Who cares how they got there?
Who cares how they got there or why they are there? Al Qaeda is in Iraq, we are in Iraq, nearly seven years ago this nation woke up to a terror war that had been waged as we slept for nearly a decade and vowed to destroy an enemy whose stated objective is to destroy us, so what’s the issue here? It doesn’t take a brain surgeon to figure this out. If we leave Iraq everyone doesn’t shake hands and go to neutral corners, they just take the ground we surrender and move the front closer to our home.
Then again, there is never-President John Kerry’s view:
From AP: In Washington, Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., said Bush “is trying to scare the American people into believing that al Qaida is the rationale for continuing the war in Iraq.” But Kerry said Bush presented no new evidence to back that up, and added: “The president is picking the wrong rationale for this war. Al-Qaida is not the principal killer of American forces in Iraq.”
Um… so we should only stay if Al Qaeda kills more American soldiers? I don’t understand his point, but I do know that Al-Qaeda was the principal killer of thousands of Americans on 9/11, so tell us senator, is that rationale enough for us to stay and fight Al-Qaeda in Iraq?
This whole argument over whether Al Qaeda was there before the Iraq war or came to Iraq as a result of the Iraq war is pointless, don’t you think?
More from AP:
Al-Qaida had no active cells in Iraq when the U.S. invaded in March 2003, and its operation there is much larger now than before the war, U.S. intelligence officers say. The war itself has turned into a valuable recruiting tool for al-Qaida, senior intelligence officials concede. Bush denied that the war triggered al-Qaida’s operations in Iraq.
Who the hell cares how they got there?! This is great news! We found the enemy… go kill them!
As far as Iraq serving as a recruiting tool, aren’t most wars valuable recruiting tools for both sides? I suppose if we surrender to Al-Qaeda there wouldn’t be much reason for them to continue recruiting… we’d all be Muslims or we’d all be dead.
Stumble it!
July 30th, 2007 at 2:54 pm
Here’s why you should care “how they got there or why they are there.”
Bush argues that the reason we should continue the war in Iraq is because we’re busy fighting Al Qaeda, the group that attacked us on 9/11, there. Our own intelligence, however, says that Al Qaeda in Iraq only comprises only 10-15% of the insurgency. In other words, 85-90% of the people we’re fighting in Iraq have nothing to do with Al Qaeda, and would presumably not be attacking us if we were not there.
Our own intelligence estimate has shown, and you seem to concede, that Al Qaeda in Iraq is not a part of the group that attacked us on 9/11, but is rather just one of the estimated 40 groups that have sprung up in sympathy with Osama Bin Laden’s Al Qaeda after the invasion. Our own intelligence also shows that these groups are increasing, not decreasing, as a direct result of the invasion.
If the war in Iraq really is about defeating Al Qaeda, the group that attacked us on 9/11, does Iraq look like a good use of lives and material resources to you, in light of what our intelligence tells us?
July 30th, 2007 at 3:43 pm
Valid points. Based upon where we are today? Yes, I believe Iraq is an important “front” in the overall war. I also believe we need to continue to bring more attention to Afghanistan, Pakistan, the Philippines and Somalia to name a few. World Wars, which this essentially is, require that we attack on many fronts; ideally, from a very selfish perspective, I’d prefer the front never come home again. Since we are in Iraq, and since Al Qaeda is there, seems only logical to fight them in Iraq.