How about a Top Ten List?

[FlashBack]

Can the creative minds of the Freepers come up with a TopTen List of why we should not cut and run in Iraq...there's been some comments I've overheard from people who obviously get their news from the Left-Wing...I mean from the Mainstream Media.

Bailing at this point is just so wrong on so many levels that I just cannot fathom anyone even thinking that way...but they are out there.

[technomage]

Probably the biggest reason I can see is this:

If Iraq becomes another radical Islamist country (like Afghanistan and Iran) with the oil reverves Iraq has, they will no longer have to depend on donations from around the world and getting their hands on the money.

They would have an almost unlimited supply of cash. And they would not be using this cash to help the peeples (like most libs would believe). They would rapidly expand their "jihad" around the world.

This would spell serious trouble. Combine that with the invevitable collaboration with Syria and Iran and the war on terror would take a very serious turn.

Remember, the goal of radical Islam is converting the world to middle ages Islam and killing those that do not convert. Period! That is their goal. All that money would surely come in handy!

By the way libs, radical Islam teaches:
Killing anyone who is homosexual.
Banning women from all positions of power.
Forcing all women to wear burkas.
All nudity is punishable by death.
Sexual exploits are punishable by death.

The list goes on and on but as you can see, the partial list above would devastate libs yet somehow they feel they are immune to this just because they "care" and are "compassionate".

They will have a real surprise coming if radical Islam wins OR if the Islamic population in this country gets into the double digits (i.e.10% or more of the population). I can see it now: Court case brought against Hollywood movie and tv studios by muslims who are "offended" by tv and movies. Court case brought against gay clubs when muslims living in the neighborhood claim that their rights are being violated because the Koran teaches that homosexuality is deviant and punishable by death.

What will the libs do?

[Eccl 10:2]

Matthew 12

43"When an evil spirit comes out of a man, it goes through arid places seeking rest and does not find it. 44 When it says, 'I will return to the house I left.' When it arrives, it finds the house unoccupied, swept clean and put in order. 45 Then it goes and takes with it seven other spirits more wicked than itself, and they go in and live there. And the final condition of that man is worse than the first. That is how it will be with this wicked generation."

Substitute "Iraq" for "man". You get the idea.

[garyhope]

#1. 9/11

#2 To hopefully keep the Islamofascists from nuking NYC, Wash. D.C. and other American cities.

#3 To stay free and independent.

#4 Because to leave would be the wrong thing to do.

$5 Because we're not Euro-chickens and weenies.

[Humidston]

I have a little different slant: I firmly believe that the closer we dig into the Oil for Food fiasco, the more the criminal world leaders will try to distract us and unseat Bush.

When we achieve our objective the world will be humbled. Not to mention, (with a little luck) the UN might possibly be totally irrelevant.

[InShanghai]

the UN might possibly be totally irrelevant

And it isn't already?

[rebel_yell2]

#1. It is better to fight and kill the bastards over there than over here.

[The Scourge of Yazid]

1. We still haven't captured Musab al-Zarqawi.

2. We have yet to incinerate Moqtadar al-Sadr.

3. We still have allies-including some courageous Iraqis who are putting their lives on the line every single day-who believe in this mission.

4. We still don't know if, or when, Saddam Hussein destroyed his chemical/biological weapons stockpile.

5. We're still not sure if he shipped these weapons to a third party-either another rogue state or a freelance terrorist organization-before the war commenced.

6. There are still approximately a dozen or so former regime figures-including Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri-who have yet to surrender to Coalition military forces.

7.Iran hasn't been neutralized, but has been emboldened by our current dithering in Iraq. If we leave now, they'll be able to expand their foothold in that part of the Persian Gulf.

8. The Kurds have been our most reliable Muslim ally in the current War on Terror. We can't let them down yet again.

9. Where will the next Iraqi version of Metallica come from if we leave now?

10. ...and...and...and...Kerry's a chicken!

Does that satisfy the requirements of this thread?

[macrahanish #1]

They'll do what libs always do.
Blame conservatives.

[Straight Vermonter]

If you can picture the region, extending from Egypt to Pakistan, Iraq is the geographical keystone.

[The Scourge of Yazid]

Hey! What's that tiny little country located between the Mediterranean and the Dead Sea?

[Smokin' Joe]

Because we would rather have car bombs in Baghdad than Miami.

Because we'll 'recover' the missing WMDs, one at a time if we leave.

Because we really do not want to see all that bad jihadist dancing in the streets on the Al Jizeera network played over and over on CNN.

[mathluv]

Since our troops are still in Japan, Germany, Korea, Bosnia, etc, my question would be do we EVER pull our troops out?

We should move some of our bases now, even here at home.

[shezza]

Ping-o-rama

[mathluv]

You are implying that libs THINK. Don't you know that they just FEEL?

[BSunday]

(drum roll)..and the number one reason why we should stay......because the leftists want us to leave.

[syriacus]

Don't abandon the children of

Iraq

Like my generation abandoned the children of

Vietnam

[Rummyfan]

"Cut-and-run' is not an option! We have started this now we need to see it through, even it that means a tripartitie iraqi confederation. From Mark Steyn in the latest National Review:

It's the crude sado-masochistic elements that bother me. Not in the photos, but in the ensuing ballyhoo. To witness an entire culture — media and political — toss all other business aside for a non-stop ritual self-flagellation session is a remarkable privilege. I use the term "self-flagellation" because, though many Democrats and pundits fancy themselves in the sado-dominant role and clearly enjoy flaying Bush, Rumsfeld, and Co., it is in the objective sense an act of masocho-submission, at least for America. Take, for example, Senator Edward M. Kennedy: "On March 19, 2004, President Bush asked, 'Who would prefer that Saddam's torture chambers still be open?' Shamefully, we now learn that Saddam's torture chambers reopened under new management: U.S. management.

Sad to say, Senator Kennedy, along with Senator Clinton, is the only elected U.S. official other than the president whom the rest of the world has heard of. That's what I mean by self-flagellation: When the most famous name in U.S. politics slanders his country and its military, around the planet it's America that's diminished. For all the bloviating, for all the Vietnam nostalgia, for all the quagmired speechifying, what does the senator actually want for Iraq?

I know what I'd like: Iraq, circa 2010, is a functioning confederal state, not a perfect democracy, but a respectable one — not New Hampshire, not Norway, but not Zimbabwe, either. Think Singapore or Belize. It has a growing economy, an enlightened education system, a free press, and an expanding middle class. Its representative at Arab League meetings votes with the King of Morocco more often than with Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia. Its presence as a free society in the heart of the region changes the dynamic, encouraging reform in some of its neighbors (Jordan) and shriveling the dictatorships in others (Syria).

[FlashBack]

Thanks for the great repsonses...they were great "pick-me-uppers"!!
We need this win in '04 like we've needed no other...the alternatives are the end of our way of life and value system.