Posted on 05/29/2008 7:49:19 AM PDT by george76
To date, not one "mainstream media" journalist has pressed the leading advocates of unconditional surrender to describe in detail what might happen after we "bring the troops home now."
There's plenty of unchallenged sloganeering, but no serious debate. This selective political softball and pep-rally journalism serves neither our country nor our political process well.
So, let's bring those quit-Iraq time-travelers back to mid-2008 and fill them in on what's happened since they were ideologically stranded five years ago:
* After our troops reached Baghdad, al Qaeda's leaders made a colossal strategic miscalculation and publicly declared that Iraq was now the central front in their jihad against us. Matter of record, in the enemy's own words.
* Al Qaeda in Iraq and its affiliates then embarked on a campaign of widespread atrocities: videotaped beheadings, mass bombings of civilians, assassinations, widespread rape (of boys and girls, as well as of women )...
* Al Qaeda's savagery alienated the Sunni Arab masses in record time. Suddenly, those American "occupiers" looked like saviors.
If we nonetheless quit Iraq in 2009, the defeated remnants of al Qaeda will be able to declare victory, after all. The organization will be able to re-launch itself... We'll have thrown away a potentially decisive triumph and revived the fortunes of the fanatics who brought us 9/11.
And the above only detailed the defeat of al Qaeda. Far more is happening in Iraq, all of it good:
Muqtada al-Sadr and his thugs have suffered a series of lopsided defeats; Muqtada's hiding in Iran, afraid to return...
Iraqis look forward to the next round of elections (to the dismay of every Persian Gulf autocracy).
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Admitting that they’ve been mistaken about Iraq guts the left’s argument for political entitlement
MSNBC has it all figured out. Iraq was big mistake no WMDs. So now anyone that was for going into Iraq must resign and only the pure Doves, initially against invasion, can be elected or even speak in public. And what happens we surrender doesnt matter, that’s GWBs fault too.
You never see any stories about what would happen if we quit 2 years ago when Murtha and Kerry and Hagel called for immediate surrender, GOT-YA only works one way.
Still I have no sympathy for McCain, or even Bush, who is better than McCain in many ways.
Very well stated by Ralph Peters, as always.
The upcoming election means far more to the majority of RATS than the security of Iraq, the Middle East or our own country. They will never admit that we and the Iraqis are winning the war against al Queda and terrorists there and that victory is within reach.
They blatantly lie and the saddest thing is that about half the people in our country believe every lie they throw out there, of course with the enemedia on their side it makes it far easier for them.
-- Ret. Gen. Merrill A. McPeak, former USAF Chief of Staff (Regretfully), Southern Oregon Mail Tribune, 1/10/2007
This is just the completion of what should have been done in Gulf War I. I was over in Bahrain just after the truce in the first Gulf War so I got to see life in the most moderate of the Gulf countries.
I think that most US Citizens would be shocked if they read the subtitles of the Islamic prayers shown on Saudi television. They were full of hate, jealousy and lust for killing. I saw nothing socially redeeming in these televised prayers and I was making sure I paid close attention while I had the chance to observe first hand. I am making an assumption that many other countries like Syria and Iran are much worse. I am also making an assumption that 10 years from now, looking back, most will view it a mistake that we did not force regime change in Syria and Iran too.
McPeak always has been and always will be a turd. What he did to the AF was sickening. Looks like he still enjoys killing morale
I have never wavered from my own position that we should have hit Iran first — then Iraq...
The MSM will once again notice Iraq after the election when there will be an opportunity to give the Democrats credit for winning the thing.
Ralph Peters on Iraq ping.
McPeak was about as wrong as he could be. He should be choking on crow.
I know. I saw and heard the long stretch of calm and quiet that allowed Maliki to bring the festering Mehdi Army problem to the forefront.
This war is so close to its conclusion. But, Iran still needs to be dealt with.
I think the DemocRATS tend to side with the Islamic Fascists because both want people to submit to them. They do not seem to recognize that they would be the first killed under Islamofascist rule. I am not sure that the Democrats want us to win.
Look at the bright side, Obama has an uncle who freed the Jews in Auschwitz.
The enemedia want us to lose.
Thanks george76.
Exactly. They’re getting ready so if the Democrats win the White House, everything will be in place for Obama/Clinton to “snatch victory from the jaws of defeat” in Iraq. The Democrats will be the saviors of the war from the evil, stupid, corrupt Republicans who were leading us to ruin. Just look at how when the Democrats acknowledge the progress in Iraq, it’s because they forced Bush to change course.
At least we have some journalist willing to present a non-biased picture in the media with wide circulation. I maintain however, carefully choosen short history lessons McPain could deliver in the months to come that would be aired by default on the boob tube, may have a positive effect on the masses that have been mislead. We shall see.
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.