It seems the Iraqi Ambassador to America has a bias in favor of America’s – and Iraq’s – current policy to hammer the terrorists until they go away – and not to surrender to them. Who’da thunk?
Yes, the Ambassador has a bias and an agenda. But who, exactly, is to say that his bias to keep America involved is due to anything other than his desire for a great future for his country?
And who, exactly, holds an opinion at-odds with his? A bunch of ill-educated MoveOn.org and DemocratUnderground ignoramuses basing their entire spiel on ideology rather than facts, history and the desires of the citizens of Iraq.
At some point the world will look back on those demanding surrender and wonder why they were so obtuse? Or why were they so isolationist – pretending all the time to care about other cultures, other peoples and other civilizations?
Mostly, one wonders, why those demanding that we be liked by the rest of the world (which seems only to include that failed demi-continent of Europe – certainly not China or India or Iraq) do not understand that their erstwhile mentors are now – of their own volition — on History’s ash-heap, that the future involves the Middle and Far East, and that Europe is a dead man walking?
Oh, my bad. Europe (the geography) will, of course, remain. But those living there will be Muslim – making the outcome in Iraq even more important. And Europeans even less.