|
This is an interesting question. Let’s start off by listing what we should NOT do: Pull out, appease the terrorists,
or grovel to the United Nations. Pulling out and appeasing the terrorists will only embolden them. And what the hell can the
U.N. do? I heard some guy on the radio today asking a bunch of ‘tards what they think we should do next (you know, one
of those "man on the street" interviews with people who probably can’t name two cabinet members). Many of these
cretins said we should "Get out of Iraq and let the U.N. take over." How pathetic. My ego is already big enough. I don’t
need people like these making it any bigger. First of all, the U.N. wants NO PART of Iraq. Remember, they ran out of there
with their tail between their legs when the guerilla war started. Furthermore, these are the same people who wanted to keep
Saddam in power (some of them were bribed with lucrative oil contracts, and others just wanted to see the U.S. get our asses
kicked in Iraq). Let me translate for you: "U.N. led coalition" = "Giving the United Nations control over the U.S., British,
and Aussie troops that are already stationed in Iraq." How the hell would that help? It wouldn’t help financially. It
wouldn’t help "share the burden," and it sure as hell wouldn’t stop future terrorist attacks. Rest assured that
Germany and France want nothing to do with Iraq (other than enjoying some of the financial benefits of trading with them –
but only after we’ve made it safe).
So what CAN we do? Establish Democracy in Iraq, and eventually let the Iraqis handle it themselves. That’s all ANYBODY
can do. Of course, members of the Marxist-Islamist Alliance (most notably, John Kerry) like to say that the war in Iraq is
a "failure" (and when you fail, you need to change your strategy). Did we fail? See #1 above. More importantly, what strategy
does John Kerry bring to the table for this phase in the War on Terror? And he better not say "get the U.N. involved," because
I carved that one up like a Thanksgiving turkey. Another option (and people won’t like this) is to send 40-50,000 additional
troops to Iraq. Where would they come from? America, of course. Kerry actually floated this idea, but I'm not buying it. Like
most Maoists, he’s merely suggesting the most unpopular idea (knowing that it will make the majority of Americans oppose
the war). It’s like when Charles Rangel or Hillary Clinton suggested bringing back the draft (knowing full well that
America’s soccer moms would overwhelmingly oppose the war if that happened).
|
