Article Surfing Archive

There was a time when countries were scared of having the US invade their country and avoided anything that might make the US military take action against them. In chess they say, the threat of a move is worse than the move itself. Chess is based on military strategy and the phrase applies there as well.

War is messy. Civilians get killed. Children get killed. That's the reality of any way. That is exactly why you should never be for going to war unless there is absolutely no other option. We had other options in regards to Iraq.

By going to war in Iraq, Bush has exposed our weaknesses, not our strengths. We do not have enough manpower to control Iraq, so Iran is not afraid, North Korea is not afraid, and certainly China is not afraid. These countries now feel they can do anything they want because what can the US do about it? They can't even control a small country like Iraq.

North Korea fires test missiles in preparation of a nuclear attack even though the US threatened them. Iran is now building a nuclear reactor despite threats from Bush and Cheney. In Iraq, terrorists and factions within Iraq openly defy the US.

Bush keeps talking about showing strength, but instead shows weakness. You cannot fight half a war. If there was actually a reason to have gone into Iraq, then it should have been all out war. Instead Bush has played it like a game of shirts and skins in basketball. "We're fighting these Iraqis, but not these over here!" While our troops have to keep figuring out whom is the shirts and who are the skins.

In Afghanistan, we had a reason. We had 9-11 and at least had someone who appeared to have admitted to being responsible. Usama Bin Laden claimed responsibility and the Taliban supported it. We could have leveled Afghanistan and made it a parking lot and I would have supported it 100%.

Instead we didn't even finish the job there. We didn't capture Bin Laden and we have yet to create a democracy there as was promised by Bush. The Afghan government barely controls Kabul, let alone all of Afghanistan. And we are too busy in Iraq to finish the job.

Afghanistan is bigger than Iraq and has a larger population than Iraq. Therefore if we are truly doing all of this to help the people of that region, why is 10% of the money for the wars in the Middle East going to Afghanistan while 90% is used Iraq? If this is truly about 9-11 and terrorism, why is 10% spent in the region where the attack on 9-11 was planned and 90% spent on Iraq, which even Bush has admitted had nothing to do with 9-11?

Whether you want to face it or not, whether you are a republican or a democrat, whether you like bush or do not, you cannot ignore the fact that the whole war on terrorism and the war in Iraq are complete and utter failures. Type failure in Google and you get GW Bush's biography. its no wonder. Go ahead try it. Type failure into Google and go to the first result.