Refuting Pelosi on The "Real" War

Discussion in 'Middle East - General' started by Adam's Apple, Mar 31, 2007.

  1. Adam's Apple
    Offline

    Adam's Apple Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,092
    Thanks Received:
    445
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +447
    Which Is 'The Real War'?
    By Charles Krauthammer, Washington Post
    March 30, 2007

    "Our bill calls for the redeployment of U.S. troops out of Iraq so that we can focus more fully on the real war on terror, which is in Afghanistan." (House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, March 8)

    The Senate and the House have both passed bills for ending the Iraq war, or at least liquidating the American involvement in it. The resolutions, approved by the barest majorities, were underpinned by one unmistakable theme: wrong war, wrong place, distracting us from the real war that is elsewhere.

    Where? In Afghanistan. The emphasis on Afghanistan echoed across the Democratic side of the aisle in Congress from Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee to former admiral and Rep. Joe Sestak. It is a staple of the three leading Democratic candidates for the presidency, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards. It is the refrain of their last presidential candidate, John Kerry, and of their current party leader, Howard Dean, who complains that "we don't have enough troops in Afghanistan. That's where the real war on terror is."

    Of all the arguments for pulling out of Iraq, the greater importance of Afghanistan is the least serious.

    And not just because this argument assumes that the world's one superpower, which spends more on defense every year than the rest of the world combined, does not have the capacity to fight an insurgency in Iraq as well as in Afghanistan. But because it assumes that Afghanistan is strategically more important than Iraq.

    for full article:
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/29/AR2007032901987.html
     
  2. NATO AIR
    Offline

    NATO AIR Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,275
    Thanks Received:
    282
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    USS Abraham Lincoln
    Ratings:
    +282
    The man is a simpleton, not once does he mention Pakistan, which is the real danger of all these countries (read the recent Front Page symposium on that?) we're dealing with now, and the country where Al-Qaeda is enjoying its rebirth in their lawless areas.

    This is the problem with neocons like Krauthammer, not only have they been totally discredited by the war in Iraq, they're not even that bright to begin with, let alone intellectually honest.
     
  3. Adam's Apple
    Offline

    Adam's Apple Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,092
    Thanks Received:
    445
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +447
     
  4. NATO AIR
    Offline

    NATO AIR Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,275
    Thanks Received:
    282
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    USS Abraham Lincoln
    Ratings:
    +282
    I'll give Bush, Pelosi, Cheney, etc. a pass on not saying Pakistan is the real problem, because the foreign policy leaders in this country have to maintain in front of the public and abroad that they are convinced Musharraf is a sustainable friend of the country, when in reality, he is a desperate man running out of time before he falls to the Islamists. Its classic diplomacy and politics.

    Krauthammer on the other hand is a columnist and third rate thinker. The consequences of him telling the truth or mentioning the reality of Pakistan are nil to US interests. Thus, it is his ignorance of the situation, not his deliberate intent to avoid antagonizing Pakistan or harming Musharaf's interests, that is the reason for him failing to mention the real battlefront in the war on terror, where most of Al-Qaeda and their ilk are enjoying freedom and safety; the tribal regions of Pakistan along the Afghan border.
     
  5. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    I disagee with your take that Krauthammer is a third rate thinker. I agree with you about Pakistan however.

    With that said, here is one reason Krauthamammer is not 3rd rate:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/05/AR2007040501796_pf.html


     
  6. Adam's Apple
    Offline

    Adam's Apple Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,092
    Thanks Received:
    445
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +447
    Nice dodge on the Dems' insistance that the real war is in Afghanistan. For your sake, you had better hope and pray that Musharraf remains is control of the government in Pakistan. If the terrorists succeed in their next assassination attempt, that means nuclear weapons will be in their hands. You think it's bad now?
     

Share This Page