If we were currently occupying only Afghanistan, having destroyed a large portion of al Qaeda, wrecked the Islamist Taliban, sent the rest of Afghanistan's radical Islamists fleeing into other countries, and Saddam and his sons still ruled Iraq with an iron fist:
Do you honestly think that Islamist terror would have faded away? Do you really think that the war in Iraq made them more hostile than the war in Afghanistan would have all by itself? Would al Qaeda be any less pissed off? That if we were only in Afghanistan, along with our allies, that the terrorists would be doing nothing right now?
Do you remember that we had no troops in either nation when New York and Washington were attacked? Do you remember that the reason al Qaeda was theoretically formed was in response to our presence in Saudi Arabia? A presence that was part of the sanctions and no-fly zones that have been touted as the way we should have continued dealing with Iraq?
It's a war. It would still be a war if we had never entered Iraq.
Current Events » in reply to Probably should be on flame
Okay, think about this...
The whole thread (41 posts)
- Signs that the "war on terrorism" can be lost
- A failed strategy
- must say ..
- Yes, the dems strategy of insulting our allies, insulting the Nat. Guard, and revelling in our casualties is failing. (n/t)
- Once again, you insult our allies
- Well, here. 'How can you say we're going it alone - - "
- Signs that democrats are years behind the curve
- It's a war.
- Sure, if we don't fight back,
- A failed strategy