Winning -- the ultimate example of Bush Bullshit

_____________________________________________________
Date Line March 23, 2007

What is “WINNING?” When it comes Iraq, we hear a lot about “winning” be nothing which defines exactly what that means.

The term “winning” is usually assumed to be understood. However this is a conflict in which people’s lives are at stake and we had best know what we are killing over.

Who is the enemy? Who is our opponent – the one against whom we are expected to be victorious in order to bring about the cessation of our involvement in the sectarian hostilities?

Idiots will immediately say “terrorists”. OK – does that means the Timothy McVey’s of the world will cease to exist? Does that mean an end to suicide bombers?

Those who believe there can be a victory are idiots. Plain and simple, they are total, complete, irresponsible idiots.

Look to the reality of Iraq:
1. The government is on our side.
2. The people want us gone and violence ended – so on our side.
3. There is nobody with whom peace can be made.


You cannot make peace with suicide bombers – they do their work and are dead.

How do you make peace with the dead? How do you “win” against the dead?

Can you stop people from killing themselves in order to kill others?

Can Bush and his idiot backers – those lame brained “support the troops” idiots who believe support means send them to their death – or make them living corpses; basket cases; wounded who are denied medical care; denied psychological care.

Yes those “rocking chair patriots” are willing to fight to the death of the last child – no matter if it is an American soldier, or an Islamic civilian; the battle will be to the last taxpayer dollar and the last child.

Who, under those conditions can win? Who but Al Qaeda? Bin Laden can win from the grave

Al Qaeda is at war with Islam far more than it is at war with us. In the

Al Qaeda game, this is a battle between Sunni and Shia; only after that is resolved does the infidel west come into play. But, as I have pointed out before, Bush is the tool of Al Qaeda – doing, and achieving, all the objective set down by Bin Laden.

Bush has managed to fulfill Bin Laden objectives – he has killed Saddam, provided a training and tactic exploration territory (Iraq) for Al Qaeda, and has weakened both the American economy and military in the process.

George Bush has proved to be the very best of Al Qaeda assets. He has, by being “a decision maker”, made every decisions Bin Laden wanted made.

Define winning. Tell us what the benchmarks are. Let us know the steps and landmarks which mean we have won. Winning? If it is really a “war on terror” would mean we could dismantle all the extra security at airports – we could return to air travel of the 60's and 70's.

More, given “hijackers”, winning the war on terror would mean we could return to air travel of the 50's – no security, no scanners, no metal detectors ... none of that.

Who is so stupid as to believe such a time would ever come again? Who? Only those who are stupid enough to believe there is a “war on terror” which can be won; and worse, believe that it can be won through any American sponsored outcome in Iraq.

There is no war, because there is no enemy who can declare and affirm peace. There is no winning, because there will always be those who understand that terrorism works – it is the ultimate example of Bush’s “Shock and Awe” inducing action.
_____________________________________________________