Priorities, Priorities - the Cindy Sheehan situation

I didn't say a thing about people dying in that post. I've been consistent in my views in this forum. Don't try to link me with everybody you disagree with.

 

Come on, G-man. It was a sarcastic remark. I mean, "infidel crudader armies" for heaven's sake. I was being cynical . . . or at least trying to be. No disrespect intended.

I just think many of you understimate how nationalistic these insurgents are. The AL Qaida terrorists now operating there are simply murdering to create mahem. But many of the Iraqi insurgents are just fighting what they see as enemy occupiers. This particular problem will vanish when we are gone.

 

It's because we were talikng about the Iraqi insurgents attacking Americans. I differentiate them from the foreign Al Qaida terrorists who are just practicisng their usual terror tactics against civilians. Concerning Al Qaida tactics, I entirely agree with you.

 

I know that you understand that rational people can have very different opinions, amigo. It's kind of what FSA is all about, after all.

I am looking at things from a different perspective, but I'm not blind. I've always been happy to support my thoughts with my reasoning. There can be no doubt that George Bush decisively kicked ass after 9/11. Whether or not he kicked the right ass is subject to much dispute.

C'est la Guerre.

 

I tend to agree. But I thought this had been accomplished with the sacking of the Taliban government in Afghanistan. This action gathered wide support from the left, right and middle. The Taliban actually were in league with and protected the Al-Qaida scum who attacked us on 9/11. That excellent response was a crushing blow to the jihadists and almost everybody agrees.

I believe that at that point a much better assessment of our potential enemies should have been forthcoming. Osama should have been pursued into Pakistan if neccessary. And Saddam should have been known to be bluffing about nuclear weapons while at the same time Korea and Iran were not. A poor decision was made. But that's water under the bridge.

Now the question is: Do we call our work finished and leave Iraq quickly or hang around for 50 years? Bad decisions must be recognized and solutions found. Defending bad decisions and fighting to the bitter end won't work in a guerrilla insugency where no one can win. This is the forgotten lesson of Vietnam.

These ragheads ain't worth our lives and treasure. Why didn't they "insurge" against Saddam if they have such a yearning for freedom? Nothing they do makes sense and as long as we are there, we will be target number one. Sooner or later they have to take responsibility and sort this mess out by themselves. I'm for sooner. We have bigger fish to fry.