[stand4somethin]

I posted this article inside of an earlier post of mine on the so-called civil war in Iraq. But it is worth its own post so that no one will miss it. The original posting was also about the so-called "civil war" in Iraq and can be found here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1587927/posts

[Political Junkie Too]

The second-guessing of 2003 still daily obsesses us: We should have had better intelligence; we could have kept the Iraqi military intact; we would have been better off deploying more troops.

I'm still baffled at how these lookbacks always ignore the impact that Powell's losing Turkey and the northen launch point for our forces has had on the overall war in Iraq. If we had a northern front and a southern front, we would have controlled the area that the terrorists fled to (and the border crossers came to) and we might not be seeing the entrenched insurgency that is there today.

-PJ

[Steve_Seattle]

If blowing up the Golden Dome doesn't start a civil war, it's hard to think of something bigger that WOULD start a civil war. I just wish at some point we could see the light at the end of the tunnel, but that point hasn't come yet. We don't seem to have arrived at the point where the insurgency is noticeably diminished. The reason for that, I think, is that we are fighting more than terrorists, we are fighting nihilists. It's harder and harder for me to see the Zarquawi crowd as Muslims. When so-called Muslims blow up mosques, kill fellow Muslims, innocent civilians, babies and children, women, day after day, deliberately, I can only call it nihilism, not Islam. A nihilist is the most dangerous enemy because he has fallen in love with destruction for the sake of destruction. He will destroy the world rather than give up. The enemy is even more evil than Bush thought it was.

[neverdem]

bump & pings