Replies

Jihadists? That is not the administration party line. They claim that these are secular Saddam types.

The Vietnam analogy is much overused but your counterargument is weak. A "majority" of the Vietnamese were not involved in guerrilla action. For that matter, the same thing could be said about China in 1948, Algeria in the 1950s, or Cuba in 1958.

Jihadists? That is not the administration party line. They claim that these are secular Saddam types.

Answar al Islam uses Islam in their name for a reason. They are being hunted in Northern Iraq as we speak. Neither I nor the admistration claimed that the fedayeen Saddam or the Ba'athists were "jihadists" although their is plenty of evidence that "jihadists" from surrounding countries enlisted in their ranks to kill Americans.

The Vietnam analogy is much overused but your counterargument is weak. No, my argument is fact. Iraq is no Vietnam for a number of reasons, both geography and geopolitics included. There is currently a small "minority" of guerillas or "terrorists" actively involved in hunting and killing American. No equivalence to NVA and Viet COng, none, nadda zip.

A "majority" of the Vietnamese were not involved in guerrilla actiion. For that matter, the same thing could be said about China in 1948, Algeria in the 1950s, or Cuba in 1958.

Yeah, and?

A "majority" of the Vietnamese were not involved in guerrilla action. For that matter, the same thing could be said about China in 1948, Algeria in the 1950s, or Cuba in 1958.

Or Northern Ireland.