not to be redundant but I said before the iraq war WAS a response to 9/11. it was a globalist solution along the lies of NAFTA: we plant the seeds of democracy in Iraq which will make terrorism less popular so we won't NEED to make any actual changes to out policies or security. Like NAFTA's plan to cut down on illegal immigration by helping the mexican economy, it failed totally. illegal immigration and terrorism are at an all time high.
I'm guessing that remittances from relatively low-wage American jobs are worth more than standard salaries in Mexico.
By the same logic, individual potential jihadists able to take up arms outnumber actual state-sponsored terrorists?
state sponsored terrorists? such as? there hasn't been state sponsered terror since the 80's
and yes, that is a centealreason for our illegal immigration problem. NAFTA has not helped it.
"Yes, Saddam is gone and brave Iraqis voted to select their new leaders.
Yadda yadda yadda."
Look: if the threat to the US has increased, then, especially given that decreasing it was given as the primary reason to go to war, there's A LOT to fault the administration with. But "Yadda x 3" about the removal of Saddam and Iraqis' voting???
Given the sort of regime Saddam's was, I just don't see what's progressive about an attitude like that. Progressives _aren't_ supposed to be concerned only (and perhaps not even primarily) with security or stability. Why not leave the Yaddaing to the Kissinger and Scowcroft types?
Commenting by HaloScan.com
