Murtha Was Right

[Beetle Bailey]

The House of Representatives just voted to do exactly what Rep. Murtha called for two years ago. How about that.

[Castle]

Ahhh.... Cut and run! There's a new strategy from Congress that Islamic extremists will surly honor and respect! Yawn!....and?

-Castle

[Beetle Bailey]

Ahhh.... Cut and run! There's a new strategy from Congress that Islamic extremists will surly honor and respect! Yawn!....and?

-Castle

Cut and run. Yawn. Same old catch phrases. Same childish buzz words. Yawn. They really don't work any more though. Do they? Infantile rhetoric designed to patronize a servile, unquestioning citizenry. Too bad the right wing has nothing new to tell us after four years. Just more of the same. Yawn.
Oh, and by the way. What strategy? There hasn't been any evidence of an actual strategy. Just a slow, grinding progression of gross strategic blunders combined with obvious tactical errors. No plan. The strategy is being determined by events rather than the other way around.
You want a new strategy? Here. I have one. Let's invade more Islamic nations. Let's see if we can really perpetuate this thing. We can use Iraq as a model. Invade countries so we can create new terrorists where few existed before. Makes as much sense as any thing we have ever heard from the Bush people. Yawn.

[bokile]

There is no more money:cool: :D Now it is time to find the ways to survive.... I will grow potatos:D Maybe I will go deer hunting or fishing to get some food:D

[Beetle Bailey]

There is no more money:cool: :D Now it is time to find the ways to survive.... I will grow potatos:D Maybe I will go deer hunting or fishing to get some food:D

Retarded.

[bokile]

Retarded.

If you have a better seggestion say so:D :D

[ArmChair General]

Ahhh.... Cut and run! There's a new strategy from Congress that Islamic extremists will surly honor and respect! Yawn!....and?

-Castle

you must enjoy seeing American's come home in body bags you sick ****.

[USMC the Almighty]

you must enjoy seeing American's come home in body bags you sick ****.

...and you must want to see the loss of an American city.

[ArmChair General]

...and you must want to see the loss of an American city.

Yes, lets start with the one that has the highest christian population.

[vyo476]

...and you must want to see the loss of an American city.

Um...what?

Usually I don't have a problem following your reasoning but this one has me stumped.

[ArmChair General]

Um...what?

Usually I don't have a problem following your reasoning but this one has me stumped.

He's reasoning, that if we pull out of Iraq, and head back home, then, as Bush and Cheney have warned, the terrorists will surely follow and unleash murder and mayhem in America's cities.

And of course, this makes perfect sense:confused: . The terrorists and Al Qaeda killers are fighting American forces in Iraq because they know how to get there. You see, muslim extremists have long known where Iraq is located, how to find it, and how to hitch a ride there. Yet they still have not figured out where America is. Despite their best efforts, Islamic terrorists just don't know where America is located. That is why there have been no terrorist attacks in nearly six years. They're waiting for US forces to withdraw, so that they can follow them back.

If American troops start to leave, the terrorists will stowaway underneath the chassis of American trucks, or hide in boxes or crates loaded into retreating American transport ships and planes. Once the terrorists are in America, they will slip away, radio back to base, and the mystery of America's location will be revealed. Once that happens, say goodbye to the American way of life.

[SW85]

The House of Representatives just voted to do exactly what Rep. Murtha called for two years ago. How about that.

Wait, what did Murtha say exactly? That the House was going to do this, or that it ought to do this?

[USMC the Almighty]

ArmChair, our presence in Iraq has damaged the terrorists capabilities. We've killed their General (Zarqawi), killed hundreds of their leaders, eliminated a lot of their training facilities, put their leader (OBL) on the run, etc.

Should we leave, we take the pressure off of AQ and allow them to regroup and re-equip to pre-2003 strength.

In my estimation, we need to keep the pressure on the Islamic fundamentalists until they are no longer a threat and of course, this entails extending the war against terrorism into Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Lebanon, Iran...

[ArmChair General]

ArmChair, our presence in Iraq has damaged the terrorists capabilities.

I don't even know what this means. It sounds like a bush talking point to me.


We've killed their General (Zarqawi), killed hundreds of their leaders, eliminated a lot of their training facilities, put their leader (OBL) on the run, etc.

Should we leave, we take the pressure off of AQ and allow them to regroup and re-equip to pre-2003 strength.

In my estimation, we need to keep the pressure on the Islamic fundamentalists until they are no longer a threat and of course, this entails extending the war against terrorism into Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Lebanon, Iran...


You know, everytime someone brings up how supposedly Zarqawi was a big dude behind all trouble in Iraq, the more it reminds me of a bad cop movie. Every cop movie has the same plot: they track down Mister Big and the crime ring gets broken. Then you read the real crime news and there is no Mister Big. It's a million little muggers and thugs, with no organization at all. Nobody puts that in a script because it's too depressing. If the problem is just one guy, you can beat it by killing or capturing him. If it's a million little nobodies, you're doomed.

Zarqawi was a nobody, strictly small-time.

The reason those Jihadi websites kept making such a big fuss about Zarqawi's every move is basically the same one that kept the Pentagon blaming everything in Iraq except the weather on him. They need a Mr. Big for their propaganda as much as we do. Except their version was a hero, Robin Hood in a greasy skullcap, always outsmarting the big dumb American crusaders. Essentially he's a great fundraising gimmick, a cross-eyed posterboy, for Al Q. They haven't done **** in years, and the only way they can keep the rich donors happy is taking credit for every blast in Iraq.

Both sides want to make the Iraq insurgency a classic Mr Big story. Al Q wants to give its own lame, James-Bond multinational crew credit for what's actually a homegrown, neighborhood-based Iraqi uprising. The Pentagon wants to put a face-an outside agitator's face-on the car bombers. America will do anything to avoid having to face the most obvious fact about Iraq: they hate our guts, all of them. Making Zarqawi out to be Mr.Big also hid the fact that our so-called intelligence units still didn't know a damn thing about the insurgency. It made it seem as if we we're hot on the trail of the one demon responsible for the whole mess.

Which suits the counter-insurgents just fine. That's the most depressing angle of all on the whole Zarqawi thing: it's not just the Pentagon and Al Q who were happy to keep him in the spotlight. The real bosses of the insurgency were getting down on their knees every night and thanking Allah for the Z-man, because he kept the heat off them.

They're not Mr. Big. There is no Mr Big. They're more like a few thousand Mr. Middles, a whole crowd of ex-officers and clan leaders in every Sunni town or village who have some kind of loose control over some of the counter-insurgents. Not all, there are hundreds of insurgent groups fighting, and nobody controls them all.

Of course some of the bigger, more professional networks have real leaders. These guys are solid, intelligent men, usually young-20s, early 30s-who get respect in the neighborhood. They are homegrown Iraqis with real standing in the clan and tribal networks that really run things in Iraq.

And they are all anonymous. Guerrilla war kills off the glory-seekers like Zarqawi pretty quickly. The guys who last will be total unknowns, until the new regime gives them their medals when we finally give up on this mess.

[bokile]

...and you must want to see the loss of an American city.

Two buildings compared to the Iraq, country of 30 million:D :D

[vyo476]

Congrats, Armchair. It's been almost a month since one of your posts made me feel physically ill. Good points all.

[bokile]

ArmChair, our presence in Iraq has damaged the terrorists capabilities. We've killed their General (Zarqawi), killed hundreds of their leaders, eliminated a lot of their training facilities, put their leader (OBL) on the run, etc.

Should we leave, we take the pressure off of AQ and allow them to regroup and re-equip to pre-2003 strength.

In my estimation, we need to keep the pressure on the Islamic fundamentalists until they are no longer a threat and of course, this entails extending the war against terrorism into Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Lebanon, Iran...

Bush supports terrorisam in Kosovo, how about that:D :eek:

http://www.rastko.org.yu/kosovo/crucified/default.htm

[bokile]

I don't even know what this means. It sounds like a bush talking point to me.


You know, everytime someone brings up how supposedly Zarqawi was a big dude behind all trouble in Iraq, the more it reminds me of a bad cop movie. Every cop movie has the same plot: they track down Mister Big and the crime ring gets broken. Then you read the real crime news and there is no Mister Big. It's a million little muggers and thugs, with no organization at all. Nobody puts that in a script because it's too depressing. If the problem is just one guy, you can beat it by killing or capturing him. If it's a million little nobodies, you're doomed.

Zarqawi was a nobody, strictly small-time.


I agree on most of what you have said, but Osama is still walking freely:D

[USMC the Almighty]

ArmChair--

Zarqawi created al Qaeda in Iraq. Not only was killing him a great symbolic victory, but it was important for practical reasons. He was their general. We was the link between bin Laden and AQI.

He also holds the distinction for being more responsible for Iraq's secterian violence then any other single person.

Your downplaying of Zarqawi's importance sounds strikinglyl similar to al Sadr's claims.

[SW85]

You guys are also forgetting the effects the war has had outside Iraq. Did you forget that Qadafi disarmed out of a publicly-stated fear of being forced to disarm by the U.S.? Or that Syria ceased its occupation of democratic Lebanon? The mere fact that millions of Iraqis risked their lives in turning out to vote is progress in its own right.

[ArmChair General]

ArmChair--

Zarqawi created al Qaeda in Iraq. Not only was killing him a great symbolic victory, but it was important for practical reasons. He was their general. We was the link between bin Laden and AQI.

He also holds the distinction for being more responsible for Iraq's secterian violence then any other single person.

Your downplaying of Zarqawi's importance sounds strikinglyl similar to al Sadr's claims.

You are so denying reality. I would suggest you read up on Zarqawi's bio a little bit. Making like he was some Mister Big of the Iraq insurgency is sheer nonsense. Once again, the real reason we kept hearing so much about the Z-man, all those long articles on his childhood, school chums, favorite color, favorite IED etc, was because both sides, the US Army PR corps and Al Quaeda's press corps, had reason to build up this little Jordanian extra as the second coming of General Giap. Our interests and Al Q's dovetailed perfectly here: we wanted to pin a local, Iraqi-manned, neighborhood-based insurgency on an outside agitator like Zarqawi, and Al Quaeda wanted to show its donors in Pakistan and the Gulf that it was the real force behind all the fuss in Iraq.

But hell, don't take my word for it. Heres a Post article:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/09/AR2006040900890_pf.html

[ArmChair General]

You guys are also forgetting the effects the war has had outside Iraq. Did you forget that Qadafi disarmed out of a publicly-stated fear of being forced to disarm by the U.S.? Or that Syria ceased its occupation of democratic Lebanon? The mere fact that millions of Iraqis risked their lives in turning out to vote is progress in its own right.

Actually I think you are the one who isn't looking at the effects the war has had outside Iraq.

You have to start with a close-up of the region, then change magnification to look at the world picture. At a regional level the big winner is obvious: Iran. In fact, Iran wins so big in this war that I've already said that Dick Cheney's DNA should be checked out by a reputable lab, because he has to be a Persian mole.

Another way countries can win in a regional war like this is from the money flooding in. That's one way to beat an insurgency: bribe it. Unfortunately, the two neighboring states likely to benefit from the Iraq war are...yup, those twin towers of evil, Syria and Iran. Just imagine how much money is flowing into their border provinces right now. Need any U.S.-issue supplies, weapons, toilet paper, or GPS units cheap? Just ask at any bazaar in Damascus or Tehran. Uncle Sam's guarantee of quality - fell off the back of a two-and-a-half ton truck.

See, this is why I keep thinking Cheney's got to be an Iranian mole. How could he not see that a war in Iraq benefits noncombatant neighboring states? He had to know. He can't be that stup - Wait, I withdraw the comment.

When you zoom farther out to look at the global picture, You see that Iran is the big time short term winner, and in the long run, you see China and India as winnders.

While we flounder around in the Dust Bowl, they've been running up their reserves, putting the money into infrastructure and bullion. The moment you wait for in a setup like this is the inevitable alliance between the regional winner and the global winners. And voila, it's already happened: In February Iran and India signed a pipeline deal sending Iranian oil to the exploding Indian market, bypassing Bush's Saudi/U.S. petro-outpost. If it weren't for Pakistan, the pipeline would already be in place. And as you might have guessed, Iran and India are talking about how easily the pipeline can be looped over the Himalayas to China - an overland route invulnerable to U.S. sea power.