Excellent article by Robert Cox in the San Francisco Examiner…..bam!….Sorry, floored once again….about the fact that no matter the reason, al-Qaeda is in Iraq, so how in the world could liberals want us to leave the field of battle to our enemy?
The case is often made these days (especially by my friends on the left) that because the majority of Americans surveyed in opinion polls do not support a continued U.S. military presence in Iraq, the Bush administration should “listen to the people” and bring U.S. troops home. The same people advancing this argument point to each American and Iraqi casualty as “proving” that the U.S. should withdraw.
When challenged on their position, many of these same people will claim that they are not “anti-war” but “anti-this war,” invariably adding that they supported the invasion of Afghanistan after the Sept. 11 attacks because that’s where the people who attacked us were.
According to recent Department of Defense and CIA estimates, al Qaeda now has between 5,000 and 20,000 fighters operating in Iraq. Al Qaeda itself claims to have as many as 12,000 fighters in Iraq, but do we really want to take Osama bin Laden’s word for anything? While no one in this country knows for sure just how many jihadists are in Iraq, it seems reasonable to believe that there are thousands of them — making Iraq home to the single largest concentration of al Qaeda members in the world.
In a tape released last fall shortly after the U.S. mid-term elections, a man who identified himself as Abu Hamza al-Muhajir said, “The al Qaeda army has 12,000 fighters in Iraq, and they have vowed to die for God’s sake.” He also said there were another 10,000 unequipped fighters ready to join them.
So it would seem that however it may have happened, the people who were responsible for Sept. 11 have now massed their forces in Iraq. All of which raises a question: If the U.S. were to withdraw all of its forces from the Middle East tomorrow and were to suddenly learn that al Qaeda had assembled 10,000 to 20,000 armed jihadists in Madagascar, Paraguay or Antarctica, what would most Americans expect President Bush to do about it?
I would like to propose that polling organizations consider adding a few new questions to their next survey, such as:
» Would you support the United States going to war in a country that was found to be a base of operations for many thousands of al Qaeda members?
Now we know how the typical leftists would answer that question since we, meaning America, are the enemy to humanity in their eyes, so ignore them. I doubt that a majority of Americans would answer that they would rather us not go to war in that situation.
Either way you slice it if we leave Iraq before the Iraqi’s are able to go it alone we will have left millions to wholesale slaughter and genocide. I know the Democrats didn’t care about this fact in Vietnam and they don’t care about it in Iraq now but I’m willing to bet Bush cares about it. In fact I know he does, as do I. We cannot allow al-Qaeda to gain control of a country again. We stopped supporting Afghanistan after helping them defeat the Soviet Union and look what happened….the Taliban and AQ moved in. The exact same thing will happen again in Iraq if we run like cowards.