Ten Myths of the War in Iraq

Blackfive ^ | 5/21/07

[bnelson44]

Personal views of:
Brigadier General Steve Anderson
Deputy Chief of Staff
Resources and Sustainment
Multi-National Force - Iraq

A Powerpoint Presentation presented at: James Madison University, 27 Apr 07

Purpose
-Present unvarnished viewpoint of soldier serving in Iraq in Baghdad for previous 8 months
-Provide insights on Operation Iraqi Freedom that may run counter to how many presently view the war
-Promote understanding of what many believe is “the defining political-military event of this generation”
-Engage in candid discussion with students, faculty and other attendees regarding OIF

Here is the presentation

[Valin]

Are you saying that we would be better off declaring victory so that those against us in Iraq can come here and attack you or yours?

Every Senator Should Read The Bensman Series From The San Antonio Express News (Border News)
Townhall ^ | May 22, 2007 | Hugh Hewitt

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1838210/posts
Posted on 05/22/2007 10:41:32 PM CDT by Valin

The four part series I noted below is must reading for every senator considering amendments to the draft immigration bill which, at its unveiling, made no provision for treating illegal aliens from countries with known jihadist networks differently from Mexican or Central American immigrants.

[CJ Wolf]

"Are you saying that we would be better off declaring victory so that those against us in Iraq can come here and attack you or yours?"

No, they wouldn't follow us home. They'd be scrambling home to Iran to fight us there. Those left in Iraq would then be fighting each other for power and too busy to worry about sending boys here. Other Islamic countries would be fighting each other to gain footholds in Iraq. Iran would suffer a similar fate after we lay waste to the Iranian military and it's current government and leave.

And frankly if another nutjob gets in power in Iraq or Iran after we have left, we do it again... until they get the message. It's much cheaper in blood and money to do it that way. If we left Iraq after Saddam was captured, we'd been able to re-invade Iraq and capture the replacement nutjob roughly 7 times already with what we have already spent in Iraq.

Your argument for staying in Iraq is akin to letting our military continue to be used as a gold plated - solider baited bug-zapper next to a conveyor belt loaded with never ending camel crap creating an endless supply of biting sand flies.

[CJ Wolf]

“Can you please explain why we are killing, capturing and chasing so many Al Quaeda in Iraq if Iraq is not part of the war on terrorism?”

Because Iran sends them there to fight us and supplies recruits with weapons. Iran is harboring and sponsoring terrorism. They will continue to sponsor terrorism against us until we take them out.

[sauropod]

*sigh* I’m surprised you wrote that considering what I posted.

I never stated “do[ing] away with the stupid old Constitution.”

If you want to strain at a gnat while swallowing a camel, be my guest.

[CJ Wolf]

Ok sarcasm aside, I believe the difference is obvious and paramount.

[mjaneangels@aolcom]

Read and bookmarked.

Thanks for sharing your link. It has very good information in it.

[mjaneangels@aolcom]

Please see Valin’s reply # 61.

[mjaneangels@aolcom]

“Because Iran sends them there to fight us and supplies recruits with weapons. Iran is harboring and sponsoring terrorism. They will continue to sponsor terrorism against us until we take them out.”

The subject is Al Quaeda, not Hezbollah, the Qods force or the Revolutionary guard.

Al Queada does not take orders from Iran.

[kidd]

War was never declared

Incorrect.

Congress tranferred their authority to declare war on Iraq to the President. The President then used that authority to declare war.

[CJ Wolf]

Really? Ok, so can you point me to this Presidential Declaration of War against Iraq? I’d like to read it.

[malia]

bump

[kidd]

Really? Ok, so can you point me to this Presidential Declaration of War against Iraq? I’d like to read it.

Certainly.

Executive Order 13290 (March 20,2003) was the initial declaration:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030320-10.html

also

http://www.treas.gov/offices/enforcement/ofac/legal/eo/13290.pdf

It was ammended by several other Executive Orders. Some of these are described in the following:

http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20051800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2005/pdf/05-10373.pdf

[CJ Wolf]

Kidd, this is not what you said it is. It is an executive order to confiscate certain properties in Iraq. But thanks for trying.

[kidd]

What part of

“I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, hereby determine that the United States and Iraq are engaged in armed hostilities”

don’t you understand?

[kidd]

Seriously.

Are you going to engage in symantics, or did you simply miss that opening statement in the executive order?

Were you looking for something that uses the word “war”? Because the terminology used in the executive order flow from the Congressional authorization.

Or are you trying to make a more fundamental point that the terms “armed hostilities” and “war” are different?

[CJ Wolf]

Seriously, why is it so difficult for this country to Declare War. Again even Bush’s AG says it’s not a War.