Cut and run
As I'm sure everyone has heard, every time someone starts to present a plan for how to get out of the mess we've created in Iraq, they get cut off and the yelling begins: "you're cut and run", "you don't have a plan", "cut and runner", etc...
Apparently the party in power equates putting their fingers in their ears and yelling "la-la-la" as being a good thing because it means staying the course. Well, consider this. When the US decided to practically abandon the war on terror (remember, no matter how many times it's implied otherwise, Osama's group attacked us, it had nothing to do with Saddam) in favor of occupying Iraq's oil fields, the intelligence was cut. All the evidence showed that Saddam was an enemy of al Qaeda, not an ally. All the uncooked evidence showed that Iraq had no WMD program. All evidence about 9/11 pointed to al Qaeda, hosted by the Taliban. But those intelligence reports were cut off, cherrypicking just the sound bites that supported invading Iraq and taking their oil. The US Army was told to run into Iraq and occupy the country. Run in without a plan that was supposed to come from the Administration, but never materialized (except for protecting the oil fields and building permanent US bases, that is). Now which position is "cut and run"?
Oh yes, now it has become public that the US military leaders actually in support of exactly what the Democratic plan for Iraq is - a slow but immediate draw-down of US soldiers from Iraq. I guess by neocon definition, the US military is now supporting the terrorists. After all, they claim that the Democratic plan gives aid and comfort to the enemy, because any member of Congress that does not follow the White House's political agenda necessarily hates America.
Apparently the party in power equates putting their fingers in their ears and yelling "la-la-la" as being a good thing because it means staying the course. Well, consider this. When the US decided to practically abandon the war on terror (remember, no matter how many times it's implied otherwise, Osama's group attacked us, it had nothing to do with Saddam) in favor of occupying Iraq's oil fields, the intelligence was cut. All the evidence showed that Saddam was an enemy of al Qaeda, not an ally. All the uncooked evidence showed that Iraq had no WMD program. All evidence about 9/11 pointed to al Qaeda, hosted by the Taliban. But those intelligence reports were cut off, cherrypicking just the sound bites that supported invading Iraq and taking their oil. The US Army was told to run into Iraq and occupy the country. Run in without a plan that was supposed to come from the Administration, but never materialized (except for protecting the oil fields and building permanent US bases, that is). Now which position is "cut and run"?
Oh yes, now it has become public that the US military leaders actually in support of exactly what the Democratic plan for Iraq is - a slow but immediate draw-down of US soldiers from Iraq. I guess by neocon definition, the US military is now supporting the terrorists. After all, they claim that the Democratic plan gives aid and comfort to the enemy, because any member of Congress that does not follow the White House's political agenda necessarily hates America.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home