaker — 8:49 am
Lex, look at it this way; we are fighting the radical islamofascists in thier own back yard where they seem more than willing to die for their cause. Their numbers are dwindling (as evidenced by al-Zarqawi himself). They do not have the ability to produce an endless stream of terrorists. Every radical islamofascist that dies in Iraq ia one less that can make his way to America and eventually demand you submit to dhimmitude or surrender your head to his basket.
Yes, we’ve lost some very brave volunteers in the process. But these young people know (apparently far better than you) what is at stake. So rest assured, your “freedoms” are being paid for with the blood of unselfish voluntary patriots. Patriots upon whose blood guys like Murtha are willing to make politica hay. (An ex-Marine, a retired Colonel, a man who knows better, a man who has shamed himself.)
Comment by Old Soldier — 9:58 am
[…] Texas Rainmaker has a good post on captured documents on the enemy state of mind, and reprodcues one of the documents. He goes on to look at those willfully ignoring the enemy’s significance, posture and prospects in this war. […]
Pingback by Pros and Cons » inside the mind of the enemy. — 10:22 am
Only Democrats make political hay.
Republicans display steely resolve.
Its amazing just how perfectly the Zarqawi documents line up w/the Bush Administration’s spin. Call me cynical but I think I’ll reserve judgment until their provenance can be authenticated.
Comment by shingles — 10:41 am
“Call me cynical but I think I’ll reserve judgment until their provenance can be authenticated.”
Comment by shingles — 10:41 am
It sure didn’t take long for someone to question the authenticity of the information. I kind of liked al-Rubaie’s response when he was questioned about the authenticity of the information: “there is nothing more authentic than finding a thumbdrive in his pocket.” (The “his” refers to al-Zarqawi himself.)
Comment by Old Soldier — 10:59 am
Its (sic) amazing just how perfectly the Zarqawi documents line up w/the Bush Administration’s spin.
Yeah, really! You have to wonder how come we were able to repeat the contents of the documents AFTER we found them, as opposed to clairvoyantly reading them BEFORE we found them! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
For those of you on the left, that was sarcasm.
Comment by Jonathan — 11:21 am
I think someone who advances an argument that anyone who is willing to criticize the war and have concern over the ongoing sectarian violence in Iraq somehow supports terrorists and insurgents, is someone who thinks poorly and cannot justify their support of a unjust occupation with anything positive to say.
When over 50 civilians are dying each day from sectraian violence, things are not well. To point that out is not to wish our troops harm, and it is not to support the terrorists. To suggest that criticism of our countries foreign policy is to be a traitor is as facist and scary as anything I’ve seen. It is really frightening to me how the Fox news set has embraced this absurd idea that Murtha wants our soldiers dead and our country to fail. It is intellectual cowardice of those who cannot advance meaningful positive arguments.
Comment by lazerlou — 11:25 am
Murtha makes political hay? So the pathetic dog and pony show the republicans just forced on the House wasn’t about making political hay? WAKE UP! They just wasted 11 hours of time, probably the full week’s work for most of them, cranking up an empty resolution which means absolutely nothing, in order to maneuver democrats for November. Troops don’t give a shit about this stuff. Anyone paying any attention knows that Al Qaeda in Iraq is a small, perhaps even tiny part of the insurgency there. Al Qaeda needs to be pursued across the globe not in Iraq, and that is exactly what Murtha and Kerry, just to name a couple, are proposing. Talk of cutting and running is so much political haymaking garbage. At the same time, while all this noble BS about supporting the troops and having resolve was being spewed out by a bunch of chickenhawks, I heard nothing about finding a way to actually win the war.
Meanwhile, our country is swirling down the toilet because of this endless war. In World War II (a favorite comparison for many Iraq War supporters), after three years we had taken back North Africa, Sicily, much of Italy, and many Pacific Islands. We had backed the Axis powers into corners from which they would never escape. The nation was beinhd the effort and knew what the objective was, as did the troops. After three years in Iraq we’ve still got ourselves a situation where much of this nation doesn’t really have any idea what the outcome is supposed to be, much of Iraq is a free fire zone, and many of the troops openly question the motives behind the effort.
Comment by Harry — 11:25 am
They just wasted 11 hours of time, probably the full week’s work for most of them, cranking up an empty resolution which means absolutely nothing, in order to maneuver democrats for November.
Dude, anytime we can get Congress to waste time is a good thing. The more time they waste doing nothing is less time they have to intrude in our lives and our wallets.
Comment by all_i_can_stands — 11:56 am
[…] Just as Zarqawi had a house dumped on him, taking out the leader of al-Qaeda and adding to the despair and funk they were already in, Jack Murthafucker (D-Baquba) is there with words of comfort, assuring them that all is not lost and that they’ll prevail in the end. […]
Pingback by Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler » Blog Archive » What Would Terrorists Do Without Jack Murtha? — 12:07 pm
Harry:
”Meanwhile, our country is swirling down the toilet because of this endless war.”
I guess unemployment below 5%, federal income (via corporate taxes) at an all time high, increases in new jobs, are avenues to national destruction. I guess we better stop all that nonsense pretty quickly.
Harry:
”In World War II (a favorite comparison for many Iraq War supporters), after three years we had taken back North Africa, Sicily, much of Italy, and many Pacific Islands. We had backed the Axis powers into corners from which they would never escape. The nation was beinhd the effort and knew what the objective was, as did the troops. After three years in Iraq we’ve still got ourselves a situation where much of this nation doesn’t really have any idea what the outcome is supposed to be…”
The comparison we “chickenhawks” make between Iraq and WWI is that victory was/is defined as total defeat of the enemy (in this case, radical islamofascism). Yes, in WWII we defeated national uniformed armies; totally removing their ability/desire to mount offensive operations. In Iraq we have removed a despotic leader who was decimating his own people – we toppled his government and defeated his army. Post WWII we had to rebuild the nations that we defeated, not because we were morally obligated to, but because we wanted them as allies not continued adversaries. Could that be why we are trying to politically stabilize Iraq as well? We may never be truly “accepted” by the Muslims of Iraq, but we can certainly do our best to ensure that Iraq doesn’t continue as a radical islamofascist training/equipping/supporting center. During WWII we did not have a boisterous population advocating for the Nazi’s and Japanese. Not every American supported WWI, but they were not advocating for our defeat. And it would be nice if the nation remained behind the current effort to defeat our self declared enemy.
Comment by Old Soldier — 12:25 pm
One other thing, Old Soldier.
“I guess unemployment below 5%, federal income (via corporate taxes) at an all time high, increases in new jobs, are avenues to national destruction. I guess we better stop all that nonsense pretty quickly.”
Consider where the jobs are coming from, and the fact that the middle class is continuing to suffer (the middle class that made this country such an incredible economic engine after WW2). Record numbers of people can’t afford health insurance. The administration lied about the cost of the mdeicare drug plan. Why? Federal income at an all time high, if that’s really true (and don’t even try to convince me that corporations are paying their full share of taxes), doesn’t seem to be doing anything about the record deficit. Why do we continue to have to borrow money from China, fer cryin’ out loud?
Comment by Harry — 1:02 pm
It sure didn’t take long for someone to question the authenticity of the information. I kind of liked al-Rubaie’s response when he was questioned about the authenticity of the information: “there is nothing more authentic than finding a thumbdrive in his pocket.” (The “his” refers to al-Zarqawi himself.)
Comment by Old Soldier — 10:59 am
OK, so that counts as proof then? Apparantly al-Rubaie’s word is good enough for you. I’ll keep that in mind when he says something in the future that you disagree with.
Maybe the document is authentic, maybe its not. Who knows. There’s a ton of disinformation floating around out there. Me, I prefer to soberly wait for independent verification before I jump for joy.
And Jonathan (comment #20): you misunderstood what I was saying. I was talking about how this document meshes perfectly with the administration’s spin PRIOR TO THE DOCUMENT’S DISCOVERY on how we’re winning the war. The document acts as confirmation of the rightness of the administration’s policies. So much so that it makes me suspicious.
Comment by shingles — 1:15 pm
MURTHA, YOU SCALLAWAG: PART III
Texas Rainmaker has a delightful expose of the connection between the desires of al Qaeda and Jack Murtha (Moonbat, Pa.). TR notes a communique from al Q that notes: The…
Trackback by GM's Corner — 1:54 pm
Murtha then joined 189 of his Democrat colleagues to vote against a resolution that would “declare that the United States will prevail in the Global War on Terror.”
The resolution was about setting a timetable for withdrawal but don’t let that stop you from joining with the arseholes who wrote the bill in using the tacked on language to paint their opponents as anti-american.
You LIAR.
Comment by Angryflower — 1:56 pm
John Murtha used to be a Marine
Now he’s a traitor….
Trackback by Something... and Half of Something — 2:10 pm
Angry flower is confusing the House of Reps with the Senate, must be the anger.
shingles accuses without any proof whatsoever and then changes stance to something about waiting for proof, but that proof evidently must be to the negative as far as the US is concerned. “But don’t you dare question shingles’ patriotism”(tm)
Harry evidently hasn’t got a clue about the subject of economics. But don’t let that spoil Harry’s anger. he likes toilets or at least the reference to toilets. Sounds intellectual to him.
Jim invents a strawman in the phrase, “steely resolve” so he can attack it.
Lex doesn’t know that the statement from the Iraw prime minister that was hastily publised by MSM and moonbat blogsites has since been repudiated as being FALSE in the first place. But don’t let that spoil Lex’s anger.
The Old Soldier fights the good fight of those who know Truth.
Carry on.
.
Comment by The Machine — 4:58 pm
(#29) Angryflower - Murtha then joined 189 of his Democrat colleagues to vote against a resolution that would “declare that the United States will prevail in the Global War on Terror.”
The resolution was about setting a timetable for withdrawal but don’t let that stop you from joining with the arseholes who wrote the bill in using the tacked on language to paint their opponents as anti-american.
You LIAR.
Try knowing that of which you speak next time. The House resolution was NOT about setting a timetable. It was exactly what I said it was.
Feel free to apologize at your convenience.
Comment by Texas Rainmaker — 5:30 pm
Blah Blah BLah.
Who’s coward..he’s a coward..wouldn’t some else like to be a coward to! IT’s like the damn Dr. pepper song.
Come on ya’ll! Being a Texan myself, Texas Rainmaker…stop using Texas to sell your opinions by the way.
Get over worrying about Murtha. He has his opinions and is no means a coward. All your donations should be going to the war effort. Not so you don’t have to have a real job and spend all your time blogging (self-masturbation), and asking for free handouts.
Sounds like welfare to me….
Comment by gitland — 5:53 pm
“All your donations should be going to the war effort. Not so you don’t have to have a real job and spend all your time blogging (self-masturbation), and asking for free handouts.
Sounds like welfare to me….”
Sounds like personal experience talking to me. And for what’s it’s worth, here is a list of charities that have received money from the minimal amount of revenue generated by this blog:
Injured Marine Semper Fi Fund
Soldiers’ Angels
Fisher House Foundation
Feel free to do YOUR part and send them a donation as well.
..and I do this in my spare time from my real (and very successful) career. But thanks for your concern.
Comment by Texas Rainmaker — 5:59 pm
“The problem is - BUSH ISN’T PURSUING THE ENEMY.
The enemy is Al Qaeda.
We’re shooting up cities in the one Middle Eastern nation Al Qaeda **wasn’t**, until we got there.”
Oh really?
Someone might want to inform Richard Clarke and the Clinton Justice Department.
Comment by Texas Rainmaker — 6:20 pm
I have neither the time not inclination to respond to all the smoke and blather that has been pumped at those who defend securing victory first. I will however respond to this:
“OK, I’ve had enough of this. I am a liberal progressive Democrat, and I **am not** advocating for our defeat. And I DO NOT KNOW OF ANYONE WHO IS.”
Actions speak louder than words. Reread Jason’s post and be sure to read the outcome of the vote Jason references. Then tell me the Democrtatic party is not in favor of cutting and running - securing a defeat! And securing a stronghold from which radical islam can operate from…
Comment by Old Soldier — 6:54 pm
Did someone leave the back door open? Why all of a sudden do we have trolls by the bucket on this blog? Why don’t all you libs go back to your own blogs and commiserate together where you can use bad language and call people who disagree with you bad names? You can’t post anything on a liberal blog because of their viciousness. Maybe some readers are going to get tired of this?????
Comment by Judith — 7:50 pm
I’m not sure I agree with Murtha, but then I think George Bush is a turd in a toilet. I too am a former officer, Army, and a combat veteran, the referenced turd is not, oh and don’t think I have any respect for the other choice in the past election, he is another turd, slimier if that is possible, in the same toilet. But YOU can thank Murtha and me and people like us for your ability to post your lame, but as good as any other, opinion. I’m trying to think of something catchy, oh yes,JOHN McNAMARA and Brenda Lee, one sings and one fucking cries.
Richard
Comment by Richard Braswell — 8:26 am
When y’all get serious about eliminating radical Islamofascism, you let me know. But here’s a clue: “Getting serious” != “kill ‘em all.” Because you can’t. One of the advantages of belonging to a military family is that you learn early that some problems don’t have exclusively military solutions.
Old Soldier: In the unlikely event you ever become qualified to judge my wisdom OR my patriotism, I’ll let you know. But don’t hold your breath.
Machine: Not only did the official making that statement insist it was true even after he left his job, a number of Senate Republicans have publicly agreed with him. I’m a Republican and have been for almost 30 years, and I’m struggling to think of ANY circumstance in which a congressional Democrat could have made such a statement and not been forced to repudiate it, if not resign, within days.
Comment by Lex — 12:14 pm
Give me a break. John Murtha is a great man who served his country admirably for 37 years. The right acts as though anyone who criticizes this incompetent administration somehow supports the terrorists. Give me a break!
Comment by Shawn — 12:33 pm
Shawn, you’re an idiot. Murtha is an idiot too. He is not criticizing the admin, he is telling the terrorists that they are winning. And that makes him a damn traitor. Maybe he could offer an alternative plan instead of just reassuring terrorist that their cause is not as lost as it really is.
Comment by phillip w. — 2:00 pm
“Murtha then joined 189 of his Democrat colleagues to vote against a resolution that would ‘declare that the United States will prevail in the Global War on Terror.’”
If victory can be achieved by an act of Congress that simply declares the US victorious, then why don’t we just do that and bring the boys home? The taxpayers would save a whole lot of money and Bush could declare “Mission Accomplished” and really mean it. Of course, there are a few tactical problems with such a plan:
1) A hollow declaration of victory is exactly that and nothing more. It won’t end the insurgency. It won’t save one soldier’s or one civilian’s life but it might make a bunch of millionaire congressmen feel better about themselves.
2) I don’t think the terrorists care what John Murtha thinks, or what Republicans in Congress think. They aren’t going to recoil in fear because an American legislative body issues a sugar-coated declaration of patriotism.
(BTW, since when did terrorists need to hear words of reassurance? These clowns gleefully blow themselves up every day. I think they’re way beyond the sphere of influence of anything uttered in our Congress.)
3) We’re not going to eliminate terrorism. We can only strive to reduce terrorism. Terrorism is not a concrete thing that can be manipulated or defeated, such as an army or a government. Terrorism is an abstract concept that can be employed any time, any place, by anybody for any reason or for no reason at all except, perhaps, sheer insanity. However, we can neutralize/eliminate individuals or organizations who are known terrorists and we can work to create conditions abroad that discourage employing terrorism to achieve political goals, but that becomes really hard to do when you topple existing power structures and you don’t immediatley establish security, thereby effectively creating a haven for terrorists.
As someone who considers himself fairly centrist (I lean left on some issues, right on others) I’ll go so far as to say that removing Saddam’s regime, in and of itself, was a good thing, at least with regard to Saddam’s record on human rights. Never mind that Bush’s publicly stated reasons for invading Iraq (WMD, imminent threat, etc.) proved to be shaky, at best.
However, “in and of itself” is the problem here. Saddam’s regime did not exist all by itself. It existed in a larger and more complex geopolitical context that was utterly ignored by the Bush Administration. Bush’s choice to ignore predictions of ethnic/religious violence is partly, if not directly, a major reason why chaos rules the day in Iraq even after so much time has passed since the invasion.
Had we not done the invasion and occupation “on the cheap” perhaps post-invasion resistance would have been significantly reduced, if not prevented. I have to wonder if administration insiders knew this and if there was some perceived advantage to allowing an insurgency to take hold. Perhaps the real lesson Bush43 learned from the presidency of Bush41 was that if you want to win re-election, make sure you have a war in progress that you can run on in an election year and then play the patriotism card. If you execute a war too well and achieve your publicly stated military goals too quickly, the public will shift its attention to other priorities and problems at home and those can be liabilities in an election year.
I really think that reasonable security could have been established in Iraq if the Bush administration had taken the care to do it. Maybe that’s what people like John Murtha are upset about.
Smile.
Comment by JML — 2:55 pm
[…] Terrorists winning. […]
Pingback by Texas Rainmaker » Liberalism in 25 Words — 9:04 am
[…] Terrorists winning. […]
Pingback by Jim N Texas! » Blog Archive » Liberalism in 25 Words — 9:07 pm
Interesting links in #44.
I’m curious as to how you think my post is proof that the terrorists are winning. I agree that perhaps they have gotten far more than they expected, with half of America chomping at the bit to shred the Constitution and create a theocratic police state. I stated that terrorism will never be eliminated. If you honestly think we can eliminate terrorism once and for all, please explain to me how this is possible. I’m in the dark, bring me into the light…
1) I have no problem with patriotism itself, but I do have a problem with the way some on the right use patriotism in much the same way that some on the left use political correctness. Example: If I criticize a co-worker’s work as being of poor quality, and that co-worker happens to be a minority, the politically correct lefties among us might immediately call me racist for attacking a minority, without regard to whether or not that individual’s work was in fact poor. Likewise, if I suggest that an action of the Bush Administration is not, in my opinion, in America’s best interest, right-wingers will immediately call me unpatriotic, without taking the time to consider whether my criticism has any validity. It’s the knee-jerk brand of patriotism that can ultimately prove more harmful than beneficial.
2) Hey, it’s the page I’m already on!
3) The problem here is that many, but certainly not all, people that we label terrorist do, in fact, see themselves as freedom fighters or liberators who are either bent on driving an occupying army out of their homeland or settling old scores with traditional regional rivals. Throw in a few incidents like Abu Ghraib and that mindset only gets reinforced. Before you blame this on the Hippie-Dope-Somking-Hacky-Sack-Playing-Flower-Petting-Kitty-Sniffing-Ultra-Liberal-Media (HDSHSPFPKSULM), consider that the Arab world has its own media outlets that will propagate such stories and spin them to serve their own interests. It is best not to give them such ammunition if we want to change hearts and minds.
4) Unfortunately, despite the best and often heroic efforts of the vast majority of our soldiers, we occasionally have a few who cross the line from soldier to murderer. Given the stress that most of the soldiers endure, I’m not surprised that a few occasionally “snap.” When they do, they feed into the problem described above in #3. The HDSHSPFPKSULM links that you provided seem to suggest that a local Iraqi reported seeing Al-Zarqawi being beaten after the bombing. The HDSHSPFPKSULM obviously wants to get as much play out of this story as possible, so they will report any shred of information that they can get their hands on. It’s all about ratings, as dictated by market forces.
5) It’s hard to swing a dead cat without hitting somebody with a conspiracy theory of one sort or another. It would be interesting, though, to know why the Bush Administration initially resisted calls to conduct investigations into what went wrong on 9/11. Perhaps his primary concern was maintaining his image as a wartime leader. Any investigation was likely to uncover a failure somewhere in the system.
6) Good old Cindy Sheehan. What would the right do without her? I’m glad somebody is vocally challenging the Bush Administration, but I’m not particularly glad that it is she that is doing it. There’s a point at which everybody needs to realize that the men and women who chose to join the armed forces did so of their own will and were fully aware of the risks involved and they also must have been aware that such a commitment might bind them to serve in situations that they themselves might not approve of. Had her son been drafted against his will, her arguments might hold more water.
Comment by JML — 9:45 pm
Terrorists depend on winning in American hearts and minds what they cannot win on the battle field. In fact it is one of the first bullet points in one of their recent laments.
From the looks of some of the comments here they seem to be doing a fair job. Still it seems there is quite a bit of room for improvement.
The cut and run faction seems to be losing votes in Congress and elections in the country.
Comment by M. Simon — 9:46 pm
re: # 36 - I followed your links, labeled ‘Richard Clarke’ and ‘Clinton Justice Department’. You posted them to refute my claim, that we are shooting up cities in Iraq where Al Qaeda wasn’t until we got there.
You first link was to some info on the bombing of the factory in the Sudan. This does not place Al Qaeda in Iraq. Your second link was to some speculation that Al Qaeda agreed to not work directly against Hussein’s regime Iraq, as a foundation to possibly work together in the future. This ALSO does not place Al Qaeda in Iraq.
Thank you for providing no evidence for your argument. as my arguments have evidence, they win.
Comment by jim x — 10:01 am
Jim X,
The link to Richard Clarke’s statement that “the U.S. government is “sure” that Iraqi nerve gas experts actually produced a powdered VX-like substance at the plant” is pretty strong evidence that al-Qaida and Iraq were working together (to say nothing of the “evidence” the Clinton admin must’ve had to issue the 1998 indictment).
Looks like you’re trying to make the argument that while acknowledging that Iraq and al-Qaida may have worked together, we shouldn’t have invaded Iraq because no member of al-Qaida had set foot within Iraq’s borders.
Well, then, try this on for size:
Comment by Texas Rainmaker — 10:10 am
For people like The Machine, here’s a link from the Washington Post which has a link to a pdf of a cable released by the US Embassy in Baghdad hours before Our Fearless Leader took off on his recent trip to Baghdad.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/16/AR2006061601768.html
Paints a real graphic picture of all the “good” we’re doing there fighting the fight against the insurgents, and “standing up” the Iraqi Army/Police, so we can “stand down.” Murtha is offering a solution that allows us to remain engaged against terrorists around the world, while allowing our Armed Forces to recover from their present abuse (that phrase from several members of the Armed Forces of my acquaintance), and be ready to pounce back in if need be. In other words, he’s thinking about it rather than just hauling up the flag, conjuring up a manly tear and spewing false blather about 9/11 over C-SPAN so he can tell his constituents he’s strong against terrorists. Too bloody right I’m angry, Machine. Our country is being taken down from within the Beltway, while our people are dying overseas as an Islamic Republic grows around them, contrary to the stated aims of the invasion (or at least the ones that were stated after the original aims proved to be false). Does that disturb you at all?
Comment by Harry — 10:47 am
Harry, doesn’t seem much worse than a typical day in Los Angeles. High gas prices, harassment, evictions, gang violence, power outages, kidnappings, and the like.
Comment by Texas Rainmaker — 12:05 pm
Nonsense, and you know it. A bad day in LA is like a day at the beach by comparison. Can you tell me the last time an IED went off at Florence and Normandie and killed 30 innocent bystanders? Can you show me that LA only has power for 4-8 hours a day, every day? Can you show me that professional women in LA are being threatened by gangsters for not wearing veils or for using cell phones?
Comment by Harry — 2:45 pm
Murtha is offering a solution that allows us to remain engaged against terrorists around the world.
Do you or your boy Murtha even know where Okinawa is located? It’s damned neary 5,000 miles away from the Middle East, where rumor has it there’s a hotbed of terrorist activity.
So, to your rosy characterization of Mad Dog Murtha’s “idea”: BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Comment by Jonathan — 6:23 pm
Oh yeah, I know where Okinawa is. My father was stationed there in the early 60s. My brother commanded a battalion landing team out of there in the 90s. My nephew passed through there on his way to Iraq in 2003. All three Marines. One an Old Breed veteran of WW2, Korea and early Vietnam. Do you know where the Persian Gulf is? Qatar? Diego Garcia? The Indian Ocean? Do you know what an Amphibious Ready Group is? Do you know what a MEU (SOC) is?
Comment by Harry — 10:21 am
Oh yeah, I know where Okinawa is.
Then you know what a stupid idea it is to launch a Middle East attack from there, oui?
Do you know where the Persian Gulf is?
Yep, my old man had some SCUDs lobbed at him in 1991 when he was there. He forgot to send me a postcard, though. Damned shame. Oh, well, at least he returned alive. I’m pretty sure I wasn’t screaming “No blood for oil” or other moonbattery while he was there…I’m funny that way.
Comment by Jonathan — 7:00 pm
[…] Terrorists winning. […]
Pingback by UrbanGrounds » Blog Archive » Defining Liberalism in 25 Words — 9:41 am
[…] It won’t be long before they grant voting rights to al-Qaida members… And it’s pretty clear how they’d vote. No Comments » […]
Pingback by Texas Rainmaker » Democrats Want More Protections for Everyone EXCEPT American Citizens — 2:45 pm
Chinese Degree Verification
Question: How to check Certificates of Attendance of Higher Education programmes gained in China?
Trackback by Chinese Degree Verification — 2:42 am