October 28, 2003
Continuing Security Issues in Iraq Hamper Bush Administration Mission
The Bush Administration claims that the latest attacks in Baghdad are a sign of desperation by those opposed to the U.S. led occupation of Iraq. Huh? What crystal ball is he looking into? Bush stated yesterday that:
“The more successful we are on the ground, the more these killers will react. The more progress we make on the ground, the more free the Iraqis become, the more electricity is available, the more jobs are available, the more kids that are going to school, the more desperate these killers become, because they can’t stand the thought of a free society.”
Is the measure of our success in Iraq now to be gauged by how many lights are on, how many schools are open, and how many policeman are created? I would argue that the attackers have grown even more brazen in their attacks because we are failing in Iraq, not succeeding. More and more American soldiers are dying every week in Iraq denoting a deteriorating security situation which can only get worse, because despite protestations to the contrary by Bush Administration officials there are not enough “boots” on the ground to carry out the mission.
Oil fire continue to burn as a result of sabotage; sizable former Iraqi Army ammunition dumps are left unguarded, in effect arming the very men we seek to guard against; borders are left largely unguarded and foreign fighter are infiltrating Iraq and killing American soldiers; dozens of attacks are carried out daily, the result of which is an erosion in the Iraqi people confidence in American competence and leadership.
Without even basic security how can meaningful progress be made toward a more stable and democratic Iraq?
Posted by V. Edward Martin at October 28, 2003 09:38 AMThe one phrase that I am most sick of hearing GW say is that anyone who causes trouble in Iraq or for the US is doing so because they “hate freedom”. I’m wondering if maybe Gallup went into the Mideast and did a survey (do you hate freedom? check one: yes, no) and found this out. In fact, I think it’s because they love freedom that they are committing these acts. They want freedom from the Americans.
Also remember: according to GW, if you opposed the war on Iraq then you are obviously saying the world would be a better place if Hussein was still alive. The beauty of black and white statements like “terrorists hate freedom” and “the world would be a better place” is that they make the information so bite sized and digestible that there is no room for discussion or debate, you just eat it up without thinking. Thanks GW, I’d much rather spend time trying to figure out what I’m going to do with the huge $300 check I got back from the IRS. Maybe I’ll try to invest it so when I get nailed to cover my share of the national debt I’ll have something to contribute.
sometimes i wonder if bush even believes what he’s saying. there must be a lot of people out there desperate to hear good news, that they so willingly accept whatever sound bite they hear from the president’s mouth on the evening news. i for one am getting tired of how his speech-writers inculcate “the war on terror” into every one of his speeches. no matter where he is, no matter what the context, he will talk about it. in my opinion, it’s time to acknowledge some other issues, too.
Posted by: Cole at October 30, 2003 02:15 AMThe Gallup organization actually went to Baghdad and did a whole survey.
You can read the results here
Posted by: Lance T. Haun at October 31, 2003 02:21 PMThanks Lance for the link. The survey information was interesting, suggesting that on some issues, the squeaky (or exploding) wheel is getting the coverage (US OUT!!). Of course we still aren’t sure what percentage of terrorists would respond “strongly agree” to the statement “I hate freedom” ;)
Posted by: ap3_lad at October 31, 2003 04:43 PMWell, you’re probably right. I don’t know how many terrorists hate freedom as much as they just hate the U.S.
Posted by: Lance T. Haun at October 31, 2003 05:26 PMAt least some terrorists hate freedom. From a press release from Al-Muhajiroun: “An examination of the ‘UN Declaration of Human Rights’ shows how the freedoms of ‘expression’, ‘ownership’, ‘worship’ and ‘personal freedom’ form the bedrock of the UN’s constitution, all being alien to Islam, which, far from such anarchy, demands complete, exclusive and non-negotiable submission to the law of the creator, Allah (SWT).”
Don’t delude yourself into thinking that these terrorist groups are freedom loving anti-imperialists.
Agreed, Jason. I think it’s important to keep in mind that the people committing the acts of agression (other than the US) belong to the same groups that would be in power if the coalition were to pack up and leave. They want freedom from Westerners, but the strict, self-imposed religiously oriented laws are going to be in place whether Bush likes it or not.
Posted by: Phil at November 4, 2003 08:22 PM
