|
or if Bush convinces the masses of fools that he's succeeded, the world will become a much more dangerous place and thousands more of our troops will be killed or maimed, along with hundreds of thousands more deaths of innocent civilians in other future countries we attack for oil.
The way I see it.....
1) A Bush "success" in Iraq = war in the next country he deems applicable = fear of terrorists here forever. or 2) A Bush "failure" in Iraq = getting our troops back home where they belong = the world being a safer, more stable place.
Sad to say, if the elections in Iraq are considered any kind of success, this world automatically becomes a much more dangerous place with George the Conquering Coward jamming "democracy and freedom" down the world's throat to cloak his cause for control of the world's oil. If he thinks he can get away with what he's done in Iraq, that will only make him attack the next country in line in Chapter 2, "Iran", of a long nightmarish book of horror. If we "succeed" in Iraq, I'm worried that our country will be at war with the world for countless decades to come.
Is it okay to think that Bush's impending failure in Iraq is the only hope there is of making the world a safer place?
|