Thursday, December 13, 2007

Only a U.S. Withdrawal Will Stop Al Qaeda in Iraq

I'm sure I'm preaching to the choir, but this stuff is true. Perhaps if we keep sending it out over the internets tubes enough times some people will "get it".

Who am I kidding?
One of the last justifications for continuing the U.S. occupation of Iraq despite overwhelming opposition from Iraqis, Americans and the rest of humanity has come down to this: U.S. forces must remain in order to battle "al Qaeda in Iraq."

Like so many of the arguments presented in the United States, the idea is not only intellectually bankrupt, it's also the 180-degree opposite of reality. The truth of the matter is that only the presence of U.S. forces allows the group called "al Qaeda in Iraq" (AQI) to survive and function, and setting a timetable for the occupation to end is the best way to beat them. You won't hear that perspective in Washington, but according to Iraqis with whom we spoke, it is the conventional wisdom in much of the country.

The Bush administration has made much of what it calls "progress" in the Sunni-dominated provinces of central Iraq. But when we spoke to leaders there, the message we got was very different from what supporters of a long-term occupation claim: Many Sunnis are, indeed, lined up against groups like AQI, but that doesn't mean they are "joining" with coalition forces or throwing their support behind the Iraqi government.

Several sources we reached in the Sunni community agreed that AQI, a predominantly Sunni insurgent group that did not exist prior to the U.S. invasion -- it started in 2005 -- will not exist for long after coalition forces depart. AQI is universally detested by large majorities of Iraqis of all ethnic and sectarian backgrounds because of its fundamentalist interpretation of religious law and efforts to set up a separate Sunni state, and its only support -- and it obviously does enjoy some support -- is based solely on its opposition to the deeply unpopular U.S.-led occupation of Iraq. [emphasis mine]

AQI didn't exist until two years ago.

So the US effectively created AQI, or provided the atmosphere for its creation, and now needs them as the bogeyman. Always have to have bogeymen.

To be fair, this isn't strictly a GOP or US political affliction. All countries' leaders need bogeymen to keep the people focused, motivated, supportive, willing to sacrifice and such.

The only difference I've noticed between leaders is how evil, imminent, dangerous, vile the perceived threats posited to the people. Some are mild and iterate a few simple trade problems which need correcting. The really "great" leaders like, (Jesus H Christ with a Honda dealership, but I can't believe this name is coming) Bush warn of imminent destruction or defilement of all the people from the bogeymen.

China is poisoning our food and children. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad won't be happy until he nukes the US. NoKo also wants to nuke US. Al-Qaeda wants to eat our young. That is the ones we lefties haven't eaten. Cuba would destroy our way of life. Especially by sending doctors to help in NOLA. Chavez? He has horns doesn't he? Its a matter of time until he will be building nukes too. Syria, Lebanon, Palestinian Authority, Canada, Iraq, the Taliban, Osama bin Laden, Hezbollah, Muslims, brown people, gays. All threats.

I apologize for being a lazy ass blogger, but you have to find your own links to all of the accusations in the previous paragraph.

Well, not so much Canada. They just send US a little meat with mad cow disease and tainted food isn't really a problem for the king who has tasters.

California somehow gets a pass, what with the E coli thing. Perhaps they forget most lettuce from California is picked by brown people. And Europe gets a pass with the frog in lettuce thing. Which is true. Such maroons.

Bush and his fellow hyenas have done a remarkable job of finding bogeymen of which we need be afraid.


Via Reuters.

Labels: , ,


Blogger daveawayfromhome said...

not buying the frog story, due to the simple fact that there isnt a lot of oxygen in the lettuce bags, and the frog would quickly asphyxiate. There's a more detailed article in the New Yorker (Sep 6, 2004) by Burkhard Bilger that'll make you realize just what a bitch it is to get that bagged lettuce to us.

12/13/2007 03:06:00 PM  
Blogger spiiderweb™ said...

You're probably right. Snopes usually is good at debunking or verifying urban myths, but they may have blown this one.

The O2 aspect of this didn't occur to me.

Great catch. I have such intelligent readers.

12/13/2007 03:50:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home