Cutting and running is just what they want and expect. That's exactly why liberals are not the ones to trust to handle national security.
Insanity has been defined as doing the same thing over and over again hoping for a different result. :blink:
Staying a failed "course" is insane, and just the reason why Americans are fed up with wingnuts and their enablers clinging to a failed, neocon-job folly. A global war on terrorists requires that our forces be able to deploy, (pay attention, now, I'll type slowly) GLOBALLY as required, properly equipped, which they can not do while bogged down in Iraq, a diversion and obstacle to fighting real terrorism.
But don't believe me, listen to the dozens and dozens of military professionals and intelligence and law enforcement experts who have counseled the same thing. Our national security interests are not well served by being held hostage to neocon (most of whom are also chickenhawks) posturing. Saddam is gone, there are/were no WMDs, and Iraq has an elected government. There is nothing else to be gained for us in Iraq, if there ever was. Time to re-deploy.
So tell us, having triggered civil war in Iraq, handing Iran a "Shiite Crescent" wrapped in a bow, how many more dead and wounded Americans and Iraqis will it take till your bloodlust is quenched? Tell us what this "course" is we are supposed to stay? All we hear are regurgitated wingnut talking points trying to prop up what is clearly a failed policy! Conservatives can only be trusted to use the 9/11 victims as political props to further their agenda of endless war(and war profiteering) while allowing terrorism to flourish again in Afghanistan(remember them?) and Pakistan. By the way, where is Osama?
All while abusing our troops through "stop-loss" orders and multiple re-deployments into combat zones, not to mention failing to provide them with proper armor and equipment, taking National Guard units out of their home states leaving those states unable to cope with disasters like Katrina and Rita. Support our Troops - stop getting them killed for no good reason!
Don't dare try to feed us that "we're fighting them over there in Iraq so we don't have to fight them here" crap. My answer to that is Madrid, London, and the most recent foiled plot which appears to be linked to our great "ally", nuclear-armed Pakistan. Shouldn't we invade them now, oh brave fighting keyboardists? Find a new dog, cause that one don't hunt!
Answer me yes or no, were any 9/11 hijackers from Iraq?
I'll make it easy for you, the answer is "no". However, most of them were from another great "ally", Saudi Arabia, which continues to use its oil revenues to spread terror and hatred of the West. Why didn't we invade them? Maybe we should follow the oil-money trail and we'll find out that it leads right back to the loudest war cheerleaders.
Those who are thinking clearly and paying attention to reality recognize that the most recent terrorist plots have been foiled by good intelligence and law enforcement, not infantry battalions. Going after flies with sledgehammers just doesn't work, and just may create so much chaos that a real terrorist attack can slip through unnoticed. Not to mention creating new jihadis by the score by playing right into the "crusaders invading Muslim countries" meme.
So, what do you say? Conservatives are clearly willing to gamble with America's security and have shown that they can't be trusted. Tell us why you are willing to risk our security by not catching the next terrorist attack because our resources have been diverted to crusading in Iraq or Iran? Don't bother to answer with the same old tired garbage, even ol' Deadeye Dick and Dubya have found out that the mojo has worn off of it...
