Posts
The problem, said Reid, is that "George W. Bush is still the commander-in-chief - and this is his war."
And there's the real problem: From the start, Reid and the Democrats have seen the war in Iraq as a partisan opportunity. NYPost
This is an interesting article from the Post as it is basically another slam on Harry Reid. I will say that the title of the article " Reid's Bloody Hands " is an eye catcher. After reading this piece of trash, it becomes apparent that none of the writing is remotely true. Just another neocon piece of slime meant to stir up the GOP faithful because we all know that no one in their right minds would fall for this bullshit.
No matter what the writer ( no name provided ) of this may say or think, the fact of the matter is that this is Bush's war. It is the Republican's war all the way around it! Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld lied us into this war and even after this was discovered, none of the Republicans in the House or the Senate dared show even the slightest interest in taking Bush to task for it! This was has been constantly rubber-stamped by the 109th Congress and the Senate, so yes, it is Bush's war and the rest of the Republicans who went along with Bush. We can toss a few Democrats in there also!
That is, a precipitous U.S. withdrawal from the region - if Reid thinks the bug-out would stop at Iraq, he's dumber than he sounds - followed by:
* A rapid, al Qaeda/Iranian-driven descent into regional chaos.
* Most likely, a general war.
* And, almost certainly, a Mideast nuclear-arms race as Saudi Arabia, Eygpt and (probably) Turkey rush to arm themselves in anticipation of an Iranian bomb.
At the very least, Reid has to understand that his rhetoric can only encourage short-run insurgent attacks on Americans in Iraq.
Their blood stands to be on his hands.
Yes, there will be a general war after the U.S. troops are out. This happens when we leave a country after trashing it for a few years. The governments who supported us usually get spanked by other groups for aiding and abetting the U.S. forces and Iraq will be no different.
We could stay for another decade or two but the result will be the same when we leave, bloodshed and chaos for awhile but these things tend to work themselves out without interference. Does the writer at the Post suggest that we keep our U.S. troops in Iraq until hell freezes over?
So far as anyone having blood on their hands, that will not be Harry Reid, John Murtha, Nancy Pelosi or any other Democrat in Congress. That blood squarely belongs to the hands of Resident George W. Bush, Vice Resident Dick Cheney and every other Republican since 2003 if not earlier!
Harry Reid needs to put a cork in it.
Today.
The writer at the New York Post needs to put a cork in it!
Today!
Tags: New York Post Harry Reid Iraq Iran U.S. troops war funding Congress Bush
