Originally Posted by gregs210
I've never heard of him before so I had no preconceived notions or bias before reading the post. I still think he has some valid points, I take it there is nothing in his column with which you would agree?
"But if Republicans are rushing to desert our troops and spit on the graves of heroes, the Democratic Party at least has been consistent - they've supported our enemies from the start, undercutting our troops and refusing to explain in detail what happens if we flee Iraq."
pretty much ends any consideration on my part of this guy.
He writes extensive on the subject. A little while back he was writing extensively that the war was lost. Since that didn't go over to well with his RWNJ audience, he has changed his tune back to that it could be won.
Myself, I reject the idea anyone is "surrendering" in Iraq. We are supposed to be at war with Al Queda. While the administration loves to call anyone who took a shot at us in Iraq is "al Queda", the truth is there are so many factions no one knows who is fighting who, and that perhaps the best way to defeat Al Queda in Iraq is to simply walk out and let the Shiites and Baathists wipe them out, which they have routinely done with Sunni fundamentalists in Iraq for the last one hundred years. The Shiites would recieve unlimited Iranian support in the endeavor, and the secular Sunnis should receive the same from us, even if it means putting the Baathist's back in power.
Iraq has never been fertile ground for the type of fundamentalism that breeds Al Queda, that has always been the forte of our so-called friends next door in Saudi Arabia - this is why pre-war Iraq was a socialist state, while Saudi Arabia has always been the home of Whabbism, Al Queda and lots of other dangerous nutiness. It is no coincidence that all of the 9-11 hijackers were Saudis, and none were Iraqis.
Anyone who knows their ass from their elbow on Middle East politics knows the best way to beat Al Queda in Iraq is to leave. As long as we are there, they will go stronger. It may be hard to grasp, but we will face defeat as long as we stay. We are the thing that keeps Iraq unstable by our very presence. If we were smart, we would allow Iraq to disintegrate into three states, and re-arm the Baathists in the Sunni section. The idea is not "surrender" it is something called "winning", something Bush has been unable to do in either Iraq or Afghanistan, has he not?