Tuesday, March 18, 2008

Is John McCain Too Liberal On Iraq?


With age, comes wisdom, or, in the case of GOP Nominee John McCain, foolish idealogical zealotry. While he rightly claims that Congress is "disconnected" from the American people on issues such as wasteful spending, McCain fails to acknowledge that the same is true for the pointless American-led war and occupation in Iraq, the torture of pow's, and the unconstitutional wiretapping done in the name of "national security."

Before I begin this, though, I believe it is necessary to clarify something. The terms "victory" and "defeat," as referred to by John McCain, have no relevance to the war in Iraq and President Bush's orwellian "war on terror."

According to John McCain, "We will not allow the United States of America to lose this war." I am not sure who Mr. McCain means by "We," or what he means by "lose the war," but as far as national stature is concerned, continuing the war would be far worse than ending it.

The problem with McCain's frequent referrals to "victory" in Iraq, is that the term "victory," in undefinable.

The "middle east," that is, the geographical area of the world where Iraq is situated, has one of the planet's highest birth rates and is getting younger every day.

This poses an incredible problem to our current position in Iraq. Our expeditionary force totals around 150,000. The amount of young men in the middle east runs in the tens of millions.

Since most of the young people in the middle east have no means of finding employment due to region's economic impoverishment, terrorist leaders thus have readily abundant supply of potential recruits right at their fingertips.

For an unemployed young person in Iraq who is looking for something to blame for his unfortunate situation, the massive U.S. occupation force is far too good a target to pass up.

When offered by a terrorist recruiter a chance to expunge this offensive presence, while at the same time earning a generous financial stipend, a desperate young person, thinking that the U.S. is the cause of his cruel economic misfortune, is given a choice that anyone in economic desperation would find hard to pass up.

Bankrolled by wealthy patrons and given an unending recruiting pool due to harsh economic conditions, terrorist organizations in Iraq have thrived, sending thousands of our troops to early deaths.

Politicians like John McCain who think that our Army of 150,000 will ever be able to create a "peaceful Iraq" in a region where our enemies number in the never-ending millions, are sadly mistaken.

By staying in Iraq, we only embolden the terrorist forces and allow them to increase their numbers. In continuing this course, we also increase the hate and resentment felt against our country by the citizens of the region, who are fed constant propaganda showing us an in imperial invader, which our occupation of Iraq only confirms.

John McCain talks about fighting "terror," but has chosen to do so by supporting policies that have antagonized the people of the middle east against us and allowed our enemies to boldly increase their numbers.

Up until now, Republicans have kept our country safe by doing precisely the opposite of what Mr. McCain now porports. After American troops were deployed to Lebanon in 1983, they were bombed by terrorists and 241 U.S. Marines were killed. Republican President Ronald Reagan, who had ordered the deployment in the first place, decided to withdraw from the country, saying that "We do not understand the complexities of middle east politics."

Then-Congressman John McCain greatly infuriated Republican leaders in 1983 by trying to thwart President Reagan's deployment of troops in Lebanon right from the start. Mr. McCain argued then that Lebanon posed no threat to our national security and that deploying troops there would only antagonize people against and create more enemies than we already had.


Seane-Anna said...

This post is unbelievable. The name of this blog is GOP Catholics yet this post reads like it was written by someone from Code Pink or the Berkeley City Council.

While I agree that the meaning of victory in Iraq can be open to civil disagreement the meaning of defeat is obvious: we retreat and the jihadis take over. And how any rational person can believe that allowing that to happen will make us safer is beyond me.

The idea that we are creating enemies in the Middle East by our "occupation" and if we would just leave utopia will break out is so naive as to border on retarded.

You referenced our withdrawal from Lebanon in the '80's. Well, did pro-America fever break out in the Muslim world after that? No! If the war in Iraq is the cause of terrorism how do you explain the fact that 9/11 happened BEFORE our invasion of that country? I'm outraged at the ease with which you supposed Republicans trade in the Left's blame America first doctrine.

Where is this thinking going to end? If we're creating enemies by everything we do, what else do you suggest we stop doing that makes the Muslims mad? A whole lot of followers of the religion of peace were ticked off by cartoons of their "prophet" that were published in Denmark. That obviously provoked them, so should Denmark and all other democratic countries suspend their freedom of speech?

Muslims don't like unrelated men and women having unsupervised interaction. Should we institute gender apartheid in America to keep them happy?

I know, let's urge the government to create a whole new department, the Department for the Prevention of Terrorism, who's sole purpose would be to prevent the creation, expression, or publication of anything that might provoke, offend, or insult Muslims. Why not? We don't want to keep creatin' those enemies!

This may sound fantastic but I really believe this will be the end result of this peace-through-not-offending-Muslims mentality. And what do you think will happen to Catholicism and the rest of Christianity of we capitulate to Islam? I'll give you a two word hint: Hagia Sophia.

NY Catholic Mom said...

"The idea that we are creating enemies in the Middle East by our "occupation" and if we would just leave utopia will break out is so naive as to border on retarded."

I certainly never suggested anything about "utopia" breaking out. Please read what I wrote more carefully.

Iraq is now a hellhole where people constantly have to fear for their lives and the Christina minority is being killed off by angry militias. Saddam was not perfect, but at least he kept some semblance of order, which we have been unable to do.

"If the war in Iraq is the cause of terrorism how do you explain the fact that 9/11 happened BEFORE our invasion of that country?"

Osama bin Laden lives in Afghanistan, not Iraq.

Anonymous said...

With respect, Iraq is not nearly as bad now as it was under Saddam. Order through torture is not order. The Kurds may not be Christian, but they are still entitled to Human Rights.


Anonymous said...

Rabid militias didn't roam the streets cleansing out Christians when Saddam was in charge, so it was a little better than it is now.

Anonymous said...

The rabid militias were the Iraqi national guard that hunted innocent young girls to rape. To say that the Saddam days were the good old days is non-sense.


Anonymous said...

There are dictators all over the world, are we going to go take over every one of them? That's a highly un-Republican way of thinking.