Monday, May 07, 2007

What happens if we leave?

How many unborn toddlers were murdered today because of the humanistic, paganish decisions of the United States Supreme Court?

Stop the
Murder of

“Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn’t do it, sins.” James 4: 17 (NIV)

Tonight’s post is a response to a column by Cal Thomas and was printed in the Peoria Journal Star on May 1, 2007, page A4. It is entitled “Defeat, retreat and repeat.” George Tenet, the former CIA Director, has just had a book published and was recently on “60 Minutes.” I missed the program.

“For the sake of argument, let’s say former CIA Director George Tenet is right in his book and that Vice President Dick Cheney pushed too hard with questionable or inaccurate intelligence because of a predisposition to go to war in Iraq and topple Saddam Hussein.

So What? We can’t go back and fix the mistakes of the past. Only two choices are available: victory or defeat.

(How can he say so what? Doesn’t he realize that the libertine Democrats are building their complete argument on hindsight? Of course, hindsight has never helped anyone make a decision when the decision had to be made; but that doesn’t seem to matter to the libertine Democrats. They have decided that the war was a mistake and so they have to have some way to justify why they supported the war in the beginning and are now against it. They can’t very well say that someone as unsophisticated as President Bush fooled them. So, they must use hindsight to justify their change of direction. By the way, have any of you who support these libertines considered this. If they were so easily duped by George Bush who they consider to be unintelligent, what is going to happen when as leaders of our country they have to contend with some of the wily dictators who are now in control in many parts of the world? Will they give away the country to save their necks? Just asking?—my addition)

Let us assume the Democratic left is right and we should pull U.S. forces out as early as Oct. 1, or perhaps a few months later, but certainly before the next president takes office, because the Bush administration’s policy in Iraq has completely failed and, in the words of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, ‘The war is lost.’

(Making such a statement [“The war is lost.”] is not only a lie but can only encourage those who are trying to destroy us. Such an offensive remark from a leader of the Senate is inexcusable! Have you noticed that the mass media seldom reminds the nation of what has already been accomplished. A dictator who attacked a defenseless country has been overthrown and executed for his crimes against his country. A new fledgling democracy has been established. [Why do you think the libertine Democrats want to throw this democracy to the wolves? Do they expect it to be a “grown-up” overnight? Examine our own history. It takes time to develop as a democracy. Our first attempt lasted how long? Or, don’t they have any understanding of history?] Major leaders of terrorist groups have been killed and captured. In fact, without checking, it is my guess that more terrorists and their leaders have been killed or captured since 9/11 than during any similar time period. Certainly, more has been accomplished during this Presidency than during all the Democratic Presidencies since we were first attacked during the Carter Administration. When you are at war there are costs, but it is better than being attacked and wringing our hands and asking “why don’t terrorists like us.”—my addition)

What next? Does the United States not suffer a loss of credibility in the world’s eyes for again failing to finish a job it started?

(More importantly, we lose credibility with our enemies. Any defeat can only encourage them to continue their terrorist tactics worldwide including attacking our shores again. A major difference between Vietnam and now is that we were fighting a country in which the concern of the enemy was to unite that country. North Vietnam did not dare to attack us in the United States because they knew we were not using our full force and might which we probably would have done if they directly attacked us here. Terrorists have no country to surrender. The battle ground can be the world. It is far better to fight them in Iraq than to fight terrorist attacks within the United States. Remind me, how many times has the United States proper been attacked since our involvement in Iraq? One? Ten? Twenty? Zero!!!—my addition)

Do the millions who voted for the first elected government in Iraq conclude they risked their lives for nothing?

(Do the libertine Democrats have any concern at all for the Iraqi people? Do they care if the fighting continues after we abandon the country? Do they think the fighting will just end if we leave? Do they care if the nation is once again taken into dictatorship after we retreat like a whipped dog? Guess what? They may not view our retreat as a “whipped dog” but the enemy most assuredly will!!!—my addition)

What would be the consequences of pulling out before Iraq is stabilized sufficiently to stand on its own?

And, most importantly, what would a U.S. retreat do to the confidence of the enemy that wishes to dominate the world by force?

(I would add, by force AND TERROR. Terrorists have an advantage in this kind of war. They are not easily recognizable [after all, we can not do profiling since that is politically incorrect; dangerous to our well-being but politically incorrect] and they do not have a nation to lose if defeated. They can spread terror and blend back into the community. They don’t wear uniforms, they don’t carry identification that declares “I am a terrorist”, and they don’t care if they murder innocent life. They are terrorists. Do you understand the concept? They don’t play fair. They are grown-up bullies who murder and terrorize for their benefit. And libertine Democrats want to placate these murderers!!!—my addition)

We have the answer to that last question. Statements declaring all but victory for the Islamists are posted on numerous Islamic Web sites. Various statements by American leaders critical of the war are cited as evidence that the United States is about to quit.

(Do you think that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s, “The war is lost.” statement is among those statements posted by the enemy? If you were a terrorist would such a statement from a Congressional leader encourage you to fight on to defeat the “Great Satan?”—my addition)

Ubaidah Al-Saif, who is associated with Al-Fajr Media in Iraq, as part of what is called ‘The Islamic State of Iraq,” said on April 25: ‘The plans of the cross worshippers (Christians don’t worship the cross, we worship the SON of GOD.—my addition) and their henchmen have collapsed.’ He quotes ‘House Majority Leader Harry Reid’ (he means Senate majority leader) as saying, ‘The Iraq war is hopeless and the situation in Iraq is the same as it was in Vietnam.’

(Not a real smart statement by a person in a leadership position. But then, libertine Democrats have been trying their best to capitulate and surrender.—my addition)

Al-Saif declares American morale is declining and our ‘battle against the enemy is first and foremost the will to fight and the length of the battle does not rest with the cross worshippers.’ He calls for his fighters to ‘be patient’ and says Allah will give them victory. Patience is not one of America’s virtues.

(“Patience is not one of America’s virtues” is an understatement. The problem is that patience and the will to win are almost a prerequisite when fighting terrorism. Part of the strategy of terrorists is to wear down the enemy and destroy his will to win even if it means retreat and capitulation. The old saying used to be “Better dead than red.” Now it seems to be “better to retreat regardless of the cost.”—my addition)

Do the war opponents realize, or care, that every critical statement they make is reported by the enemy’s media and passed on to homicide bombers and fighters to encourage them to keep killing Americans and Iraqis.

(I think they know. I don’t think they particularly care. If they did, they would keep silent. Not only are their statements an encouragement to the enemy, it must also be discouraging to our own troops who are putting their life on the line daily to help fight terrorists and establish a newly formed democracy in Iraq. They seem to have forgotten the old World War II saying “Loose lips; sink ships!” I wonder if the libertine Democrats realize this or do they just not care!!!) [Okay, actually so did I. Consequently, I went to Encarta ® to try to find it. I didn’t, but fortunately it just popped into my head. However, I did find three other quotes from World War II that seem appropriate. They are: 1) “Careless talk costs lives.” (Anonymous, British Ministry of Information) I wonder if the libertine Democrats realize this or do they just not care!!! 2) “Wars are not won by evacuations.” (Winston Churchill (1874 - 1965), British prime minister and writer, Referring to Dunkirk, Their Finest Hour.) I wonder if the libertine Democrats realize this or do they just not care!!! 3) “Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory there is no survival.” (Winston Churchill (1874 - 1965), British prime minister and writer, Speech to the British Parliament.) {Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2007 [DVD]. Redmond, Wa: Microsoft, Corporation, 2006.}I wonder if the libertine Democrats realize this or do they just not care!!! Where is the Democratic leadership that helped this nation win World War II? Do today’s libertine Democrats not realize that we are at war or do they just not care?]

The official Palestinian Authority broadcast media have cranked up hate propaganda against America and Israel. On April 22, in addition to the usual scenes of ‘martyred’ female homicide bombers clad in white and floating beneficently across the screen, viewers were treated to this: ‘Be certain that America is on its way to utter destruction, America is wallowing (in blood) today in Iraq and Afghanistan, America is defeated and Israel is defeated, and was defeated in Lebanon and Palestine. … Make us victorious over the community of infidels. … Allah, take the Jews and their allies, Allah, take the Americans and their allies … Allah, annihilate them completely and do not leave anyone of them.’

(The Democrats are suppose to be such great defenders of Israel. Yet, they have taken the Iraq situation and put it in its own little box—separate and apart from all other world issues. The terrorists have not. They directly link Iraq, the United States, and Israel all together. Even if they dislike this war, they should be supporting it because supporting it is supporting Israel and, of course, our own troops. I wonder if the libertine Democrats realize this or do they just not care!!!—my addition)

That’s not defeat and retreat talk. That’s the talk of victory and self-confidence.

In an April 26 op-ed for the Washington Post, Sen. Joseph Lieberman—a lonely voice within his party because he favors victory for our side and for Iraq’s elected government—said that while progress is slow, it is visible but will take more time. He said even if Iraq’s Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds were to achieve a political solution tomorrow, the threat of al-Qaida would not go away.

(Of course not. The libertine Democrats almost seem to be hoping for an al-Qaida victory in Iraq. With support lacking in our own country, how can a newly emerging democracy hope to go it alone with terrorists in their mist?—my addition)
Lieberman concludes: ‘The challenge before us, then, is whether we respond to al-Qaida’s barbarism by running away, as it hopes we do—abandoning the future of Iraq, the Middle East and ultimately our own security to the very people responsible for last week’s atrocities—or whether we stand and fight.’

(What is the libertine Democrat’s response to “stand and fight”? Isn’t it “cut and run”?—my addition)

Lieberman has chosen to ‘stand and fight and win,’ (Not a bad choice!!!—my addition) which is better than defeat, retreat and having to repeat the battle somewhere else against a much stronger enemy, with more casualties.

(Stronger because a victory in Iraq will made them stronger, renew and intensify their goal of our annihilation, increase their confidence and their belief in the rightness of their mission, and justify their use of terror tactics. NO GOOD for the United States will come from a terrorist victory in Iraq!!!)

It’s shameful that so many Democrats running for president (all of them as far as I know—my addition) appear ready to accept defeat and retreat if it advances their presidential prospects, no matter the prospects for the security of Iraq, the Middle East and the United States.

(Every libertine Democrat who supports retreat and defeat in Iraq should be asked these questions and we should demand legitimate answers [not platitudes and not what we should have done in the past—hindsight does not solve any problem].
1) After we leave Iraq, what will happen in Iraq during the next 12 months, during the next 24 months, and during the next 36 months?
2) Do you envision that Iraq will have a democracy three years from our retreat from Iraq?
3) Will our retreat from Iraq strengthen al-Qaida, weaken al-Qaida, or have no influence on the strength of al-Qaida?
4) Will our retreat from Iraq end terrorist attacks on the United States, increase terrorist attacks on the United States, or have no influence on terrorist attacks on the United States?
The following questions are to be answered with a yes or no response only:
1) Are terrorist groups at war with the United States?
2) Is the United States at war with terrorist groups?
3) Do you intend to win any war between the United States and terrorist groups?
And finally, please explain how such a war will be won.

If the Democratic candidates will not or can not answer these questions to our satisfaction, none of them should be elected President of the United States. NONE OF THEM!!!


Post a Comment

<< Home