This is insane, absolutely insane! We have been arming the Iraqi army composed mostly of Shiites. Now we are arming the Sunnis!
Can't you just hear this: "We are giving you these weapons but you must promise to use them only against the al Qaeda terrorists who came into your country after we removed Saddam Hussein, and never against Iraqi Shiites or American troops. Okie dokie?"
U.S. arming Sunnis in Iraq to battle old Qaeda allies
By John F. Burns and Alissa J. Rubin
Sunday, June 10, 2007
BAGHDAD: With the four-month-old increase in American troops showing only modest success in curbing insurgent attacks, American commanders are turning to another strategy that they acknowledge is fraught with risk: arming Sunni Arab groups that have promised to fight militants linked with Al Qaeda who have been their allies in the past.
U.S. Now Arming Sunnis in Iraq
Discussion in '2007 Archive' started by KenH, Jun 17, 2007.
-
Bro. Curtis <img src =/curtis.gif>Site Supporter
George Bush is the drunk friend you are trying to get out of a club alive, while he throws punches & swears at everyone. You try, and then, in his drunken stupor, he throws a punch at you. You leave him to be pummelled, and feel like an idiot for ever sticking up for him.
-
Except it is our troops who are in harm's way while he sits on his high and mighty delusional loft. Why won't the American people impeach this nut?
-
Because he keeps us safe from terrorists.
-
Right. Especially when it comes to defending and protecting our borders. :laugh:
-
Great, another group of American-backed terrorists is being made so we can fight another war in Iraq, against our former allies, in 10 or 15 years.
Terrific.
:BangHead: :BangHead: :BangHead: -
-
What constitutional protection are you referring to?
-
"The strategy of arming Sunni groups was first tested earlier this year in Anbar Province, the desert hinterland west of Baghdad, and attacks on American troops plunged after tribal sheiks, angered by Qaeda strikes that killed large numbers of Sunni civilians, recruited thousands of men to join government security forces and tribal police. With Qaeda groups quitting the province for Sunni havens elsewhere, Anbar has lost its long-held reputation as the most dangerous place in Iraq for American troops."
-
-
I suppose that depends on what 'high crimes and misdemeanors' really means. However, that is not a constitutional protection against an impeachment. Here's an interesting article on the high crimes etc...
http://www.constitution.org/cmt/high_crimes.htm -
-
He can't be impeached just because you don't like him or his policies.
Only Bush haters disagree and pine away for that which they can't legally obtain.
Poor babies.:tear: -
I don't think you understand what impeachment is. Bush can be impeached, if congress decides to impeach him. Whether or not the senate would convict him is another story. But there is nothing in the constitution barring him from being impeached, if the house feels his actions merit it. When the policies of an administration are to manufacture evidence to support acts of aggression, one might argue this to be an high crime and/or misdemeanor. Only war lovers disagree and pine away for constitutional protections that don't exist. Like the one that says a president can't be impeached because we don't like his illegal policies.
-