Maybe I’m missing something, but if killing our guys is patriotic resistance in the view of the people we’re supposedly “liberating,” then what are we doing sending our guys over there for? Target practice? Does this make sense to anybody besides Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Rice?
If anything should have Americans of all political stripes calling for an immediate return of all US troops from Iraq, it would be the Iraqi summit conference in Egypt earlier this week, hosted by Egyptian leader Hosni Mubarak, at which it was decided that attacking and blowing up US, British and other occupation troops should not be called "terrorism," but rather "acts of resistance."
That's pretty shocking, wouldn't you say?
And yet, there has been nothing but silence from the right-wing yak shows, little in the mainstream media, and nothing from the White House.
And how about the "support our troops" crowd? So far, not a word.
And what about the "noble mission" for which over 2100 American soldiers have so far died--the one Bush keeps citing as a reason to keep on sending more soldiers over to die?
Turns out our troops aren't being killed by terrorists, as President Bush and Vice President Cheney have been saying, but by noble Iraqi resistance fighters. Take it from the Iraqi leaders who we have installed as Iraq's puppet government.
According to them, it's only terrorism if you blow up other Iraqi citizens. Blowing up Americans or Brits is okay. It's even patriotic, apparently.
Man, if I was an American soldier in Iraq right now, I'd be ready to pack it up. I mean, doing your duty is understandable to a point, but this is getting rediculous.
What I want to know is, where's the outrage?
I want to hear now from some of the parents of active-duty troops in Iraq who were trashing Cindy Sheehan for saying not one more mother's son should die in Iraq, now that they know how much the Iraqis want their sons and daughters over there.
For other stories by Lindorff, please go (at no charge) to This Can't Be Happening! .