I've noticed a number of editorials that say all of the fighting took place amongst anti AQI groups. That could be a big factor in the domestic debate.
All Shiite groups are anti-alQaeda ... they're Shiite! AQ thinks Shiites are apostates anyway which, by Takfiri definition, they're Kufr and that means any Shiite can be killed at anytime.
Putting Foot to Al Qaeda Ass Since 1993
just watch what goes on. To my knowledge, no one other than politicians and pundits uses that phrase. What, precisely, does Central Front mean in any event?
Not that, even were that 'central front' statement remotely sensible, would it be negated by the fact that we're moving troops to take part in inter Shiite battles. That occurs on almost a daily basis there. Given a fight of any kind in Iraq, we're almost certainly going to be at least peripherally involved. Look at Najaf in '04. What difference does that make?
But this begs the question are those votes associated with grievance against a wrong action or are they votes without an inform and accepted awareess of the consequences of doing so.
In other words if you want me to do something because it's what you feel, believe whichever fine your the populous and ultimately you rule, However if you require this without consideration of it's very likely aftershocks and the very good possibility that you or your family may suffer from it in the long run then it's on you.
If on the other hand you are like many others who wish to push for what they want without being willing to accept responsibility for its outcomes, then Should the decision be quite that simple?
Any man can destroy that which is around him, The rare man is he who can find beauty even in the darkest hours
Cogitationis poenam nemo patitur
doing things that were not highly sensible would get you killed, you'll not mind if I agree with you on deciding elections and even on the bit about winning votes while pointing out that such an attitude has no place in geopolitics (See Kennedy, J; Johnson,L; Carter, J. Reagan, R; Bush G.H.W.; Clinton W.).
IOW, there's a time and place for not being sensible and one for being very sensible. It's sort of important not to conflate the two...
That doesn't mean for a second that bringing the troops out precipitously would be sensible and I'll also suggest that it might not buy nearly as many votes as you think. Further, the majority of those it did buy would be voting against a party, person or issue rather than for the issue cited.
I don't know of anyone who isn't ready for Iraq and Afghanistan to be over and done with. They aren't and won't be for a while. Why we're in either place is not irrelevant because the 'why' is directly related to the failure of four previous administrations from both parties to confront an obvious threat. That's hard for the western mind to grasp but it's harsh reality. A precipitous departure from either place will be touted as another failure. That, too is hard for western minds to grasp.
Whether you or I would have done it the way it was is immaterial; it was done that way. What the future holds is murky but I'll wager one thing -- if we leave early, we'll be back there (and it will be far harder) during your lifetime.
Sort of like Ron said above -- gotta think about the aftershocks...
Bookmarks