This is not a post I relish writing, as I am about to make predictions that only spell disaster for the USA. But as I continue to see the divide between the antiwar crowd and the Bush defenders widen, with people continuing to be forced to choose a side, I am more and more convinced that we can lose not only the war in Iraq, but possibly lose the war on terror completely. Allow me to document:
1. The Iraq theater - This has not been a shining success for us since our initial invasion, when the WMD's that we expected to find did not appear. And while the capture of Saddam Hussein was a good thing, the war has stretched on past the expectations of most Americans. The Iraqi government is still shaky and making friends with Iran. And we have only seen improvement after the change in strategy that was desperately needed. Now, with the country more secure, the pressure to leave will increase. This means that Al Qaeda just has to hold on until we're gone. Then they can start the bombing back up.
2. FISA and Gitmo - We have a mess on both these fronts. FISA, the authorization to wiretap terrorists, is being held up for mindless politics as usual, over protecting businesses that supplied the government with requested information from lawsuits. With Bush threatening a veto of the House version of the bill, the House and Senate versions differing on the previous point, and no sign of resolution in sight before the general election, we have just lost a tool to fight terror. As for Guantanamo Bay, it is still a political football being tossed away by all three top-tier candidates. Which brings me to,
3. The antiwar crowd - From the Code Pinkos who show up everywhere to scream "war criminal" at every member of the Bush Administration they can find, to bombings and vandalism against military recruiters, to towns passing resolutions charging President Bush with war crimes, the antiwar movement that made Vietnam truly unwinnable is back at it again. But this time, it's not a chess game with Communism we're fighting. We are fighting an enemy that will use our weaknesses against us. And their best weapon is the antiwar bunch.
4. Presidential candidates - With the exception of John McCain, every other candidate of note is in line with the antiwar pukes. Clinton and Obama have promised to pull troops out, and I'm not sure what their plans to win are. On the fringe, Ralph Nader and Ron Paul, polar opposites on most every other issue, are both insanely ready to jerk troops they day they would (theoretically, thankfully) take the oath of office. And even McCain, while supporting the war at large is ready to close down Gitmo, end anything that might be perceived as torture so America hold its head up high. But the problem is that there's a murderous raghead with a knife ready to saw that head off.
Al Qaeda thinks in decades, in survival, in using a culture's weaknesses to strike it, to infect it, and to kill it. They are simply trying to survive until we give up on the war because it is unpopular, because somebody might get their rights violated, because we have these foolish ideals about how to treat murdering bastards.
Al Qaeda will win because we lack the will to win. And we will lose because we choose to give up. We have always been a nation slow to enter war, but willing to win, even at a terrible cost. We are that nation no longer.
7 comments:
1. By going into Iraq, we created Al Qaeda in Iraq. If you don't want situations like these to repeat themselves, don't vote for a war hawk Republican who thinks he has to prove how big his balls are. "Bring em on" and "Mission Accomplished" just show us what kind of "leadership" has brought us to this point. This has all happened before and it will happen again if you keep putting clones of the same people in power. Is the world better off without Saddam sure but is the world (besides Exxon) better off with the 3rd largest oil producing nation in the world in politica and economic chaos? No. Is the world better off that because of Iraq there are now more terrorists and we create more every day we are there? No. Are we better off that Iran now knows we could never invade them and overthrow their government?No. A vote for McCain is like a vote for another 100 years of Bush; His words, not mine.
2. If you can't win a war without spying on your own citizens you were never going to win in the first place. What does Gitmo have to do with the war? It doesn't help us win or lose battles.
3. Who has the anit war crowd bombed? Its the war crowd who is doing the bombing, ask the 50-100k dead Iraqis about that. As I said, this has happened before and it will happen again. Vietnam was a staged war that we were dragged into based on lies and corporate sponsorship. When there is this much money to be made in war, you will see a lot more of them. If the American people don't protest this then we might as well start lining up for our food pellets and our daily re-education camps.
4. We have already won the war, its time to go. Our objectives:
A. Get the WMDs. Done, there were and are none
B. Get Saddam and his sons. Done
C. Reestablish an Iraqi government aka (spread freedom). Done
D. Train an Iraqi army. Done, but they already had one that Brimmer decided set loose with their weapons to turn into militias but 5 years later they now have one again.
E. Exxon recorded record profits and their stock prices along with Halliburton, Chevron, UDI and every other company with connections to Washington, have all skyrocketed making them all rich. Mission accomplished.
So whats your problem exactly? You think we should be there for another 100 years? They are only attacking us because we are there. If we weren't there, they wouldn't be shooting at us.
1 Dammit, you're making me have to defend McCain.
McCain is right in that sense. While no one wants to spend 100 years in a war, that's the kind of commitment we have to have to beat these murderous cockbites. And if it was not one place we have to weed them out, it's another. Not saying Iraq has been all puppies and handjobs, bit if we can get it stabilized and get out, we will be in better shape than before we went in.
2. FISA is for spying on foreign terrorists. The F stands for Foreign. Get it.
And Gitmo is becoming a political football and something terrorist and Code Pinkos can use.
3. New York recruiting office was bombed, plenty of others vandalized. Then there's Berkley.
As for bombing, ask the Iraqis who is bombing their markets. It ain't the American Army.
4. A-D are accomplishments, and as I have said, it is time to begin looking at our exit strategery.
As for E, and part of 3, tere's no discussion without finding a corporation for you to bash, is there?
And my problem is this, as I was a little unclear writing my post at 1am:
We are fighting an enemy that wants to kill as many of us as it can. The only way to beat them is to kill every last one of the sons of bitches, then defile their corpses with goats so that these bastards don't mess with us ever again.
But we are too divided, too sensitive, and too weak-willed to do what must be done. And your comment proves just that.
What exactly does "Al Quaeda wins"
mean? They rule the entire world?
We pull our nose out of other country's business? Terror runs amock? We fix US infrastructure rather than Iraq's? US surrenders and we become a fundamentalist muslim state? What exactly...?
Ah, a simple but complex question.
Al Qaeda wins simply by continuing to exist, by spreading terror, by attacking us again. It is also about our utter lack of resolve in fighting the war. It's about America growing tired of a war that doesn't have a movie ending like the first Gulf War, or the great WWII. It's about the mentality that led us to the disaster that Vietnam became.
And I thought it was a catchy title for the post.
1. What is "beating them". Define that. If you kill a vile anti american you think your job is done. I say when you do that you leave his 4 sons and 6 brothers who now want to avenge his death.
For someone so against the "nanny state", you seem to have no problem with being Iraqs nanny and pulling money away from Americans to do it, as long as it means your taxes don't go up and we just cut education budgets for black kids in the city. So, define winning. I just did, we have won.
2. So you don't advocate wire tapping American citizens without warrents? Only foreigners? Ok, thats one thing we can agree on but that still has nothing to do with winning in Iraq. You aren't going to get any intelligence about Baghdad from some exchange student in Iowa.
3. No, its the military contractors who are gunning people down, not the military, thanks for pointing that out. One military recruiting center has been "bombed". That's what upsets you? Not the 30,000 gun deaths per year or the Planned Parenthoods that get bombed but everyone is fair game besides military targets?
4. But thats what it always comes back to doesn't it. Follow the money. Why do your favorite TV shows get cancelled? Its not because the writters were done, its not because the shows sucked, its because the corporations no longer wanted to put their money in it. Its not a conspiracy theory its a fact.
Yes, defile them, it worked so well at Abu Ghraib.
We'll make this really short, so you can comprehend.
We need to kill every last one of them. If that means their sons or brothers are going to bring the Jihad, we kill them too.
What the hell does the war have to do with screwing black children, and what does it say about you that you try to make such a stupid statement?
You're going seriously conspiracy theory on the wiretapping. You almost sound like a Ron Paulista.
Anybody terror bombing should be chucked in jail. If they kill anybody doing it, they should be shot in the face. That includes the anti-abortion zealots.
As for the corporation bashing, the corporations are just using the available cash to make money. Your problem should be with a government that spends too much, not with a company that uses that to their advantage. And yes, that includes the Bush administration.
And I'm talking about defiling the dead, not the living.
Where do I begin....
oh yeah. Here's the short answer.
Anybody who attacks our country, or shoots at our troops should be shot dead.
I don't have every answer as to the costs, but I would like to see an end to the hostilities in Iraq. However, I am willing to trust the current military commanders to pull out and leave a relatively stable Iraq. Other than that, I don't know what to tell you.
Ad as for who I've called traitors for trying to defund the war, please provide me the example.
Post a Comment