PDA

View Full Version : Dear Al Qaeda


mulefeathers
03-28-2007, 07:35 AM
Dear Al Qaeda:
We know that things in Iraq have been a bit tough for you lately. President Bush's determination to bring stability to Iraq through an increase in the number of troops has been showing results .. and even more troops are on the way. Because of the troop surge you have seen a decline in the number of American troops you and your Islamic fascist buddies have been able to kill. Because of the increased level of security in Baghdad the Iraqi people were starting to feel better about their future. You know this, even though the American people may not. You're close to the situation so you can readily see the changing conditions. The American people are insulated from this reality by a media apparatus that is more concerned with the destruction of President Bush than to the success of our efforts in Iraq.

All in all, it was getting to be a pretty depressing picture for you and your terrorist pals.

Well ... cheer up. Things are about to change. After a rather close vote in the U.S. Senate today you are one step closer to knowing an exact date upon which all U.S. troops will be withdrawn from Iraq. As we're sure your political analysts will tell you, setting a specific date for withdrawal. We're sure you realize that you cannot commit yourself to victory and to a date-specific withdrawal at the same time. You select one course of action, or the other.

Take heart, too, in the fact that other nations and regimes in the Middle East have now seen further evidence that the United States does not have the political will to commit itself to victory. Your tactic of waging a war of attrition against American troops has been validated. The American people, having heard a preponderance of negative news from their media, are calling for capitulation. They've become complacent after five years have passed since 9/11 with no terrorists attacks in our country. Oh, there have been some isolated incidents of mad Muslims shooting up shopping malls and mowing innocents down with their cars ... but nothing major to rekindle their determination. Was this your plan all along? Somehow we think that you are that clever ... and if that's the case, this element of your grand plan has also worked very well.

You now realize that you can advance your radical Islamist goals throughout the Middle East, and perhaps into Europe, without any fear of retaliation or interference from the United States. The will to fight is lost. The desire for victory has died. The American people have become fat, lazy and complacent. They no longer see either their freedom or their culture as something they are willing to fight for. It must be heady days indeed in your caves and tents. Hard to imagine, isn't it? Al Qaeda actually has more determination to see their cause through than the great United States of America! Perhaps that's because you're dedicated to the cause of the spread of Islam, while the American people have lost their dedication to the cause of liberty. Complacency will do that to you.

We do have one word of caution for you. You and your Islamic terrorist buddies have been the beneficiaries of the aftermath of the 2000 presidential election in the United States. That election, and the close vote in our State of Florida, created a sense of hatred and resentment in Democrats against our president such as has never been seen before in our history. From that moment on Democrats and liberals in the U.S. were steadfastly dedicated to the idea of the destruction of the Bush presidency. Oh, to be sure, there were a few weeks of solidarity following your attacks of 9/11, but it didn't last. When the panic subsided Democrats suddenly realized that any measure of success in the war against you might actually strengthen the Republican hold on power. It didn't take Democrats long to decide that their hatred of George Bush, and their desire to see his presidency destroyed, absolutely outweighed any concerns they had about protecting our people from another one of your vicious attacks. Democrats have convinced themselves that, once they have gained full control of our government, a few "we feel your pain" comments directed at your murdering Islamic followers will be all that is needed to put the Western world and the wonderful, peaceful, serene religion of Islam around a desert campfire singing rousing renditions of Kumbaya. You just need to be aware that there is a chance, though slight, that the Democrats might actually decide that our culture is worth fighting for ... if they can first rid our country of the Bush pestilence.

At any rate .. the Senate has now set a deadline. If the bill makes it to the president's desk he says he will veto it. Some feel, however, that when the president realizes that the legislation merely sets a date certain for our capitulation to you in Iraq, and doesn't open the doors to any additional stem cell research, he will decide that a veto is not warranted. So ... just sit tight. Save your energy. Catch your breath. Cool it. You may soon know the exact date that you one day commemorate as the date you chased the infidels out of Iraq. This could well be the date you will remember as the beginning of the final steps toward your 12th Caliphate and the cause of world domination under Islamic law.

You are small but determined to see your dreams of domination come true. America is strong but complacent and unwilling to fight for the cause of liberty. Time to ferment some goat's milk for a toast!

Yours truly

America the Timid.

Bill McIntyre
03-28-2007, 12:32 PM
There is a lot of bullshit in that letter, but I'll confine myself to commenting narrowly on the issue of a deadline for pulling out.

Of course its a bad idea to tell them when we are leaving, but I doubt that many of the Democrats who voted for it actually expect it to happen. Its just an attempt by Congress to get the President's attention.

He has all the power in fighting a war, and Congress has limited options other than control of the purse strings. The President is ignoring the fact that the main reason for Democrats getting control of both houses of Congress was dissatisfaction with his conduct of the war. If he would meet Congress half way and talk, admit that things aren't going well, and admit to some oversight, then Congress wouldn't have to try to force his hand.

After all, we were told up front that it was only going to last a few months and wouldn't cost us a dime because Iraqi oil revenues would pay for it. Now it is open ended, and people are getting tired of hearing that it will just take a bit longer.

But as long as he insists that its his way or the highway and that he doesn't have to listen to Congress, then Congress is going to use what few tools it has to get his attention.

lens
03-28-2007, 12:52 PM
Is there a difference between telling them "when we are going to pull out," and "When we are going to push forth a surge?":rolleyes:

Either way they are just going to (as the nay-sayers keep repeating) wait it out!

bruce_s
03-31-2007, 01:03 PM
The shame in all this is that the enemy know how and when to push the right buttons.They know that a long series of small cuts will eventually make many of us tire of this conflict and want to bring the troops home.I mean the media keeps a count of dead and wounded soldiers and constantly keeps us abreast of it.

Bill McIntyre
03-31-2007, 01:35 PM
I mean the media keeps a count of dead and wounded soldiers and constantly keeps us abreast of it.

I would hope that they would.

Would you want that information to be kept secret?

Low-Mu
03-31-2007, 02:13 PM
Bill, what were the others points of his opinion that you thought were bullshit? You have all the time in the world, your retired brother...enlighten this young republican.

I agree with America getting complacent part and the desire for victory has died for most but not all. The only thing the public can see is the death toll. People now a days want something for nothing. They think everything should be given to them without working hard for it, Liberty included. 4,000 people died in a month at IWO JIMA. 3,000 in 4 years in the GWOT by people who volunteered, not by draft and people can't handle it. The greatest generation understood what was at stake back then. The video game generation hasn't got a clue.

firefyterx
03-31-2007, 02:36 PM
I don't think the death toll should be secret, just not used as negative propaganda by the anti war groups.

Bill McIntyre
03-31-2007, 02:37 PM
Bill, what were the others points of his opinion that you thought were bullshit? You have all the time in the world, your retired brother...enlighten this young republican.

All the bullshit about Americans being fat and complacent and not willing to fight for their ideals and their country, and all the bullshit about Democrats not thinking our culture is worth fighting for. The great majority of veterans in Congress are Democrats, and they are the ones who have walked the walk rather than just talk the talk.

Americans are willing to fight if they see a threat. Iraq was hardly a threat, and only distracted us from going after the people who did 9/11.

As far as the "Greatest Generation" goes- Americans were isolationist and had to be almost dragged into WWII. That's why there have always been allegations that Roosevelt know that the Japanese were going to attack Pearl Harbor but did nothing about it so that he could finally get public support for joining the war. I don't believe that to be true, but it shows the prevailing attitudes back then.

Anyway, it took an attack on American soil to get us involved. The likelihood that England was going to be over run by Fascists as had already happened to Western Europe was not enough to get the Greatest Generation interested in fighting for freedom.

And BTW, the Greatest Generation got drafted.

Bill McIntyre
03-31-2007, 02:58 PM
I don't think the death toll should be secret, just not used as negative propaganda by the anti war groups.

And just how are the numbers to be published without appearing to be negative propaganda? The numbers are facts-its up to you what to make of them. Someone else in this thread just used the numbers to show how few had died compared to WWII. So was that pro-war propaganda?

The News Hour With Jim Lehrer on PBS ends the program by showing, in silence, photographs and names of the young men and women who have died in Afghanistan and Iraq. I look at 18-year-old Lance Corporals, 22-year-old 2d Lts, and 45-year-old Staff Sergeants who obviously must be reserves or guard people mobilized for the war, and I get tears in my eyes.

But while I think its important for people to see these photos and realize that the casualty figures are not just abstract numbers, I've often wondered if the right feels that this is just anti-war propaganda. How do you guys feel about it?

Young people dying is serious shit. It may be that a cause is worth their deaths, but we shouldn't try to minimize the deaths so that the public doesn't think about the real cost.

Low-Mu
03-31-2007, 06:06 PM
Thanks Bill for the response. You have very good points and taught me a few things. I have lost a few friends while they were down range disarming an IED, and I do think it is very important that they are recognized for their valor with a face and a name and not become just a statistic. Even if Iraq was a misteak, my friends were still killed by a Islamofacist terrorist, not an Iraqi. Terrorists lose all credibility as a humanbeings and would slit your mothers throat if they had the chance. It is a world wide threat. Most of the people who voted for the war now take it back because it isn't popular any more. But "W" has stayed the course and doesn't give a shit what anybody thinks. I think he understands that the threat is here to stay and isn't in it for the popularity, thats for sure. Global warming, Anna Nicole Smith, American Idol and all that other shit is what is on the TV along with the death toll and the fact that no attack on American soil has happened, in my opnion has made people complacent, I just think people are forgeting who we are fighting and why. The death toll shouldn't anger people against our president and government, it should anger them that it is the same people that flew those birds into the WTC on 9/11 doing it. They want to rule the world and they say it out in the open, people just turn their heads and pretend it isn't there, for god sakes they are blowing themselves up to prove their point. We need Iraq not for their oil but so we have a forward operating base against all the other Islamofacist nut jobs that want to rule the world.

bruce_s
03-31-2007, 06:28 PM
I agree young people dying is serious shit as you say but I think it should be treated with respect and not used in a political manner.
Down in texas they had an area where they had a bunch of fake tombstones with names on them.People were outraged over this and I understand that they were left there along with tons of garbage after they finished.Is that respectful?
I think we should all be aware of the cost of war and I don't watch pbs so I could not comment on lehrers program.It sounds like it is done in a respectful manner.
Young men dying is what wars are about.Old men start them and young ones bear the brunt.
As far as the congress trying to get bushs attention by passing this piece of legislation thats a crock.If thats the case why did they have to give away so much pork to get the votes.Politics as usual.No real commitment here.What about barak obama and harry reid?Didn't they say its a waste of lives?All wars are a waste of lives.If they feel that strongly about it then make up a bill that calls for immediate withdrawal.Show some real courage.OK I would respect them a lot more if they did.It brought tears to my eyes also when I saw some of the faces of some of these kids and fathers who gave their lives up in that shithole.The sooner we get out the better but telegraphing everything does nothing but give aid and comfort to our enemies.
One other thing as far as the main reason the dems got power back thats also not quite right.That may have been a part but there were many conservatives who thought the pubs lost their way and outdemocrated the dems.I mean many dems won on fiscal responsibility.Are you kidding me?

Bill McIntyre
03-31-2007, 10:43 PM
I mean many dems won on fiscal responsibility.Are you kidding me?

And why not? Look at recent history. Reagan tripled the national debt from under one trillion to around three trillion in his eight years, Bush 41 added another trillion in his four years, then Clinton ran surpluses and lowered the national debt, and then it has gone really bad again under Bush 43.

Republicans get a lot of mileage out of fiscal responsibility claims, but the record just doesn't bear them out.

Of course I'm sure someone will say that it isn't Bush's fault that he is running huge deficits, because he had to fight a war. Well he didn't have to fight a war because there was not a single Iraqi connected with 9/11, and of course he promised us that the war would be self-supporting from Iraqi oil revenues anyway. That didn't work out too well, did it?

But while spending billions on the wrong war, he also cut taxes. Unless you are a big fan of what his Daddy referred to as Voodoo Economics, increasing spending dramatically while cutting taxes dramatically does tend to run a deficit.

So yes, its entirely reasonable for Democrats to win votes on the fiscal responsibility issue. The only administration since 1980 to run a surplus was Democratic.

junior
03-31-2007, 11:03 PM
Voodoo Economics, increasing spending dramatically while cutting taxes dramatically does tend to run a deficit.

If taxes were cut for those above the economic fall line, while increasing spending in neither social programs, national infrastructure nor any other manner which distributes wealth down stream, I must be left to conclude that Republicans owe some wealthy people a shit ton of money for their selfless campaign donations:D