The summary did not reach a sweeping conclusion about the impact of the anti-Saddam invasion...Instead it said Iraq was "shaping a new generation of terrorist leaders and operatives."...The increased role of Iraqis in running al Qaeda in Iraq might lead foreign veterans of the insurgency to focus on targets abroad, it said...But if the terrorists "leaving Iraq perceive themselves, and be perceived, to have failed, we judge fewer fighters will be inspired to carry on the fight," the report concluded...The document, prepared in April, is out of date in one dire warning...
It said if Abu Musab al-Zarqawi continued to evade capture, the terrorist chief "could broaden his popular appeal and present a global threat."...But Zarqawi was killed when his safe house was blown up by U.S. jets in June....Secret Intel: Iraq War Not Only Reason For Surge In Terrorism, Niles Lathem, The NY Post, 9/27/2006
If the terrorists perceive themselves, and be perceived, to have failed, we judge fewer fighters will be inspired. Okay, basic question: does this suggest that the Iraq war is the cause of terrorism? Did the Japanese fighting back when we retaliated for their 1941 sneak attack on Pearl Harbor suggest that if only Americans had not counter-attacked all would have been well? The sophistry of the blank-faced idiots in MSM never ceases to amaze me. Of course, the terrorists are fighting like mad in Iraq. That's why our troops are there, to draw them in. The President and his administration associates have been saying this for three years. I hope someone else besides a NY Post reporter covers this story, but don't count on hearing it out of Katie Couric's well-paid mouth.
Luther
No comments:
Post a Comment