I often hear the retreat-monkeys (as I call them) talking about "redeployment", which is code for surrender.
[Incidentally, the term "redeployment" is a misuse of an official-sounding word to mask the true Liberal Agenda. And it angers military types to hear the likes of Harry Reid and Nansy Pelosi misleading the public in this manner.]
They say, "why aren't we killing Al-Qaeda?" "Why don't we go to Afghanistan, or other places, where we know Bin-Laden is?".
I heard a marine biologist on the radio the other night. He was studying starfish. As many probably know, if you cut off the limb of a starfish, it grows back. But what fascinated this biologist (and what was previously unknown to me) was that a single limb can regenerate an entire body and 4 other limbs.
Al-Qaeda is exactly like a starfish. It's committed, decentralized, and global. Killing Bin-Laden (what the Liberals foolishly think to be the "heart" of the starfish) is not going to kill the organism.
The Liberals who think we aren't doing enough have a fundamental misunderstanding of our enemy,
and of war.
In war, you engage the enemy, whenever you can, wherever you can, and kill as many of them as you can.
And that's exactly what we're doing (quite successfully) in Iraq. We have defined a battleground in a previously indefinable conflict. We have set the terms, laid the traps, and are luring the enemy to fight us. And we are kicking the crap out of them.
Will we get Bin-Laden eventually? I sure as hell hope so.
But will getting him kill the organism (and stop Al-Qaeda)?
And it is this fundamental misunderstanding about the nature of our enemy, and indeed, the nature of war, that disqualifies and precludes Liberals from ever being smart enough, mature enough, or qualified enough, to lead this great nation or command our armed forces, (most especially) in times of war.
God help the enemy if Romney or Giuliani wins.
God help us if it is Obama or Hillary.