Monday, July 18, 2005

Lefty Appeasers

Here's a Brit follow-up to the Lancet lies.

"There is no doubt that the situation over Iraq has imposed particular difficulties for the UK and for the wider coalition against terrorism. It gave a boost to the al-Qa'eda network's propaganda, recruitment and fund-raising, caused a major split in the coalition, provided an ideal targeting and training area for al-Qa'eda-linked terrorists and deflected resources and assistance that could have been deployed to assist the Karzai government [in Afghanistan] and to bring Osama bin Laden to justice. Riding pillion with a powerful ally has proved costly in terms of British and American military lives, Iraqi lives, military expenditure and the damage caused to the counter-terrorism campaign."

Sooo:

1. Deposing Saddam Hussein was a diversion from the Global War On Terror. Presumably because Hussein's invasion of Kuwait, financing of Palestinian terrorism, ties to al Queda and poison gas attacks on the Kurds & Iranians were not Terror. I don't think so.

2. If you attack an enemy, they fight back! So the best course is to ignore them and then they'll only beat you up a bit. Most kids learn this is a lousy strategy when they encounter their first schoolyard bully.

3. A US/UK alliance weakens both countries. Not true historically.

From late 1941, a battered Britain "rode pillion" with the US to fight multiple enemies - Germany, Italy and Japan. Think of the Brit lives saved if we'd never gotten involved & stayed focused on defending, say, Gibraltar!

No more London blitzes, no food rationing, no loss of 50,000 airmen over Germany, no Western Desert or D-Day losses, no V-1 and V-2 attacks, no slaughter in Malaya, Burma and Singapore (assuming we withdrew).

But we did fight, and we won, and the world was delivered from a nightmare. No thanks to lefty appeasers.