• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's 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.

"We will defeat al Qaida in Iraq."

bhkad

DP Veteran
Joined
May 18, 2007
Messages
10,742
Reaction score
1,753
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
"We will defeat al Qaida in Iraq."

July 24, 2007

President Bush Discusses War on Terror in South Carolina

Charleston Air Force Base
Charleston, South Carolina

[...]

The key theater in this global war is Iraq. Our troops are serving bravely in that country. They're opposing ruthless enemies, and no enemy is more ruthless in Iraq than al Qaeda. They send suicide bombers into crowded markets; they behead innocent captives and they murder American troops. They want to bring down Iraq's democracy so they can use that nation as a terrorist safe haven for attacks against our country. So our troops are standing strong with nearly 12 million Iraqis who voted for a future of peace, and they so for the security of Iraq and the safety of American citizens.

There's a debate in Washington about Iraq, and nothing wrong with a healthy debate. There's also a debate about al Qaeda's role in Iraq. Some say that Iraq is not part of the broader war on terror. They complain when I say that the al Qaeda terrorists we face in Iraq are part of the same enemy that attacked us on September the 11th, 2001. They claim that the organization called al Qaeda in Iraq is an Iraqi phenomenon, that it's independent of Osama bin Laden and that it's not interested in attacking America.

President George W. Bush, joined by South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, watches as USAF military personnel conduct cargo loading operations aboard a C-17 aircraft Tuesday, July 24, 2007, during a visit to Charleston AFB in Charleston, S.C. White House photo by Eric Draper That would be news to Osama bin Laden. He's proclaimed that the "third world war is raging in Iraq." Osama bin Laden says, "The war is for you or for us to win. If we win it, it means your defeat and disgrace forever." I say that there will be a big defeat in Iraq and it will be the defeat of al Qaeda.

President Bush Discusses War on Terror in South Carolina

Here's the mp3 audio file.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/07/20070724-3.pod.a.mp3
 
Last edited:
Our action to remove Saddam Hussein did not start the terrorist violence -- and America withdrawal from Iraq would not end it. The al Qaida terrorists now blowing themselves up in Iraq are dedicated extremists who have made killing the innocent the calling of their lives. They are part of a network that has murdered men, women, and children in London and Madrid; slaughtered fellow Muslims in Istanbul and Casablanca, Riyadh, Jakarta, and elsewhere around the world. If we were not fighting these al Qaida extremists and terrorists in Iraq, they would not be leading productive lives of service and charity. Most would be trying to kill Americans and other civilians elsewhere -- in Afghanistan, or other foreign capitals, or on the streets of our own cities.

Al Qaida is in Iraq -- and they're there for a reason. And surrendering the future of Iraq to al Qaida would be a disaster for our country. We know their intentions. Hear the words of al Qaida's top commander in Iraq when he issued an audio statement in which he said he will not rest until he has attacked our nation's capital. If we were to cede Iraq to men like this, we would leave them free to operate from a safe haven which they could use to launch new attacks on our country. And al Qaida would gain prestige amongst the extremists across the Muslim world as the terrorist network that faced down America and forced us into retreat.

If we were to allow this to happen, sectarian violence in Iraq could increase dramatically, raising the prospect of mass casualties. Fighting could engulf the entire region in chaos, and we would soon face a Middle East dominated by Islamic extremists who would pursue nuclear weapons, and use their control of oil for economic blackmail or to fund new attacks on our nation.

We've already seen how al Qaida used a failed state thousands of miles from our shores to bring death and destruction to the streets of our cities -- and we must not allow them to do so again. So, however difficult the fight is in Iraq, we must win it. And we can win it.

Less than a year ago, Anbar Province was al Qaida's base in Iraq and was written off by many as lost. Since then, U.S. and Iraqi forces have teamed with Sunni sheiks who have turned against al Qaida. Hundreds have been killed or captured. Terrorists have been driven from most of the population centers. Our troops are now working to replicate the success in Anbar in other parts of the country. Our brave men and women are taking risks, and they're showing courage, and we're making progress.

For the security of our citizens, and the peace of the world, we must give General Petraeus and his troops the time and resources they need, so they can defeat al Qaida in Iraq.

Continued from above.
 
Someone should remind BUSHEY BOY that he said he invaded IRAQ to 'FREE THE IRAQI PEOPLE'!!!
Tell him to stop with all this other B.S.!

There were several reasons for the invasion. That was one of them. Or are you one of those who insists there was only ONE reason for invading?

Tell us how much sense that makes after you tell us how you buy Certs because it's a candy mint AND because it's a breath mint. :mrgreen:
 
Given the record of "mistakes", inaccuracies, incomptence, and ignorance of the President, his Administration, and his neocon backers, there is little reason to believe the President has a clue about what is going on in Iraq, or that if he did he'd be forthright about it.[/
 
Last edited:
There were several reasons for the invasion. That was one of them. Or are you one of those who insists there was only ONE reason for invading?

Tell us how much sense that makes after you tell us how you buy Certs because it's a candy mint AND because it's a breath mint. :mrgreen:
---
The other reasons were WMD and Iraq-Saddam was a immenent threat and we all know that Bush lied about that.
---
Certs??? HE!! NO! Certs is for sissys! It wont get rid of my stoggie cigar taste. One cigar and I have to brush and google for 5 minutes.:mrgreen:
 
I think people know by now im against pulling out of Iraq but it now seems there isnt the will to continue but i at least hope people will not be happy about it you will be condemning a country to complete mayhem.
 
BTW: WE haven't defeated Al Quida in Afganis. yet!
When Bushy Boy 'CUT AND RAN' from Afhanis. Osama and all the rest jumped for joy and thanks to Bushy Boy they are ALL REBUILT!
 
---
The other reasons were WMD and Iraq-Saddam was a immenent threat and we all know that Bush lied about that.
---
Certs??? HE!! NO! Certs is for sissys! It wont get rid of my stoggie cigar taste. One cigar and I have to brush and google for 5 minutes.:mrgreen:

He didn't lie. He did a 'Terry stop.'
 
Someone should remind BUSHEY BOY that he said he invaded IRAQ to 'FREE THE IRAQI PEOPLE'!!!
Tell him to stop with all this other B.S.!

That he did say. Here is his quote in the proper context:

fall-goodthing.JPG
 
---
OK! I give up! Whats a Terry stop?:mrgreen:

Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court which held that the Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures was not violated when a police officer stopped a suspect on the street and searched him without probable cause to arrest.

The Court held that police may briefly detain a person if they have a reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime. Because of the important interest in protecting the safety of police officers, police may perform a quick surface search of the person's outer clothing for weapons if they have reasonable suspicion that the person stopped is armed. This reasonable suspicion must be based on “specific and articulable facts” and not merely upon an officer's hunch. This permitted police action has subsequently been referred to in short as a “stop and frisk”, or simply a “Terry stop”. The Terry standard was later extended to temporary detentions of persons in vehicles, known as traffic stops.

Terry v. Ohio - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
That he did say. Here is his quote in the proper context:

fall-goodthing.JPG
---
OK! We agree. So WHY are all the Cons saying we went into Iraq to get terrorist that were NOT there?
--
Next, Why did Bushy Boy leave Afgain. and let Osama and his gang go free?
Bushhy said that Osama was responsible for 911 so with about 30 other countrys needing 'liberating:roll: ' why did he choose Iraq??? Was it because of that old lady crying in the pict???:roll: Could be because Busie Boairy saw that woman and decided to invade Iraq to FREE HER???:roll:
How do you spell 'DADDYs WAR'?
Bushyeyie 2001- We will hunt down Osama and his gang of thugs no matter where he goes.
Bushy :liar2 2003- Osama is no longer a priorty now.
---
BTW: You can dump that pict now that the whole middle east wants us OUT of Iraq! The only glimpse they are getting is a glimpse of a bomb up their azz!
 
Last edited:
I can't believe that speech by Bush. What a bunch of crap.

How can anyone still believe his "fear" game?! His allusions that Iraq attacked us on 9/11. His implication that "they" will follow us home.

Sickening..disgusting. Tell us the truth for once.
 
Back
Top Bottom