Posted by Curt on 23 August, 2006 at 6:40 pm. Be the first to comment!

I find it quite curious how the Democrats continue to portray the Iraqi war as a nuisance to the “real” war on terror. You know that war they “really” want to fight because we all know how tough they would be against terrorists if that darn Iraqi war was not around.

Just look at some of the steps Democrats have taken in support of our war on terror:

  1. Supporting our intelligence services ability to listen in on Al-Qaeda calling into the states (NSA)
  2. Supporting our intelligence services ability to track terrorist finances (SWIFT)
  3. Supporting the imprisonment of terrorists caught on the battlefield until the end of the conflict (Gitmo)

Oh wait, they didn’t support any of those. Actually, just the opposite. But here is Dean saying recently that they would fight the “real” fight:

The occupation in Iraq is costing American lives and hampering our ability to fight the real global war on terror against al Qaeda and the resurgence of the Taliban in Afghanistan, not to mention dealing with the threats posed by Iran and North Korea. Democrats believe we need a new direction in Iraq that is both tough and smart, and will fight the real war on terror here at home and around the globe.

Can you imagine the job they would do if they were in power? Listen in on our enemies, hell no! Track their finances, hell no! Actually capture the enemy and put them away, hell no!

Ann Coulter lays into this statement by Dean and his fellow Democrats a bit better then I can:

This year’s Democratic plan for the future is another inane sound bite designed to trick American voters into trusting them with national security.

To wit, they’re claiming there is no connection between the war on terror and the war in Iraq, and while they’re all for the war against terror – absolutely in favor of that war – they are adamantly opposed to the Iraq war. You know, the war where the U.S. military is killing thousands upon thousands of terrorists[…] […]Assuming against all logic and reason that the Democrats have some serious objection to the war in Iraq, perhaps they could tell us which part of the war on terrorism they do support. That would be easier than rattling off the long list of counterterrorism measures they vehemently oppose.

They oppose the National Security Agency listening to people who are calling specific phone numbers found on al-Qaida cell phones and computers. Spying on al-Qaida terrorists is hampering our ability to fight the global war on terror!

[…]Democrats oppose the Patriot Act, the most important piece of legislation passed since 9/11, designed to make the United States less of a theme park for would-be terrorists.

The vast majority of Senate Democrats (43-2) voted against renewing the Patriot Act last December, whereupon their minority leader, Sen. Harry Reid, boasted: “We killed the Patriot Act” – a rather unusual sentiment for a party so testy about killing terrorists.

[…]They oppose profiling Muslims at airports.

They oppose every bust of a terrorist cell, sneering that the cells in Lackawanna, New York City, Miami, Chicago and London weren’t a real threat like, say, a nondenominational prayer before a high school football game. Now that’s a threat.

The Democrats by and large care little for the security of this country. They care about power. They cannot stand a Republican controlled Government and will stop at nothing until that is changed, the safety of our country be damned!

In their quest for that power they will say that hey, they support the troops, just not the war. They support the war on terror, just not how it is conducted (you know, effectively) but offer no other strategies except “leave Iraq”.

I mean it appears sometimes that if we deal with terrorists outside of Afghanistan then it’s unjustified, because THOSE terrorists are the only ones we should be fighting since they attacked us. The other terrorists have been good little boys so we are just being mean attacking them.

If they supported the war on terror then they would support the Patriot Act, the NSA wiretapping program, the SWIFT program, capturing and keeping terrorists under lock and key, the war in Afghanistan, the war in Iraq (where we kill terrorists by the busloads), tough tactics against Iran, Israel in their fight against the same terrorists. I mean it’s common sense. You don’t support those things then your just talking nonsense.

AJStrata carries this one step further when he posted about the tactics the left has used to win that power back. He goes over all the steps they have been using, with some success all the way up to the Lamont win:

And it seemed to be working with the Lamont win over Leiberman and a liberal judges decision that Al Qaeda had a First Amendment right to talk to their comrades here in the US. The jubilation by the left echoed Harry Reid’s claim that the Democrats had “killed the Patriot Act”! And then reality hit.

First there UK Airline Bombing plot, and the fact it was foiled using the same NSA surveillance and financial monitoring methods the NY Times explained needed to be exposed since they were no longer needed. After all Bush was simply over reacting. That news alone was a stunner, because so many people travelled that day and you could feel the reality of 9-11 come rushing back. But this time it was not fear but determination to face it down. This reaction obviously clashed with the “runaway, its too hard” calls from the left. So now the left has decided we are not safe, after spending months making us not safe, and ridiculously asks for America to vote for them. It is too late now to switch gears. The 9-11 anniversary is coming upon and the cable shows and theatres are showing dramatic reminders of those fateful days. And it is not hard to imagine what August 06 would have been like if there had been no monitoring of communications and money transfers.

Basically, reality hit. There really is a threat to our security. They can’t gloss over 9/11 five years later, hoping people may have forgot. No, the tactics they disapprove of actually saved thousands of lives.

But now they are gonna get REALLY tough.

Sigh.

UPDATE

Just saw this on Free Republic and just had to update. This is a post from Jeeni Criscenzo, a Democrat Congressional Nominee, on her blog about the terrorists inside Iraq that are killing our soldiers:

It is important to distinguish between the militia, or death squads and the resistance, particularly when considering the amnesty aspects of the Reconciliation Plan crafted in Cairo last month. Over 95% of the Iraqi people oppose the presence of the U.S. troops in their country and consider the people the U.S. call “insurgents” to be patriotic freedom fighters — no different that (sic) how we look at the people who fought in our Revolutionary War. Heroic titles go to the victors and if justice is to ever come to the people of Iraq, the people we call insurgents will have to be recognized as the ones who are actually defending their homeland.

Simply amazing!

Other’s Blogging:

>