Posted on 06/15/2008 7:06:53 PM PDT by Kaslin
No nation openly agrees to let us use their territory to attack another nation. Such action is an act of war and always requires an individual decision at the time. Iraq doesn’t exist to be used by us to attack Iran. That does not make them “ungrateful” They didn’t exactly ask us to invade them whether it brought them some good things or not.
In the future, expect leftwingers to hold pro-American Iraqis in the same kind of contempt that they hold, say, pro-American Miami Cubans in. Every Iraqi they encounter or see on TV will be a reminder that they wished for failure and defeat and suffering for Iraq but did not get it.
Yep.
And WTH is Jack Murtha doing on this thread? ;-)
Yes,...good news it would seem...thanks.;
We don't need Iraq to attack Iran. And we don't expect a public statement from Iraq in this regard--compare to Pakistan.Syria lost its North Korean nuclear program--and we had plausible deniability.
What we have accomplished in Iraq is twofold:
One, we tied up the Islamist enemy and killed his leadership and 20,000 of his fighters--simultaneously preventing another strike on CONUS;
Two, we have made an ally of an enemy--all through the steadfast performance of the American fighting man, and the American commander-in-chief.
Iran will have its toys broken and its mullahs pwned at a time of our choosing.
***************************EXCERPT***********************
The WaPo notices in todays editorial a signal lost on much of the MSM over the last week. The fact that the new government of Iraq stood up to Iran and signaled that they DO want a partnership with America. Just on their terms:
************************SNIP*********************
The WaPo goes on to wonder why the Democrats have stood in lockstep with the leaders of Iran in denouncing the US-Iraqi agreement before the thing is even written.
Its pretty clear their intentions are that we put in a basing system in Iraq that parallels the Korea-Japan history,
~~~The history of every single outside occupation of Iraq over the last thousand years argues against that logic.
-Sen. James Webb
The history suggests that it cant be done .so why even try says the Democrats. Sure, it may be impossible but at least friggin try! In the end their mission is to make it appear that Bush wants to stay in Iraq forever, that way Obama can look good when he says he will bring them all home.
The WaPo continues:
If the United States were to make a formal commitment to defend Iraq from external aggression, congressional consideration and approval of the pact would be appropriate. For now, the biggest risk is that Tehran and its allies will pressure Mr. Maliki into backing away from a partnership with Washington. In that case, Iran would hasten to substitute itself as Iraqs defender and strategic ally, with momentous implications for the rest of the Middle East. Surely this is not what the Democrats want.
Surely you jest?
This is exactly what they want. How else to blame Bush for it?
Post #26 was from the Flopping Aces Blog....
From the Strata Sphere Blog:
Sadrists Movement Is Dead, Pulls Out Of Elections
******************************EXCERPT************************
the Sadrist movement is now limping off the Iraqi political stage, too injured from a self-inflicted wound of extremism to survive by popular support:
The movement of anti-American cleric Moqtada al-Sadr said Saturday that it would not take part in provincial elections this year, one day after it formed a new paramilitary group to fight U.S. troops.
Sadr is clearly a spent political force.
Bush should go to Baghdad one more time.
Travis McGee predicted this result years ago re al Qaeda thugs rushing into Iraq to be destroyed like moths attacking lanterns/candles:
“What we have accomplished in Iraq is twofold:
One, we tied up the Islamist enemy and killed his leadership and 20,000 of his fighters—simultaneously preventing another strike on CONUS;
Two, we have made an ally of an enemy—all through the steadfast performance of the American fighting man, and the American commander-in-chief.
Iran will have its toys broken and its mullahs pwned at a time of our choosing.”
Thanks Ernest. Iran is trying to get through “spontaneous demonstrations” and negotiations what it couldn’t and can’t achieve through military and paramilitary means. In this it has partially and temporarily succeeded.
As an author, he distorts culture to inject his polymorphous perversity into the story.
As a veteran, elected representative, father of an American warrior, he can barely contain himself from a physical assault on POTUS/CinC.
Hey, Jimmy Webb--if God had wanted man to fly, He'd-a given 'im wings!
Let Macaca be a lesson: a slip of the tongue gets you a sawed-off psychopath where you coulda had a patriot.
Agreed!
JUst another example of the Marxist demrats taking the same point of view of our enemies.
The friend of my enemy is my enemy.
Traitors.
Picture Jim Webb as vp.
Howdy! Long time, pal. Must be an election comin’ up ............. FRegards
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.