"We urge you to instead broaden the debate," said John and Pete.
According to blogger, Joshua Holland (who saw some of the initial House "debate") this translated into the following:
- One Republican representative spoke of the attack on the USS Cole
- King (R-Iowa) started with a lesson about the Barbary Pirates in the late 1700s
- Another delved into a lengthy, silly explanation of Why "They" Hate Us
- Todd Akin's (R-MO) discourse on Davey Crockett was bizarre
- Blunt (R-MO) chose Vietnam
- Boehner (R-OH) opted for the Civil War
- Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) saw echoes of the Second World War
- Putnam (R-FL) opted for the war in the Pacific.
Shadegg and Hoestra go on, "We would further urge you to join us in educating the American people about the views of radical Islamists."
Boys, I don't know how to tell you this, but I think the American people "get it". A couple of planes exploding in towers is really all that it took. We, the people, are not really in the dark about radical Islamists. What we clearly don't understand is why you defend the continuation of war in Iraq when a few radicals, from all over the globe, are what you seek.
Shadegg and Hoestra did get something right though, "If we let Democrats force us into a debate on the surge or the current situation in Iraq, we lose."
Yep. That's true. You lose and the American people (as well as the Iraqis), the US military, and the economy of the United States win.
The rest of the letter is equally disturbing.
"No radical Islamist leader has ever claimed that their goal is Iraq alone or, if they succeed in Iraq, that this war against us would ever end," Hoestra says.
So, I guess that what you're saying, Pete, is that this war should go on forever?
The boys quote Kagen, one of the original pre 9/11 neo-con designers of the war in Iraq, "In fact, Robert Kagen recently wrote a piece for the Washington Post entitled "Grand Delusion" noting many politicians' desire to wish the war way. He notes that those who call for an end to the war don't want to talk about the fact that the war in Iraq and in the region will not end, but will only grow more dangerous if we walk away."
The thing that we learned from Vietnam, Mr. Kagen, …let me rephrase that… The thing that some of us learned from Vietnam is that you can't beat an "ideology" by fighting a "country" half way across the world.
Amazingly the reps continue with, "Thanks to the liberal mainstream media, Americans fully understand the consequences of continuing our efforts in Iraq - both in American lives and dollars."
There's that damned "liberal mainstream media" again. They're always screwing things up! Apparently they are liberal…even though they are owned by a handful of conglomerates whose editors are, 2 to 1, Republican. And how dare they point out that kids are dying, or being literally scarred for life, or that the war is costing us more money than we have. Your case would have been easier to believe, boys, if I had ever seen one single coffin returning from Iraq. How is the MSM liberal again?
The lad's grand finale is, "If we do not defeat radical Islam in Iraq, then where will we do so?"
How about looking where the threat really is? How about addressing the real reasons that "radical Islamists" hate you – your imperialism (Iraq – a GREAT place for a military base!) and your ever-insatiable gluttony for their oil (20 billion dollars of it MISSING on US watch).
The fellers then provide an impressive list of 18 "radical Islamist" attacks, not one of which is in the US, and not many of which are actually connected to any organized "radical Islamist" group (like al-Qaeda).
Here are Shadegg and Hoestra's, "Some Major Attacks by Radical Islamists Since 2002"
July 11, 2006 - Mumbui, India Commuter train bombed, killing at least 200.
The Indian National Security Advisor M K Narayanan has said that India "we have pretty good evidence" - " of the involvement of Pakistan's intelligence agency, the ISI in the Mumbai train blasts of July 11. Governments with friendly ties to Washington include Pakistan. Pakistan's ISI (remember this is essentially a US Middle-Eastern ally) is equivalent to the CIA or the FBI.
November 9, 2005 Amman, Jordon. Suicide bombers hit 3 American hotels, killing 57,
This attack was carried out by three "liberated" Iraqi's.
October 26, 2005 - Hadera, Israel. Falafal stand bombing kills 7.
This suicide bombing was carried out by a Palestinian whose home and land had been stolen by Zionist Israelis.
July 7, 2005 - London, England, Transit bombings leave 56 dead and 700 injured.
Three of these four "suicide" bombers were all born in England. The fourth was born in Jamaica. Most had converted to Islam in their teens and this was more of a "copy-cat" act of violence than anything which could be tied to a "Radical Islamic" group. The leader said, "Your democratically elected governments continually perpetrate atrocities against my people all over the world. Your support makes you directly responsible. We are at war and I am a soldier. Now you too will taste the reality of this situation."
April 7, 2005 - Cairo, Egypt. Bombing at market kills 20.
"Two of the defendants" (the third is still at large) "did not belong to any terrorist group, [prosecutor-general Mahir] Abd al-Wahid said." It is more likely that the attacker was unemployed and depressed according to one report.
December 12, 2004 - General Santos, Philippines. Bomb killed 15.
Islamic and communist rebels operate in provinces near General Santos. No one claimed responsibility and no link to al-Qaeda or Osama has been established.
So these "radical Islamist" terrorist groups appear to be, by-and-large, a few disenfranchised loners who are trying to throw a wrench in the bulldozer. Only by carefully listening to "their" complaints will people like Hoestra and Shadegg come to any real understanding of why these "terrorist" acts occur. You probably won't want to hold your breath for that to happen – unless it's for water boarding.
More Articles...
