Rome, NY Sucks

But At Least We're Not Utica

Monday, September 11, 2006

The 9/11 Post

It's about Iraq. Now, some critics say that Iraq has nothing to do with the War on Terror. The problem is that critics have also claimed if our resources were spent catching bin Laden instead of fighting in Iraq, we would have killed him by now and all terror would end. So now Iraq has been conflated with the War on Terror. Good job overplaying your hand.

So, why did we go into Iraq? The worst reason seems to be that there were nuclear weapons ready to go. That was the reason that was used with the UN. The US wanted to go into Iraq because Saddam lied about his WMDs, provided no proof that he destroyed his WMDs and had no inspections for years before that. If he had nothing to hide, he made a good show of having something to hide. Why not? France assured Iraq that they would veto any military action so they could make secret oil deals.

So we went in alone. That was the mistake. Not a failure of leadership rather than a failure of solidarity. And that is the fault of the rest of the world.

And what have we done? Gotten Saddam? Check. Ended the terorism in Iraq? Apparently, since the complaints are about the civil war. Did we end the insurgency? Maybe, since the only thing left is the much lamented civil war. Two down, one to go.

I am reminded of the 2004 election. Kerry was for and against the war. The democrats talked down the economy when it was bad and the war was going better, then talked down the war when it was going bad and the econlmy was getting better. They'd better hope Iraq doesn't get better in October because that's all it will take to decimate their chances.


  • At September 17, 2006 7:00 PM, Blogger Pauline said…

    The Democrats will lost the elections because of their stance on illegal immigration.

  • At September 17, 2006 10:53 PM, Blogger RomeHater said…

    That's assuming the Republicans don't copy their positions and pass the watered down bills.

  • At September 19, 2006 1:19 AM, Blogger Pauline said…

    I'm in Ca. surrounded by illegals. They have made statements that they "deserve" special treatment in schools, hospitals, etc. They have managed to take over school boards and other positions of authority. And our state gov't does nothing but appease them. I'm sick of the whole mess. Where are the leaders we need? Not in Ca.

  • At September 19, 2006 3:28 PM, Blogger Roman Hokie said…

    I want to know how they got on school boards. Don't you have to be a citizen to run for an elected position? (I realize that California - and New York - have different ways of governing than the rest of the country)

    Just a thought.

  • At September 20, 2006 3:11 AM, Blogger Pauline said…

    Of course they have to be elected-but when small towns have a majority of Mexicans, they can pass laws, elect "their" people, etc. Many of the voters are illegal immigrants but does anyone do anything about it? You bet your bippy they don't.

  • At September 20, 2006 11:48 AM, Blogger York Staters said…

    So we caught Saddam. But can we really count trading "ending terrorism in Iraq" for "civil war" as a plus on our side? There is plenty of terrorism and insurgency in Iraq, calling it a civil war doesn't make it go away (or absolve us of responsibility)

    Just sayin'


  • At September 20, 2006 6:22 PM, Blogger RomeHater said…

    So we are figting terrorists.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home