Posted on 10/11/2004 10:38:31 PM PDT by quidnunc
The most frequently offered argument of Sen. John Kerry and other anti-war Democrats to support their charge that the invasion of Iraq was a mistake is that Iraq has become a den of terrorists.
This claim is true. But it completely undermines the Democrats' charge that invading Iraq was a mistake.
They say this: There are far more terrorists in Iraq since the invasion, and, therefore, the invasion was a mistake.
Yet, in order to believe that the greater number of terrorists in Iraq means the invasion was a mistake, you have to believe one or both of the following — that were it not for the invasion, the terrorists who are in Iraq would have been engaged in some peaceful work in some other country, or that they are newly minted terrorists who were perhaps selling shoes prior to the war in Iraq.
Neither scenario makes sense.
Take the leading terrorist — the Jordanian butcher of human beings, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Everyone acknowledges he was a terrorist before the war in Iraq. In the 1990s, he spent seven years in a Jordanian prison for plotting to overthrow the government and establish an Islamic state. He then went to Germany, where he set up a terrorist cell.
So here's the question that apparently goes unasked of all the Democrats who are sure it is President Bush who lacks intelligence: What would Zarqawi be doing now if he were not slaughtering people in Iraq? Selling used cars in Amman? Playing cello in the Berlin Philharmonic?
-snip-
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
Excellent point.
We are able to kill and capture hundreds, perhaps even thousands of terrorists in Iraq.
Gen Franks said in his speech at the RNC: "We can fight the terrorists over there, or we can fight them over here. I prefer to fight them over there".
Prager bump.
Amen!
BTTT!
Working for the Kerry campaign!
I could see Kerry blowing a question like that off with "Nobody knows" and then changing the subject back to Bush's
decisions on Iraq.
Good one Dennis.
ping
Huh? Who or what is 'working for the Kerry campaign'?
"Dennis Prager: Ask Kerry One Question – What Would Zarqawi be Doing if he Weren't in Iraq"
OPINION-SPECULATION: He would be in Iran.
I have another question. Knowing what we know now, was it wrong for president Kennedy to take us into Vietnam?
Yeah, that's one of those "So when did you stop beating your wife?" kids of questions.
It would be a cut and run response, where the running would start with "This administration..."
I hope someone in the campaign reads this, it's a great question, would knock Kerry on his A$$
I could see Kerry blowing a question like that off with "Nobody knows" and then changing the subject back to Bush's
decisions on Iraq.
I thought I DID see that! I KNOW at least I heard it!
Exactly which strong national powers would you have brought into the coalition to pressure Iraq, in 2003 --and what would you have done with them? --and what would that have done?
He'd be a guest on Oprah!
If as you say, you believe human life begins at conception,yet you are willing for innocent human life to be taken, what do you do with American's primal document, the Declaration of Independence, which points to our highest national principles, especially that we are "endowed by our Creator with... the Right to Life?"
What more needs to be said?
We brought it to them, it has prevented it from escalating here, sKerry is p!ssed, Dasshole is deeply saddened, and Pelosi is speechless.
Works for me!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.