<<<Good question, but who knows?... but it's very convenient for al-Q that we are there, whether the excited assembling jihadists are veterans or hot-headed bandwagon types. And it's quite inconvenient for us. To quote a Dowd characterization of the situation posted earlier (and if there's anything below someone thinks is inaccurate, I'd be more than happy to read why they think so) >>
And I say-bring them on, lure them in. This is a war on terror and 1/2 of those involved will have to be killed, being too damn stubborn to be converted.
We chose the battleground, and its not a stinking jungle with the enemy hidden behind treees or in a swamp.
We dont have to invade Syria or Saudi Arabia to chase them out of their own stomping ground where they have the advantage and where politics is involved. And our casualties would be much greater, or do you think the UN would approve the invasion of another country and provide fighting troops?
Our soldiers in Iraq are now used to getting shot at or bombed, have learned to duck, to perform under duress.
Using laser sights, 1000 yd rifles, choppers and gunships, the enemy will be caught somewhere between our spread out forces. As soon as they step inside Iraq somebody will be gunning for them.
A soldiers life is tough no matter where he is- the war on Iraq is over, the war on terrorists is just beginning.
Lets use the advantage we have.
Sig
. |
