Iraq war
The Rocky Mountain News editorial is suggesting that President Bush “should heed the advice of Sens. Pete Domenici and Richard Lugar. Yet, the editorial ignores the fact that Iraq is the focal point of al Qaeda, not Afghanistan, as Ayman al Zawahiri himself confirmed last week. Such Republican retreats not only undermine the war effort in Iraq, but play into the hands of the enemy. Gen. David Petraeus’s assessment is not due until September, but that is not soon enough for the Republican senators, who appear more concerned about winning the 2008 election than winning the war.
This letter has not been edited.
At this particular point nobody has any idea of what winning the war means. What defines victory and which war are we even referring to? The civil war between the various factions in Iraq, the war in Afghanistan, the war against Al Qaeda in Pakistan, or the war against American people and its values by this administration.
Unfortunately, the administration is winning one of the wars and it's the latter one.
Posted by on July 14, 2007 02:26 PMAnon 2:26 - In reality, most rational people realize what "winning in Iraq" means. Those who wish to detract from it and call the effort "lost" are the only ones unable (or unwilling) to see the big picture.
Posted by KW on July 14, 2007 03:08 PMThe larger war is the War on Terror that is fought militarily, politically and economically across the globe.
The key battle is currently being waged in Iraq. If we can help foster and leave behind a stable, pluralistic society, then we will have won that battle and the larger war will be easier.
If we lose in Iraq, then victory the war on terror will come at a higher cost.
Either way, the War on Terror will go on.
That's why American can't afford to have any of the current Democrat candidates in the White House.
Posted by James Jones on July 14, 2007 03:47 PMHey Pelosi and Reed are saying that after 1 or of the surge it is not working and they want to recall the troops. Pelosi and Reed have been in control of Congress for 6 months now and none of the promises they made to get elected have been fulfilled. Maybe it is time to recall Congress
Posted by not here on July 14, 2007 05:27 PMWhy should King Bush listen to Domenici, and Lugar he won't even listen to 80% of the American public. In 2008 we will be shouting the King is dead, long live the Queen!!!
Posted by on July 14, 2007 07:40 PMAnon 7.40
Leaders aren't lead polls. They do what they think is right - that's the difference between being a leader and being a member of the political class.
Posted by James Jones on July 14, 2007 08:22 PMJames Jones:
Too bad what Bush thinks is right is just plain stupid. Too bad he's "leading" us right off a cliff. Too bad he has a prostrate group of cultists willing to parrot his dissonant spin which is the only thing he's produced in six years as the "decider".
Most Americans and the rest of the world have decided he's a failure on the evidence. Others still cling to the hope that their gamble to follow the stupid guy to oblivion will still pay off.
And did you seriously try to imply that Bush is not a "member of the political class"? Are you aware of his family background James? Or do you think he's just a scruffy rancher from Texas- a regular guy?
What a mark you are.
Posted by Charles B on July 14, 2007 08:46 PMIf Bush was fully justified to have listened to Domenici and fired US Attorney David Iglesias, why is the good Senator's advice now to be ignored?
Posted by on July 15, 2007 12:27 PMJuly 14, 2007 07:40 PM
Will that queen be John "I love my hair" Edwards?
Posted by Mountain Cat on July 18, 2007 06:57 AM