Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Prost1

I was once OK with "War on Islamofascism" but now I see why the President chose to be more general in the naming. Baathists are more like hard-core leftists than Islamists. Bush has centered the war on terror, wisely, on the Godless socialist Baathists...leaving a "way out" for the Islamists to "save face". The way the western left has come to support the socialist Baathist terrorists is so shocking that many Islamists must be shaking their heads and wondering if they, the Islamists, really want a world in which they are allied with such nutcases plus the Godless Baathists. We can defeat the socialists and the Islamists can pretend to thank us for it...thus surrendering to us by making it look like they wanted the Baathists gone all the time. Our naming the WOT would be quite important.

Similarly, it is good that the President didn't call this WW3. That would have invited the enemy to make this more of a world war than it has been. WOT is a good name that gives everyone a chance to end hostilities at any time conditions are right and terror is renounced.


54 posted on 11/29/2005 2:26:46 PM PST by GermanBusiness
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]


To: GermanBusiness

Good thoughts...

So there are several enemies. Islamofacists, Baathists, Terrorists, Arabs and Turks....and vile Imans...


57 posted on 11/29/2005 2:31:34 PM PST by Prost1 (I get my news at Free Republic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson