Who lost Iraq? Why, you did, you cowardly terrorist-loving liberal traitor. We would have won if you'd supported the invasion from the beginning. It's your fault, you and that quisling appeasement Congress, undermining our Commander-in-Chief and deserting our brave men and women in harm's way.

I am expecting another attack on the continental US-- I refuse to use that Nazi phrase, "the Homeland"-- but not for any of the administration's fearmongering reasons. I think it's going to happen because Bush has INCREASED al-Qaeda membership faster than the Marines can kill 'em. As far as I can tell, the only candidates to say these honest but forbidden words are Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul. Every politician who accuses war opponents of supporting al-Qaeda should be immediately confronted with the unpleasant facts about just who has been strengthening al-Qaeda for the past five years.

I wish the the neocons and the terrorists were better shots, and would only kill each other, leaving the world a better place, but a lot of innocent people are going to die again, both here and in the poorly aimed retaliation overseas.

Most infuriating of all, Bush and company won't take the blame for enabling the next attack-- they'll blame you and me, the opponents of the war, for emboldening the terrorists. It's Michael Moore's fault that we lost in Iraq, for not supporting the invasion from the get go; it's Cindy Sheehan's fault for undermining our troops. It's Congress' fault for not spending another 3,000 lives.

Al-Qaeda, in the meantime, are as happy as pigs in shit with the war in Iraq. An attack on U.S. soil will inspire more repression, which will provoke resentment, which will incite rebellion, which will lead to more repression, which will... It's working for them in Pakistan, it works in Saudi Arabia and Egypt, they've opened new training facilities in Iraq and Afghanistan-- five bucks says somewhere in Osama's secret lair, there's a sign posted over the desk that says LET GEORGE DO IT.

No comments: