Skip to comments.
The Truth About What's Happening In Iraq
boblonsberry.com ^
| 8/28/03
| Bob Lonsberry
Posted on 08/28/2003 6:23:09 AM PDT by shortstop
The war in Iraq isnt being lost in Baghdad. Its being lost in America.
In Iraq, its going quite well. In America, were too stupid to realize that.
So let me explain.
These idiots on the news who count each fatality from the announced end of major fighting are doing more to hurt the cause than all the suicide bombers in Baghdad. One uses explosives and the other uses lies.
The kind of lies that are told by diversion and distortion.
The simple fact is that of course we have sustained more casualties since the actual battle stopped. On the battlefield, they were on our turf. In Baghdad, we are on their turf.
We are a conventional military. Lots of tanks and troops and nobody can stand up to us. Rolling over the Iraqi military, we were in our element.
But in the chicken-crap terrorist world of shoot and run, the jihad boys are in their element.
When we were in a position of advantage our casualties were lower than they are when we are in a position of disadvantage.
So, naturally, we continue to take casualties.
Does that mean were losing?
Only if you need a blow dryer and a TelePrompTer to do your job.
I would point out that during the conquest of Iraq, we took over a nation, advanced hundreds of miles into enemy territory, toppled a military numbering in the hundreds of thousands, overthrew a government, took control of a good chunk of the worlds oil supply and put vast amounts of our power on the ground in somebody elses country.
On the other hand, in their guerilla war, the jihad boys have accomplished not a freaking thing.
We still own the nation, we still own the oil, were still in charge, theyre still out of power, we still operate freely a long way from home.
Theyre like a dog chasing a car. Lots of noise, plenty of bravado, not a damn bit of difference.
So the daily television score of who died when means nothing, except as a needless insult to the families of brave Americans 100 times more noble than the pretty boys on TV.
Heres another lie: There is no link between Iraq and terrorism.
In fact, the war with Iraq is one of our most important tools in protecting America from terrorists.
Heres how: Before we went into Iraq, the target of international Muslim terrorism was American civilians in the United States. Since we went into Iraq, the target of international Muslim terrorism has been American servicemen in Iraq.
Good.
More than good. Wonderful.
Thousands of these jihad boys, all coked up on their gutter religion, have streamed into Iraq to be martyrs against the infidels.
Good. The more the merrier.
On September 11 they attacked us where we were weak. Now weve tricked them into attacking us where we are strong.
The idiots.
Think about it. Their objective was to attack women and children, businesspeople and flight attendants, in our homeland.
So we changed the venue.
We started breaking the furniture in their neighborhood.
Now all the little Osamas are sneaking into Iraq to take on G.I. Joe.
You pick: Do you want them attacking unarmed citizens in America, or trained and equipped soldiers in Iraq?
Personally, I like our odds now a lot better.
Personally, I think its worthwhile and successful. In every battle there are casualties, even in a battle like this. That is to be accepted and understood.
Two facts that escape the self-appointed gods of the media.
Many have died and more will do the same. But each will have sacrificed to directly protect the United States of America and its people. There is a direct link between Iraq and terrorism against America.
The link: As long as we tie the savages up in Iraq, they wont be coming after our families back home.
Score that a win.
And anybody who says different doesnt know his head from a hole in the ground.
TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: iraq; lonsberry
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 161-173 next last
On September 11 they attacked us where we were weak. Now weve tricked them into attacking us where we are strong.
1
posted on
08/28/2003 6:23:09 AM PDT
by
shortstop
To: shortstop
I'd rather the terrorists gather in one place where they face well trained, well armed soldiers rather than take on civilians who are unarmed and not trained.
Additionally, in post war Germany, Hitler supporters were killing our soldiers in numbers that are hard to pin down, but it went on for years. Their favorite method was stringing wire across roadways and garrotting our soldiers. A recent History Channel program devoted an entire show to the matter.
2
posted on
08/28/2003 6:26:47 AM PDT
by
Peach
(The Clintons have pardoned more terrorists than they ever captured or killed.)
To: shortstop
Lonsberry knocks another one out of the park.
To: shortstop
Our beloved 'non-partisan' media has a vested financial and ideological intrest in portraying this the way they do. I hope they enjoy making their blood money off of dead American soldiers.
4
posted on
08/28/2003 6:30:27 AM PDT
by
.cnI redruM
(Nothing Is More Vile Than A Blowhard With Halitosis! - redruM)
To: shortstop
On Sept 11, 'they' attacked us where the government had disarmed her citizens and left them vulnerable.
" Since we went into Iraq, the target of international Muslim terrorism has been American servicemen in Iraq.
Good.
More than good. Wonderful."
What an idiot.
5
posted on
08/28/2003 6:31:06 AM PDT
by
JohnGalt
(Vichycons-- Supporting Endless War Abroad; Appeasing the Welfare State at Home, Since 2001)
To: JohnGalt
Not an idiot. Lonsberry's point is that we took the war to the terrorists and the terrorists are now shooting at people who can, and do, shoot back.
To: Behind Liberal Lines
You're correct. Terrorism is a world problem - nearly every country has been attacked by terrorists - and I'd far rather the bad guys face well armed soldiers than civilians.
7
posted on
08/28/2003 6:36:38 AM PDT
by
Peach
(The Clintons have pardoned more terrorists than they ever captured or killed.)
To: shortstop
Saddam lost his chain of command. In fact, he has lost a good deal of anything to command. The various fedayeen Saddam troops infiltrating the borders from Iran and Syria (and Saudi Arabia, for that matter) are coming to the killing fields, to "lay down their lives for Allah", but the great glory will die with them, a truth that has not yet sunk in. The best part of this war is that it is being conducted on somebody else's real estate, most notably the real estate the enemy claims as his home base.
To: JohnGalt
>>What an idiot.<<
I think you are missing the point. It is not good that they are attacking our troops, rather, it is good that they are targeting our trained professional than our kindergarteners.
9
posted on
08/28/2003 6:37:53 AM PDT
by
netmilsmom
(God Bless our President, those with him & our troops)
To: shortstop
Pretty simple. I would hope more realize that FREEDOM in Iraq means Freedom in the USA. Why do we think any country should not be free?
Do we complain when there is a policeman death, or a baby, woman, man, child? Those are the true victims. Fires, Car accidents, Robbery, are all bad also do they not occur since Iraq was liberated. The news is so bad its not funny.
FR is a place for discussion and we have to remember most dont have a view of the whole picture.
Thank God for the first Admendment.
To: Behind Liberal Lines
I doubt you would characterize it as a 'good thing' in the style and bravado of the author.
People are dying, and I am sure, in supporting the troops, you believe they deserve better than an internet hack declaring their deaths are the result of an intentional policy of placing American solidiers in a position to be targets for terrorists.
11
posted on
08/28/2003 6:39:30 AM PDT
by
JohnGalt
(Vichycons-- Supporting Endless War Abroad; Appeasing the Welfare State at Home, Since 2001)
To: soccer8
ping
To: netmilsmom
Then why did the author say it was a good thing?
That is all well and good that the author takes no responsibility to protect himself or his family, but its gutless to advocate a policy of putting a man or women in harms way half a world away as a stand in for terrorist targets.
13
posted on
08/28/2003 6:43:40 AM PDT
by
JohnGalt
(Vichycons-- Supporting Endless War Abroad; Appeasing the Welfare State at Home, Since 2001)
Comment #14 Removed by Moderator
To: shortstop
Bump.
15
posted on
08/28/2003 6:55:53 AM PDT
by
auboy
To: BillClintscum
JohnGalt said it all, "idiot" he just said it to the wrong poster.
JohnGalt a little to the left, a little more... more, now down, way down, keep going, almost there... OK now take a deep breath, squeeze gently... the report... Yes JohnGalt the correct target is (was) BillClintscum.
To: BillClintscum
I thought about it. You're daft.
17
posted on
08/28/2003 7:03:09 AM PDT
by
manic4organic
(An organic conservative)
To: JohnGalt
Then why did the author say it was a good thing?
That is all well and good that the author takes no responsibility to protect himself or his family, but its gutless to advocate a policy of putting a man or women in harms way half a world away as a stand in for terrorist targets.
He said it was a good thing because we have put trained professional soldiers against these thugs instead of our moms and dads, sisters and brothers and mostly our children against them.
No death is a good death, soldier or civilian. At least the soldiers have a fighting chance. My five year old does not.
18
posted on
08/28/2003 7:06:00 AM PDT
by
netmilsmom
(God Bless our President, those with him & our troops)
To: shortstop
The liberals and the press crave for another Vietnam. They are trying their best to create an Iraqi TET any way they can. They are succeeding. Did anyone else notice a shift in Fox news to more cynical reporting of positive things and more visibility of negative?
19
posted on
08/28/2003 7:06:54 AM PDT
by
pfflier
To: JohnGalt
That is all well and good that the author takes no responsibility to protect himself or his family,Since you have the answer to protecting ourselves (individually) against terrorist attacks please share it with us all.
20
posted on
08/28/2003 7:08:32 AM PDT
by
BigWaveBetty
(It was only George Bush who liberated us, without him it wouldn't have happened. ~Nadia Mohammed)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 161-173 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson