Home arrow Commentary arrow OPINIONS arrow op-ed arrow Bush Invited the Attacks in Iraq
Jul 11 2007
Bush Invited the Attacks in Iraq | Print |  E-mail
Op_ed
By MWC NEWS   

Translation

President Bush Invited the Attacks in Iraq
by Jacob Hornberger

ImageAs I have been writing here for many months, a monumental political battle continues to shape up over the U.S. military occupation of Iraq. Yesterday, President Bush provided further confirmation of that battle by restating his steadfast commitment to keep the troops in Iraq until they “win this fight,” which means until after he leaves office. Meanwhile, a coalition of Democrats, Republicans up for reelection in November 2008, and a majority of the American people are lining up against the president and demanding an end to the occupation long before the president leaves office.

Congress could force a withdrawal from Iraq by simply cutting off funding for the war, which it has the power to do under the Constitution. I just think that the members of Congress lack the courage to do that. After all, don’t forget that most of these people enacted the Patriot Act without reading it and delegated their constitutional power to declare war because they were scared of being labeled unpatriotic. Anyway, my hunch is that President Bush would ignore a funding cut-off anyway with some sort of national-security signing statement.

The wild card in all this is the individual soldier — and, to a certain extent, his spouse, parents, and loved ones. As of right now, the mindsets of the average soldier and his family are that U.S. soldiers are in Iraq to protect our freedoms and the American way of life. If they figure out what a crock that is, there is no telling what the result might be. How many people want to lose their lives or the lives of their loved ones over a crock?

"Congress could force a withdrawal from Iraq by simply cutting off funding for the war, which it has the power to do under the Constitution. I just think that the members of Congress lack the courage to do that. After all, don’t forget that most of these people enacted the Patriot Act without reading it and delegated their constitutional power to declare war because they were scared of being labeled unpatriotic."

Of course, no one can deny that President Bush is responsible for the deadly quagmire in Iraq. He was the Decider. He decided to order a military attack on a country that had never attacked the United States, an attack that has now resulted in the deaths and maiming of hundreds of thousands of people — and all in the name of (nonexistent) WMDs, freedom, and democracy.

Also, we shouldn’t forget that President Bush himself invited the terrorist and insurgent attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq. After all, what other meaning could “Bring it on!” have? Those were the president’s exact words and he addressed them to all terrorists and insurgents in the Middle East. What Bush was saying with those words was essentially: “We’re here in Iraq. We invite you to come and attack us. We dare you.” Of course Bush himself wasn’t in Iraq. He was referring to the U.S. soldiers who are now getting killed and maimed and screwed up in the head at the hands of those who are indeed “bringing it on.”

How will this political battle end? Will President Bush succeed in continuing the U.S. occupation of Iraq until he leaves office? It’s anyone’s guess. My hunch is that the president will win and that the Iraqi people, American people, and U.S. troops will lose.

Mr. Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation.

Recommend this article...




Did you enjoy this article? Please bookmark it onto:
Digg!Reddit!Del.icio.us!Newsvine!Blogmarks!Yahoo!

Quote this article on your site | Views: 1096

Comments (5)
RSS comments
1. 11-07-2007 18:23
As the USA kills and destroys islmaic radicals in Iraq and Afghanistan, islamic radical supporters around the world mourn their losses.  
 
Understandable - considering they are all terrorists at heart.
Guest
Redneck
2. 14-07-2007 14:04
Redneck, 
The US is not destroying, it is making radicals. 
Not from killing Islamic radicals, but from slaughtering innocent Islamic folk. Is it a case of kill em all, they are all the same? Is that it? 
 
Mike
Registered
3. 14-07-2007 17:30
Redneck is our resident apologist Mike 
 
He has set of beliefs: 
 
One and foremost. US can do no wrong 
Two: MWC is anti-American medium therefore they are there only to discredit US 
Three: All Muslims are to be killed.
Guest
Shahram
4. 15-07-2007 04:13
Shahram, 
I actually dealt with the likes of Redneck, in a comment I made on the article, |How to write the truth|. 
 
Mike
Registered
5. 16-07-2007 14:07
MWC, cannot discredit the US, 
it offers a chance for negative feedback, and comment. 
And without this feedback,(dissent), the US would discredit itself in the eyes of the the World as it would run in a crazy loop of its own excesses. The brakes must be put on somehow, otherwise it would drag its friends and allies, and its protectorates into the political black hole its heading for. 
Some people have a twisted view of what a patriot is. 
 
Mike
Registered

Write Comment
  • Please keep the topic of messages relevant to the subject of the article.
  • Personal verbal attacks will be deleted.
  • Please don't use comments to plug your web site. Such material will be removed.
  • Just ensure to *Refresh* your browser for a new security code to be displayed prior to clicking on the 'Send' button.
  • Keep in mind that the above process only applies if you simply entered the wrong security code.
Name:
E-mail
Homepage
Title:
BBCode:Web AddressEmail AddressBold TextItalic TextUnderlined TextQuoteCodeOpen ListList ItemClose List
Comment:



Code:* Code
I wish to be contacted by email regarding additional comments

Powered by AkoComment Tweaked Special Edition v.1.4.4


Tags:  Jacob Hornberger US Congress Bush Invited Iraq
 
< Prev Content   Next Content >
 

Translate

Enter Amount: