ScottW wrote:
"Eeyore" wrote in message
...
John Reid became the first senior Cabinet figure to admit Britian's foreign
policy was turning young Muslims to terrorism.
The Home Secretary's remarks end at least three years of denial by the
Government that the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan have been a key factor
behind the alarming rise in Islamic extremism.
The most stubborn refusal to accept the argument has come from the Prime
Minister.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1770
And this in a 'right wing' paper !
So...the sooner you surrender, the safer you'll be.
No, your right-wing 'patriots' have increased our risk exponentially.
There's no doubt about that, and there's not a damned thing we can do
about it at this point.
How many generations of damage do you suppose that we've created,
toopid?
How many generations do you suppose that we should 'stay the course'
before we leave?
Do you disagree with Kissinger's statement that military victory in
Iraq is no longer possible? If yes, based on what?
And how many generations do you suppose it might take for Iraq to form
a functioning democratic government that can survive after we do leave?
Just curious.
Here's to the 'safe and secure' environment that we've created:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15848198/