Re: Rep. Murtha ignites GOPpish reactionism
Consecutive days of a popular sense of "Finally! A sense of direction!!", since U.S. Congressman Murtha's initial statement with regard to the U.S. Neocon conceived and initiated act of <b>all out war on Iraq**</b> to install in Iraq the directorship of U.S./British recognized "Iraqi National Congress" (INC), a coalition/cabal of long-time Iraqi exiles of capitalUSt persuasion, and U.S. Neocons of cororatUSt, militarUSt interest$.
On 21nov05 pbs NewsHour retired U.S. Army Lt. General Wm. Odom has given the best analysis for a reasonable U.S. withdrawl from U.S. occupation of Iraq:
Glad to have had U.S. Military suck al-Qaida anti-terrorUSts resources and efforts into Iraq ("... at least they're not here.") , U.S.'s War criminal Cheney thinks quite oppositely from Gen. Odom:
Like General Odom, Congressman Murtha and many others have stated and observed, the al-Quida militancy and anti-terrorUSt ideology is in Iraq because it is in Iraq where U.S. corporatUSt, militarUSt interest$ are not only most vulnerable but also the least appreciated.
An Iraq ruled by al-Qaida? When did al-Quida ever rule a country? Never. Not in Afghanistan or anywhere else. U.S. military and economic occupation forces give al-Quida its reasons, for both al-Qida and an overwhelming majority of Iraqi peoples, for al-Quida being in Iraq, for Iraqi men supporting al-Quida goals.
Another retreat? What does Cheney propose? No retreat, just continue a misconceived, misguided, mistaken mission whose goal extends more distant proportional to the amount of U.S. treasure which is expended to reach it.
Mr. Cheney et. al, need to face the fact that his/their war not only has been/is an inexcusble calamity, but it is a crime for which no civilian perpetraitor, such as himself, should expect his or her being excused from prosecution.
Consecutive days of a popular sense of "Finally! A sense of direction!!", since U.S. Congressman Murtha's initial statement with regard to the U.S. Neocon conceived and initiated act of <b>all out war on Iraq**</b> to install in Iraq the directorship of U.S./British recognized "Iraqi National Congress" (INC), a coalition/cabal of long-time Iraqi exiles of capitalUSt persuasion, and U.S. Neocons of cororatUSt, militarUSt interest$.
On 21nov05 pbs NewsHour retired U.S. Army Lt. General Wm. Odom has given the best analysis for a reasonable U.S. withdrawl from U.S. occupation of Iraq:
LT. GEN. ODOM: " ...objectively, (Congressman Murtha) understands that we need a basic strategic change of direction. And unless we make it, we're going to pay a higher and higher price over a longer time until we eventually do do it. I don't think that we will still have troops in there by the year 2007. I think the Army is already broken. You can already see signs the administration is giving hints of troop draw-downs.
'People are becoming more and more aware of that it is not in our interest to be there. And the unfortunate thing about the debate is a refusal to go back and look at the war aims and look at whose interests were really served best. It is clear that Iran's interests were served by our invasion and that al-Qaida's interests because it could not break [in] there until we came in. If we were to get out fairly precipitously, you can bet al-Qaida will be run out, too. They don't operate in the Kurdish area now, and the Shiites and the Iranians hate the al-Qaida.'
Glad to have had U.S. Military suck al-Qaida anti-terrorUSts resources and efforts into Iraq ("... at least they're not here.") , U.S.'s War criminal Cheney thinks quite oppositely from Gen. Odom:
Unindicted U.S. War Criminal Cheney: "Would the United States and other free nations be better off or worse off with Zarqawi, bin Laden and Zawahiri in control of Iraq?"
Like General Odom, Congressman Murtha and many others have stated and observed, the al-Quida militancy and anti-terrorUSt ideology is in Iraq because it is in Iraq where U.S. corporatUSt, militarUSt interest$ are not only most vulnerable but also the least appreciated.
"Would we be safer or less safe with Iraq ruled by a man intent on the destruction of our country?"(cheney)
An Iraq ruled by al-Qaida? When did al-Quida ever rule a country? Never. Not in Afghanistan or anywhere else. U.S. military and economic occupation forces give al-Quida its reasons, for both al-Qida and an overwhelming majority of Iraqi peoples, for al-Quida being in Iraq, for Iraqi men supporting al-Quida goals.
"It is a dangerous illusion to suppose that another retreat by the civilized world would satisfy the appetite of the terrorist and get them to leave us alone."(cheney)
Another retreat? What does Cheney propose? No retreat, just continue a misconceived, misguided, mistaken mission whose goal extends more distant proportional to the amount of U.S. treasure which is expended to reach it.
Mr. Cheney et. al, need to face the fact that his/their war not only has been/is an inexcusble calamity, but it is a crime for which no civilian perpetraitor, such as himself, should expect his or her being excused from prosecution.
Comment