The Official Antiwar Story is burned into some people's brains, and no amount of pointing out the flaws seems to work. The Story, of course, is that the radial Islamists, led mostly by al Qaeda, are enraged and strengthened by the invasion of Iraq, but would not have been if we had only destroyed al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan.
Amazingly, another component of the Official Story is that Saddam was a thousand parsecs from anything having to do with terrorism, that al Qaeda and bin Laden were violently opposed to Saddam's supposedly secular regime, and that no alliance between Baathists and Islamists could ever be possible.
Yet we are now supposed to believe that the invasion of Iraq has suddenly created a firestorm of radical Islamic support, where somehow, for some reason, the invasion of Afghanistan alone would not have.
The mental connections just aren't being made, and this thread shows how immune some people are to simple reason.
Current Events » in reply to No It Doesn't
Skulls that would stop a neutrino in its tracks?
The whole thread (37 posts)
- Nice analysis of bin Laden's recent rants
- re: Bin Ladin is a fool if he thinks he can gain power in Saudi Arabia.
- Yes
- Myths
- re: Myths
- "Please, please, please, Brer Fox, don't throw me in that there briar patch!" -- Brer Rabbit in Joel Chandler Harris' Uncle Remus Tales
- And you swallowed that?
- So Bin Laden is in fact managing the terror campaign against the Iraqi people
- re: Myths? Right you are making them. (n/t)
- Taking out Iraq was strategically correct
- re: Myths
- re: Myths
- Myths
