Dec 17 2007

What Would Bin Laden Say If US Retreated From Iraq?

Published by at 8:45 am under All General Discussions,Bin Laden/GWOT,Iraq

What would Bin Laden and al-Qaeda claim if America followed the Surrendercrats’ idea of running from Iraq? We don’t have to guess how they would utilize a democrat induced failure because al Qaeda have spoken out on the UK’s departure from Basra which is actually a move made from success (tentative, but a success):

Britain’s decision to “flee” Iraq shows the insurgency is stronger than ever, Al-Qaeda’s number two said Sunday, after British forces transferred security control in Basra province to the Iraqis.

In a 98-minute Al-Qaeda videotape with English subtitles, Ayman Al-Zawahiri said recent reports from Iraq reveal “an increase in the strength of the Mujahideen and a deterioration in the Americans’ conditions, despite their desperate attempts to deceive and mislead.

Zawahiri however said that in his view Iraq is the world’s foremost arena for Jihad and that “the condition of the Iraqi Jihad is — overall — excellent.”

He said US claims of progress, including in the September 2007 report to US Congress by top US commander in Iraq, General David Petraeus, and the US ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker, are “empty propaganda meant to cover up the American failure in Iraq.”

It is clear how al-Qaeda would use an actual retreat as envisioned by the Surrendercrats to claim they had vanquished the evil Americans and it was time to rise up and take over southern Europe (and of course later America). If we wanted to unleash the next fascist storm on this planet, one that would make Hitler’s Nazis look tame in comparison, all it would probably take is a democrat forced surrender in Iraq. And then the world truly would be wrapped in bloody carnage.

2 responses so far

2 Responses to “What Would Bin Laden Say If US Retreated From Iraq?”

  1. kathie says:

    The evil Bush knew what al Queda would say, and what it would mean. The do good Dems don’t think al Queda in Iraq is the same al Queda who attacked us on 911. Or maybe they don’t think al Queda is al Queda at all and who cares we need war money to do other domestic things.

  2. dave m says:

    Sad day for the British Army. Even in the UK,
    from reporting I follow, everyone knows it’s a cut n run.
    The London Times has been documenting the return of
    islamist savagery to Basra and betrayal of those iraqis who
    helped the Brits. Most of their papers are just saying it was a
    war that couldn’t have been won … anyways. Or saying the
    dream of a democratic awakening in Iraq was just foolish nonsense.
    But that doesn’t really fool anyone. Even arch war foe John Humphries
    who has spent about half of his beeb radio programs denouncing the
    West or the “illegal war” or “neocons” couldn’t bring himself to own
    his own personal victory this morning. He lamented their Army
    declaring defeat and abandoning Basra’s women to the islamists.
    Gordon Brown is finding failure an orphan, as many other politicians
    have lamented. His approval ratings are now lower than President
    Bush’s even though he gave his leftist base what they wanted,
    defeat.
    The next time Brown gets in front of the TV cameras demanding
    that Zimbabwe, or Burma, or Sudan should stop the massacre
    of their civilians, those dictators are just going to smile and
    think “Or What?” .
    This is what the Left does. My surprise is that they cannot even
    celebrate their “victory” and want it to be someone else’s fault.
    So what would Al-Qaeda say? That was your rhetorical question.
    The style of their gloating would be similar to Almond Dinner Jab’s
    who gleefully says “America has just surrendered to Iran”.