Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Willravel
Conditions continue to worsen. The only reason we're seeing violence starting to drop of is due to a combination of mass exodus, high fatality rates, and certain gangs finally having cleansed the areas they're in. The problem is each of these conditions is going to eventually result in further instability. Worse yet, the coalition forces are still targets for the frustrations of the insurgents, which means further violence but more violence concentrated on our troops. BTW, there was just a report of a suicide bombing that killed 16 people.
Leaving Iraq will lend to stability. It's that simple.
They're linked.
|
A follow on from my last post....here is Bush's "last dance" with this lie, on August 21, 2006:
Quote:
.....Q Quick follow-up. A lot of the consequences you mentioned for pulling out seem like maybe they never would have been there if we hadn't gone in. How do you square all of that?
THE PRESIDENT: I square it because, imagine a world in which you had Saddam Hussein who had the capacity to make a weapon of mass destruction, who was paying suiciders to kill innocent life, who would -- who had relations with Zarqawi. Imagine what the world would be like with him in power. .....
|
You have to see it as a deliberately misleading statement, and....since it wasn't true and was conjured up by Doug Feith, what else would you call it ace????? If it wasn't Bush's "go to" justification, and Cheney's...over and over, for nearly four years, why did they so often lead with it, in their responses to the question of why we went into Iraq?