No People can be bound to acknowledge and adore the invisible hand, which conducts the Affairs of men more than the People of the United States.
-- George Washington
Not me. The first headline is nearly meaningless. "Some" (how much exactly?) "Progress" (as defined by whom?) "May" (but maybe not) "Mean Hope" (that's hope not certainty) "for Baghdad" (what about the rest of the country?). The cycle in Iraq has been very clear and repetitive. The US cracks down in an area and things are calm for a little while, then they go right back to chaos. There is no reason to think the current reduction in deaths in Baghdad is any different.The inconsistency is in the second headline. Why on earth is there any debate about this? There is nothing whatever that the United States can accomplish in Iraq that is of any value whatever to the citizens of the United States. Any Senator who can't see that should resign.
DL, do you mean to say that the terrorists wait until the US leaves or weakens and then they come back?Sounds like a great argument for withdrawal to me.
The "terrorists" are Iraqi groups that are resisting their country's occupation by a foreign power. They have nothing to do with those who attacked the US on 9/11. Their tactics are a great argument for US withdrawal.
The terrorists are killing indiscriminantly. They want to undermine their own government in order to gain power for themselves.If they are simply waiting for the US to leave as you attest, then we should not oblige them.
Post a Comment