Foreign fighters make up a small percentage of those involved in the insurgency. Most insurgents are Sunni Iraqis, former Iraqi soldiers and those still loyal to Saddam Hussein. But the foreign terrorists, radicalized by the war, are responsible for most of the suicide bombings that are killing Iraqis in such great numbers. The few senior Al-Qaida leaders operating in Iraq are using these young, ardent Sunni "martyrs" to great effect -- to kill as many "infidels" and Shiite Muslims, their traditional enemy, as they can.
That will likely continue so long as American and other occupying forces remain in Iraq, and will probably taper off with their departure. Ending the occupation sooner rather than later would be wise, and might herald the kind of progress so many ache for in Iraq.
Emphasis mine.
Posted by Ryan at July 20, 2005 11:24 AM | TrackBackYes, those "mights" and "maybes" and "kinda-sortas" weaken the case.
It's much better to say things like "We have ABSOLUTE PROOF of Saddam's nuclear program and we're 100% SURE he is going to give WMDs to terrorists and we DEFINITELY know EXACTLY where his weapons labs and stockpiles are."
David, Clinton in '98? No, wait, Bush Sr in '90? No, wait, wait. You must be referencing Bush Jr. in 2003! Or, wait, maybe you're referencing international intelligence going back two decades? It's so hard to tell sometimes with you.
Posted by: Ryan at July 21, 2005 02:20 PMDon't make the mistake of thinking that because I am against Bush and this war that I am for Clinton and his wars and the Democratic party in general. I was actually more active during the Clinton era than I have been in the Bush era.
Also don't think that just because politicians have been agreeing on their bullshit for decades means that the rest of us outside the politics/media establishment have bought into it.
ANd don't forget that there were millions of people who came out before the war and said that we didn't buy the WMD bullshit. So don't pretend that this was some sort of universal consensus and folks who bring up the lack of WMDs now are just hypocritical Monday-morning quarterbacks.
Posted by: David Grenier at July 21, 2005 06:26 PMI'm curious then, David, as to what extra-special intelligence regarding WMDs you and those millions of detractors were privy to that the rest of knuckle-dragging Monday morning quarterbacks were not.
And lest you forget, there were other reasons beyond WMDs as to why those of us in favor of the war were, you know, in favor of the war. Am I disappointed and disillusioned that no substantial WMDs have been found? Yes and no. Yes, because they were an important personal reason for my support of the war. And no, because thankfully none could be used. But, again, WMDs weren't the sole reason I supported the war. I know, I know, all the war critics are dismissive of Iraq's pre-war terror connections, so what's the point of even going point by point over all those again, right? Deposing a despotic regime that rattled sabers against the West through state-controlled propaganda? Like, like, so what, man. This is all old territory we've torn through 100 times before. I can recite the back-and-forth in my sleep, and then I wake up, and I STILL think I'm right, and you still think YOU'RE right.
But at least we agree on Strong Bad.
Posted by: Ryan at July 21, 2005 08:40 PM
Stumble It!
