Posted on 11/24/2006 6:46:08 PM PST by kristinn
I'm reading an astonishing number of comments on Free Republic these days by posters who have joined the ranks of the anti-American left in calling for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. Some claim to have military experience, some claim to be patriotic Americans and some claim to be smarter than the rest.
These posters are joining the Murtha-Rangel-McDermott treason caucus. Oh, they say they love the troops, but their decision to abandon them in the field speaks otherwise.
Three years ago, the United States led an international coalition to rid the world of one of the worst regimes on the planet. Saddam Hussein was an international terrorist: He financed terrorism, he trained terrorists and he harbored terrorists. He waged war on Iran, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Israel. He waged war on the people of Iraq, including genocidal campaigns against the Kurds in the north and the marsh Arabs in the south.
Saddam successfully subverted the Oil-for-Food program and was wearing down support for continuing the sanctions keeping him in check.
He had numerous contacts with al Qaeda over the years. He tried to assassinate a former U.S. president. He maintained research capabilities to implement nuclear, chemical and biological weapons as soon as the sanctions were lifted. There is evidence that some of these programs would have been operational within a year even with the sanctions in place.
The decision to remove Saddam and his regime as part of the Global War on Terror was correct.
Three-and-a-half years after Iraq and the world were liberated from Saddam and his terrorist regime, there are those on Free Republic who are clamoring to give up, surrender, cut and run, stab the troops in the back, betray the Iraqis, betray our allies in the GWOT, spit on the graves of our fallen heroes and join Cindy Sheehan, Medea Benjamin and Ramsey Clark in bringing about America's defeat in the GWOT.
It's only been three-and-a-half years--only six months since the freely elected government in Iraq was formed. In that time, what has been called a mini-Marshall Plan of construction and reconstruction has come to fruition. The Iraqis have held three national elections, they have held numerous local elections, fourteen out of eighteen Iraq provinces are relatively peaceful and stable.
Six months ago, when the Iraqi government was formed, the experts said the war would be taken to Baghdad because our enemies in the region could not abide the example of a free, democratic society in the Middle East. For once, the experts were right. The battle of Baghdad has been a prolonged Tet Offensive style operation of headline-grabbing attacks intended to sap the morale of Americans and Iraqis alike.
From what I've been reading on Free Republic lately, a lot of Freepers have fallen for the enemy's ploy and are howling like barking moonbats for our immediate withdrawal from Iraq. Some of that talk is couched in talk of 'we're fighting a PC war like Vietnam!' The soldiers I met in Iraq recently told Debra Argel Bastian to pass on a message to the Vietnam vets criticizing the war: With all due respect to your service, this is not Vietnam. It is not being fought like Vietnam. Please let us finish our mission.
But our enemy is playing the Vietnam ploy to great benefit. They know they can count on the American and world media to broadcast their propaganda. They work with leftist Americans to sabotage the war effort at home. They know these leftist Americans have allies in the Democratic party. They know they do not need a military victory--only political and psychological victories are needed to defeat America.
You guys are playing right in to their hands. Congratulations.
There are those who argue that murder and dictatorship is the mindset of the Middle East and that will not be changed by our actions. Funny how those who smugly denigrate the Arab peoples' capacity for freedom forget the wholesale slaughter of millions of Westerners by Westerners at the hands of Western dictatorships just a few generations past.
I hear complaints that the Iraqis aren't standing up. Yet, to use one common example, when police recruits are slaughtered in bombings, Iraqis line up the next day at the same recruiting center. The insurgency is small in number, but they are able to do enough damage on a daily basis to stretch out the time it will take to secure the whole of Iraq.
At this time of our testing, the American people are starting to go wobbly. Sadly, many Freepers are too. Our troops and their Commander-in-Chief are not, thank God. It's only been three-and-a-half years. The progress made has been phenomonal. Throw in the towel now, and you'll just have the terrorists follow us home. Everyone knows that, including you. I'm not willing to pay that price, not now, not ever, but you are.
Let me close by offering similar sentiments recently offered by two men 'in the know' on the situation in Iraq who are not giving up. First, Kurdish Regional Government Prime Minister Barzani: "When I was in the United States recently and read the negative news in the Washington Post, New York Times and in the network TV broadcasts, I even wondered if things had gotten so bad since I had left that I shouldn't return."
Next, Gen. Abizaid: "When I come to Washington, I feel despair. When I'm in Iraq with my commanders, when I talk to our soldiers, when I talk to the Iraqi leadership, they are not despairing."
Thanks Dixie!
Impossible to refute actual photographs and exact quotes
Jon Carry? Nixon?
Robert Gates brings a kindler, gentler get the h3ll out strategy. Sorry to be the one to break the news. This is why the neocons are all in a snit and torching everyone in sight. Worry not, we will maintain enough presence to delight the media with a monthly body count......
I disagree.
What happened on 9/11 took planning, coordination, communication and money. It is difficult to plan, coordinate, communicate or effectively raise money when your top leaders are continually taken out, and we have found them and taken them out.
Additionally, Al Queda itself has admitted not only that Iraq is indeed the battleground to fight for, but that they are demoralized by defeats and hardships that have been imposed on them due to the US Military taking the fight to them.
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
Thank you Krisinn for reminding us why we are fighting and the reason we CAN NOT withdraw from Iraq.
You need a bull horn and a larger platform to get this message out.
Maybe, I don't know. I don't think the Iranians would know either, which would sort of be the point.
bttt
And to be quite honest, I don't understand why we don't "colonize" what we conquer, if attacked first. Seems like a good way to avoid another attack on our soil!
/sarcasm
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
No, I don't doubt it for one single second that they would use a nuclear weapon if they they could.
If they were willing to kill 20,000 people in one day (their admitted target figure) why should we think they might get queasy about 100,000 or a million dead?
Yes, Iraq is not yet a stable democracy, but many people doubt whether Iraq can ever become a stable democracy*, no matter what level of intervention we attempt. Nation-building was not the primary objective, so would we be "accepting defeat" if we leave before it is accomplished? Hardly.
*Traditionally, it has been conservatives who have questioned whether our country should be engaged in nation-building, and many question whether it is even possible in non-Western countries like Iraq. Foreign policy liberals, beginning with Woodrow Wilson, have advocated such policies, but I think it is far from clear that this approach is best.
I know. I wish Bush saw this as the threat we do; but he's risked a lot on the strategy of NSA surveillance, so they must have some idea to put their eggs in that basket as far as protecting soft targets.
When this administration and especially the Democrats finally find out the HARD WAY that we're right -- then at that time perhaps YOU too will understand. Get a life.
very dull point.
Thank you for pointing this out. A lot of FReepers need to hear it.
|
The British were not about to achieve it even after ten years in Iraq.
There are some who think we SHOULD just colonize, but I do believe in the concept of "American Exceptionalism".
We ARE different. We could have kept Japan and Germany after WWII, but we didn't. (who would have taken them from us?)
However, our military footprint in Iraq may indeed be a way to, in effect, "colonize" the area. I don't really think that is a bad idea, either. We may need that footprint there in the not so distant future.
"the left has to come up with a whole new bunch of lies instead of recycling the old rumsfeld ones?"
So, in other words, it's just political?
Whatever that means. All I'm saying is that you're less likely to invade if you think you might get gassed. I was very afraid for our boys when it looked like they might get gassed during the invasion.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.