• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Al-Qaida No. 2: Get Set to Fill Iraq Void

TimmyBoy

Banned
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Al-Qaida No. 2: Get Set to Fill Iraq Void By KATHERINE SHRADER, Associated Press Writer
42 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - In a letter to his top deputy in Iraq, al-Qaida's No. 2 leader said the United States "ran and left their agents" in Vietnam and the jihadists must have a plan ready to fill the void if the Americans suddenly leave Iraq.

"Things may develop faster than we imagine," Ayman al-Zawahri wrote in a letter to his top deputy in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. "The aftermath of the collapse of American power in Vietnam — and how they ran and left their agents — is noteworthy. ... We must be ready starting now."

Senior U.S. military commanders have said that Iraqi security forces are improving significantly and some U.S. forces could return home early next year. Yet skeptics have raised concerns about whether such statements simply let the insurgency know how long they must wait for the U.S. to leave.

In a letter taking up 13 typed pages in its English translation, al-Zawahri also recommended a four-stage expansion of the war that would take the fighting to neighboring Muslim countries.

"It has always been my belief that the victory of Islam will never take place until a Muslim state is established ... in the heart of the Islamic world," al-Zawahri wrote.

The letter laid out his long-term plan: expel the Americans from Iraq, establish an Islamic authority and take the war to Iraq's secular neighbors, including Lebanon, Jordan and Syria.

The final stage, al-Zawahri wrote, would be a clash with Israel, which he said was established to challenge "any new Islamic entity."

The letter is dated July 9, and was acquired during U.S. operations in Iraq. It was written in Arabic and translated by the U.S. government. The Pentagon briefed reporters last week on portions of the document, but the full text was not available until Tuesday.

In a statement, the National Intelligence Director's office said the letter "has not been edited in any way" and its contents were released only after it was clear no military or intelligence operations would be compromised.

House Intelligence Chairman Peter Hoekstra, R-Mich., said his committee is reviewing the letter, but he cautioned "against reading too much into a single source of intelligence."

In his letter, al-Zawahri, a Sunni, devoted significant attention to al-Zarqawi's attempts to start a civil war with the rival Muslim Shiite sect, the majority that now dominates the new Iraqi government. Ultimately, al-Zawahri concluded that violence, particularly against Shiite mosques, only raises questions among Muslims.

"This matter won't be acceptable to the Muslim populace however much you have tried to explain it, and aversion to this will continue," he wrote.

Al-Zawahri was also critical of the Taliban, which was toppled in the 2001 U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan, because, he said, they did not have the representation of the Afghan people. He said students of the Taliban retreated to their tribes.

"Even the devout ones took the stance of spectator," al-Zawahri wrote.

Contrasting that, he saw fearlessness in battles waged in the Iraqi cities of Fallujah, Ramadi and Al Qaim.

At times, the letter got personal. Al-Zawahri said he tasted the bitterness of America's brutality, noting that his "favorite wife's chest was crushed by a concrete ceiling" during an apparent U.S. attack. His daughter died of a cerebral hemorrhage.

To this day, he wrote, he did not know the location of their graves.

The letter then switches to the court of public opinion.

"More than half of this battle is taking place in the battlefield of the media," he wrote. "We are in a media battle in a race for the hearts and minds of our umma," or community of Muslims, he wrote.

The line is an apparent reference to a phrase — "hearts and minds" — often used by President Bush.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051011/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_al_qaida
 

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,097
Reaction score
537
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Sounds like they are in tune with the anti-war, anti-america crowd here. The Sheehan's and Pelosie's and Carville's and Frankan's must give them quite the comfort in thier plans.

Can we imagine if they both win.
 

TimmyBoy

Banned
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Stinger said:
Sounds like they are in tune with the anti-war, anti-america crowd here. The Sheehan's and Pelosie's and Carville's and Frankan's must give them quite the comfort in thier plans.

Can we imagine if they both win.
My position, based on what I know, is that Iraq was not a clear and present danger. It is my view that we made a mistake by launching an invasion of Iraq. We wouldn't be in this predicament if we did not invade this country. Al-queda was not strong in Iraq prior to the invasion. However, now that we have invaded Iraq, Al-queda is strong in Iraq and we can't cut and run, because the consequences for cutting and running would be severe and could threaten all of the Middle East and the rest of the world.

Also by invading, we leave ourselves open to where we can't deal with other threats like Iran or North Korea more effectively, which are trying to obtain nuclear weapons while the other one probably does possess some nuclear devices. I believe it was a strategic error, this invasion.
 

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,097
Reaction score
537
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
TimmyBoy said:
My position, based on what I know, is that Iraq was not a clear and present danger. It is my view that we made a mistake by launching an invasion of Iraq. We wouldn't be in this predicament if we did not invade this country.
Well what you think along those lines is of no consequence is it. We ARE there we ARE at war.

Al-queda was not strong in Iraq prior to the invasion. However, now that we have invaded Iraq, Al-queda is strong in Iraq
And where would you have rather them to be strong? Where did you prefer to fight them? We ran them out of Afghanistan and they cannot operate efficiently out of Pakistan. Iraq is where they were headed whether we invade or not. It was a matter would the be there with Saddam in charge and supporting them or an elected government which did not support them.

and we can't cut and run, because the consequences for cutting and running would be severe and could threaten all of the Middle East and the rest of the world.
Just as not having gone there in the first place, there was no avoiding the conflict with them it was a matter of whether Saddam would be there to support them.

Also by invading, we leave ourselves open to where we can't deal with other threats like Iran or North Korea more effectively,
We have dealt with both quite effectively, or did you prefer we invade them?

which are trying to obtain nuclear weapons while the other one probably does possess some nuclear devices. I believe it was a strategic error, this invasion.
And are on the verge of realizing it is not in their interest to do so thanks to Bush and Rice and their diplomatic efforts.
 

akyron

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 17, 2004
Messages
10,337
Reaction score
2,432
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
TimmyBoy said:
"More than half of this battle is taking place in the battlefield of the media," he wrote. "We are in a media battle in a race for the hearts and minds of our umma," or community of Muslims, he wrote.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051011/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_al_qaida
All we need is for a Jane Fonda to show up in Baghdad and hang out with the local insurgents and take some pictures with some RPGS and the Deja Vu would be complete.


"If you understood what Communism was, you would hope, you would pray on your knees that one day we would become Communist."_ Jane Fonda 1970


Of course this time a different word would be used at the end.
 

robin

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2005
Messages
1,045
Reaction score
0
Location
UK
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
TimmyBoy said:
My position, based on what I know, is that Iraq was not a clear and present danger. It is my view that we made a mistake by launching an invasion of Iraq. We wouldn't be in this predicament if we did not invade this country. Al-queda was not strong in Iraq prior to the invasion. However, now that we have invaded Iraq, Al-queda is strong in Iraq and we can't cut and run, because the consequences for cutting and running would be severe and could threaten all of the Middle East and the rest of the world.
America made a war where there was none. The upshot is & may well be in the long term, less stability in the region & a greater threat from Muslim Extremists.
How Bin Laden must now love the Bush camp, becuase this is precisely his wish... the USA mired in war on Muslim turf.
The moral is... it's never wise to start wars at the best of times & this one's not even in the right country !
 
Last edited:

kal-el

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 22, 2005
Messages
3,412
Reaction score
8
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
TimmyBoy said:
My position, based on what I know, is that Iraq was not a clear and present danger. It is my view that we made a mistake by launching an invasion of Iraq. We wouldn't be in this predicament if we did not invade this country. Al-queda was not strong in Iraq prior to the invasion. However, now that we have invaded Iraq, Al-queda is strong in Iraq and we can't cut and run, because the consequences for cutting and running would be severe and could threaten all of the Middle East and the rest of the world.

Also by invading, we leave ourselves open to where we can't deal with other threats like Iran or North Korea more effectively, which are trying to obtain nuclear weapons while the other one probably does possess some nuclear devices. I believe it was a strategic error, this invasion.
I agree with this sentiment.

I believe Gunny posted this article last night?
Check out the last post: http://www.debatepolitics.com/showthread.php?t=3352&page=115
 
Last edited:

getinvolved

Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2005
Messages
155
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
akyron said:
"If you understood what Communism was, you would hope, you would pray on your knees that one day we would become Communist."_ Jane Fonda 1970
Oh Jane, I can't imagine how this idea did not catch on!
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
kal-el said:
I agree with this sentiment.



I believe Gunny posted this article last night?
Check out the last post: http://www.debatepolitics.com/showthread.php?t=3352&page=115
Forum tip:

If you want members to go to a direct post, don't copy & paste the page it's on and make them find it...

Click the Post # in the upper right...This will open another window with just that post...copy & paste the address at the top of that window...

In this instance, it would be...

http://www.debatepolitics.com/showpost.php?p=111957&postcount=1150
 

DivineComedy

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 11, 2005
Messages
2,231
Reaction score
129
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
getinvolved said:
Oh Jane, I can't imagine how this idea did not catch on!
Even Aymen al-Zawahiri understands the news media of today, so it is no surprise that such media savvy actors are working in the shadows.

“Some voices have risen on the part of some peoples, journalists, writers, and, in a very restricted way, the voices of those who are preparing themselves, in the shadow, to replace the rulers there.” (Saddam Hussein Shabban 13, 1422 H. October 29, 2001.)

*****

“The gracious brother/Abu Musab, God protect him and watch over him, may His religion, and His Book and the Sunna of His Prophet @ aid him, I ask the Almighty that he bless him, us, and all Muslims, with His divine aid, His clear victory, and His release from suffering be close at hand. Likewise, I ask the Almighty to gather us as He sees fit from the glory of this world and the prize of the hereafter.” (Aymen al-Zawahiri)
http://www.dni.gov/letter_in_english.pdf

“But what I want to bring to your attention today is the potentially much more sinister nexus between Iraq and the al Qaeda terrorist network, a nexus that combines classic terrorist organizations and modern methods of murder. Iraq today harbors a deadly terrorist network headed by Abu Musab Zarqawi, an associate and collaborator of Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda lieutenants.” (Transcript of the GREAT Psychic Powell's U.N. presentation)
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/02/05/sprj.irq.powell.transcript.09/

“A-I want to be the first to congratulate you for what God has blessed you with in terms of fighting battle in the heart of the Islamic world, which was formerly the field for major battles in Islam's history, and what is now the place for the greatest battle of Islam in this era, and what will happen, according to what appeared in the Hadiths of the Messenger of God @ about the epic battles between Islam and atheism. It has always been my belief that the victory of Islam will never take place until a Muslim state is established in the manner of the Prophet in the heart of the Islamic world, specifically in the Levant, Egypt, and the neighboring states of the Peninsula and Iraq; however, the center would be in the Levant and Egypt. This is my opinion, which I do not preach as infallibile, but I have reviewed historical events and the behavior of the enemies of Islam themselves, and they did not establish Israel in this triangle surrounded by Egypt and Syria and overlooking the Hijaz except for their own interests.” (Aymen al-Zawahiri) http://www.dni.gov/letter_in_english.pdf

Such a huge Muslim State is a very large objective and aim, and it is interesting that al-Zawahiri brings up history: Bush has a degree in history. The “liberal” agents told us before the invasion that Saddam was “secular” but obviously that did not answer the full strategic question of why Saddam was “not in agreement with those concerned, over the objectives and aims…:”

http://www.debatepolitics.com/showpost.php?p=59790&postcount=1

Considering that, what “liberal” agents said Israel was not worth it?

“(4) Therefore, the mujahed movement must avoid any action that the masses do not understand or approve, if there is no contravention of Sharia in such avoidance, and as long as there are other options to resort to, meaning we must not throw the masses-scant in knowledge-into the sea before we teach them to swim, relying for guidance in that on the saying of the Prophet @ to Umar bin al-Khattab<: lest the people should say that Muhammad used to kill his Companions.” (Aymen al-Zawahiri) http://www.dni.gov/letter_in_english.pdf

Yes, we know all about those that cannot swim:

“…not to mention those who will suffocate because they cannot swim…
(Saddam Hussein Shabban 13, 1422 H. October 29, 2001.)

“And do the brothers forget that we have more than one hundred prisoners - many of whom are from the leadership who are wanted in their countries - in the custody of the Iranians? And even if we attack the Shia out of necessity, then why do you announce this matter and make it public, which compels the Iranians to take counter measures? And do the brothers forget that both we and the Iranians need to refrain from harming each other at this time in which the Americans are targeting us?” (Aymen al-Zawahiri) http://www.dni.gov/letter_in_english.pdf

Considering that compromise, what “liberals” kept telling us that Al Quacka would not compromise their beliefs to be allied with Saddam?

Strategically, knowing that the enemy aims have “always been…that the victory of Islam will never take place until a Muslim state is established in the manner of the Prophet in the heart of the Islamic world, specifically in the Levant, Egypt, and the neighboring states of the Peninsula and Iraq…”

Should we cut and run from Israel and Iraq, removing sanctions on Iraq, and allowing Saddam to continue to sponsor terrorism (for the goal of eliminating the Zionist entity) in violation of United Nations (of tyrants too) resolution 687 and the United Nations Charter?

What strategy would an agent of the enemy support?

The “liberals” keep saying that “Saddam was no threat to us,” and we know Saddam was no threat to the enemy, so maybe that is what they mean.
 

TimmyBoy

Banned
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The problem is this:

1) Powell went before the UN and basically presented fabricated evidence of Saddam's alleged WMD program. This "evidence" that he presented was later proven false, which makes me think that the Bush Adminstration was fabricating evidence to trump up charges against Saddam and get support to invade Iraq under the disguise of "defending the US" and worse yet, exploiting the 9/11 tragedy of 3,000 americans dying to get support to invade Iraq on dubious, trumped up, baseless accusations.

2) Al-queda was not strong in Iraq. Probably wasn't even in Iraq. Saddam was likely too frightened to have them in his country because he knew the US would use it as an excuse to get rid of him.

3) The invasion created a terrorist problem in Iraq, not destroyed the terrorist problem. Now Al-queda is strong and if the US leaves, will use it as a base of operations to launch further terrorist attacks against the US and it's neighbors. Thus the invasion has made the Middle East less stable, America less safe and the world a less safer place.

4) Real threats to America like Iran and North Korea can just thumb their noses at the US. The US, with it's military overstretched as it is, can no longer have a viable military option against Iran and North Korea, due to the fact that they invaded Iraq, which their was no clear and present danger when the US chose to invade Iraq.

5) Now that the US has invaded Iraq, it is bogged down in a guerrilla war that has a meat grinder affect. The US can't leave, because the consequences are too great to leave, but by staying the US is stuck in this guerrilla war where the US military gets grinded down and constantly takes casualties in a never-ending guerrilla war. The military is essientially stuck in a meat grinder.

6) One CIA expert stated that the invasion of Iraq was a "christmas gift" to Al-queda and Osama Bin Laden. By invading Iraq, we played into the hands of Al-queda and Bin laden.

Does anybody care to add to the list as to why it was a mistake to invade Iraq or does anybody care to make a solid case as to why we should have invaded Iraq?
 
Last edited:

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,097
Reaction score
537
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
robin said:
How Bin Laden must now love the Bush camp, becuase this is precisely his wish... the USA mired in war on Muslim turf.
What he an Alqaeda "love" as evidenced by the letter are the Cindy Sheehan's and all the other appeasors working to destroy our will to fight. That includes, as stated in the letter, the media which is doing everything it can to help Alqaeda succeed.
 

TimmyBoy

Banned
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
When you look at the invasion of Iraq, all the facts surrounding the invasion of Iraq, it makes one wonder just how much the US government honestly and truly cares for it's own people. It seems that fighting terror was not a concern at all in invading Iraq, rather it appears as if it was just an elite group of people who control the government, invading a country at the cost of their own people, so that they may profit from it.
 

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,097
Reaction score
537
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
TimmyBoy said:
When you look at the invasion of Iraq, all the facts surrounding the invasion of Iraq, it makes one wonder just how much the US government honestly and truly cares for it's own people.
Well obviously quite a bit to make such a sacrifice.
It seems that fighting terror was not a concern at all in invading Iraq
,

And your basis for that assertion, didn't you ever listen to what Bush said in his speeches?
rather it appears as if it was just an elite group of people who control the government
,

Control what country?

invading a country at the cost of their own people, so that they may profit from it.
Who profitted? Why did the congress vote almost uniaimously for the Iraqi Liberation Act? Why did the UN vote the use of force? Because some unnamed "elite's" wanted to profit?

Go back and reread all the speechs the administration gave, they clearly spelled out the reasons.

Now it's a matter of whether we have the will to carry it out or will allow the terrorist to win. They can't defeat us on the battlefield, they, and the elitist who support them, can only destroy our will to fight, then they win. Which outcome is it you support?
 

Iriemon

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
19,405
Reaction score
2,187
Location
Miami
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I say let them have it! Rather than US troops getting shot up and spending all our money on that country where they obviously could care less about us, let's let Al-Queda take it over and let them deal with civil war and daily attacks and fanatics from three different groups who hate each other. Let them get their guys killed with suicide bombers every other day. Fight terrorists with terrorists.

And if they get too threatening we bomb the hell out of them.
 

TimmyBoy

Banned
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Iriemon said:
I say let them have it! Rather than US troops getting shot up and spending all our money on that country where they obviously could care less about us, let's let Al-Queda take it over and let them deal with civil war and daily attacks and fanatics from three different groups who hate each other. Let them get their guys killed with suicide bombers every other day. Fight terrorists with terrorists.

And if they get too threatening we bomb the hell out of them.
If we were to leave and they became a serious threat to us, bombing them wouldn't do any good, putting troops on the ground wouldn't do any good, it seems the only alternative would be to nuke them and basically wipe their entire country off the map.
 

Iriemon

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
19,405
Reaction score
2,187
Location
Miami
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
TimmyBoy said:
If we were to leave and they became a serious threat to us, bombing them wouldn't do any good, putting troops on the ground wouldn't do any good, it seems the only alternative would be to nuke them and basically wipe their entire country off the map.
Why would you suppose the Iraqis would love Al-Queda running their country any better than us?
 

TimmyBoy

Banned
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Iriemon said:
Why would you suppose the Iraqis would love Al-Queda running their country any better than us?
Well, if we leave, we leave a power vaccum that needs to be filled and Al-queda would probably try to fill. Just like the Taliban did in Afghanistan after Soviet troops left. Their regime became a threat to the world and sheltered Bin Laden. Most Afghan people didn't want to be ruled by the Taliban, but the Taliban ruled because they ruled by force, fear, intimidation and also by providing some security to people. The same case could happen in Iraq if US troops depart.
 

Iriemon

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
19,405
Reaction score
2,187
Location
Miami
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
TimmyBoy said:
Well, if we leave, we leave a power vaccum that needs to be filled and Al-queda would probably try to fill. Just like the Taliban did in Afghanistan after Soviet troops left. Their regime became a threat to the world and sheltered Bin Laden. Most Afghan people didn't want to be ruled by the Taliban, but the Taliban ruled because they ruled by force, fear, intimidation and also by providing some security to people. The same case could happen in Iraq if US troops depart.
Great! We can send some weapons and support to the insurgents and let Al-Queda get bogged down in that quagmire instead of us!
 

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,097
Reaction score
537
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Iriemon said:
I say let them have it! Rather than US troops getting shot up and spending all our money on that country where they obviously could care less about us, let's let Al-Queda take it over and let them deal with civil war and daily attacks and fanatics from three different groups who hate each other. Let them get their guys killed with suicide bombers every other day. Fight terrorists with terrorists.
Oh they'll handle it, they'll do it with summary executions. They'll do it with rape and murder. Then they will take over the entire country and use it as their base of operations and financial cash cow. Then they will probably go after Kuwait and it's resources then Saudi Arabi, Syria, Lebanon and of course wipe out Isreal in the process.

And then what do we do?
 

Iriemon

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
19,405
Reaction score
2,187
Location
Miami
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Stinger said:
Oh they'll handle it, they'll do it with summary executions. They'll do it with rape and murder. Then they will take over the entire country and use it as their base of operations and financial cash cow. Then they will probably go after Kuwait and it's resources then Saudi Arabi, Syria, Lebanon and of course wipe out Isreal in the process.

And then what do we do?
That presumes a lot -- Al Queda did not control Iraq before we jumped in. But I don't doubt there is a risk that there could be a radical government much worse than Hussein. To bad nobody thought of that before Mar 03, eh?

But if Al Queda actually takes over the Govt, they'd have good bombing targets instead of when they are hiding in a bunch of caves where we can't find them.
 

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,097
Reaction score
537
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger
Oh they'll handle it, they'll do it with summary executions. They'll do it with rape and murder. Then they will take over the entire country and use it as their base of operations and financial cash cow. Then they will probably go after Kuwait and it's resources then Saudi Arabi, Syria, Lebanon and of course wipe out Isreal in the process.

And then what do we do?



Iriemon said:
That presumes a lot --
Well give me a good reason not to presume it.

Al Queda did not control Iraq before we jumped in. But I don't doubt there is a risk that there could be a radical government much worse than Hussein. To bad nobody thought of that before Mar 03, eh?
I think we did, that's why we need to win, and the left which seems to be supporting the Alqaeda side is not helping us accomplish that are they.

But if Al Queda actually takes over the Govt, they'd have good bombing targets instead of when they are hiding in a bunch of caves where we can't find them.
So you imagine the we pull out but still fight them there? I'm sorry but I don't follow your reasoning, what advantage would that be? We'd only have to fight our way back in, start back at square one in trying to get a new government going.
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
23,722
Reaction score
8,409
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
It's amazing how eerily close this letter sounds to everything I have been saying for months doesn't it?

Only the truly inept and obtuse will continue to parade around that "everything would be OK if we just apologized and left" or "America's foreign policy is to blame" or "It's not an Islam problem" or.....well, the garbage used by the global left just snowballed to the legion of sheep didn't it?
 

26 X World Champs

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
7,536
Reaction score
429
Location
Upper West Side of Manhattan (10024)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Stinger said:
Sounds like they are in tune with the anti-war, anti-america crowd here. The Sheehan's and Pelosie's and Carville's and Frankan's must give them quite the comfort in thier plans.

Can we imagine if they both win.
Only an idiot would believe that the people listed above support anything Al-Quaeda.

Writing posts that are totally full of bullshit might make some of you feel superior but what it really does is reveal how ignorant and prejudiced you really are.
 
Top Bottom