[lit-ideas] Re: Sustaining our Resolve
- From: "Andreas Ramos" <andreas@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 11:38:49 -0700
From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
1) We removed a Militant Islamic enemy, one who harbored terrorists,
one who practiced his pan-Arabism by invading one of our allies, one who
desired, acquired and used WMDs, and one who has supported terrorist
activities.
What a string of false facts. We removed a secular dictator. Saddam had nothing to do with
al-Qaeda; they hated each other because they were on opposing sides (secular vs. Islamic
fundamentalists). The WMDs he had in the 80s were given to him by the USA. By cluelessly
removing him (Bush didn't know about Shiites and Sunni), we collapsed a govt that opposed
Iran. Iran thus gained power in Iraq because the Shiite are the majority. The result: Iran
won the war and we are in a hell of a mess. Prognosis: The USA will be pushed out of the
Middle East, just as the jihad pushed the USSR out. As for Israel, well... By invading Iraq,
we lost the entire Middle East.
2) We enhanced our posture vis a vis the war on terror by showing
certain nations, especially Saudi Arabia that we were more formidable than
Saddam Hussein who claimed victory (and was believed in the Middle East)
after the first gulf war
The US Secretary of State was thrown out of Lebanon. The Arab world sees that the USA is
unable to hold Iraq. This is very bad news for the govts in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, etc.
We are no longer in charge of Iraq. The American forces are in their bunkers, waiting for
Bush to figure out how to withdraw.
The Arab world also knows Bush was behind the destruction of Lebanon, the only Arab
democracy.
The US posture in the Arab world is at its lowest point EVER. Can it get worse? Oh, yes.
Bush is preparing to attack Iran. That'll be fun: they'll lose everything, from Morocco to
Indonesia. But hey, they can blame it on lesbian ballroom dancers!
3) We held Saddam to account for the UN violations -- justifiably
ignoring the stone-walling of France and Russia we now know were in cahoots
with Saddam. They had promised to stop the US in the Security Council.
France & Russia were the chief beneficiaries in the Oil for Food UN Scandal
and made promises to Saddam they couldn't keep.
Nonsense. The show trial is still dragging on. It's obvious why.
4) We showed other Militant Islamic nations that we meant what we said
about going after our Militant Islamic enemies. Pakistan had already agreed
to cooperate as a result of our resolution in Afghanistan. Lebanon declared
that we had rescued them from Syrian domination by our actions in Iraq.
Qhadaffi in Libya decided to relinquish his nuclear weapons.
See my reply to #2.
5) We removed most of the bases that Al Quaeda might use for staging
operations: Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan and north Lebanon were gone to them.
South Lebanon is now in jeopardy as is much of Pakistan. Our actions in
Afghanistan and Iraq were extremely effective in combating Al Quaeda.
The CIA unit in charge of pursuing al Qaeda has been disbanded.
The Bush White House NEEDS al Qaeda. As long as there is an Islamofascist terrorist
organization, the Bushies can cover up their blunders by pointing to the paper wolf and
screaming they will defend us and denoucing its enemies.
6) Al Qaeda's commitment to fighting us in Iraq permits us to reduce
their numbers directly.
"Al Qaeda in Iraq" was a disinformation campaign by the US military against the American
people. They created a fake threat in order to justify the war.
7) We have succeeded in setting up a Democratic government in Iraq
that has had elections and been confirmed.
This one is very funny. The majority (60%) of the killing in Iraq is by the Shiite militias,
i.e., the Iraqi government that we set up.
8) We have developed and trained the Iraqi Army such that it can
handle external threats and internal threats of any foreseeable size.
And yes, dear Lawrence, they are doing just that. They are murdering the Sunni Arabs. 60% of
the killing.
9) We are working on developing the Iraqi police such that they can
handle internal criminal matters.
You want to raise 60% to 80%?
10) We have done all this with a casualty count much lower than virtually
any major war we've ever been involved in.
You're comparing apples to oranges. Combat against Nazi Germany was mechanized land warfare.
The situation in Iraq is considered a "police situation", where the military acts as a
police force, supervising the population. It is not a war.
We are losing 2.2 US soldiers per day in Iraq. This is low is because the US military is
hiding in its bunkers. If they venture out, they get shot by "our democratic government"
that we installed in Iraq.
Yes, it's low, because we are avoiding losses in Iraq due to US internal politics. You take
a disaster and convert it into a success.
(To Irene) Your articles are anti-American and pro-Islamic. Now there's nothing wrong
with that. We don't have laws punishing treason in the US anymore so I guess you are home
free. You side with Militant Islam and I side with America -- no big deal. If my answers
don't meet your anti-American, pro-Islamist criteria, however: tough.
Anyone who disagrees with Lawrence's fantasies about race war is committing
treason.
Lawrence, as I showed above, literally everything you say is disconnected from reality. It's
a long string of self-contradictory, factless, self-justifications to cover up blunders and
create justifications for more wars on your moral enemies.
yrs,
andreas
www.andreas.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
